Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 565 posts

Re: Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

#511

Post by tptacek »

pvg wrote: post #509
microcolonel wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with the idea that merely having an account on said website should imply that I am immoral. I know of a number of good, honest people who have Gab accounts, and I don't want to live under the control of the bigots who would judge me that shallowly (in much the same way allowing myself to be cowed by other bigots would be wrong).

So you've got 'fine people on both sides' and 'they're the real bigots'. If you think these are somehow substantive or convincing rejoinders, you should probably re-think that. Mostly they just make you sound like a Nazi online.

... or, at least, someone who fits most people's mental model of the kind of person who maintains a Gab account.

Re: Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

#512

Post by anigbrowl »

lmm wrote: post #411
anigbrowl wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, proposing that a group have more rights that they don't currently enjoy is just like saying a group should be suppressed and have their rights curtailed.

It is. The only point where "rights" matter is when two groups of people are in conflict, and each side will always be able to express what they want as a "right" (e.g. making it illegal for other people to describe you in their own terms is your "right to exist").

That doesn't follow. If group A enjoys a right and group B does not, and that right is extended to group B, Group A no longer enjoys the same advantage over Group B but hasn't suffered any limitation of rights. To use the supplied example, if you're a male driver in Saudi Arabia your driving privileges are unimpaired by the novel legality of female drivers.

Re: Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

#513

Post by anigbrowl »

ddingus wrote: post #279
s73v3r_ wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you're being pointed out that you're wrong. That "more speech" doesn't help, and can actually get people killed.

I have no complaints about the discussion I can see. I have no desire to go through Karma on people who would just rather down vote because they don't like what they read. Personally, I almost never downvote, would much rather engage and have a chat about things. Most of the time that happens here, on this topic it's obviously not. And the whole thing is by no means definitive. I happen to have a very significant amo…

None of this is the slightest bit responsive to the point I made that some people;s response to losing an argument is to engage in violence. There's no law to enforce here, nobody suggested that Lane Davis should be arrested for the holding Nazi opinions. It's a simple observation that the solution to bad speech is not always more speech because people who are engaging in bad speech in bad faith often aren't interested in making progress through dialog.

That's why online trolls often make arguments that are empty of meaning but cling to a posture of superiority - they are not interested in winning an objective argument, but in having the appearance of controlling the conversation, so that if the honest interlocutor gets exasperated by the trollish arguments, the troll claims victory. Provocateurs at real life demonstrations engage in the same tactics. Supporters of authoritarian rulers revel in the discomfiture of their political opponents rather than any objective improvement in their own conditions.

Now, if you want to make general policy points and articulate your views that's fine, but if you're going to simply ignore your conversation partners and beat down straw man arguments of your own creation, why should anyone take your nostrums seriously?

Re: Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

#514

Post by patrickg_zill »

tptacek wrote: post #496
patrickg_zill wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's already a bunch on Twitter, where I've had an account for a while. So it's too late for me, but save yourself...!

Who is this argument trying to kid? Gab is a white supremacist message board. I just reloaded the site 3 times, and got alt-right memes on all 3 loads. The only reason anyone is having a hard time seeing this now is that Gab is dying, and half the posts are innocuous bot content they inject to make it look like the site has activity. Like I said across the thread: even the white supremacists are giving up on the plac…

"I just created a Gab account to try to find hashtags or accounts that are not WN."

As I clearly wrote, I created a Gab account in order to look around. I've not made one post nor followed anyone.

Please remember that many HN followers look up to your posts...

Re: Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

#515

Post by tptacek »

patrickg_zill wrote: post #514
tptacek wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is this argument trying to kid? Gab is a white supremacist message board. I just reloaded the site 3 times, and got alt-right memes on all 3 loads. The only reason anyone is having a hard time seeing this now is that Gab is dying, and half the posts are innocuous bot content they inject to make it look like the site has activity. Like I said across the thread: even the white supremacists are giving up on the plac…

"I just created a Gab account to try to find hashtags or accounts that are not WN." As I clearly wrote, I created a Gab account in order to look around. I've not made one post nor followed anyone. Please remember that many HN followers look up to your posts...

Yes, and then Patrick said "don't fall for it", and you suggested that Twitter was just as bad, so I wrote a comment that both rebutted the idea that Twitter is just as bad and asked if you were really (un-ironically) keeping the account.

It sounds like your answer is no! I think: good call.

Re: Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

#516

Post by [deleted] »

snowwrestler wrote: post #383
mikec3010 wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this very similar to what Tipper Gore's group tried in the 80s to censor rap and "hard rock" artists ? "Oh! We need to block this harmful speech. Think of the children! "

If a record store chooses to carry less than every album ever made, does that mean it's censoring the ones it doesn't carry? Because the subject of this thread is Microsoft deciding what they want host, not the government telling Microsoft what they are permitted to host.

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

#519

Post by Endy »

s73v3r_ wrote: post #489
Endy wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I understand what you're saying, but if it was so vile and so toxic, why would people keep returning to it and stay so involved? Whether you happen to like it or not, these are communities just as much as any other. I think it would be better for the human condition if, instead of dismissing them as "vile toxicity", we looked at what they're saying and what's caused them to feel a need to say it. Then again,…

Because the people who are there are the ones who agree with that vile toxicity. "we looked at what they're saying and what's caused them to feel a need to say it." While that might be needed, Gab is not the place to do it.

Where, pray tell, is the proper place to engage with these people as fellow human beings then in your opinion? Is it loosely defined as a place that the rhetoric and world-view you prefer (and which I probably prefer as well) rules with an iron fist, with people who are actively censoring what someone says and forcing them into changing the way they address you? Over time, lines have been drawn, and many people have become disenfranchised based on the unwritten rules of certain Web communities. I'm not suggesting for a moment that you'll change your mind suddenly and agree with their views - or that I would. The people who feel strongly about certain issues have formed communities, and they supposedly defend the right and virtue of free speech. So, speak to them! Freely. Don't seek to control, but to understand. And then when you do understand, if you can find common ground, work from it. If not, sit back and consider where your morality differs so distinctly from another member of the human race that you can find no core values in common. I've found doing that makes for a much better result in my dealings with both left-wing and right-wing radicals - because I can usually find at least something we both see as positive.

Re: Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed

#520

Post by stale2002 »

aliakhtar wrote: post #457
stale2002 wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what if they weren't? Would you have a problem with a phone company listening into your conversations and determining if you said something bad or not?

If you broke the law by saying something, yes. Incitement to violence is not protected free speech.

This isn't about illegal speech.

This is about perfectly legal speech that does not fall under the definition of incitement.

We have the police for handling illegal incitement to violence.

Post reply on HN