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

You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

freddiedeboer.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 863 posts

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#531

Post by justaman »

AshWolfy wrote: post #430
vwatson wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Popper part is easy: In the 1970s, during the student revolts, many right leaning people (who would be called fascists these days) got platforms on talk shows and politely debated their left wing counterparts. It did not lead to the Fourth Reich, on the contrary, public opinion has shifted to the left in and after the 70s. The right wing backlash you see now is a direct result of the insanity and totalitarianism…

You can draw a line from rush limbaugh to tuker carlson, they built a legion of people who they encouraged not to think for themselves and now they are sicking them on the world >insanity and totalitarianism citation needed? Thats literally the same line limbaugh used in the 70s

>You can draw a line from rush limbaugh to tuker carlson, they built a legion of people who they encouraged not to think for themselves and now they are sicking them on the world

Citation needed.

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#532

Post by saalweachter »

lukebitts wrote: post #371
throwaway53453 wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The right are not the ones cancelling people. It's better to have everyone fighting like hell than one side censored into oblivion.

> The right are not the ones cancelling people The right is the one failling at cancelling people, but they try just as much as the left

Tell that to the "RINOs". :-P

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#533

Post by spaced-out »

bleah1000 wrote: post #530
ralmidani wrote: post #351

You can't censor it away completely, but you can help the redeemable extremists __know__ they're indulging in extremism by forcing them to go to fringe websites rather than allow them to stay on Twitter and Facebook as if nothing is wrong. As for the "deplorables" who know what they're doing and will never question it or feel any remorse, we should not be giving them a megaphone. sources[0]: I was susceptible to extr…

This is just a few people explaining how they de-radicalized. Now imagine the opposite, someone with some slightly bad opinion suddenly finds themselves shut out of the main platforms because of hate speech rules. They now become more radicalized. Due to the number of people constantly being suspended/banned I think there is a greater chance that these people will become radicalized, than someone will realize they ha…

>How do you balance trying to avoid creating these kinds of echo chambers, versus creating radicals by pushing them to other sites where there are no restrictions?

By aggressively removing it to limit how many people are exposed, and ban those who continue to share it despite being warned.

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#534

Post by runarberg »

cassalian wrote: post #505
runarberg wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which people on the left? Coca-Cola is very much a capitalist institution and you have to stretch real hard to think of them as left-wing.

edit: Misread the article and grabbed the first name I saw. This edit fixes the reference: "The seminar entitled 'Facing Racism' , given by Robin DiAngelo , was presented through LinkedIn Education publicly, although not free of charge. The company admitted that, in effect, it invited its workers to take the course, but they clarify that it was not mandator" I would assume that Robin DiAngelo would be on the left.

Five minutes of digging and I found out that this news article is actually just reporting on a tweet[1] by #DrKarlynB[2] which I found out is an organizational psychologists who hates critical race theory. Of her retweets she primarily retweets republicans, and the comment section of her tweets often contains pro-trump rhetoric.

For all I know the slides she presents from Robin DiAngelo’s lecture were taken out of context. I think this is a pretty poor example. Can you do better?

1: https://twitter.com/DrKarlynB/status/1362774562769879044

2: https://twitter.com/DrKarlynB

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#535

Post by spaced-out »

betwixthewires wrote: post #484
jdlyga wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely agree. Back a year ago when you saw this kind of stuff all over Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc it felt so normalized. But now you have to go to fringe websites. It's still out there of course. But it's very back-alley and definitely makes you take what people are saying with a grain of salt.

This is a shortsighted take IMO. "Fringe" websites are growing rapidly while engagement on the big, normal websites is declining or slowing down. The problem is people want to talk about these things, and if that's what people want to talk about they're going to go where they can talk about them. This is directly addressed in the article (when we say we want to ban hate speech, what we really want to ban is hate, but…

>"Fringe" websites are growing rapidly while engagement on the big, normal websites is declining or slowing down.

source?

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#536

Post by saalweachter »

jude- wrote: post #142
jude- wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I just think the solution should lie in : 1) dialog 2) laws If they're not willing to be reasonable (like, you don't get to "dialog" about whether or not genocide is appropriate), then the best and most moral course of action could very well be to stop them from recruiting your friends. In the context of tech, this is the essence of deplatforming. Twitter and Facebook cannot censor, since they are not governments.…

[flagged]

One of my all-time favorite metaphors on the internet:

"I really don’t understand how bipartisanship is ever going to work when one of the parties is insane. Imagine trying to negotiate an agreement on dinner plans with your date, and you suggest Italian and she states her preference would be a meal of tire rims and anthrax. If you can figure out a way to split the difference there and find a meal you will both enjoy, you can probably figure out how bipartisanship is going to work the next few years."

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#537

Post by throwaway210222 »

kthejoker2 wrote: post #229

Ctrl+F "Popper" - zero results found. If you don't provide a cogent counterargument to Karl Popper's paradox of tolerance, I can't take an essay like this seriously. Simply throwing up your hands and saying, "hate exists, let it rain free on the marketplace of ideas" is ... well, not worth a lot. Also, I love the absence of evidence = evidence of absence argument: * Germans have stringent anti-hate speech laws * ...…

"The existence of intolerant speech doesn't exclude anyone."

Except people who want to draw certain cartoons.

Do you even think through your statements?

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#539

Post by runarberg »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #517
runarberg wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> after adjusting for income level and crime rate of where the encounter takes place Please stop with this racist skewing of statistics. There are thousands of factors involved. A bad faith person will always be able to stack them up in a way that favors their cause. Experts in criminology pretty much agree that racial justice is a problem in urban and sub urban USA, including police violence. The only reason to disa…

So morpheos137 asks for statistics, you provide none, but accuse him/her of racist skewing of statistics. Um... pretty sure you're the one with the agenda here.

I am not a criminologists, whichever statistics I provide will be of as poor quality as theirs.

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#540

Post by mindcandy »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #504
sir_bearington wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of reaction is what phrases like "it's okay to be white" and "all lives matter" are meant to elicit. It's exactly what trolls want you to do. The other 90% of the population is appalled. Is it not okay to be white? Do some lives not matter? You're being played.

There are people explicitly saying that no, it's not OK to be white - that if you're white you are automatically racist, and automatically guilty for what happened in the past. White Fragility is an example. "It's OK to be white" isn't just a dogwhistle. (It may be that, but it isn't just that.) It's an explicit rejection of that kind of "all whites are guilty racists" baloney.

That's what makes it such an effective troll. If it was simply obviously bad from all conceivable contexts it wouldn't work. But, you are still being trolled. And, you are playing right into their game. They are getting you to sing their slogan and laughing at you the whole time.

Yes, there are some people out there in social media who have taken to hating white people for being white. That's not OK. Call it out. But, don't dance for the trolls in the process.

Post reply on HN