Microsoft threatens to stop hosting Gab unless posts are removed • Hacker News Board

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

#561

Post by lylecubed » Tue, Aug 14, 2018, 6:50 PM UTC

pcwalton wrote: post #560

lylecubed wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only thing somebody has to do today to become a "white supremacist who spews Pepe memes and vile anti-Semitism" AND a "neo-Nazi" is vote for Trump. So, more than 51% of the country right there very much care.

Luckily, we don't have to have the argument about whether Trump voters are unfairly treated, because the evidence that Torba is an odious anti-Semite is clear and obvious to all but the willfully blind.

> the evidence that Torba is an odious anti-Semite is clear and obvious to all but the willfully blind.

Torba's jewish. That makes you the anti-semite.

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

#562

Post by webmaven » Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 9:48 PM UTC

weberc2 wrote: post #447

specialist wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lie is half-way around the world before the truth has its pants on. — Mark Twain Younger me was a free speech ultimatist. Alas, human nature. Propaganda works, so well that people aren’t even aware of changing their minds. Overton windows. Blowback, where refuting further cements the falsehood. Belief as attire. Etc, etc.

I agree, but I also think there’s some effect of censorship that drives people toward the censored idea. Part of it is a rebellion against authority (“who are YOU to tell ME what ideas are fit or unfit to consume?”); I think there’s some related effect that is driving Trump’s popularity—some people are rebelling against the cultural authority of the left (by which I mean major news publications, entertainment media,…

> there’s some effect of censorship that drives people toward the censored idea.

Not successful censorship per-se, but attempted censorship. See the "Streisand Effect": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

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

#563

Post by webmaven » Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 10:19 PM UTC

jarfil wrote: post #271

mirimir wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Also, you can refute all you want, but if the bad ideas are better clickbait than your refutations, they will spread faster.

That's why refutations also need to be good clickbait. But of course that requires good communicators, while many people with in-depth knowledge are not even mediocre ones.

For refutations to be both true and better clickbait requires not merely good communicators, but excellent or even world-class communicators, to adequately satisfy both sets of constraints.

Meanwhile, bullshitters have a much easier job.

eg. the creationist argument "If evolution is true, why are there still monkeys?" doesn't even make sense, it just sounds good, confirms existing bias, conveys the (false) feeling of understanding, etc. As a result, it is unfortunately very persuasive, and continues to spread much faster than the refutations, which aren't as simple and don't give the same superficial "aha" jolt of satisfaction.

In fact, the closest I've come to a refutation that works as well is "well, if selective breeding of dogs is true, why do we still have wolves?", but of course then you still have to follow up with one or more examples of natural selection mechanisms & the idea of non-uniform environments (more small and fast prey over here, dry and cold weather over there, etc.), or you're inadvertently confirming their bias by introducing an intelligent selecting agency as part of your argument.

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

#564

Post by webmaven » Wed, Aug 15, 2018, 10:32 PM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #512

lmm wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> if you're a male driver in Saudi Arabia your driving privileges are unimpaired by the novel legality of female drivers.

Your right to drive is unimpaired, but the privilege of driving that you enjoy most definitely is.

Most movements to expand rights to new groups are opposed by those who would thereby experience a diminution of their privelege (which is always relative).

This is also why you have the wealthy so often opposing policies that will create more wealth for everyone including themselves, because those same policies reduce their relative advantages.

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

#565

Post by ilove_banh_mi » Thu, Aug 23, 2018, 3:32 AM UTC

s73v3r_ wrote: post #234

ilove_banh_mi wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think of a bakery refusing to make a wedding cake for people they disapprove of?

That equating homosexuality with being an alt-right troll is completely disingenuous to the point of being insulting.

If a given business is forbidden from discriminating for any aspect of their potential customer's life, then this rule has to be applied across the board, regardless of what you happen to approve or disapprove of.