Makes this tweet all the more relevant -
https://nitter.net/JudiciaryGOP/status/1578174670854975491
Kanye West is buying Parler
61–70 of 939 posts
Re: Kanye West is buying Parler
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the problem lies in the impunity, not in the free speech itself. IMHO people should be allowed to say everything but they must accumulate the reputation for saying it. If someone is a racist bigot, they shouldn't be physically restrained(deleting posts is like physically covering someones' mouth) from being bigots but they should definitely be known for it. Then it's up to the community to decide how to inter…
Agree. The big one you missed is identity. Most hate is anonymous. Being able to filter by tags like “known racist” or whatever, and seeing someone’s history of sharing misinformation is useful but most people would self-censor if their identity was known or other users would filter out those that won’t identify. What I wonder is what Musk will do if he finds out the scales are artificially weighted towards conservat…
A study showed that people are more aggressive online when using their real name
> Results show that in the context of online firestorms, non-anonymous individuals are more aggressive compared to anonymous individuals. This effect is reinforced if selective incentives are present and if aggressors are intrinsically motivated.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
Re: Kanye West is buying Parler
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know my left wing friends would claim the media still is right wing and truly left wing ideas are disallowed. It may be that the left wing was censored and vilified for so long that it ceased existing in the US.
What kind of ideas? I guess if you go far enough left then everything is to your right.
Socialism is apparently a dirty word in the US, but a perfectly normal political ideology in large parts of the rest of the world.
Re: Kanye West is buying Parler
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is that amusing? It makes sense that the "more free" platforms tend to attract people from the right because highly moderated platforms tend to censor right wing discussion more than left wing discussion. More extreme people are kicked off each platform successively until they end up places like 4chan. The opposite would be true if the mainstream advocated right wing politics, forcing left wing people onto the fr…
I know my left wing friends would claim the media still is right wing and truly left wing ideas are disallowed. It may be that the left wing was censored and vilified for so long that it ceased existing in the US.
The news media maybe. But watching tv, surfing the web, etc the majority generally sides with the liberal status quo of our times. It's rare to see genuine positive religious sentiment in media compared to real life, and it's very obvious to me
Re: Kanye West is buying Parler
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please, deleting a tweet is hardly being 'physically restrained' > Than it's up to the community to decide how t interact with those people. Twitter is a private company, and it chooses to run it's service how it wants. The government avoids actually physically restraining racist bigots, and lets the community decide how to deal and interact with those people. Some may chose to harbor them (Parlor, 4chan, etc), and o…
I don't accept that content deletion is a way to go. When an offensive content is deleted we lose the ability to jude it for urselves. The content must remain but be strictly attached to a persona so the persona can be "judged" rightfully. In real life, when we deal with these people we want to know what they did. It gives fidelity, unlike "the person said something that violates rule 4 section 3". We should stop pre…
How do you feel about HN's approach - flagged or heavily downvoted comments are invisible if you are not logged in or if you have not changed "showdead" from the default unchecked state (at which point they're rendered in a hard-to-read colour)?
Re: Kanye West is buying Parler
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the problem lies in the impunity, not in the free speech itself. IMHO people should be allowed to say everything but they must accumulate the reputation for saying it. If someone is a racist bigot, they shouldn't be physically restrained(deleting posts is like physically covering someones' mouth) from being bigots but they should definitely be known for it. Then it's up to the community to decide how to inter…
Agree. The big one you missed is identity. Most hate is anonymous. Being able to filter by tags like “known racist” or whatever, and seeing someone’s history of sharing misinformation is useful but most people would self-censor if their identity was known or other users would filter out those that won’t identify. What I wonder is what Musk will do if he finds out the scales are artificially weighted towards conservat…
Wouldn't self censor solve the problems just as well as deleting content?
See, because we don't say everything that comes to our mind, we are able to interact in a civil manner with people that can have any kind of opinions. In real life, I'm sometimes shocked that someone is a total bigot.
However, when civility is established we can discuss these ideas too and instead of having these people being toxic these ideas can be expressed in a civil manner and discussed. Maybe they have a point sometimes? If they do, it can be dully noted and if they don't they will be exposed to the counter arguments. Also, when ideas are expressed in civil manners, people don't label other people straight as "bigot", "racists" and accept the nuances. In fact, some prominent right-wing people are doing that, people like Jordan Peterson. Because the guy is civil, he is effective and it's up to the rest to contradict his claims in civil manners.
So yes, it is alright to have some self restraint and think before you speak. It's definitely much better than oppressing it.
edit: the comment I responded was a bit different, I guess the OP added more thoughts.
Re: Kanye West is buying Parler
#67Re: Kanye West is buying Parler
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
> at least we can hold them responsible when they don't deliver it. This is in contrast with the pure fascist where they cannot be held responsible for anything because they don't claim virtue in first place. What's the plan to do that when they censor all dissent on the platforms they just bought?
Then do what Gab, Gettr and Truth Social did and 'build your own platform'. If not that, then use a Mastodon instance like mastodon.social as an alternative? The only thing these networks censor is anything that is illegal in their hosted jurisdiction i.e the US.
The only thing these networks censor is anything that is illegal in their hosted jurisdiction
Truth Social has apparently banned (and shadow banned) lots of people for posting anti-Trump and anti-GOP political messages.
Re: Kanye West is buying Parler
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't accept that content deletion is a way to go. When an offensive content is deleted we lose the ability to jude it for urselves. The content must remain but be strictly attached to a persona so the persona can be "judged" rightfully. In real life, when we deal with these people we want to know what they did. It gives fidelity, unlike "the person said something that violates rule 4 section 3". We should stop pre…
How do you feel about HN's approach - flagged or heavily downvoted comments are invisible if you are not logged in or if you have not changed "showdead" from the default unchecked state (at which point they're rendered in a hard-to-read colour)?
I don't like it when it's due to low score, it is an oppression of unpopular opinions.
I like it when it's about flagged posts. I have the option enabled to show these posts and I would vouch if there's something worthy in it. So spam and other BS is "removed" but I still can take a look at it and see it for myself.
Overall, I think HN is one of the best moderated online places.
Re: Kanye West is buying Parler
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know many won't like this, but I think he meant Defcon 3, which I'm still not sure what it implies. I highly doubt he meant to issue death threats the way that people are perceiving this. Not to excuse his actions. I'd rather like to know wtf he's talking about and why.he would say something like this.
He accused a rapper of being co trolled by Jewish people, and also that he'd go "deathcon3" on Jewish people. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-63198991
[deleted]