Injunction issued in case about social media pressure from US Government

Post by tome » Thu, Jul 06, 2023, 1:32 PM UTC

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #23

doitLP wrote: post #20

> Doughty said that one Flaherty [White House director of digital strategy] message in February 2021 accused Facebook "of causing 'political violence' by failing to censor false COVID-19 claims." Flaherty also wrote in a July 2021 email to Facebook, "Are you guys fucking serious? I want an answer on what happened here and I want it today." Sure sounds like a relationship where the power only goes one direction and th…

which direction are you imagining? the one originating from the dude who used a swear word? or the one originating from the company who felt comfortable ignoring the dude and the request? after all, anyone can feel comfortable demanding anything, what matters is what they get : e.g. TFG felt comfortable demanding that his political rivals be imprisoned, did he get it?

Post by ImPostingOnHN » Thu, Jul 06, 2023, 1:33 PM UTC

axus wrote: post #51

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd look at it as some random government bureaucrat demanding it: the fact that the company felt comfortable ignoring said random bureaucrat when it suited them seems to indicate they didn't feel coerced at all

So if they did it to me, it's bad, but to Facebook it's OK? In some court cases the actual harm matters, and sometimes it's the principle that matters.

Post by dporter » Thu, Jul 06, 2023, 1:33 PM UTC

vxNsr wrote: post #46

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

which direction are you imagining? the one originating from the dude who used a swear word? or the one originating from the company who felt comfortable ignoring the dude and the request? after all, anyone can feel comfortable demanding anything, what matters is what they get : e.g. TFG felt comfortable demanding that his political rivals be imprisoned, did he get it?

> TFG what is this referring to?

Post by Guthur » Thu, Jul 06, 2023, 1:34 PM UTC

nonrepeating wrote: post #31

Guthur wrote: post #18

The problem i believe we are coming to is that all secular governance eventually replaces the role once taken by church and religious philosophy. It starts to become the arbiter of moral truth and with out any real moral center it can only but fail spectacularly. The second and third political theories of racial and social idealogies more rapidly succumb to this due to a more overt desire to place the state at this m…

Interesting point, and one that's difficult to dispute. Belief in the supernatural or divine is baked into human nature. There's significant research showing that human capacity for faith is genetic. So, as we're building a secular society, it's worth asking: what happens to that need for the divine? Failing to account for basic human nature drove vast amounts of suffering in the 20th century, I fear that making a si…

Post by jwells89 » Thu, Jul 06, 2023, 1:34 PM UTC

JKCalhoun wrote: post #42

safety1st wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is, Nazis are really unpopular, so if we have a free market, Nazi hellscapes will be unpopular, too. This is a case where the free market is good at solving a problem, we know this because Nazis have been writing books for nearly a century, yet you probably haven't heard of any of them other than Mein Kampf. Whether we have a free market in social media is up for debate, certainly the dominant platforms enj…

> Nazis have been writing books for nearly a century Small, basement-run printing press? Sort of like nazi zines? I remember seeing copies of "Soldier of Fortune" in the 1970's (US) but it was relegated to the one weird military-collectible-store-that-also-sold-Avalon-Hill-games. Extreme ideologies need buy-in from a printer, publisher, and distribution network — combined they create quite a series of hurdles, act as…