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

Trump’s Twitter Exile Spurs Opposition from Germany, France

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 112 posts

Re: Trump’s Twitter Exile Spurs Opposition from Germany, France

#71

Post by ttt0 »

GarrisonPrime wrote: post #38
trident5000 wrote: post #8

I'm looking past Trump. The tech cartel can not only decide which party wins elections, they can decide which candidates within the winning party keep their seats. And they are getting more and more desperate to shape politics as they run from anti-trust. For me its too much power.

A fair enough opinion, and a worthy discussion. But this particular issue of Trump’s Twitter suspension is clearly about not giving delusional lunatics more fodder for their actions, rather than silencing Trump. Edit: I’m not siding with or against Twitter here. Whether their decision was wise or not certainly needs to be discussed. I’m just pointing out that “silencing the lunatic in the White House” isn’t the only…

And you think that banning him didn't do that? I am supposed to believe that they were so considered that he might say something that might cause some actions, but they didn't considered at all what their action of banning him will cause?

Re: Trump’s Twitter Exile Spurs Opposition from Germany, France

#72

Post by inglor_cz »

GarrisonPrime wrote: post #38
trident5000 wrote: post #8

I'm looking past Trump. The tech cartel can not only decide which party wins elections, they can decide which candidates within the winning party keep their seats. And they are getting more and more desperate to shape politics as they run from anti-trust. For me its too much power.

A fair enough opinion, and a worthy discussion. But this particular issue of Trump’s Twitter suspension is clearly about not giving delusional lunatics more fodder for their actions, rather than silencing Trump. Edit: I’m not siding with or against Twitter here. Whether their decision was wise or not certainly needs to be discussed. I’m just pointing out that “silencing the lunatic in the White House” isn’t the only…

"But this particular issue of Trump’s Twitter suspension is clearly about not giving delusional lunatics more fodder for their actions"

I believe that the effects of this permaban (and the seemingly coordinated effort to purge the Internet of Parler) will be pretty much the opposite, reenforcing paranoia about unelected tyrants more powerful than any office holder in the U.S.

Re: Trump’s Twitter Exile Spurs Opposition from Germany, France

#73

Post by GarrisonPrime »

Someone1234 wrote: post #48
GarrisonPrime wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly, the comment meant baseless violence. Violence to protect the helpless from violence is acceptable.

They asked for an example of Trump "calling for violence" on Twitter, which I provided. Your response: That's calling for violence but the GOOD kind. It isn't up to Twitter to decide if an individual's brand of violence calling is the good or bad kind, it violates their policies.

Yet they didn’t suspend him for the specific example provided.

Also, I don’t think it’s so clear that threatening a defensive act could be called “inciting violence”.

If a group of criminals were parading through a neighborhood performing home invasions, I do not think it’d cross the line to warn them off with a public declaration of “our house has guns and we will protect ourselves”.

Re: Trump’s Twitter Exile Spurs Opposition from Germany, France

#75

Post by qzw »

shortandsweet wrote: post #61
dmwallin wrote: post #27

Having the government govern free speech doesn't get you free speech. If the problem is social media companies that are so large they suck up all the air in the room then solve THAT problem and enforce existing anti-monopoly laws.

It doesn't get you free speech but what it does give is power to the people to decide. Elections of those law makers. There is no avenue for the people in the current model.

I would be very wary of giving even more power to those who already have plenty of power. Also, there's no constitutional right to an audience. Everyone that gets kicked off of Twitter can continue to say anything they like, but they don't get to access the built-in audience that Twitter provides.

Re: Trump’s Twitter Exile Spurs Opposition from Germany, France

#76

Post by GarrisonPrime »

ttt0 wrote: post #71
GarrisonPrime wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A fair enough opinion, and a worthy discussion. But this particular issue of Trump’s Twitter suspension is clearly about not giving delusional lunatics more fodder for their actions, rather than silencing Trump. Edit: I’m not siding with or against Twitter here. Whether their decision was wise or not certainly needs to be discussed. I’m just pointing out that “silencing the lunatic in the White House” isn’t the only…

And you think that banning him didn't do that? I am supposed to believe that they were so considered that he might say something that might cause some actions, but they didn't considered at all what their action of banning him will cause?

That’s worthy of discussion. I’m not siding with or against Twitter here. Just saying the issue isn’t as one-sided as many might like to believe it is.

Re: Trump’s Twitter Exile Spurs Opposition from Germany, France

#77

Post by scj »

V-2 wrote: post #42
Arnt wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US law laws for free speech, and it has societal norms, too. What norms people expect to apply in the fora they use, most prominently Facebook. So they haven't updated their laws to match the current society's norms, and the result is that Facebook has to write rules for something approximating all of society. That cannot be simple for Facebook, and I think it's a bit cowardly of the two big parties that neither…

Is "current perception" really common, or just what the loudest voices demand? And even if it is common, in my opinion the very idea of free speech is that it may go beyond the commonly held notions of acceptability. It seems kind of pointless otherwise - what's widely accepted already shouldn't really need much protection. Eg. penalization of blasphemy in theocratic societies surely passes the test of "freedom of sp…

You can't yell fire in a crowded theater... Can you incite a riot, or hatred? What about representing fictions as fact in the news? What are the limits of satire?

The American answers to these questions aren't the same as they are in other nations.

While I don't fully agree with some of my nation's answers to these questions, at least I theoretically have a democratic voice in what those standards and laws are. But some private company in a foreign nation with foreign beliefs is unaccountable from my perspective.

Even if I boycott it, it doesn't mean much so long as my neighbors, friends, and family are using it.

Re: Trump’s Twitter Exile Spurs Opposition from Germany, France

#78

Post by WhoCaresLies »

VWWHFSfQ wrote: post #6

But don't Germany and France both have actual laws against offensive speech on the internet that allows the government itself to compel social media websites to delete people's content? Their feigned concern over Twitter excercising its 1st Amendment rights seems a bit hypocritical here.

exactly, law rules, not Twitter or Facebook, they aren't justice, they aren't judges

Re: Trump’s Twitter Exile Spurs Opposition from Germany, France

#79

Post by GarrisonPrime »

trident5000 wrote: post #57
GarrisonPrime wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A fair enough opinion, and a worthy discussion. But this particular issue of Trump’s Twitter suspension is clearly about not giving delusional lunatics more fodder for their actions, rather than silencing Trump. Edit: I’m not siding with or against Twitter here. Whether their decision was wise or not certainly needs to be discussed. I’m just pointing out that “silencing the lunatic in the White House” isn’t the only…

My issue here is that while I agree Trump is goofy and id like to see him go, the definitions of what is and is not dangerous ultimately is up to a handful of unelected corporate employees. Those definitions are and will more so align with corporate strategy and a bottom line. And while its not a freedom of speech issue in the strict legal sense, it is by a practical matter.

I agree that is an issue, and should be discussed. I didn’t mean to imply Twitter’s decision was plainly correct.

Re: Trump’s Twitter Exile Spurs Opposition from Germany, France

#80

Post by muro »

yalogin wrote: post #54

I don’t get the rationale used there. A president is not forced to use Twitter or any other social media. If they choose to use it then they have to abide by the rules of the platform, and the platform should impose the rules as they see fit. Forcing the platform to change the rules because of a special person is a slippery slope.

That worked before these platforms were defacto monopolies. Now that they are, there should be different rules. When twitter or Facebook remove someone, it has a huge impact on the individual at no cost to the tech company. With their size, there should be responsibilities to society too, not just shareholders.
Post reply on HN