71–80 of 166 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You stick the CEO in jail.
Why would you? Companies exist for a very reason to separate legal from private entity. CEO is not a company.
I was acting in my capacity as CEO when I killed that person. It is The Company that is responsible, not me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I, for one, don’t want to see/read holocaust deniers, aggressive hate speech, or fascist propaganda. This stuff is not okay in any way. People being allowed to megaphone this FUD for cheap attention/clicks/manipulation always find idiots who actually believe this shit, and move the Overton window towards even more destructive speech being tolerated. While I do value free speech in general, there is a red line. Like,…
My concern is that any pro-Palestinian content gets axed (US/EU are very pro-Israel) Like the story about the HAMAS rapes/baby beheadings were completely uncorroborated - will any questioning of that be censored?
Now people spread propaganda garbage that _looks_ credible but is actually fake or several years old. This is adding kerosene into the fire and might ultimately lead to additional problems _ontop of_ the current suffering in the Middle East. I‘d prefer to not pile up additional issues instead of worrying about media underrepresentation of a side.
There is no such thing as truth as seen by all parties. If this keeps going they will block everything and say they can't comply.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Very few countries have freedom of speech enshrined quite as forcefully as it is in the United States. One really has to wonder where this is going to go? It leads to an oligarchy as the rich are able to use their money as speech to buy control of the government. Oh wait, you meant the US's free speech laws are a good thing. Maybe the Americans reading this should think about how their opinion on this issue might ha…
> People outside the US aren't all stupid. There are reasons other countries have different speech laws and not all of those reasons are bad. This is flawed logic. Consider: There are reasons other countries have honor killings and not all of those reasons are bad.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I, for one, don’t want to see/read holocaust deniers, aggressive hate speech, or fascist propaganda. This stuff is not okay in any way. People being allowed to megaphone this FUD for cheap attention/clicks/manipulation always find idiots who actually believe this shit, and move the Overton window towards even more destructive speech being tolerated. While I do value free speech in general, there is a red line. Like,…
> fascist propaganda Huge opportunity here to censor your disfavored groups by calling them fascist, which has, in recent times, evolved from being a political science term, to being a very broad type of insult/accusation usable against almost anyone you don’t like.
Very few countries have freedom of speech enshrined quite as forcefully as it is in the United States. One really has to wonder where this is going to go? I understand why they want to do it, but once a censorship regime is established it will be very difficult to dislodge. What happens when the next set of elections puts in somebody who uses that power for less than ideal purposes?
I, for one, don’t want to see/read holocaust deniers, aggressive hate speech, or fascist propaganda. This stuff is not okay in any way. People being allowed to megaphone this FUD for cheap attention/clicks/manipulation always find idiots who actually believe this shit, and move the Overton window towards even more destructive speech being tolerated. While I do value free speech in general, there is a red line. Like,…
The solution to this is to let people use filters.
Trying to have something like this as a rule ends up with existential conflict[1] over what the definitions and set of things allowed should be.
[1] For instance, my personal red line is about people being allowed to express their political views and I will happily physically fight you over this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure this "freedom of speech" absolutism is such a good idea. A society needs to put limits on behavior of its individuals to be sane. I support that people can express whatever opinion they have, but not in any way they want.
You say "society", but in practice its a group of unelected bureaucrats engaging in political censorship and regulatory capture.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My concern is that any pro-Palestinian content gets axed (US/EU are very pro-Israel) Like the story about the HAMAS rapes/baby beheadings were completely uncorroborated - will any questioning of that be censored?
Right now in Germany we have real problems with the large amount of Muslims entering the country, the single reason why rightwing parties are coming to power. It’s a very delicate topic and polarized. Now people spread propaganda garbage that _looks_ credible but is actually fake or several years old. This is adding kerosene into the fire and might ultimately lead to additional problems _ontop of_ the current sufferi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> fascist propaganda Huge opportunity here to censor your disfavored groups by calling them fascist, which has, in recent times, evolved from being a political science term, to being a very broad type of insult/accusation usable against almost anyone you don’t like.
As a German, I have a really good idea what actual fascism looks like, thank you. We have also laws that specify what types of content are illegal, and for very good (historical) reasons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People outside the US aren't all stupid. There are reasons other countries have different speech laws and not all of those reasons are bad. This is flawed logic. Consider: There are reasons other countries have honor killings and not all of those reasons are bad.
Honor killings are outlawed in Europe and also occur in the US, so I don't understand what point you are trying to make here.