Diaspora social network cannot stop IS posts • Hacker News Board

Re: Diaspora social network cannot stop IS posts

#71

Post by bellerocky » Thu, Aug 21, 2014, 4:10 PM UTC

kumar303 wrote: post #68

bellerocky wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think it's a bit weird that instead of using this to promote their values (Decentralization, Freedom, Privacy as mentioned on their landing page [0]) they are essentially pressuring pod admins to take down the content. Yeah that's probably because the ISIS is known for suicide bombings, cutting off heads, video taping it so that the families and friends of the victim can see how gruesome their loved one died, kil…

I'll admit I'm somewhat conflicted. You can arrive at similar conclusions thinking about it as child pornography. In both cases it does seem like censoring the material is the right thing to do. However, my conflict comes from the fact that censorship doesn't really solve the root problem. In child molesters, the problem is better treated in psychiatric care and in extremism the problem is better treated through educ…

My comment was specifically a criticism of the idea that diaspora should use its inability to remove ISIS murder videos as a promotional opportunity. Having said that, if I owned a diaspora pod and there was a mechanism for it, I'd remove ISIS content.

Re: Diaspora social network cannot stop IS posts

#72

Post by Alupis » Thu, Aug 21, 2014, 4:10 PM UTC

waps wrote: post #67

Alupis wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think anyone really takes issue with Twitter pulling down content -- they are a private company (as-in not controlled by the govt) -- but when a government starts censoring material (like in the UK were linking-to, or even viewing of this sort of material is considered illegal), that's where things get not-OK. What I find more outrageous was that the reporter apparently was held captive for 2 years... without…

> What I find more outrageous was that the reporter apparently was held captive for 2 years... without anyone (in the public) knowing. Bergdahl was held captive for 5 years and luckily was returned in a controversial exchange. What is going on that we are not able to protect and/or recover our people? I feel like I'm stating the obvious, but here goes : the US cannot protect every one of it's citizens from every exte…

> Terrorist forces who recruit out of a near-global pool of 1 billion muslims, who effectively have presence everywhere

Just want us to be careful here -- you don't have to be a Muslim to be a terrorist -- and not all terrorist's are Muslims.

Re: Diaspora social network cannot stop IS posts

#73

Post by waps » Thu, Aug 21, 2014, 4:11 PM UTC

bellerocky wrote: post #60

Alupis wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think anyone really takes issue with Twitter pulling down content -- they are a private company (as-in not controlled by the govt) -- but when a government starts censoring material (like in the UK were linking-to, or even viewing of this sort of material is considered illegal), that's where things get not-OK. What I find more outrageous was that the reporter apparently was held captive for 2 years... without…

Yeah the threats about being arrested for viewing the video struck me as weird too. It's a horrific video and I have no intention of viewing it but watching it makes you a criminal? Then again I'm totally OK with people being arrested for watching child pornography so there's some kind of gray line where even consuming content is no longer OK and I'm glad I'm not the one who has to figure out what goes in what bucket…

> Yeah the threats about being arrested for viewing the video struck me as weird too.

A police officer explained this to me. They do this because they want the ability to arrest the people who are recruiting muslims using these videos. The "recruiting" thing is impossible to prove, so ...

These videos are made with one purpose only : to recruit more muslims to their cause. Assuming they know what they're doing, that's exactly what free dissemination of these videos will do (otherwise, after all, there wouldn't be an al qaeda or IS organization in the first place).

I think you can at least agree that using arrests, and even violence (of the police kind, not the IS kind), to prevent that from happening is unambiguously a good thing.

The arguments against these laws are mostly of the "slippery slope" kind, and I agree that these laws are open to abuse. I hate to say it but I also don't see an alternative.

Re: Diaspora social network cannot stop IS posts

#74

Post by xtrumanx » Thu, Aug 21, 2014, 4:13 PM UTC

ibebrett wrote: post #59

logfromblammo wrote: post #50

It seems odd to structure a project around freedom of speech, control of your own information, and dilution of central authority, and then act disappointed when it actually gets used for those purposes. If a group that posts videos of journalist executions can use it without getting shut down, it is certainly usable for any other group that may be unpopular with their local majority: Tibetan nationalists, Falun Gong,…

There is a difference between a forum for the free exchange of ideas, and a decentralized system that can be used to plan and share murders/(horrible other things). It is totally legal (in the usa) for you to get together with your friends and talk about whatever you want, but it is not legal for you to get together and plan an overthrow of the government, or a murder. It's not good that a dangerous group has a new t…

Your comment can apply to any technology; from computers and radios to simple things like hammers and knives. Yes, dangerous groups could use those tools for evil but that problem shouldn't be attributed to the tool or their creators. Especially when the tool was not designed for evil and is not primarily used for evil.

Re: Diaspora social network cannot stop IS posts

#75

Post by bellerocky » Thu, Aug 21, 2014, 4:14 PM UTC

aestetix wrote: post #64

bellerocky wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like you're confused here. Freedom of speech is about citizens and their government, not citizens and private entities. Having said that, freedom of speech has never meant that you can say whatever you want, and the courts have supported this. Right now there are people in jail for threatening politicians on Twitter. So yes, freedom of speech is a limited right. It's not a right to encourage people to rape, mur…

>> Right now there are people in jail for threatening politicians on Twitter. Do you have a source for that? I would be very interested in seeing the details.

Yes, http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/obama-twitter-death-thre...

Just google "Secret Service twitter" or follow the @SecretService at https://twitter.com/SecretService They're not shy about this. It's probably illegal to threaten anyone's life or really any kind of violence on Twitter, not just politicians. I doubt threats of violence are protected speech.

Re: Diaspora social network cannot stop IS posts

#76

Post by waps » Thu, Aug 21, 2014, 4:15 PM UTC

Alupis wrote: post #72

waps wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What I find more outrageous was that the reporter apparently was held captive for 2 years... without anyone (in the public) knowing. Bergdahl was held captive for 5 years and luckily was returned in a controversial exchange. What is going on that we are not able to protect and/or recover our people? I feel like I'm stating the obvious, but here goes : the US cannot protect every one of it's citizens from every exte…

> Terrorist forces who recruit out of a near-global pool of 1 billion muslims, who effectively have presence everywhere Just want us to be careful here -- you don't have to be a Muslim to be a terrorist -- and not all terrorist's are Muslims.

I'm not arguing otherwise. I fear though, that that distinction only matters as long as the number of terrorists is small enough. Evidently, that number has been growing by a lot. So while I believe that every person has the right to be judged on his own, I fear that we will not realistically have that choice for much longer.

Re: Diaspora social network cannot stop IS posts

#77

Post by judk » Thu, Aug 21, 2014, 4:17 PM UTC

bellerocky wrote: post #57

tinco wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free speech is about humans expressing their thoughts, whether they be love or hate. That in many countries free speech is limited to prevent propaganda for 'dangerous' causes like rape, pillaging and terrorism is an evil deemed necessary by most. So yes, for a true believer in basic human rights it can be shocking that we have restricted ourselves (as voters in democracies) in our right of free speech, and can feel…

> So yes, for a true believer in basic human rights it can be shocking that we have restricted ourselves (as voters in democracies) in our right of free speech, and can feel that when trying to aid universal free communications ( by hosting pods). The video being "suppressed" is of the gruesome, intimidating murder of James Foley, a journalist who risked his life for a profession dedicated to 1st amendment principles…

So perhaps it's best to, at his death, not destroy the principles he lived for.

Re: Diaspora social network cannot stop IS posts

#78

Post by logfromblammo » Thu, Aug 21, 2014, 4:17 PM UTC

bellerocky wrote: post #18

dewey wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's "Freedom of Speech" (but only if we like it)?

Seems like you're confused here. Freedom of speech is about citizens and their government, not citizens and private entities. Having said that, freedom of speech has never meant that you can say whatever you want, and the courts have supported this. Right now there are people in jail for threatening politicians on Twitter. So yes, freedom of speech is a limited right. It's not a right to encourage people to rape, mur…

Freedom of speech has always meant that you can say whatever you please, in the sense that the speech cannot be rightfully prevented. Just because someone cannot gag you does not mean they can't slap you in the face after hearing what you say.

The freedom is about lack of prior restraint. It does not absolve you from the consequences if your words cause another to be harmed.

You can shout "Fire!" in a crowded club, if there is a fire in it. You can even shout "Fire!" in a crowded club if there is a bomb in it, hoping for a more orderly and less panicked evacuation. You can also shout "Fire!" in a crowded club if you like the Ohio Players or P-Funk. But if you make a false alarm and someone gets an injury in the resulting panic--even if it's just fewer sales at the bar because everyone left--you'd better be prepared to accept the consequences. And it isn't enough that your words could have caused harm, there has to be some actual harm and some actual intent to cause mischief.

So if you stand before a crowd and encourage people to run riot and sack the city, the consequences you face are going to be a lot different if that crowd is a rotary club meeting or if it is an unruly mob with pre-sharpened pitchforks. It is absolutely your right to do it, but if you do it with criminal intent, expect to be punished for the damage that you caused.

Re: Diaspora social network cannot stop IS posts

#79

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Aug 21, 2014, 4:24 PM UTC

bellerocky wrote: post #12

dewey wrote: post #2

I think it's a bit weird that instead of using this to promote their values (Decentralization, Freedom, Privacy as mentioned on their landing page [0]) they are essentially pressuring pod admins to take down the content. I know they could just setup their own Pod but these values are what makes them any different from the likes of Twitter and I would've expected them to stand by them a bit more. [0] https://diasporaf…

> I think it's a bit weird that instead of using this to promote their values (Decentralization, Freedom, Privacy as mentioned on their landing page [0]) they are essentially pressuring pod admins to take down the content. Yeah that's probably because the ISIS is known for suicide bombings, cutting off heads, video taping it so that the families and friends of the victim can see how gruesome their loved one died, kil…

[deleted]

Re: Diaspora social network cannot stop IS posts

#80

Post by Alupis » Thu, Aug 21, 2014, 4:26 PM UTC

waps wrote: post #73

bellerocky wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah the threats about being arrested for viewing the video struck me as weird too. It's a horrific video and I have no intention of viewing it but watching it makes you a criminal? Then again I'm totally OK with people being arrested for watching child pornography so there's some kind of gray line where even consuming content is no longer OK and I'm glad I'm not the one who has to figure out what goes in what bucket…

> Yeah the threats about being arrested for viewing the video struck me as weird too. A police officer explained this to me. They do this because they want the ability to arrest the people who are recruiting muslims using these videos. The "recruiting" thing is impossible to prove, so ... These videos are made with one purpose only : to recruit more muslims to their cause. Assuming they know what they're doing, that'…

I disagree. The people making the videos are not in the US or UK. Furthermore, the people making the video are already breaking US and UK laws -- murder. The simple act of making a video (of some kind), posting it, linking to it, nor viewing it are illegal in themselves. However, if the government of the US or UK deem the video content to be "extremist" content, now it becomes illegal to link-to, or view the video? That seems bad to me (censorship). (again, murder is already illegal). Where does it draw the line? What about extremist videos that don't include murder but talk poorly about the US and UK governments and people? Will be deem those to be illegal to view too?

Police can already arrest the people making the videos (if they were in the UK or US) without having to make it a crime to simply view the video.

I don't buy the argument that these videos are propaganda to recruit -- they are there to stir fear and incite the idea that no one will save you if you are captured. The goal of the videos are to bend the public opinion.

The video will only sicken the majority of US and UK citizens -- which will in turn demand direct military action. This is, what both administrations (US and UK) have been trying to avoid recently as both have campaigned in large to avoid any direct use of the military (aka, boots-on-the-ground). It would be bad, politically, to then renege on that and send troops in.