741–750 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“I may disagree with what you say but will defend with you your right to say it.” - Voltaire
Those always sounded like noble, wise words. And maybe they once were. But in age when white supremacy/fascism/nazism/strongman-leader-ism is rising again, I’m no longer sure I agree with them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those always sounded like noble, wise words. And maybe they once were. But in age when white supremacy/fascism/nazism/strongman-leader-ism is rising again, I’m no longer sure I agree with them.
Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Blind faith in a political figure from several centuries ago is, to me, as ridiculous as blind faith in an imaginary magic sky deity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> because someone used your property for offensive purposes, the water company cut off the water supply This actually happens in Europe, typically when authorities decide squatters should not be tolerated. TBH, services like Cloudflare should be free to operate as they please. A publisher is simply not entitled to a CDN. If there is a demand for specific niches, a supply will eventually emerge, like it has for porn.
> TBH, services like Cloudflare should be free to operate as they please. A publisher is simply not entitled to a CDN If a CDN is necessary to support the site being a public platform that's not a given. This whole "A private company should be able to act like it pleases" that Cloudflare mirrors in their news is an ideological standpoint, not an absolute truth. It's certainly possible to see it differently: If a comp…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sorry, but how can anyone say "what kind" of free speech...? Don't you see that labeling or discriminating between "free speech of type A, allowed" and "free speech of type B, disallowed" defeats the whole notion of "free"? Somehow people tend to think that their own discrimination isn't, while others is.
It is my understanding that, currently, the following speech is of "type B, disallowed" in the US: * Shouting fire in a crowded theatre * False advertisement * Medical or legal advice (allowed, heavily regulated by the Government) * Advocacy of force or criminal activity And I assume, many others that I do not know of. Unless you are arguing that there is no such thing as free speech in the US, then it must be that y…
* threats of violence
* blackmail
These may be entirely verbal, and yet are considered serious crimes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Should that mean a power company can cut off your power because they don't like what you've said? Should that mean the water company can cut your water off for criticizing them? Should that mean that a bank can refuse to give you a loan, because you said something bad, even if your credit is more than acceptable? ------------------------------- Remember this: its the extremist that the law is made around. And soon en…
Your hypos fall well short of the level of actions undertaken by the two sites which have been terminated by CloudFlare, which advocated for, championed, and celebrated violent actions against innocent and blameless third parties, including children. Your argument fails to credibly address the situation at hand.
Who is going to deplatform Facebook and Twitter? After all plenty of shooters have used them too. Before the usual: " But 8chan is a cesspool of bla bla" Probably it is, but, either the users are doing something ilegal in the site and you close it if the owners refuse to comply with a legal request, or they are not doing anything illegal so they have to be left alone. For the "Free Speech is freedom from government p…
People of color, and LGBT are demographics. White supremacy is an ideology (a reprehensible one at that). People choose their ideology, not their race, or sexuality. They are not the same thing. Third party businesses should not feel any obligation to do business with "dudes who blabber" about the murdering and hate of others.
I don't like 8chan as a website, but I'm still not a fan of this move. Feels like no one online wants to just provide a 'dumb pipe', and always want to act like a pseudo publisher trying to dictate what's allowed and what isn't. Imagine if real life utilities did this. If because someone used your property for offensive purposes, the water company cut off the water supply, or the electricity company refused to provid…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those always sounded like noble, wise words. And maybe they once were. But in age when white supremacy/fascism/nazism/strongman-leader-ism is rising again, I’m no longer sure I agree with them.
> I’m no longer sure I agree with them. the problem is that the alternative is, basically, a white-list of approved ideas. Who makes this white-list? That's the issue with wholesale censorship. A system like that will get gamed as soon as the political winds change one way or another.
Is nazizm fine if the political winds change a bit? No, of course not.
And I’m not saying “blanket censor an understanding of these things in historical context”. That would be insane. But I am saying - just maybe, consider stopping giving free, entirely unregulated platforms for black-list extremists and terrorists to spread their message.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
because the line of reasoning you are using has been repeated over and over and over.... but it's not exactly working out well. Words have a lot of power, and we already limit what people can say through libel laws. Much of the hate speech going on is really just libel to a group of people. No one really wants to police speech, but we already know untruths targeted at individuals can be devstating and we have created…
Under your interpretation, would I be allowed to say that it’s evident that there are (nontrivial, sometimes cognitive) innate group differences between the sexes, or between racial groups? If you’re convinced that such a statement would simply be “libelous”, I can’t get on board with your idea. As far as I can tell, the current state of affairs is this: the science suggests rather strongly that there are indeed inna…
I'm not precisely defining what the law is, in NZ we have hate speech laws. Everyone still goes around with their own unique ideas, sometimes shitty ideas..... like when they mistakenly conflate genetic sex and gender identity, or talk about race as a scientific concept when really that's quite an ambiguous term ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_categorization) ). Its not even about the "truth" so much, I'm an atheist, but I believe in religious freedom and peoples right to believe in things I believe to be completely false. It's about making sure groups of people, especially minorities are free to live their lives according to their beliefs (not necessarily without criticism ).
NZ Law society did a pretty good summary recently
https://www.lawsociety.org.nz/practice-resources/practice-ar...