5 ms·

It wasn't that long ago when they were burning books that didn't conform to the social norms of the establishment. You'd think Germans would be smarter than to

by Grue3 9y ago

It wasn't that long ago when they were burning books that didn't conform to the social norms of the establishment. You'd think Germans would be smarter than to make the same mistake twice. The social media companies must fight this law. What if, say, Russian government demands removing any content promoting homosexuality (as it is currently against Russian law)? This type of shit will destroy Internet as we know it.

tmalsburg2 9y ago
Honestly, comparing this to burning books in the Third Reich is simply showing that you know very little about history or that you choose to ignore it to make some simplistic argument for unconditional free speech. The horrible crimes of the Third Reich shouldn't be invoked so casually.
- pavelludiq 9y ago
  There is no such thing as conditional free speech.
  - mirimir 9y ago
    Well, there are circumstances like yelling "fire" in a crowded place. But otherwise, I agree.
    - Asooka 9y ago
      Even in that case, I'd argue that you're penalised not for the speech itself, but because it was used in a premediated way that caused concrete physical harm to people. As in, you're free to carry a gun, but you're not free to fire at people without good reason. And even then you're free (as in unrestrained) to fire at whoever you like, but there are consequences. Contrast that with automatic censorship on the internet which is like having a gun that will not fire at certain people, period, and the bullets themselves would change trajectory to not hit anyone the algorithm deems "not worthy of being shot".
      - tremon 9y ago
        And how is tweeting e.g. that "$minority_group is the root of all evil and should be shot on sight" not a "premeditated way [of speech] that caused concrete physical harm to people"?
mirimir 9y ago
> This type of shit will destroy Internet as we know it. Not "will". It's been happening for many years. There's the "Right to Be Forgotten". The US blackholes lots of stuff that it considers illegal. At least China only censors its own people. The only hope is overlay networks that can't be censored.

by Grue3 9y ago

tmalsburg2 9y ago

Honestly, comparing this to burning books in the Third Reich is simply showing that you know very little about history or that you choose to ignore it to make some simplistic argument for unconditional free speech. The horrible crimes of the Third Reich shouldn't be invoked so casually.

pavelludiq 9y ago
There is no such thing as conditional free speech.
- mirimir 9y ago
  Well, there are circumstances like yelling "fire" in a crowded place. But otherwise, I agree.
  - Asooka 9y ago
    Even in that case, I'd argue that you're penalised not for the speech itself, but because it was used in a premediated way that caused concrete physical harm to people. As in, you're free to carry a gun, but you're not free to fire at people without good reason. And even then you're free (as in unrestrained) to fire at whoever you like, but there are consequences. Contrast that with automatic censorship on the internet which is like having a gun that will not fire at certain people, period, and the bullets themselves would change trajectory to not hit anyone the algorithm deems "not worthy of being shot".
    - tremon 9y ago
      And how is tweeting e.g. that "$minority_group is the root of all evil and should be shot on sight" not a "premeditated way [of speech] that caused concrete physical harm to people"?

mirimir 9y ago

> This type of shit will destroy Internet as we know it. Not "will". It's been happening for many years. There's the "Right to Be Forgotten". The US blackholes lots of stuff that it considers illegal. At least China only censors its own people. The only hope is overlay networks that can't be censored.