4 ms·

Silicon Valley controls a lot of the world's communication and we should be really worried if silencing of unpopular opinions is the order of the day. As a "mi

Silicon Valley controls a lot of the world's communication and we should be really worried if silencing of unpopular opinions is the order of the day. As a "minority" I perhaps disagree with a lot of what this person has written but my reaction to it will be to counter his arguments with a better one rather than go on to silence him. -- I have already written about this somewhat during the past elections. https://medium.com/@oothenigerian/trump-v-clinton-silicon-valleys-mind-bending-hypocrisy-is-more-of-a-threat-to-freedom-than-dd6263af03ac https://medium.com/@oothenigerian/trump-v-clinton-silicon-va...

cm2187 9y ago
And calling "fake news" any opinion they disagree with. I find it pretty problematic that Facebook wants to police the political debate. Kind of like if gmail started blocking emails sent to a gmail account if it disagrees with its content.
- hncens0rship 9y ago
  And yet this community argued heavily against the idea that social media sites were censoring conservative opinions during the election / now. lol.
- yesbabyyes 9y ago
  > Kind of like if gmail started blocking emails sent to a gmail account if it disagrees with its content. I'm pretty sure that gmail's superior spam filter was one of its big initial selling points?
  - cwkoss 9y ago
    If 30+% of the country passionately supported penis-enlargement pills, it would have been received much differently.
  - adbachman 9y ago
    Yeah, thank goodness Gmail blocks the hell out of content. Email was a wasteland before good spam filters existed.
steven777400 9y ago
This is basically a given/open intention. There was an HN thread a week ago [0] wherein Google indicated they were using new metrics to identify and remove "terror content". The metrics include input from a variety of groups. One of the top HN comments said, "Those groups have very specific agendas. They shouldn't be allowed to block articles which disagree with their agenda." [1] [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14903370 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14903370 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14904016 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14904016
- Animats 9y ago
  That was me. I want to hear from the other side. My main beef with Google on news is that they're terrible at provenance. I want to see the original source, not the pundit echo chamber. But the pundits probably generate more ad clicks.

cm2187 9y ago

And calling "fake news" any opinion they disagree with. I find it pretty problematic that Facebook wants to police the political debate. Kind of like if gmail started blocking emails sent to a gmail account if it disagrees with its content.

hncens0rship 9y ago
And yet this community argued heavily against the idea that social media sites were censoring conservative opinions during the election / now. lol.
yesbabyyes 9y ago
> Kind of like if gmail started blocking emails sent to a gmail account if it disagrees with its content. I'm pretty sure that gmail's superior spam filter was one of its big initial selling points?
- cwkoss 9y ago
  If 30+% of the country passionately supported penis-enlargement pills, it would have been received much differently.
- adbachman 9y ago
  Yeah, thank goodness Gmail blocks the hell out of content. Email was a wasteland before good spam filters existed.

steven777400 9y ago

This is basically a given/open intention. There was an HN thread a week ago [0] wherein Google indicated they were using new metrics to identify and remove "terror content". The metrics include input from a variety of groups. One of the top HN comments said, "Those groups have very specific agendas. They shouldn't be allowed to block articles which disagree with their agenda." [1] [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14903370 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14903370 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14904016 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14904016

Animats 9y ago
That was me. I want to hear from the other side. My main beef with Google on news is that they're terrible at provenance. I want to see the original source, not the pundit echo chamber. But the pundits probably generate more ad clicks.