5 ms·

I think there's a difference in denying an 'event' took place... and being blatantly racist, some people just really honestly believe that (because they're reta

I think there's a difference in denying an 'event' took place... and being blatantly racist, some people just really honestly believe that (because they're retarded or their parents were, and passed on that gene). There's levels. I'm sure denying the moon landing hurts those who were there... There are people who deny that Columbus killed millions, and enslaved millions more in the short time he was here. -- It's offensive, but not something you can convince them they're wrong on. I think if nobody SEES the post, does it really exist? I as user can see it so yay, FB didn't block me. While, I as another user, friend of first user cannot see it, so never happened... That's honestly the best policy probably, I mean it's also got to be something AI can train for, because they're not going to pay people to read and approve EVER comment or post on fb, that'd be insane. I don't understand how saying the holocaust didn't happen is considered threatening/hate speech per se, and not just mis-information. Again, I say this as a progressive, definitely against fascism here and Trump, but I also have Aspergers so have trouble sometimes 'feeling' the way others think I should feel about a subject, and logically it doesn't really elicit the same feeling as that Vice video, w/ the woman who didn't believe it happened, but wished it had - her wanting millions of jews dead is disgusting - more so, than just not believing it happened... I guess, I don't feel that someone else's belief in historical events is as bad as other speech. I think there needs to be a fine line, and I agree where Mark drew that.

cmurf 8y ago
If you believe people learn from history, or learn from mistakes, then you must recognize that any attempt to diminish, reduce, suppress, discredit history is not mere misinformation. It's planned deception with a purpose that not well intentioned. Perhaps innocently ignorant is "I've never heard of the holocaust, tell me more." Or even, "I've heard of the holocaust, but I have no concrete reasons to believe it happened, it seems incredible." Malevolent, willfully destructive to civil discourse, bordering on fighting words, is "The holocaust did not happen. People who claim it did are liars." But all of that is orthogonal to what Facebook's policy should be. No matter what they're going to run into trouble. The U.S. and E.U. have rather different ideas about the limits of free speech. And even greater differences exist around the world. And in that sense I think it doesn't matter what policy they go with as long as it's consistent, and the CEO doesn't say absurd things like holocaust deniers aren't intentionally getting it wrong, let alone try to give deniers a psychological evaluation. He needs to stick to policy decisions, not evaluate people's intent and end up sugar coating it.

cmurf 8y ago

If you believe people learn from history, or learn from mistakes, then you must recognize that any attempt to diminish, reduce, suppress, discredit history is not mere misinformation. It's planned deception with a purpose that not well intentioned. Perhaps innocently ignorant is "I've never heard of the holocaust, tell me more." Or even, "I've heard of the holocaust, but I have no concrete reasons to believe it happened, it seems incredible." Malevolent, willfully destructive to civil discourse, bordering on fighting words, is "The holocaust did not happen. People who claim it did are liars." But all of that is orthogonal to what Facebook's policy should be. No matter what they're going to run into trouble. The U.S. and E.U. have rather different ideas about the limits of free speech. And even greater differences exist around the world. And in that sense I think it doesn't matter what policy they go with as long as it's consistent, and the CEO doesn't say absurd things like holocaust deniers aren't intentionally getting it wrong, let alone try to give deniers a psychological evaluation. He needs to stick to policy decisions, not evaluate people's intent and end up sugar coating it.