6 ms·

It's funny how those who cry hardest about being censored, when given a completely free space to express themselves, fill it to the brim with xenophobia, racism

by orf 8y ago

It's funny how those who cry hardest about being censored, when given a completely free space to express themselves, fill it to the brim with xenophobia, racism and anti-Semitism. As much as free speech advocates may decry this, it works. Alex Jones audience has suffered since popular private companies have terminated their relationship with him.

nailer 8y ago
You're nut picking [1]. A right wing person that is insane is more likely to use a right wing platform. We shouldn't blame Twitter for insane left wing people killing cops and we shouldn't blame Gab for this right wing attack. [1] https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nutpicking https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nutpicking
- orf 8y ago
  You also seem to be nut picking. I'm not really talking about the extreme ends that can be found on any platform. I am talking about the average discourse, which judging by the most popular posts is an appalling mix of the worst traits of humanity
  - nailer 8y ago
    > You also seem to be but picking. That's not what nut picking is - see https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nutpicking https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nutpicking. I've edited my comment above to add the same link for anyone else unfamiliar with the term. > I am talking about the average discourse That's a good argument - but I can't confirm, I'm not on gab, but as liberal and hence a free speech advocate I follow them on Twitter. Anyone have an archive link to the top posts on Gab?
    - orf 8y ago
      Sorry, I meant literally picking nutcases on a platform rather than the literal sense. That didn't come across well! I saw them yesterday when there was a previous thread here. There was one decrying "liberal insensitivity" just above two saying transexuals are mentally ill and "there are 21 genders, male, female and 19 types of [homosexual slur]". Below that where typical memes about "rivers of filth" walking to the USA right now, etc.
      - nailer 8y ago
        I honestly don't think that represents an "appalling mix of the worst traits of humanity". I'll call people male or female based on their preference, but I'm not calling anyone 'xe' or any other pronouns, nor would I accept a biological man in a woman's change room with nothing more than self identification (as proposed in the UK). That's a pretty common view. Likewise, transexuality has only recently been declassified as mental illness by mainstream physchological groups. Saying people who don't yet adopt the latest progressive outlook are full of hatred is a kind of hyperbole and often has the opposite effect than intended. That said I appreciate how civil this discussion has been.
        orf 8y ago
        I also prefer to do that. I was not explicitly saying this was the worst trait, more the general biggotry, intolerance, racism, xenophobia, ignorance, sexism and anti-Semitism that seems to prevade the site. Examples of which I cannot link to, nor would I want to. However you can see a lot of the recent shooters posts are merely reposts of others, so it's not an isolated nutjob. The example above was just pretty funny, as users (or bots) decry "libtard intolerance" shoulder to shoulder with some of the most intolerant views there are
Zuider 8y ago
'Popular private companies' have been put under severe pressure by political activist groups such as David Brock's Media Matters to 'deplatform' conservatives. The 'ending of relationships' has not necessarily been due to completely internal decisions of those private companies. Alex Jones is crazy, but you ought to have been more careful in your wording so as not to associate him with anti-Semitism. He is, in fact, a Jewish convert, married to a Jewish woman.
quantummkv 8y ago
This is where you are wrong my friend. Alex Jones audience has suffered on the popular private platforms that banned him. Please don't be under the delusion that he has lost any of his core followers. The fact that you cannot see them on your platforms does not mean that he is out or lost followers. He simply moved to platforms that you do not visit or are not that much visible on the open internet. The internet does exist outside of FAANG.
- anarazel 8y ago
  It's a significant difference whether you can become an infowars listener by watching a video on youtube that has infowars content as the next suggested title, or whether you need to explicitly search it out.
  - spiderfarmer 8y ago
    Amen. There are many studies that show people were radicalized simply by browsing Youtube on autopilot.
  - quantummkv 8y ago
    It does definitely speed up the process. But that's about it. You can still share the actual content. A follower of Jones can share content and information on messaging applications to others, for example. Unless tech companies start scanning and retroactively deleting content from user's devices, there is no stopping to this. Even then word of mouth is a very effective and time tested way. Silk Road was very active and successful despite any social media presence. tl;dr any tech solution to this problem is only gonna end up blowing in everyone's faces. Find some other ways.
forgottenpass 8y ago
>It's funny how [...] It's an entirely mundane and predictable consequence when the free-speech branded platform is not already the market leader. http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/07/22/freedom-on-the-centralized-web/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/07/22/freedom-on-the-centrali...
bradleyjg 8y ago
I agree that there's a very important distinction between private actors and the government, and don't like the contemporaneous trend in online discussion spaces of trying to erase that distinction. That said, registrars act under contract with ICAAN which is at least quasi-governmental. It makes me a lot less comfortable for them exercise unguided discretion than, say, an ISP or app store.
oldsklgdfth 8y ago
As much as I can't stand hate speech rants on social media. I would much rather have these people in plain sight, where their views can be somewhat challenged, rather than sentencing them to the dark echo-chamber corners of the internet for them to brew up storms. Just my two sense. It's hurtful to hear some extreme views, but ignoring and ostracizing these people is not equivalent to eliminating hate.
- spiderfarmer 8y ago
  Allowing these people in plain sight without any pushback normalizes their views. And by allowing them to have a large platform they can freely spread their "free-from-facts" propaganda that will speak to a subset of people who are easily misled. Challenging them in public will not help when they're also convincing people that critics are the enemies that are out to destroy them. Free speech is being abused, plain and simple.
  - oldsklgdfth 8y ago
    I don't know that limiting free speech addresses such abuses. Maybe the spread of "free-form-facts" propaganda is not as significant, as that there is a large subset of people who are easily misled. If you can't judge and think critically about the stuff you hear you're basically a house plant with complicated emotions. Also how do you know what is propaganda and what is not if you've never been exposed to it?
    - spiderfarmer 8y ago
      "free speech" or "freedom of expression" was never without limits. The version of Article 19 in the ICCPR amends the "freedom of expression" by stating that the exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may "therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others" or "[f]or the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals". https://web.archive.org/web/20080705115024/http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm https://web.archive.org/web/20080705115024/http://www2.ohchr...

by orf 8y ago

nailer 8y ago

You're nut picking [1]. A right wing person that is insane is more likely to use a right wing platform. We shouldn't blame Twitter for insane left wing people killing cops and we shouldn't blame Gab for this right wing attack. [1] https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nutpicking https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nutpicking

orf 8y ago
You also seem to be nut picking. I'm not really talking about the extreme ends that can be found on any platform. I am talking about the average discourse, which judging by the most popular posts is an appalling mix of the worst traits of humanity
- nailer 8y ago
  > You also seem to be but picking. That's not what nut picking is - see https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nutpicking https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nutpicking. I've edited my comment above to add the same link for anyone else unfamiliar with the term. > I am talking about the average discourse That's a good argument - but I can't confirm, I'm not on gab, but as liberal and hence a free speech advocate I follow them on Twitter. Anyone have an archive link to the top posts on Gab?
  - orf 8y ago
    Sorry, I meant literally picking nutcases on a platform rather than the literal sense. That didn't come across well! I saw them yesterday when there was a previous thread here. There was one decrying "liberal insensitivity" just above two saying transexuals are mentally ill and "there are 21 genders, male, female and 19 types of [homosexual slur]". Below that where typical memes about "rivers of filth" walking to the USA right now, etc.
    - nailer 8y ago
      I honestly don't think that represents an "appalling mix of the worst traits of humanity". I'll call people male or female based on their preference, but I'm not calling anyone 'xe' or any other pronouns, nor would I accept a biological man in a woman's change room with nothing more than self identification (as proposed in the UK). That's a pretty common view. Likewise, transexuality has only recently been declassified as mental illness by mainstream physchological groups. Saying people who don't yet adopt the latest progressive outlook are full of hatred is a kind of hyperbole and often has the opposite effect than intended. That said I appreciate how civil this discussion has been.
      - orf 8y ago
        I also prefer to do that. I was not explicitly saying this was the worst trait, more the general biggotry, intolerance, racism, xenophobia, ignorance, sexism and anti-Semitism that seems to prevade the site. Examples of which I cannot link to, nor would I want to. However you can see a lot of the recent shooters posts are merely reposts of others, so it's not an isolated nutjob. The example above was just pretty funny, as users (or bots) decry "libtard intolerance" shoulder to shoulder with some of the most intolerant views there are

Zuider 8y ago

'Popular private companies' have been put under severe pressure by political activist groups such as David Brock's Media Matters to 'deplatform' conservatives. The 'ending of relationships' has not necessarily been due to completely internal decisions of those private companies. Alex Jones is crazy, but you ought to have been more careful in your wording so as not to associate him with anti-Semitism. He is, in fact, a Jewish convert, married to a Jewish woman.

quantummkv 8y ago

This is where you are wrong my friend. Alex Jones audience has suffered on the popular private platforms that banned him. Please don't be under the delusion that he has lost any of his core followers. The fact that you cannot see them on your platforms does not mean that he is out or lost followers. He simply moved to platforms that you do not visit or are not that much visible on the open internet. The internet does exist outside of FAANG.

anarazel 8y ago
It's a significant difference whether you can become an infowars listener by watching a video on youtube that has infowars content as the next suggested title, or whether you need to explicitly search it out.
- spiderfarmer 8y ago
  Amen. There are many studies that show people were radicalized simply by browsing Youtube on autopilot.
- quantummkv 8y ago
  It does definitely speed up the process. But that's about it. You can still share the actual content. A follower of Jones can share content and information on messaging applications to others, for example. Unless tech companies start scanning and retroactively deleting content from user's devices, there is no stopping to this. Even then word of mouth is a very effective and time tested way. Silk Road was very active and successful despite any social media presence. tl;dr any tech solution to this problem is only gonna end up blowing in everyone's faces. Find some other ways.

forgottenpass 8y ago

>It's funny how [...] It's an entirely mundane and predictable consequence when the free-speech branded platform is not already the market leader. http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/07/22/freedom-on-the-centralized-web/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/07/22/freedom-on-the-centrali...

bradleyjg 8y ago

I agree that there's a very important distinction between private actors and the government, and don't like the contemporaneous trend in online discussion spaces of trying to erase that distinction. That said, registrars act under contract with ICAAN which is at least quasi-governmental. It makes me a lot less comfortable for them exercise unguided discretion than, say, an ISP or app store.

oldsklgdfth 8y ago

As much as I can't stand hate speech rants on social media. I would much rather have these people in plain sight, where their views can be somewhat challenged, rather than sentencing them to the dark echo-chamber corners of the internet for them to brew up storms. Just my two sense. It's hurtful to hear some extreme views, but ignoring and ostracizing these people is not equivalent to eliminating hate.

spiderfarmer 8y ago
Allowing these people in plain sight without any pushback normalizes their views. And by allowing them to have a large platform they can freely spread their "free-from-facts" propaganda that will speak to a subset of people who are easily misled. Challenging them in public will not help when they're also convincing people that critics are the enemies that are out to destroy them. Free speech is being abused, plain and simple.
- oldsklgdfth 8y ago
  I don't know that limiting free speech addresses such abuses. Maybe the spread of "free-form-facts" propaganda is not as significant, as that there is a large subset of people who are easily misled. If you can't judge and think critically about the stuff you hear you're basically a house plant with complicated emotions. Also how do you know what is propaganda and what is not if you've never been exposed to it?
  - spiderfarmer 8y ago
    "free speech" or "freedom of expression" was never without limits. The version of Article 19 in the ICCPR amends the "freedom of expression" by stating that the exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may "therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others" or "[f]or the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals". https://web.archive.org/web/20080705115024/http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm https://web.archive.org/web/20080705115024/http://www2.ohchr...