9 ms·

Anyone remembers how the internet was going to liberate the expression, instead we got two, three bottlenecks manned (or is it personed?) by censors actively su

Anyone remembers how the internet was going to liberate the expression, instead we got two, three bottlenecks manned (or is it personed?) by censors actively supported by the MSM and virtually the entire university system.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
porphyrogene 8y ago
Facebook is a private entity and they can do with their software what they want. If that drives away users then that’s their problem. You can set up a server or a static page and disseminate your opinions more easily now than ever. No one ever promised the ability to say whatever you want without response or repurcusion from individuals, corporations, charities, political parties or interest groups. Facebook executives are disrespectful and duplicitous but this is hardly an existential contradiction of the concept of the free and open web. If people choose a corporate platform with corporate censorship then the real problem is that no one is offering a better alternative.
naaaaak 8y ago
Also censored by payment processors and Big Tech collusion. Collusion met with indefensibly weak arguments of “just build your own”. Build your own = shovel, lay cable, and found a bank before you get to your project, because Big Tech and Big Payment will cut you down if you say something they don’t like.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
ben_w 8y ago
> manned (or is it personed?) “Staffed”
freehunter 8y ago
That is absolutely not the fault of the Internet and entirely the fault of the people using the Internet. Every time I hear this complaint on a forum other than Facebook or Reddit or Twitter I laugh because if it was true, HN wouldn't exist. The millions of independent phpBB forums wouldn't exist. I wouldn't be allowed to write my own HTML and Javascript if this was true. Some people willingly put themselves into buckets, yes. It's always been that, it will always be that way. But don't pretend for a second that this is the death of the Internet or a lack of free expression or censorship or any of that nonsense until you can't buy an IP address and host a web server on your own hardware. The web is free and open, and the existence of non-free and non-open parts of the Internet does not negate that in any way.
- spaginal 8y ago
  https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcrunch.com/2017/08/13/godaddy-tells-white-supremacist-site-daily-stormer-to-find-a-new-domain-provider/amp/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcrunch.com/2017/08/13/godad... Domain providers are beginning to police content they deem as unacceptable speech or ideas. Are you going to remember IP addresses when the DNS system itself polices thought? The problem is, tech companies are beginning to behave like a cartel when it comes to free expression. We don’t just see it in Facebook, we see it across all facets of the digital economy, from payment providers to hosting providers to DNS services themselves. If your solution for someone getting the scarlet letter is to say they are free to build their own network, then we are approaching a major problem.
  - freehunter 8y ago
    The slope is not nearly as slippery as you're imagining it to be. I'm not sure literal white supremecists are the shining beacon upon which you want to hang your argument (if I'm wrong on this, you don't need to read any further). We're not talking about a controversial political opinion, we're not talking about coastal liberals shutting down good American conservative free speech, we're talking about white supremecists who refer to themselves as genocidal. People who want to murder (and have done so) non-white people just for the crime of having a different skin color. But beyond that absolutely ridiculous argument, yes. The Internet is free-as-in-freedom as long as you have an IP address. If you want to start your own competitor to the World Wide Web because a few private companies exercise their right to not to business with you, you can do that. The Web and the Internet work without domain names, and if you really need your message out there and your followers really need to hear it, is typing in an IP address too much work? If it is, then your message might not be as convincing as you think it is. But even still, you can host your own website or Internet service regardless. And you can start your own registrar and host your own servers and make your own payment processor. That is entirely possible and at that point only the government can stop you (and even then, you can choose your own government like The Pirate Bay did). If your movement is stopped by a lack of convenience, that's not Facebook's problem. Saying "but Facebook banned me" as if Facebook was the entire Internet or even the entire Web doesn't fly. Only you can give them that power, and you can take that power from them whenever you want to. Being banned from Twitter/Facebook/YouTube is only a problem if you honestly believe that Twitter/Facebook/YouTube owns the entire Internet. But they don't. You're free to start a competitor any time you want.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

porphyrogene 8y ago

Facebook is a private entity and they can do with their software what they want. If that drives away users then that’s their problem. You can set up a server or a static page and disseminate your opinions more easily now than ever. No one ever promised the ability to say whatever you want without response or repurcusion from individuals, corporations, charities, political parties or interest groups. Facebook executives are disrespectful and duplicitous but this is hardly an existential contradiction of the concept of the free and open web. If people choose a corporate platform with corporate censorship then the real problem is that no one is offering a better alternative.

naaaaak 8y ago

Also censored by payment processors and Big Tech collusion. Collusion met with indefensibly weak arguments of “just build your own”. Build your own = shovel, lay cable, and found a bank before you get to your project, because Big Tech and Big Payment will cut you down if you say something they don’t like.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

ben_w 8y ago

> manned (or is it personed?) “Staffed”

freehunter 8y ago

That is absolutely not the fault of the Internet and entirely the fault of the people using the Internet. Every time I hear this complaint on a forum other than Facebook or Reddit or Twitter I laugh because if it was true, HN wouldn't exist. The millions of independent phpBB forums wouldn't exist. I wouldn't be allowed to write my own HTML and Javascript if this was true. Some people willingly put themselves into buckets, yes. It's always been that, it will always be that way. But don't pretend for a second that this is the death of the Internet or a lack of free expression or censorship or any of that nonsense until you can't buy an IP address and host a web server on your own hardware. The web is free and open, and the existence of non-free and non-open parts of the Internet does not negate that in any way.

spaginal 8y ago
https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcrunch.com/2017/08/13/godaddy-tells-white-supremacist-site-daily-stormer-to-find-a-new-domain-provider/amp/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcrunch.com/2017/08/13/godad... Domain providers are beginning to police content they deem as unacceptable speech or ideas. Are you going to remember IP addresses when the DNS system itself polices thought? The problem is, tech companies are beginning to behave like a cartel when it comes to free expression. We don’t just see it in Facebook, we see it across all facets of the digital economy, from payment providers to hosting providers to DNS services themselves. If your solution for someone getting the scarlet letter is to say they are free to build their own network, then we are approaching a major problem.
- freehunter 8y ago
  The slope is not nearly as slippery as you're imagining it to be. I'm not sure literal white supremecists are the shining beacon upon which you want to hang your argument (if I'm wrong on this, you don't need to read any further). We're not talking about a controversial political opinion, we're not talking about coastal liberals shutting down good American conservative free speech, we're talking about white supremecists who refer to themselves as genocidal. People who want to murder (and have done so) non-white people just for the crime of having a different skin color. But beyond that absolutely ridiculous argument, yes. The Internet is free-as-in-freedom as long as you have an IP address. If you want to start your own competitor to the World Wide Web because a few private companies exercise their right to not to business with you, you can do that. The Web and the Internet work without domain names, and if you really need your message out there and your followers really need to hear it, is typing in an IP address too much work? If it is, then your message might not be as convincing as you think it is. But even still, you can host your own website or Internet service regardless. And you can start your own registrar and host your own servers and make your own payment processor. That is entirely possible and at that point only the government can stop you (and even then, you can choose your own government like The Pirate Bay did). If your movement is stopped by a lack of convenience, that's not Facebook's problem. Saying "but Facebook banned me" as if Facebook was the entire Internet or even the entire Web doesn't fly. Only you can give them that power, and you can take that power from them whenever you want to. Being banned from Twitter/Facebook/YouTube is only a problem if you honestly believe that Twitter/Facebook/YouTube owns the entire Internet. But they don't. You're free to start a competitor any time you want.