3 ms·

I fully support scrubbing hateful content from any place where it appears. I think people should take note though, that this is the exact point in time when th

I fully support scrubbing hateful content from any place where it appears. I think people should take note though, that this is the exact point in time when the machinery for censoring and filtering the internet is being implemented. Although hateful speech is a great use case for this technology I can't help but wonder what it will get pointed at next. This isn't the kind of development that can sit back idly after performing its primary function.

philwelch 8y ago
The arguments for censorship and "deplatforming" follow the fashions of the times. In one era, the notion of screenwriters inserting subtle communist propaganda into Hollywood films was terrifying enough to motivate an industry blacklist. In an earlier era, advocating resistance to the draft was considered dangerously treasonous. Somehow these threats always seem less severe in hindsight than they seemed at the time, though.
- JimBrimble35 8y ago
  I think that's an interesting argument, but I also think you need to consider the type of tooling and the reach of content in today's world. The apparatus that we have for tracking an identifying individuals and their media consumption habits gives unprecedented control over perception at a very granular level. It also sounds like the events that you mention were dealt with quickly and severely, maybe they would have been more severe threats given the space and time to form more completely. My fear is that we'll get to a point where people won't know about the suffering or injustice that is occurring in the world without physically going to the places where it's happening. Or that people will have to go to extreme lengths or break the law simply to escape their filter bubble. /tinfoil hat
  - philwelch 8y ago
    > It also sounds like the events that you mention were dealt with quickly and severely, maybe they would have been more severe threats given the space and time to form more completely. In the case of draft resistance in the world wars, perhaps. We did win those wars within 2 and 4 years of the US entering them, respectively. In the case of the Hollywood blacklist, the Communist screenwriters became a cause celebre and, once the anti-Communists went overboard, were rehabilitated within Hollywood. This is despite the fact that they were members of an organization under the control of the USSR under Stalin. To some extent there was even an informal counter-purge of Hollywood conservatives who supported the blacklists and investigations. > My fear is that we'll get to a point where people won't know about the suffering or injustice that is occurring in the world without physically going to the places where it's happening. Ah, back to the last hundred thousand years of human history!
2_listerine_pls 8y ago
The problem is the platform might one day decide you are the witch.
duality 8y ago
"This isn't the kind of development that can sit back idly after performing its primary function." To me, this sounds like you _don't_ fully support this development. And rightly so. It'll soon be technology in search of additional applications.

philwelch 8y ago

The arguments for censorship and "deplatforming" follow the fashions of the times. In one era, the notion of screenwriters inserting subtle communist propaganda into Hollywood films was terrifying enough to motivate an industry blacklist. In an earlier era, advocating resistance to the draft was considered dangerously treasonous. Somehow these threats always seem less severe in hindsight than they seemed at the time, though.

JimBrimble35 8y ago
I think that's an interesting argument, but I also think you need to consider the type of tooling and the reach of content in today's world. The apparatus that we have for tracking an identifying individuals and their media consumption habits gives unprecedented control over perception at a very granular level. It also sounds like the events that you mention were dealt with quickly and severely, maybe they would have been more severe threats given the space and time to form more completely. My fear is that we'll get to a point where people won't know about the suffering or injustice that is occurring in the world without physically going to the places where it's happening. Or that people will have to go to extreme lengths or break the law simply to escape their filter bubble. /tinfoil hat
- philwelch 8y ago
  > It also sounds like the events that you mention were dealt with quickly and severely, maybe they would have been more severe threats given the space and time to form more completely. In the case of draft resistance in the world wars, perhaps. We did win those wars within 2 and 4 years of the US entering them, respectively. In the case of the Hollywood blacklist, the Communist screenwriters became a cause celebre and, once the anti-Communists went overboard, were rehabilitated within Hollywood. This is despite the fact that they were members of an organization under the control of the USSR under Stalin. To some extent there was even an informal counter-purge of Hollywood conservatives who supported the blacklists and investigations. > My fear is that we'll get to a point where people won't know about the suffering or injustice that is occurring in the world without physically going to the places where it's happening. Ah, back to the last hundred thousand years of human history!

2_listerine_pls 8y ago

The problem is the platform might one day decide you are the witch.

duality 8y ago

"This isn't the kind of development that can sit back idly after performing its primary function." To me, this sounds like you _don't_ fully support this development. And rightly so. It'll soon be technology in search of additional applications.