4 ms·

If you have to create a special message board that is the only place where you can say what you want to, perhaps you should think about what you are saying. Th

If you have to create a special message board that is the only place where you can say what you want to, perhaps you should think about what you are saying. This is so obviously not an issue of "free speech." Free speech means the government cannot prosecute you for what you say. Any company can tell you to fuck off for any reason though, and that's the free market all the "free speech" advocates love so much.

deogeo 8y ago
> Free speech means the government cannot prosecute you for what you say. No, that's the 1st amendment of the US constitution. Free speech is a broader concept, and the 1st amendment defends it only from government interference.
- CM30 8y ago
  Thank you. So many people seem to assume the US constitution is the be all and end all answer about freedom of speech (or anything else included in it) whereas it's only one interpretation used by the government/legal system in a certain part of the world. Censorship not necessarily equal government censorship, and its ludicrous that people seem to assume it does.
Nasrudith 8y ago
> If you have to create a special message board that is the only place where you can say what you want to, perhaps you should think about what you are saying. That only shows that reception to what is being said is overwhelmingly negative. Society has an unfortunate long history of doing that for arbitrary and stupid things. There are legitimate reasons for using something like this. Granted with the "alt-right" it is a clear case of "They laughed at Einstein but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown". I can't help but think it is a shame that an overlay messageboard concept like that wound up being used in a double rot13 cryptofascist dumpster fire. Although it would probably always tend toward toxicity given its usefulness for hatedoms of any sort. I'm imagining a useful fact checker one slapped over news websites and even maintaining "score" of accuracy per author, site, and topic.
- deogeo 8y ago
  > They laughed at Einstein but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown Off topic, but I don't think they laughed at Einstein. Special and general relativity were well received by the scientific community, weren't they?
  - Nasrudith 8y ago
    Sort of - he got it published easily enough and the revered Max Planck praised it highly within a year and lectured on it but he certainly faced resistance. He had some allies who were themselves great mathematicians and physicists but he didn't exactly get the red carpet rolled out for him. It took four years after publication to get an associate professor position sufficient to resign from the patent office.
- syshum 8y ago
  Did you see these messages for yourself, personally? Or did you just go on "media reporting" Do you know, personally, if these messages where the "majority" of the content or do you believe if even a single one of these "rot13 cryptofascist dumpster fire" messages where posted anywhere on the network that is justification for a complete ban? Do believe companies like Mozilla should be uphold legal speech as it pertains to US Laws (as mozilla is a US Company) or should they impose greater censorship over everything that flows through their web browser, picking and choosing what is "acceptable"
syshum 8y ago
>>" Free speech means the government cannot prosecute you for what you say. Incorrect, very very very incorrect I am alarmed by the fact that people believe the only censorship by government is a problem or what "free speech" means. A society can be completely devoid of free speech while not having any government censorship at all. We are seeing the manifestation of such a society today. Government censorship is only one kind, and only 1 threat to free speech, but it is far far far from the only threat. > Any company can tell you to fuck off for any reason though, Yes, yes they can. But if they do they should not be able to advertise, collect money, and promote being "for everyone" or "adovating for the free and open web" or other such statements. That is and should be considered fraud if they do such things. If Mozilla wants to be a censorship platform, they need to own it in their marketing, mission statement, and public advocacy > the free market all the "free speech" advocates love so much. It is always amusing with Authoritarian and socialist promote the "free market" when it comes to censorship when in reality they have not idea what they are talking about
kayfox 8y ago
> If you have to create a special message board that is the only place where you can say what you want to, perhaps you should think about what you are saying. Such was discussing LGBT issues before the 2000s.
- netsharc 8y ago
  Ah, gotta love Nazis screaming "you have to tolerate my intolerance!". LGBTs were viewed as immoral until about a generation ago (depending on your location, still immoral now). I wonder how racism, viewed as immoral now (again, also depending on location), could be viewed as a moral opinion in a strange future.
  - writepub 8y ago
    > Ah, gotta love Nazis screaming "you have to tolerate my intolerance!". Wow! Just casually name-calling someone a Nazi, because of a difference of opinion is just so damn 2019. Here's a quick thought experiment for you - name ONE conservative who you DO NOT consider a Nazi. Just one. And then maybe you'll realize that the problem isn't that the opposing philosophy is actual Nazism, it's that you've been trained to open a debate with the accusation of "You are a Nazi because you disagree with my politics. Prove otherwise"
    - yhoneycomb 8y ago
      this is exactly the kind of thing a nazi would say
      - writepub 8y ago
        Like "yhoneycomb" is the exact kind of ID Hitler would choose.
        yhoneycomb 8y ago
        i enjoyed this exchange lol
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

deogeo 8y ago

> Free speech means the government cannot prosecute you for what you say. No, that's the 1st amendment of the US constitution. Free speech is a broader concept, and the 1st amendment defends it only from government interference.

CM30 8y ago
Thank you. So many people seem to assume the US constitution is the be all and end all answer about freedom of speech (or anything else included in it) whereas it's only one interpretation used by the government/legal system in a certain part of the world. Censorship not necessarily equal government censorship, and its ludicrous that people seem to assume it does.

Nasrudith 8y ago

> If you have to create a special message board that is the only place where you can say what you want to, perhaps you should think about what you are saying. That only shows that reception to what is being said is overwhelmingly negative. Society has an unfortunate long history of doing that for arbitrary and stupid things. There are legitimate reasons for using something like this. Granted with the "alt-right" it is a clear case of "They laughed at Einstein but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown". I can't help but think it is a shame that an overlay messageboard concept like that wound up being used in a double rot13 cryptofascist dumpster fire. Although it would probably always tend toward toxicity given its usefulness for hatedoms of any sort. I'm imagining a useful fact checker one slapped over news websites and even maintaining "score" of accuracy per author, site, and topic.

deogeo 8y ago
> They laughed at Einstein but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown Off topic, but I don't think they laughed at Einstein. Special and general relativity were well received by the scientific community, weren't they?
- Nasrudith 8y ago
  Sort of - he got it published easily enough and the revered Max Planck praised it highly within a year and lectured on it but he certainly faced resistance. He had some allies who were themselves great mathematicians and physicists but he didn't exactly get the red carpet rolled out for him. It took four years after publication to get an associate professor position sufficient to resign from the patent office.
syshum 8y ago
Did you see these messages for yourself, personally? Or did you just go on "media reporting" Do you know, personally, if these messages where the "majority" of the content or do you believe if even a single one of these "rot13 cryptofascist dumpster fire" messages where posted anywhere on the network that is justification for a complete ban? Do believe companies like Mozilla should be uphold legal speech as it pertains to US Laws (as mozilla is a US Company) or should they impose greater censorship over everything that flows through their web browser, picking and choosing what is "acceptable"

syshum 8y ago

>>" Free speech means the government cannot prosecute you for what you say. Incorrect, very very very incorrect I am alarmed by the fact that people believe the only censorship by government is a problem or what "free speech" means. A society can be completely devoid of free speech while not having any government censorship at all. We are seeing the manifestation of such a society today. Government censorship is only one kind, and only 1 threat to free speech, but it is far far far from the only threat. > Any company can tell you to fuck off for any reason though, Yes, yes they can. But if they do they should not be able to advertise, collect money, and promote being "for everyone" or "adovating for the free and open web" or other such statements. That is and should be considered fraud if they do such things. If Mozilla wants to be a censorship platform, they need to own it in their marketing, mission statement, and public advocacy > the free market all the "free speech" advocates love so much. It is always amusing with Authoritarian and socialist promote the "free market" when it comes to censorship when in reality they have not idea what they are talking about

kayfox 8y ago

> If you have to create a special message board that is the only place where you can say what you want to, perhaps you should think about what you are saying. Such was discussing LGBT issues before the 2000s.

netsharc 8y ago
Ah, gotta love Nazis screaming "you have to tolerate my intolerance!". LGBTs were viewed as immoral until about a generation ago (depending on your location, still immoral now). I wonder how racism, viewed as immoral now (again, also depending on location), could be viewed as a moral opinion in a strange future.
- writepub 8y ago
  > Ah, gotta love Nazis screaming "you have to tolerate my intolerance!". Wow! Just casually name-calling someone a Nazi, because of a difference of opinion is just so damn 2019. Here's a quick thought experiment for you - name ONE conservative who you DO NOT consider a Nazi. Just one. And then maybe you'll realize that the problem isn't that the opposing philosophy is actual Nazism, it's that you've been trained to open a debate with the accusation of "You are a Nazi because you disagree with my politics. Prove otherwise"
  - yhoneycomb 8y ago
    this is exactly the kind of thing a nazi would say
    - writepub 8y ago
      Like "yhoneycomb" is the exact kind of ID Hitler would choose.
      - yhoneycomb 8y ago
        i enjoyed this exchange lol

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]