4 ms·
I can’t pinpoint exactly when the shift happened, but in the recent past the tech industry was always the first to defend free speech and the open exchange of i
by cal5k 7y ago
I can’t pinpoint exactly when the shift happened, but in the recent past the tech industry was always the first to defend free speech and the open exchange of ideas. Today it seems to be increasingly beholden to a loud minority of employees with some very illiberal views about speech.
- gameswithgo 7y agoThis happened because we saw that free speech on internet forums just let to people harassing women and yelling racist nonsense constantly. The forum you are on deletes garbage too. free speech is a principle that the government can't silence you. it never meant that other people have to listen to you or care what you say.
- humanrebar 7y agoFree speech is a principle based in rationality. Exercise of power should not overrule reason and independent thought. Governments are notoriously powerful and prone to censorship, but private groups like corporations and busybody neighborhoods can also be heavy handed and net harmful.
- youdontknowtho 7y agoOnly when the speech is insulting, racist, or oppressive. This whole thing is a dodge so that the far right can get their views in front of people. This is something that they explicitly state as a goal and a tactic. The guy voted for all kinds of gross right wing BS. People don't want to hear what he has to say.
- major505 7y agoWho decides what is insult, racist and opressive? This are a very particular definition.
- cal5k 7y agoYes, a "dodge so that the far right can get their views in front of people" that also happens to be a constitutional amendment from 1791. The idea of handing the power to determine what speech is "insulting, racist, or oppressive" to government of any kind is absolutely horrifying to me. It would be a dismantling of one of the core principles of western democracy. And PS I'm Canadian.
- treesrule 7y agoI mean, its not just the tech industry, even people like Senator Cruz who used to `ostensibly` be for the constitutions has toyed with a ban on supporting BDS and regulating private companies speech.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- kristiandupont 7y agoI don't know about generally, but my own feeling is that I am more reluctant about the whole thing because a lot of the people chanting about freedom of speech seem to be destructive and ill-intentioned these days.
- humanrebar 7y agoSo free speech is guilty by association? I understand the emotional reaction. I don't understand how nominally rational people don't overrule their collective id on this one.