5 ms·

I thought you were saying that “universal rules for nudity (subcontent: nipples)” are easier to write than “universal rules for fact-checking.“ If so, I disagr

I thought you were saying that “universal rules for nudity (subcontent: nipples)” are easier to write than “universal rules for fact-checking.“ If so, I disagree. They are either: a) equally hard, given the common understanding of what “facts” mean nowadays, or b) nudity is harder, given cultural contexts. Culture makes a lot of difference for what’s considered nudity (e.g. women breastfeeding goats, as illustrated in the link), and it should matter less for statements about average temperatures for a given region, etc. But the “facts” as presented are contested anyway, since they are derivations based on data + interpretation, even if the interpretation is from >95% of scientists in the relative field. That makes me lean more towards (a) even though I wish it was (b).

s1artibartfast 6y ago
>I thought you were saying that “universal rules for nudity (subcontent: nipples)” are easier to write than “universal rules for fact-checking.“ If so, I disagree. They are either: I think we still have a misunderstanding. I am saying that enforceable rules for nipples are easier to write, regardless of the cultural approval of those rules. A well written rule can be enforced by only looking at the content that is on the platform ( eg the image). That is not to say people might disagree (its Art!) or they might get it wrong (its a male nipple). When it comes to statements of fact, this is not the case. The enforcers must draw conclusion based on off platform research, a presumed intent of the post, and/or a presumed interpretation.
- filoeleven 6y ago
  I think I’m with you now. The nature of a factual claim is that it refers to other things that must be examined in order to determine if it passes or fails a rule, whereas for many kinds of images there is no external reference that has to be consulted: the content is all right there in the image itself. In which case I’d have to agree! Thanks for taking the time to clarify it for me.
  - s1artibartfast 6y ago
    Exactly! I would say that many other common rules follow the feasibility of images. For example it is easy to test if a post is doxxing, contains swear words, ect.

s1artibartfast 6y ago

>I thought you were saying that “universal rules for nudity (subcontent: nipples)” are easier to write than “universal rules for fact-checking.“ If so, I disagree. They are either: I think we still have a misunderstanding. I am saying that enforceable rules for nipples are easier to write, regardless of the cultural approval of those rules. A well written rule can be enforced by only looking at the content that is on the platform ( eg the image). That is not to say people might disagree (its Art!) or they might get it wrong (its a male nipple). When it comes to statements of fact, this is not the case. The enforcers must draw conclusion based on off platform research, a presumed intent of the post, and/or a presumed interpretation.

filoeleven 6y ago
I think I’m with you now. The nature of a factual claim is that it refers to other things that must be examined in order to determine if it passes or fails a rule, whereas for many kinds of images there is no external reference that has to be consulted: the content is all right there in the image itself. In which case I’d have to agree! Thanks for taking the time to clarify it for me.
- s1artibartfast 6y ago
  Exactly! I would say that many other common rules follow the feasibility of images. For example it is easy to test if a post is doxxing, contains swear words, ect.