3 ms·

The framing itself is an attack. That you keep on insisting that imposing censorship is a solution or that rights need to be "worked around" is pretty goddamn a

The framing itself is an attack. That you keep on insisting that imposing censorship is a solution or that rights need to be "worked around" is pretty goddamn authoritarian.

bmitc 6y ago
I am suggesting we think about these problems. It isn't "working around rights" to question the anything goes situation we have right now with social media and even our official government media and traditional media companies. Furthermore, our rights guarantee us against government censorship, and I am not suggesting that. It isn't a workaround or an attack to say those rights don't apply everywhere. And I am not insisting on anything. We need to think about it. Humans are easily emotionally manipulated, and our technology is a powerful medium in which to perform that manipulation. It is a very real threat to many systems. It is a fact that the 2016 election was manipulated via social media propaganda through the direct and indirect influence of the wealthy and various companies (Robert Mercer, Cambridge Analytica, Facebook, etc.). It is a suspicion that foreign actors also played a part in this. Are you suggesting we just throw up our hands and allow these things to take place? These are explicitly attacks on the very system that you say I am supposedly attacking. We need to address these things as we are clearly vulnerable to them.
- p1esk 6y ago
  These are explicitly attacks on the very system that you say I am supposedly attacking No. Spreading lies is very different from censoring lies. I should be allowed to say that Earth is flat, or our president is an idiot. You or the president should not be allowed to prohibit me from saying those things.
  - bmitc 6y ago
    They were and are attacks on the democratic voting process. Freedom of speech does not guarantee that you can say whatever you want without repercussions and it does not grant or guarantee you unrestricted propagation of what you write or say or record through non-governmental networks and platforms. We simply need to understand that the Internet, social media, networks, data, etc. have changed things and will continue to do so. We need to understand them and adapt our society to be able to face the new threats they provide and enable. And we need to stop having knee jerk reactions to everything.
    - p1esk 6y ago
      I share your concerns, and I agree that spread of misinformation in the modern society is a problem. However, I don't see how we could censor it without damaging the right to free speech.

The framing itself is an attack. That you keep on insisting that imposing censorship is a solution or that rights need to be "worked around" is pretty goddamn authoritarian.

bmitc 6y ago

I am suggesting we think about these problems. It isn't "working around rights" to question the anything goes situation we have right now with social media and even our official government media and traditional media companies. Furthermore, our rights guarantee us against government censorship, and I am not suggesting that. It isn't a workaround or an attack to say those rights don't apply everywhere. And I am not insisting on anything. We need to think about it. Humans are easily emotionally manipulated, and our technology is a powerful medium in which to perform that manipulation. It is a very real threat to many systems. It is a fact that the 2016 election was manipulated via social media propaganda through the direct and indirect influence of the wealthy and various companies (Robert Mercer, Cambridge Analytica, Facebook, etc.). It is a suspicion that foreign actors also played a part in this. Are you suggesting we just throw up our hands and allow these things to take place? These are explicitly attacks on the very system that you say I am supposedly attacking. We need to address these things as we are clearly vulnerable to them.

p1esk 6y ago
These are explicitly attacks on the very system that you say I am supposedly attacking No. Spreading lies is very different from censoring lies. I should be allowed to say that Earth is flat, or our president is an idiot. You or the president should not be allowed to prohibit me from saying those things.
- bmitc 6y ago
  They were and are attacks on the democratic voting process. Freedom of speech does not guarantee that you can say whatever you want without repercussions and it does not grant or guarantee you unrestricted propagation of what you write or say or record through non-governmental networks and platforms. We simply need to understand that the Internet, social media, networks, data, etc. have changed things and will continue to do so. We need to understand them and adapt our society to be able to face the new threats they provide and enable. And we need to stop having knee jerk reactions to everything.
  - p1esk 6y ago
    I share your concerns, and I agree that spread of misinformation in the modern society is a problem. However, I don't see how we could censor it without damaging the right to free speech.