8 ms·

> Who cares what a bunch of teenagers say on the Internet? Because it gets to the point where it becomes young adults planning mass shootings on the Internet.

keiferski 6y ago
...and this actually happens how often? Say, in comparison to the consequences of suppressing speech (easily observable throughout the 20th century)? Or even just other causes of death or violence? It's minuscule, so little that it's almost absurd to even be worried about it.
- notreallytrue 6y ago
  Please stop pretending that USA are not a violent country where mass shootings don't happen all the time https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2020 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_th...
  - keiferski 6y ago
    Almost all of these look to be local-level disagreements or semi-organized crime, not radicalized teenagers on 8Chan.
    - notreallytrue 6y ago
      They send hate letters to each other with stagecoach services? The problem is that there is no such thing as "freedom of speech" it's BS, there is a right to have an opinion, but some opinions are crimes and should never become speech, let alone be public Corollary: public speech must be granted to everyone, because it's in the US Constitution, but you should not use it to badmouth the US
      - nitrogen 6y ago
        but some opinions are crimes No. The US does not criminalize thought, and doing so would be tyranny. you should not use it to badmouth the US Also No. The very purpose of freedom of speech and the press is to maintain channels for criticism and change.
        notreallytrue 6y ago
        > No. The US does not criminalize thought, and doing so would be tyranny. That's why nobody takes Americans seriously and they need so many guns to get attention Fascism is a crime in Italy, it's in the Constitution Nazism is a crime in Germany as well They are not opinions, they are crimes Of course not for the US that saved lots of them and brought them home Or supported them when they literally destroyed South America instating far right dictatorships... > The very purpose of freedom of speech and the press is to maintain channels for criticism and change Says the country where every year tens of mass shooting episodes happen and never changed anything to prevent them, despite being the only place in the developed World where it happens and an insurmountable amount of criticism Do you mind if I don't buy your BS?
        nitrogen 6y ago
        What is your purpose in this conversation? Have you ever lived in the US?
        notreallytrue 6y ago
        I did of course Did you ever lived outside of it? Not as an occupant of course, because that's what usually Americans living abroad do The point is to prove that "freedom of speech" said by American corporations is ridiculous and nobody should believe it, on the contrary, everybody should start to worry
        nitrogen 6y ago
        If you're sincere, you are definitely acting on incomplete information with regard to what America and Americans are actually like, and missing the point that it's individuals who need to have the freedom to speak, not corporations. If you're here with an agenda, well, whatever you're doing isn't making the world better.
  - Vinceo 6y ago
    OP never said he pretends that USA are not a violent country where mass shootings don't happen all the time. OP implied that young adults PLANNING mass shootings on the INTERNET is miniscule.
    - notreallytrue 6y ago
      Are you sure? Looks like 99% of the mass shootings are organized by young people and 99% of them happens in the US (in the west)
      - rglullis 6y ago
        What website should we block if we want to avoid another Boston Marathon bombing or men running trucks over people in Christmas markets like in Berlin? (I just realized that both happened mere blocks of my residence at the time. Maybe if I become homeless we will be able to prevent these horrific events)
        notreallytrue 6y ago
        Let's start with Facebook and Twitter that are cancerous and see what happens... > men running trucks over people in Christmas markets like in Berlin? This is one of those events that we can consider extremely rare. Nobody can prevent the actions of some lone wolf
        rglullis 6y ago
        So rare that a very similar one happened in the French Riviera just some months after? Anyway, the point is that we can not solve social issues with technological solutions. You are just acting on the symptoms but still never going to get a cure. Block a "cancerous" open site, and crazy sick people are just continue to do what they do in a darker corner of the net.
        notreallytrue 6y ago
        Yes, rare. Like a few times in a century, not hundreds times in a year, every year, sir. Closing social networks is not a technological solution, it's political. Public speech must not be controlled by private entities Unless you are the US and don't understand it. Crazy people with their forums for crazy people have no ability to target hundreds of millions of people through paid ads Please, try to understand it, because it's really not that hard There's a reason why every developed country in the World strictly controls firearms but not knifes There's a reason why the only "developed" country where mass shootings happen all the time is the only developed country that refuses to strictly control firearms It's the most evident proof of Einstein law of insanity
  - mrmonkeyman 6y ago
    The totals are still insignificant. No matter how hard you cry injustice, your precious cars and food kill way, way, way more.
  - sneak 6y ago
    480 deaths in a year in a country of 350M isn't a lot, and doesn't make a place "a violent country". Being killed in a mass shooting in the US is only approximately one order of magnitude more likely than getting struck and killed by lighting in the US.
- tjoff 6y ago
  Once a month? Free speech has never been free, some limitations has always existed. So I'm not sure what observable consequences you are talking about.
- dash2 6y ago
  It’s non-obvious what the consequences of suppressing free speech are. You can’t just assume an equivalent between that and fascism or socialism. Today, Germany bans certain kinds of hate speech, as a result of its previous experience.
  - notreallytrue 6y ago
    Nobody wants to suppress free speech, just private controlled public speech. Free speech is not gratis. It needs care.
alexisread 6y ago
Rather than censoring people, we could take the approach that our worldview is robust enough to withstand competition / challenge. More discussion should in theory wither the fragile ones: https://youtu.be/BiqDZlAZygU https://youtu.be/BiqDZlAZygU The real issue is echo chambers, and getting people to voluntarily cross- pollinate their bubbles. Censoring actually makes this issue worse though.
- unknownkadath 6y ago
  You are assuming that the market place of ideas selects for correctness rather than virality.
  - ryukafalz 6y ago
    We might get a bit closer if our communication tools encouraged correctness rather than virality.
    - sudosysgen 6y ago
      Which they never will without some central power because the (economic)market selects for virality when it comes to communication tools. The action of that central power will be called censorship. You could also try to have some guarantee of interoperability to reduce network effects and thus make the market effect weaker and reduce the selection for virality. That seems like something we could try.
panta 6y ago
Maybe they become those young adults for different reasons? It could be an effect of an alienating society, focused mainly on wealth instead of on the human being.
- dash2 6y ago
  You can’t explain a change with a constant. We’ve had capitalism for centuries. Far right and Islamic terrorism are not new, but they have risen greatly, and their spread is linked to extremism on the internet.
  - thu2111 6y ago
    Most Islamic extremism is spread through mosques and prisons, at least in Europe. I can't remember the last time a terrorism investigation tracked the original radicalisation back to the internet. It's a non issue.
    - skinkestek 6y ago
      ISIS at is peak had a significant web presence.
      - thu2111 6y ago
        Good point, but I'm struggling to remember people who were radicalised exclusively through ISIS websites. There probably have been a few just because there were so many cases by now they all blur together a bit, but usually ISIS sympathisers seem to have been exposed to a lot of ISIS propaganda during sermons. They may also have consumed online content but it was in addition to, not in replacement of, traditional offline radicalisation.

keiferski 6y ago

...and this actually happens how often? Say, in comparison to the consequences of suppressing speech (easily observable throughout the 20th century)? Or even just other causes of death or violence? It's minuscule, so little that it's almost absurd to even be worried about it.

notreallytrue 6y ago
Please stop pretending that USA are not a violent country where mass shootings don't happen all the time https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2020 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_th...
- keiferski 6y ago
  Almost all of these look to be local-level disagreements or semi-organized crime, not radicalized teenagers on 8Chan.
  - notreallytrue 6y ago
    They send hate letters to each other with stagecoach services? The problem is that there is no such thing as "freedom of speech" it's BS, there is a right to have an opinion, but some opinions are crimes and should never become speech, let alone be public Corollary: public speech must be granted to everyone, because it's in the US Constitution, but you should not use it to badmouth the US
    - nitrogen 6y ago
      but some opinions are crimes No. The US does not criminalize thought, and doing so would be tyranny. you should not use it to badmouth the US Also No. The very purpose of freedom of speech and the press is to maintain channels for criticism and change.
      - notreallytrue 6y ago
        > No. The US does not criminalize thought, and doing so would be tyranny. That's why nobody takes Americans seriously and they need so many guns to get attention Fascism is a crime in Italy, it's in the Constitution Nazism is a crime in Germany as well They are not opinions, they are crimes Of course not for the US that saved lots of them and brought them home Or supported them when they literally destroyed South America instating far right dictatorships... > The very purpose of freedom of speech and the press is to maintain channels for criticism and change Says the country where every year tens of mass shooting episodes happen and never changed anything to prevent them, despite being the only place in the developed World where it happens and an insurmountable amount of criticism Do you mind if I don't buy your BS?
        nitrogen 6y ago
        What is your purpose in this conversation? Have you ever lived in the US?
        notreallytrue 6y ago
        I did of course Did you ever lived outside of it? Not as an occupant of course, because that's what usually Americans living abroad do The point is to prove that "freedom of speech" said by American corporations is ridiculous and nobody should believe it, on the contrary, everybody should start to worry
        nitrogen 6y ago
        If you're sincere, you are definitely acting on incomplete information with regard to what America and Americans are actually like, and missing the point that it's individuals who need to have the freedom to speak, not corporations. If you're here with an agenda, well, whatever you're doing isn't making the world better.
- Vinceo 6y ago
  OP never said he pretends that USA are not a violent country where mass shootings don't happen all the time. OP implied that young adults PLANNING mass shootings on the INTERNET is miniscule.
  - notreallytrue 6y ago
    Are you sure? Looks like 99% of the mass shootings are organized by young people and 99% of them happens in the US (in the west)
    - rglullis 6y ago
      What website should we block if we want to avoid another Boston Marathon bombing or men running trucks over people in Christmas markets like in Berlin? (I just realized that both happened mere blocks of my residence at the time. Maybe if I become homeless we will be able to prevent these horrific events)
      - notreallytrue 6y ago
        Let's start with Facebook and Twitter that are cancerous and see what happens... > men running trucks over people in Christmas markets like in Berlin? This is one of those events that we can consider extremely rare. Nobody can prevent the actions of some lone wolf
        rglullis 6y ago
        So rare that a very similar one happened in the French Riviera just some months after? Anyway, the point is that we can not solve social issues with technological solutions. You are just acting on the symptoms but still never going to get a cure. Block a "cancerous" open site, and crazy sick people are just continue to do what they do in a darker corner of the net.
        notreallytrue 6y ago
        Yes, rare. Like a few times in a century, not hundreds times in a year, every year, sir. Closing social networks is not a technological solution, it's political. Public speech must not be controlled by private entities Unless you are the US and don't understand it. Crazy people with their forums for crazy people have no ability to target hundreds of millions of people through paid ads Please, try to understand it, because it's really not that hard There's a reason why every developed country in the World strictly controls firearms but not knifes There's a reason why the only "developed" country where mass shootings happen all the time is the only developed country that refuses to strictly control firearms It's the most evident proof of Einstein law of insanity
- mrmonkeyman 6y ago
  The totals are still insignificant. No matter how hard you cry injustice, your precious cars and food kill way, way, way more.
- sneak 6y ago
  480 deaths in a year in a country of 350M isn't a lot, and doesn't make a place "a violent country". Being killed in a mass shooting in the US is only approximately one order of magnitude more likely than getting struck and killed by lighting in the US.
tjoff 6y ago
Once a month? Free speech has never been free, some limitations has always existed. So I'm not sure what observable consequences you are talking about.
dash2 6y ago
It’s non-obvious what the consequences of suppressing free speech are. You can’t just assume an equivalent between that and fascism or socialism. Today, Germany bans certain kinds of hate speech, as a result of its previous experience.
- notreallytrue 6y ago
  Nobody wants to suppress free speech, just private controlled public speech. Free speech is not gratis. It needs care.

alexisread 6y ago

Rather than censoring people, we could take the approach that our worldview is robust enough to withstand competition / challenge. More discussion should in theory wither the fragile ones: https://youtu.be/BiqDZlAZygU https://youtu.be/BiqDZlAZygU The real issue is echo chambers, and getting people to voluntarily cross- pollinate their bubbles. Censoring actually makes this issue worse though.

unknownkadath 6y ago
You are assuming that the market place of ideas selects for correctness rather than virality.
- ryukafalz 6y ago
  We might get a bit closer if our communication tools encouraged correctness rather than virality.
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    Which they never will without some central power because the (economic)market selects for virality when it comes to communication tools. The action of that central power will be called censorship. You could also try to have some guarantee of interoperability to reduce network effects and thus make the market effect weaker and reduce the selection for virality. That seems like something we could try.

panta 6y ago

Maybe they become those young adults for different reasons? It could be an effect of an alienating society, focused mainly on wealth instead of on the human being.

dash2 6y ago
You can’t explain a change with a constant. We’ve had capitalism for centuries. Far right and Islamic terrorism are not new, but they have risen greatly, and their spread is linked to extremism on the internet.
- thu2111 6y ago
  Most Islamic extremism is spread through mosques and prisons, at least in Europe. I can't remember the last time a terrorism investigation tracked the original radicalisation back to the internet. It's a non issue.
  - skinkestek 6y ago
    ISIS at is peak had a significant web presence.
    - thu2111 6y ago
      Good point, but I'm struggling to remember people who were radicalised exclusively through ISIS websites. There probably have been a few just because there were so many cases by now they all blur together a bit, but usually ISIS sympathisers seem to have been exposed to a lot of ISIS propaganda during sermons. They may also have consumed online content but it was in addition to, not in replacement of, traditional offline radicalisation.