19 ms·

> Public speech must not be controlled by private entities This is part where we disagree. Not that I am defending that private entities should "control" publi

> Public speech must not be controlled by private entities This is part where we disagree. Not that I am defending that private entities should "control" public speech, but rather that this control is circunstancial. Remove Facebook and Twitter (and every big media conglomerate as well, FOX, CNN, NBC) all you want, people will still look for groups that share their views and messages that confirm their biases. This is not just a guess. I am seeing this first-hand with the people looking into leaving Twitter and joining Mastodon. Go to /r/mastodon and you will see me arguing with every one that comes with the idea that different instances mean different "communities" and "interests". Also, consider the alternative. The article is saying that we shouldn't want a decentralized web. Who would you propose to "control" public speech? If not private companies and if not smaller groups, the only alternatives left is, guess what, Big State and tyrants

notreallytrue 6y ago
They always looked for places where to share their opinions with other people Those places didn't weaponize their feelings and weaknesses against them to sell them ads Want to make a global social network? The State should be able to control them (every single state they operate in) and their decisions should be held accountable in court The SN banned you? They should have human support to solve the issues and a judge could overrule the decision, while now they are black holes I trust the State, more than Facebook, if someone doesn't they shouldn't impose their decisions on other groups, including other countries It's weird to read that people living in countries where the police can arrest you for not stepping out of the car or saying to a police officer to f*ck off defend the right to wear swastikas or private companies keeping public speech hostage in the name of freedom Decentralised web can exists only among many small actors, when there are a few behemoth that control everything, of course segregation is gonna be the most obvious response: Russian internet, Chinese internet and let's hope European internet soon.
- rglullis 6y ago
  > Those places didn't weaponize their feelings and weaknesses against them to sell them ads. This can be said of every media company. Every newspaper, magazine (low-brow or high brow), radio, TV station, cable TV company. Every. Single. One. > I trust the State, more than Facebook. It doesn't matter who you trust more. It matters who you are able to disengage from. We as individuals and as groups can choose to keep Facebook of our lives. Can the Chinese say the same from the CCP? > segregation is gonna be the most obvious response (...) let's hope European Internet So, you are so afraid of Facebook's "control" of the internet that you would actively advocate to put in the hands of tyrants and kleptocrats? Either you don't understand the concept of "decentralized web" or you are just fucking with me.
  - notreallytrue 6y ago
    > This can be said of every media company. Every newspaper, magazine (low-brow or high brow), radio, TV station, cable TV company No. It can't. How can you even believe something so ridiculous? > It matters who you are able to disengage from. It matters that the State is not profit based and is under public control. Chinese are more free than many Americans I would strongly prefer to be Chinese than black in USA But what baffles me more are people always bringing up CCCP without even knowing about the different positions in the communist space (that people like you often confuse with socialism) For example you even ignore the existence of the Sino-Soviet split of 1956 > o, you are so afraid of Facebook's "control" of the internet that you would actively advocate to put in the hands of tyrants and kleptocrats? It's definitely true that arguing with stupid people is a useless waste of energy.
    - rglullis 6y ago
      Regarding media: "playing the insecurities of people to sell them ads" is actually something that every marketer does. No exceptions. Fabricate demand. From news channels that are considered infotainment to product placement spots on movies, from teen magazines that promote utterly wrong role models and lead girls to bulimia, anorexia and all sorts of psychosis to any property from Arianna Huffington that mastered the exploitation of outrage culture to sell to Millennials. Rest assured that every single media outlet that depends on ads to make money has no interest in elevated public discourse and thrives on public anxiety. And no matter how bad it is, it is still better than State-owned media, which bypasses the whole marketing mechanisms and just relies on the ruling power to keep the very same type of public control through fear and intimidation. Regarding China and freedom: tell me if you prefer to be Black in the US or a Uighur in a concentration camp. Afterwards tell me which people gets to more or less manipulated by their media.
      - notreallytrue 6y ago
        > Regarding media: "playing the insecurities of people to sell them ads" is actually something that every marketer does Nope. That's an American centric view, there are other markets outside of US and they don't operate in the same way at all. > Regarding China and freedom: tell me if you prefer to be Black in the US or a Uighur in a concentration camp Maybe you don't realise it, but your answer represent everything's wrong in US and why people don't believe in US BS anymore. Black people in US aren't even considered Americans, nobody ever answered to me "they are not black, they are Americans" Nobody ever challenged the idea that black people in US are lesser people in the first place nobody! In fact to find something worse you had to resort to bringing up concentration camps, while I simply said. "I would prefer to be Chinese that black in USA" I stand on my idea concentration camps < being black in USA < being Chinese in China

notreallytrue 6y ago

They always looked for places where to share their opinions with other people Those places didn't weaponize their feelings and weaknesses against them to sell them ads Want to make a global social network? The State should be able to control them (every single state they operate in) and their decisions should be held accountable in court The SN banned you? They should have human support to solve the issues and a judge could overrule the decision, while now they are black holes I trust the State, more than Facebook, if someone doesn't they shouldn't impose their decisions on other groups, including other countries It's weird to read that people living in countries where the police can arrest you for not stepping out of the car or saying to a police officer to f*ck off defend the right to wear swastikas or private companies keeping public speech hostage in the name of freedom Decentralised web can exists only among many small actors, when there are a few behemoth that control everything, of course segregation is gonna be the most obvious response: Russian internet, Chinese internet and let's hope European internet soon.

rglullis 6y ago
> Those places didn't weaponize their feelings and weaknesses against them to sell them ads. This can be said of every media company. Every newspaper, magazine (low-brow or high brow), radio, TV station, cable TV company. Every. Single. One. > I trust the State, more than Facebook. It doesn't matter who you trust more. It matters who you are able to disengage from. We as individuals and as groups can choose to keep Facebook of our lives. Can the Chinese say the same from the CCP? > segregation is gonna be the most obvious response (...) let's hope European Internet So, you are so afraid of Facebook's "control" of the internet that you would actively advocate to put in the hands of tyrants and kleptocrats? Either you don't understand the concept of "decentralized web" or you are just fucking with me.
- notreallytrue 6y ago
  > This can be said of every media company. Every newspaper, magazine (low-brow or high brow), radio, TV station, cable TV company No. It can't. How can you even believe something so ridiculous? > It matters who you are able to disengage from. It matters that the State is not profit based and is under public control. Chinese are more free than many Americans I would strongly prefer to be Chinese than black in USA But what baffles me more are people always bringing up CCCP without even knowing about the different positions in the communist space (that people like you often confuse with socialism) For example you even ignore the existence of the Sino-Soviet split of 1956 > o, you are so afraid of Facebook's "control" of the internet that you would actively advocate to put in the hands of tyrants and kleptocrats? It's definitely true that arguing with stupid people is a useless waste of energy.
  - rglullis 6y ago
    Regarding media: "playing the insecurities of people to sell them ads" is actually something that every marketer does. No exceptions. Fabricate demand. From news channels that are considered infotainment to product placement spots on movies, from teen magazines that promote utterly wrong role models and lead girls to bulimia, anorexia and all sorts of psychosis to any property from Arianna Huffington that mastered the exploitation of outrage culture to sell to Millennials. Rest assured that every single media outlet that depends on ads to make money has no interest in elevated public discourse and thrives on public anxiety. And no matter how bad it is, it is still better than State-owned media, which bypasses the whole marketing mechanisms and just relies on the ruling power to keep the very same type of public control through fear and intimidation. Regarding China and freedom: tell me if you prefer to be Black in the US or a Uighur in a concentration camp. Afterwards tell me which people gets to more or less manipulated by their media.
    - notreallytrue 6y ago
      > Regarding media: "playing the insecurities of people to sell them ads" is actually something that every marketer does Nope. That's an American centric view, there are other markets outside of US and they don't operate in the same way at all. > Regarding China and freedom: tell me if you prefer to be Black in the US or a Uighur in a concentration camp Maybe you don't realise it, but your answer represent everything's wrong in US and why people don't believe in US BS anymore. Black people in US aren't even considered Americans, nobody ever answered to me "they are not black, they are Americans" Nobody ever challenged the idea that black people in US are lesser people in the first place nobody! In fact to find something worse you had to resort to bringing up concentration camps, while I simply said. "I would prefer to be Chinese that black in USA" I stand on my idea concentration camps < being black in USA < being Chinese in China