12 ms·
Regardless of being the right thing to do or not, it is very interesting to see a software platform banning a president of a country. Interesting times.
by aprdm 6y ago
Regardless of being the right thing to do or not, it is very interesting to see a software platform banning a president of a country.
Interesting times.
- systemvoltage 6y agoYou must have something to say besides it’s interesting?
- BrawnLongHaul 6y agoBecause, to me, it seems that any thought that differs from SV, left-leaning orthodoxy, is instantly flagged, downvoted, or deleted.
- systemvoltage 6y agoSaying something is interesting is not adding any value. It’s obvious that all this is very interesting, indeed.
- Epokhe 6y agoIt’s also interesting that you’re so worried by this comment. I found some value in the original comment because it highlighted a software company is doing it. Just relax.
- systemvoltage 6y agoI’m not worried, I’m expressing how ridiculously afraid people are to take a side because hey, it’s kind of a polarizing and controversial topic. Tell us what you think! In some ways, it’s self-censorship so one doesn’t get downvotes. I think I find anyone telling someone to relax a bit condescending, but I’m gonna assume good faith that you’re not meaning it.
- Epokhe 6y agoSorry if that came across that way. I just found your first reply unnecessary. I think each take is useful, no matter how opinionated they are. I understand your point though, I also wouldn't want every comment in the thread being neutral. Knowing HN, I think we're doing fine :)
- systemvoltage 6y agoAll good.
- aprdm 6y agoThinking that you have to Take a Side is IMO a false dichotomy. There is a whole specter of opinions. Between "I support what facebook did" and "I do not support what facebook did", or "I support Trump" vs "I hate Trump". if I were to take a side right now I would not be able to. Regardless I find it interesting, much of the discussion I've heard in the last 24h is very interesting to me. FWIW I am not American nor do I live in the USA.
- systemvoltage 6y agoI should perhaps expand and sort of agree with you: You don't need to take sides. Just expand more on your stance as neutral than just saying "It's interesting". I expect more from HN comments I guess.
- midasz 6y agoQuickly, to the victim-mobile...
- laddng 6y agoI often find myself responding with "interesting" when I haven't yet formulated an opinion - to me it's an indication that I'll have to get back to you on how I feel about it. I haven't found another synonym to use as a response, and I often catch myself constantly saying "interesting" over and over. It's interesting.
- dkjaudyeqooe 6y agoLike Trump is just a regular president of a country. It's not surprising at all given his behavior. Being president doesn't excuse it.
- hartator 6y agoWhat policies he pushed you are not happy with? Less taxes, no new wars, and leaving each state making their own decisions for covid-19 seems pretty center right to me.
- gameswithgo 6y ago1. less taxes I am not happy with 2. immigrant children in cages 3. easing of environmental rules 4. pulling out of climate deal 5. pulling out of iran deal 6. lying about the election being a fraud, and causing insurrection 7. pardoning his criminal cronies
- boogies 6y ago> 2. immigrant children in cages Who built the cages? https://lmddgtfy.net/?q=who%20built%20cages%20for%20children https://lmddgtfy.net/?q=who%20built%20cages%20for%20children You’re making https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25673162 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25673162 ’s point.
- dragonwriter 6y ago> Who built the cages? Who cares? There’s all kinds of less-objectionable potential uses of the cages than the ones to which the Trump Administration has put them. Building them isn’t the problem.
- boogies 6y ago> There’s all kinds of less-objectionable potential uses of the cages than the ones to which the Trump Administration has put them. They were built to keep children separate from each other (gender segregated) and from adults: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/08/26/fact-check-obama-administration-built-migrant-cages-meme-true/3413683001/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/08/26/fac...
- bl0b 6y agoI learned on HN some time ago that: > "May you live in interesting times" is an English expression that is claimed to be a translation of a traditional Chinese curse. While seemingly a blessing, the expression is normally used ironically; life is better in "uninteresting times" of peace and tranquility than in "interesting" ones, which are usually times of trouble. [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_you_live_in_interesting_times https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_you_live_in_interesting_ti...
- laddng 6y agoI heard this phrase in Shanghai and never knew it may be a curse - thanks for sharing this - I usually say this every once in a while but maybe shouldn't
- techer 6y ago“Despite being widely attributed as a Chinese curse, there is no known equivalent expression in Chinese.[2] The nearest related Chinese expression translates as "Better to be a dog in times of tranquility than a human in times of chaos." (寧為太平犬，不做亂世人)”
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- danbolt 6y agoIt looks like the symbols for dog (犬) and person (人) are at end of each verse. I can't speak Chinese, but I'd imagine the line rings well hearing the ordering of subject/object/verb like that.
- justinnhli 6y agoThere are more constraints than that - the corresponding words in each phrase are also the same parts of speech, and are often read with a specific cadence. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antithetical_couplet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antithetical_couplet
- 6y ago
- NN88 6y agoI have a social media platform that I created that Trump isn't on. Did I deplatform him?
- disown 6y agoEven more interesting is the blatant support of zuckerburg and facebook here. Of all places, you'd think HN would support free speech, but yesterday, you got downvote brigaded for mentioning that facebook and tech companies shouldn't be our censors. The logic was "we must protect democracy by having zuckerburg censor an elected government official". One moment it's facebook is evil. The next moment, facebook and zuckerburg are the heroes we need to save democracy. Go figure.
- MacsHeadroom 6y ago"The logic" for me is that private censorship IS free speech whether I agree with it personally or not. The point of free speech protections are to protect the stuff you don't like. Don't like a private business censoring? That's free speech.
- Chris2048 6y ago> The point of free speech protections are to protect the stuff you don't like no, its to protect speech you don't like, not "stuff", or it could be abstracted to any number of maxims. a private business cannot censor its own expressions, only those of others. The issue of censorship only cones up wrt publishing platforms discrimination on who they serve.
- wizzwizz4 6y agoHas it not occurred to you that, maybe, we should judge people for their actions? Rather than deciding upon an immutable set of Good People and Bad People, we should judge good and bad deeds?
- dionian 6y agoIf only Facebook would act that way towards Trump. He called for the people to leave the Capitol.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- awb 6y agoSince the election results became apparent cable outlets have begun cutting away from the President’s speeches and tech companies have begun censoring the President’s speech. Absolutely nothing has changed in the President’s speech or behavior since his 1st speech announcing his candidacy 5 years ago. We needed a John Hancock 5 years ago that was willing to draw a line on violent speech and disinformation regardless of the consequences. Instead we got media leadership with their thumbs to the wind ignoring their platform policies and hiding behind a “public interest” rationale. Too little too late.
- threeseed 6y agoContext matters. What Trump did over the last 5 years pales in comparison to what he is doing now. The effortless transition of power is the most fundamental and sacrosanct process in a democracy. And everyone has an obligation to defend it.
- prox 6y agoIt’s literally what he has sworn to defend at the inauguration. Instead we got this tweet “Statistically impossible to have lost the 2020 Election," he tweeted. "Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!" He has sworn duty to not incite the crowd, no matter how much he thinks he has lost. That’s what the courts are for (which he tried and lost) and even many,many recounts (which didn’t move the needle noticeably) and that is what the democratic process is for.
- URSpider94 6y agoI'd argue that there's actually no difference in his behavior. Trump has been consistently divisive, untruthful and inflammatory since day one. What has happened is that his sustained behavior has radicalized a significant fraction of the population to the point that they are convinced that everyone else is lying to them and there's a massive conspiracy against their god-leader. I don't want to run afoul of Godwin's Law here, but if you ever wonder how people ended up following leaders like Stalin, Franco or Mussolini - it was a process of years. People who called this out as dangerous from day one were ridiculed as alarmists or partisans.
- tshaddox 6y agoIt seems more interesting that a software platform like this would be expected to treat a president of a country different than a normal person. Should the queen of England get even more privileges to break rules on the platform? And the peerage somewhere below that (but still much higher than the common folk)?
- NE2z2T9qi 6y agoAnd what rules exactly did Trump break? He explicitly did not call for violence. It seems like you want people silenced if they question the official narrative. That's precisely antithetical to free-speech ideals. Do you know how often I've seen Republicans called Nazis? Or evil? Or that they need to be eliminated? I don't go crying to Facebook to censor opinions I don't like.
- bra-ket 6y agoexactly, but the lefties are lost cause at this point after years of brainwashing. I have never seen so many people so deep in 'alternate reality'.
- Voloskaya 6y agoInsults are not actual call to immediate violence. Calling thousands of supporters to go to the capitol and telling them "you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong." is a very precise call to violence.
- NE2z2T9qi 6y agoGot it. Protesting should be illegal. Thanks for the lesson on free speech.
- zarkov99 6y agoMan, I am sympathetic to the free speech argument and I agree that the right has been getting shafted in that department, but this does seem pretty close to the "don't yell fire in a crowded theater" exception. This was not a protest in the democratic sense. It is a shameful day for the country.
- agnosticmantis 6y agoThe fact that very little of his term is left and that everyone, including his former allies, are abandoning him, make the story less surprising in retrospect. But yes, these are hard to predict times.
- suyash 6y agoI can see it only going to get worse from here, if social media companies powers go unchecked.
- irrational 6y agoIt would be more interesting if they did it years ago. Doing it less than 2 weeks before he leaves office seems uninteresting and cowardly to me.
- mmmeff 6y agoCan we call it what it is? A corporation is banning the president, not a software platform .
- yawaemworht 6y agoWhile I don't agree with twitter policies as of the last few months, I don't think that somebody should get a different treatment based on the status/job/role they have in society.
- dgudkov 6y agoIt's a turning point. For the 1st time ever the tech giants asserted that their power in the internet is bigger then the government. It was kinda obvious the last few years, but remained implicit. Today the implicit became explicit. I'm sure it will have a profound impact on American democracy in the long run. Interesting times, indeed.