5 ms·

Just because companies in a free market should be legally free to censor people, doesn’t mean they should do it. The sheer number of people who can’t grasp thi

by jpxw 6y ago

Just because companies in a free market should be legally free to censor people, doesn’t mean they should do it. The sheer number of people who can’t grasp this basic point is staggering.

m00x 6y ago
So you think HN/Reddit comments should be unmoderated?
- jpxw 6y ago
  No. There’s a role for moderation, in removing comments which are off-topic or illegal. My issue is with “moderation” where you just remove content you disagree with politically.
  - tomrod 6y ago
    Political disagreement in some contexts is illegal. I've seen some real gems from ParlerWatch, people wanting to roast the wives and children of liberals on open spits to teach them the danger of liberalness. Liberal means free, btw.
    - IncRnd 6y ago
      You can find that sort of trash on Parler, Twitter, Facebook, and elsewhere - from people of many political stripes.
      - tomrod 6y ago
        Yes, but higher density with the GOP and other nationalism-focused groups. It's just a natural outcome of the different ideologies. One is bound by hate over decrease in privilege, the other is a broad coalition to make lives better for folks who then get frustrated and vent online (and sometimes in the streets).
  - mreome 6y ago
    Trump was banned for inciting a violent, seditious, riot that left four people dead. That's not just "content you disagree with politically" Edit: I wonder why I got down-voted. My comment was not "off-topic or illegal", perhaps someone disagrees with me politically. =P
  - m00x 6y ago
    His tweets incited violence. He went 4 years spewing misinformation and even threatening to invoke section 230 twitter without being banned. There is a massive agreement that he went over the line and he had to be banned.
- konjin 6y ago
  Do you think the East India company should have been able to arrest and murder who ever it wanted because it wasn't the state? Power is power and it needs to be held accountable. HN censorship doesn't matter because it's a tiny fish in a very large pond. Reddit censorship does matter because they are basically a monopoly when it comes to online forums. Same for twitter/facebook when it comes to social media and google search results.
  - m00x 6y ago
    So Reddit and facebook shouldn't be moderated? You'll be in for a wild ride.
    - konjin 6y ago
      Facebook? No. Reddit? No central moderation beyond court orders. They were a lot better when they let each community decide their own standards pre-2017.
tomrod 6y ago
They aren't censoring their customers. They're QAing their product. If you don't pay for the service, you are the product.
landemva 6y ago
" ... companies in a free market ... " USA hasn't had free markets in a while. And monopoly platforms are not free markets. DoJ won't go after monopolies for violation of century-old anti-trust laws. I give USA about ten years until it splits up.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
perl4ever 6y ago
I was just saying to someone I know, there is literally no amount of internet censorship that would upset me for the simple reason that I grew up before social media was a thing, so shutting it all down in a worst case scenario does not seem apocalyptic or totalitarian. I'm not sure I want to eliminate all freedom on the public internet, but I just have been thinking that people are really exaggerating the stakes here. And it seems especially weird for the right to be so frightened, because surely when "America was great" was before this era of Facebook and Twitter? Weren't we free then?

by jpxw 6y ago

Just because companies in a free market should be legally free to censor people, doesn’t mean they should do it. The sheer number of people who can’t grasp this basic point is staggering.

m00x 6y ago

So you think HN/Reddit comments should be unmoderated?

jpxw 6y ago
No. There’s a role for moderation, in removing comments which are off-topic or illegal. My issue is with “moderation” where you just remove content you disagree with politically.
- tomrod 6y ago
  Political disagreement in some contexts is illegal. I've seen some real gems from ParlerWatch, people wanting to roast the wives and children of liberals on open spits to teach them the danger of liberalness. Liberal means free, btw.
  - IncRnd 6y ago
    You can find that sort of trash on Parler, Twitter, Facebook, and elsewhere - from people of many political stripes.
    - tomrod 6y ago
      Yes, but higher density with the GOP and other nationalism-focused groups. It's just a natural outcome of the different ideologies. One is bound by hate over decrease in privilege, the other is a broad coalition to make lives better for folks who then get frustrated and vent online (and sometimes in the streets).
- mreome 6y ago
  Trump was banned for inciting a violent, seditious, riot that left four people dead. That's not just "content you disagree with politically" Edit: I wonder why I got down-voted. My comment was not "off-topic or illegal", perhaps someone disagrees with me politically. =P
- m00x 6y ago
  His tweets incited violence. He went 4 years spewing misinformation and even threatening to invoke section 230 twitter without being banned. There is a massive agreement that he went over the line and he had to be banned.
konjin 6y ago
Do you think the East India company should have been able to arrest and murder who ever it wanted because it wasn't the state? Power is power and it needs to be held accountable. HN censorship doesn't matter because it's a tiny fish in a very large pond. Reddit censorship does matter because they are basically a monopoly when it comes to online forums. Same for twitter/facebook when it comes to social media and google search results.
- m00x 6y ago
  So Reddit and facebook shouldn't be moderated? You'll be in for a wild ride.
  - konjin 6y ago
    Facebook? No. Reddit? No central moderation beyond court orders. They were a lot better when they let each community decide their own standards pre-2017.

tomrod 6y ago

They aren't censoring their customers. They're QAing their product. If you don't pay for the service, you are the product.

landemva 6y ago

" ... companies in a free market ... " USA hasn't had free markets in a while. And monopoly platforms are not free markets. DoJ won't go after monopolies for violation of century-old anti-trust laws. I give USA about ten years until it splits up.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

perl4ever 6y ago

I was just saying to someone I know, there is literally no amount of internet censorship that would upset me for the simple reason that I grew up before social media was a thing, so shutting it all down in a worst case scenario does not seem apocalyptic or totalitarian. I'm not sure I want to eliminate all freedom on the public internet, but I just have been thinking that people are really exaggerating the stakes here. And it seems especially weird for the right to be so frightened, because surely when "America was great" was before this era of Facebook and Twitter? Weren't we free then?