4 ms·

Free speech is very much under attack. If the platforms we use to communicate -- and which generally allow any communication, no matter how poignant or inane -

Free speech is very much under attack. If the platforms we use to communicate -- and which generally allow any communication, no matter how poignant or inane -- allow some speech, but not others, we have a problem. Twitter is compelled to take down some messages. Facebook temporarily hellbans users for crossing over lines. I saw an article yesterday saying the US wants to filter SMS messages. E-mail seems safe at present, but that could change suddenly. Governments seem to be enacting hate-speech laws disallowing saying certain things, and that's double-plus good only if you agree with the power of the day. How, pray tell, do we have speech of any consequence, if the methods we regularly use to speak are denied to us?

seriousquestion 5y ago
Here's the SMS thing for the curious > Biden allied groups, including the Democratic National Committee, are also planning to engage fact-checkers more aggressively and work with SMS carriers to dispel misinformation about vaccines that is sent over social media and text messages. https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/12/biden-covid-vaccination-campaign-499278 https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/12/biden-covid-vaccina...
- aj3 5y ago
  That seems to be about stopping spamming over SMS. AFAIK censoring SMS between unknown individuals isn't even technically possible.
  - floren 5y ago
    SMS is unencrypted and routes through the carrier's hardware. I can't see that much difficulty in, say, implementing a list of phrases or URLs which result in the message being dropped, given carrier cooperation. (The carrier cooperates or else they end up called into Congress over and over to testify about such-and-such)
    - aj3 5y ago
      Standards don't provide such filtering functionality and telcos operate their equipment as a black box, so they don't have ability to implement additional features, especially when there is no business case for that and it could open them to new liability (undermining safe harbor arrangement).
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
meh99 5y ago
You’re right I forgot communication didn’t exist before Twitter and iPhones. How silly of me. God said let their be Steve Jobs and suddenly human communication… Privately owned infrastructure was never for you. It’s for the elites to corral you all along. Believing Twitter was ever on your side was your first mistake. They were Walmart; moved in with low prices now they’re raising them. It’s an emotional con to keep you focused on a political narrative (American dream of free enterprise; for some, toil for depreciated wages for the majority) and not exploring alternative communication pipelines. How free is our speech if it’s constrained to Wall Street, tech companies, SV, and DC? You walked right into constrained speech in order to fit in.
- Covzire 5y ago
  These SV companies amassed a level of power over the public square that nobody saw coming. Especially during a time of lockdowns the only speech that American citizens had with their other citizens was via 3 platforms, all of which were stiffling free speech, even to the point of banning some CSPAN coverage of a politician that represents them.
  - meh99 5y ago
    That’s a blatant lie, or more generously, harmfully ignorant perspective. Academics, thinkers, have been warning about private power eroding public for decades. Oh sure SV specifically is new NOW, but they haven’t done anything Walmart didn’t do to little communities decades before, or ATT hasn’t done; co-opt control of public government for private gain. I’m done with this community. It’s a bunch of ostriches who are equivocating their failures as political agents; don’t login. They lose their power. Stop living in the bespoke simulation in your head.
    - Covzire 5y ago
      And newspapers also, long before Walmart was choosing which books or magazines or music to stock. But Walmart has never had direct control over the public square at the incredibly grand scale that Twitter, Facebook and Youtube do, that's the point.

seriousquestion 5y ago

Here's the SMS thing for the curious > Biden allied groups, including the Democratic National Committee, are also planning to engage fact-checkers more aggressively and work with SMS carriers to dispel misinformation about vaccines that is sent over social media and text messages. https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/12/biden-covid-vaccination-campaign-499278 https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/12/biden-covid-vaccina...

aj3 5y ago
That seems to be about stopping spamming over SMS. AFAIK censoring SMS between unknown individuals isn't even technically possible.
- floren 5y ago
  SMS is unencrypted and routes through the carrier's hardware. I can't see that much difficulty in, say, implementing a list of phrases or URLs which result in the message being dropped, given carrier cooperation. (The carrier cooperates or else they end up called into Congress over and over to testify about such-and-such)
  - aj3 5y ago
    Standards don't provide such filtering functionality and telcos operate their equipment as a black box, so they don't have ability to implement additional features, especially when there is no business case for that and it could open them to new liability (undermining safe harbor arrangement).
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

meh99 5y ago

You’re right I forgot communication didn’t exist before Twitter and iPhones. How silly of me. God said let their be Steve Jobs and suddenly human communication… Privately owned infrastructure was never for you. It’s for the elites to corral you all along. Believing Twitter was ever on your side was your first mistake. They were Walmart; moved in with low prices now they’re raising them. It’s an emotional con to keep you focused on a political narrative (American dream of free enterprise; for some, toil for depreciated wages for the majority) and not exploring alternative communication pipelines. How free is our speech if it’s constrained to Wall Street, tech companies, SV, and DC? You walked right into constrained speech in order to fit in.

Covzire 5y ago
These SV companies amassed a level of power over the public square that nobody saw coming. Especially during a time of lockdowns the only speech that American citizens had with their other citizens was via 3 platforms, all of which were stiffling free speech, even to the point of banning some CSPAN coverage of a politician that represents them.
- meh99 5y ago
  That’s a blatant lie, or more generously, harmfully ignorant perspective. Academics, thinkers, have been warning about private power eroding public for decades. Oh sure SV specifically is new NOW, but they haven’t done anything Walmart didn’t do to little communities decades before, or ATT hasn’t done; co-opt control of public government for private gain. I’m done with this community. It’s a bunch of ostriches who are equivocating their failures as political agents; don’t login. They lose their power. Stop living in the bespoke simulation in your head.
  - Covzire 5y ago
    And newspapers also, long before Walmart was choosing which books or magazines or music to stock. But Walmart has never had direct control over the public square at the incredibly grand scale that Twitter, Facebook and Youtube do, that's the point.