3 ms·
...I'm less sure of this. If Windows Defender was deleting any file named "Animal Farm.txt", that would be a form of censorship, right? It's preventing the tra
by Wowfunhappy 5y ago
...I'm less sure of this.
If Windows Defender was deleting any file named "Animal Farm.txt", that would be a form of censorship, right? It's preventing the transmission of a piece of political literature.
Now, what if it was deleting "Animal Farm - The Video Game.exe"?
Now, what if it was deleting the keygen for "Animal Farm - The Video Game"? What if the activation server for that game had gone offline, and this keygen was now the only way to play it?
My point being, software (and especially games) can absolutely be a way of expressing ideas, and if you block the software, that seems like censorship to me. I also think that some forms of censorship are fine and even necessary—I don't particularly like stumbling across porn unprepared—but it should be optional.
- Goronmon 5y agoIf Windows Defender was deleting any file named "Animal Farm.txt", that would be a form of censorship, right? It's preventing the transmission of a piece of political literature. I guess, in some ways, you could consider it censorship. But without evidence that its being done specifically to target certain types of speech, as opposed to a side effect from some other goal, I'm not sure it's a particularly useful label. What is anti-virus software in general but "censorship" of people's abilities to distribute viruses to whoever they want? What is an adblocker but software that "censors" someone's ability to advertise in the most effective way possible?
- crazygringo 5y agoNo, it depends on the intent. If the intent is to prevent the transmission of ideas, then yes it's censorship. If the intent is to protect from harm -- totally unconnected to ideas -- then no it's not censorship. The reason Defender deletes keygens is that they're statistically associated with malware and viruses, as any Google search will terrifyingly immediately reveal. It clearly is falling under the "protect from harm" category as it's designed to do. But so to answer your question clearly: deleting "Animal Farm.txt" because of the ideas inside is censorship (prevents it being transmitted). The video game would similarly be censorship if based on its content. But if it's deleting all keygens, regardless of content of their associated video games, then clearly not censorship.
- jacobr1 5y agoIsn't the stated intent of most censorship to protect from harm?
- crazygringo 5y agoI think the distinction is pretty clear. But if it needs to be clearer: in censorship the harm is in the ideas themselves, the perspectives they spread. In prohibitions that are non-censorship, it doesn't have anything to do with ideas. You aren't locking your door to prevent the idea of burglars entering your house.
- apostacy 5y agoBut nearly every instance of censorship is framed as non-political and purely to protect people from harm.
- httpsterio 5y agoStated intent maybe yes, but that's only optics. Censorship is just meant to preserve the powers in control, be they good or bad.
- apostacy 5y agoWhat is political censorship? Amazon literally deleted Animal Farm off of people's Kindle readers because of copyright[1]. We are so immersed in our ideology that we don't see that copyright is ideological and political. Would it have really been better if it was because the text of it was considered problematic? [1]: https://www.mercurynews.com/2009/07/17/amazon-deletes-kindle-readers-1984-and-animal-farm/ https://www.mercurynews.com/2009/07/17/amazon-deletes-kindle...