5 ms·
They seem to have forgotten the Inquisition. Really, in their view they were just trying to help people not be infected by false claims.
by pfortuny 5y ago
They seem to have forgotten the Inquisition.
Really, in their view they were just trying to help people not be infected by false claims.
- dang 5y agoPlease don't post unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments to HN. We're trying for something different here. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29596102 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29596102.
- jf22 5y agoCan I ask if you think Facebook fact checking is as serious as the Spanish Inquisition?
- zepto 5y agoIt has the potential to be. Of course they aren’t going to torture individuals, but they could easily amplify large scale suffering stochastically.
- QuarterReptile 5y agoNot in any meaningful way without first coming to terms on a shared ethical framework and a common understanding of 'serious', no.
- SantalBlush 5y agoYou're not wrong, but this whole discussion is about ethics, and I don't see any shared ethical framework being established.
- xenocratus 5y agoAnother question would be: which Spanish Inquisition - the real one, or the one that lives in popular culture?
- pfortuny 5y agoI am talking of the real one (which as you say is much milder than the popular one): they did burn books and prosecute people for their ideas, which is what I was thinking of.
- pfortuny 5y agoIt is the thought behind it: there is a single true opiniom. Mind you: it may even be worse. Not in terms of physical harm.
- joshuamorton 5y agoWhat single true opinion is that? As I see it, there's lots of opinions, some are clearly wrong, and some are varyingly plausible. Annotating the clearly wrong ones isn't anything close to claiming that there is only one opinion.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]