5 ms·

Illegal to ban users? So a neo-nazi account spams, harasses, doxxes hundreds of users and spreads gore all over your platform, and you aren't allowed to shut th

Illegal to ban users? So a neo-nazi account spams, harasses, doxxes hundreds of users and spreads gore all over your platform, and you aren't allowed to shut them down unless you go through the court system first? This is one of the most absurd ideas I've ever heard.

2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
Harassment is against the law. Maybe your platform shouldn't allow such abuse? They can fix their platform so this isn't possible without banning anybody. I'm just brainstorming here.
- shadowgovt 5y ago
  > They can fix their platform so this isn't possible without banning anybody. How? You can't preemptively determine the output of a Turing-complete program without solving the halting problem, so while Google will always try to do their damnedest to predict a bad actor before they get to the store, they will definitely always fail to find some. If they can't ban them when they find them, what should the alternative be?
  - wheresmycraisin 5y ago
    Don't allow free-form communication and ban toxic users. That's what nintendo does.
- andybak 5y ago
  > Maybe your platform shouldn't allow such abuse? They can fix their platform so this isn't possible without banning anybody. This feels more like handwaving than brainstorming ;-) It's a tricky problem and I think your suggestions should try and reflect that as much as possible.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
    Are all platforms equally abusable?
    - andybak 5y ago
      Taking your question literally - no. Obviously not.
      - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
        Right. What makes some less abusable than others? Do more of that. You obviously can't eliminate all abuse but it can be managed to an acceptable degree with thoughtful design. This is getting away from my larger point that the incentives here are screwed up. Why is that? Why doesn't Google fix their shit? What is blocking this from fixing itself? Usually there is an incentive like threat of lawsuit or people leaving the platform.
- throwaway684936 5y ago
  > Maybe your platform shouldn't allow such abuse? Yes, perhaps we could come up with a set of rules that users must abide by to use the service, such as not being abusive. And if they're found to be breaking these rules, we could then restrict their access to the service. The worst actors would have their access restricted permanently. If you're suggesting "stop 100% of all abusive content before it happens," that's just silly.
ars 5y ago
Is the government allowed to shut them down without a court order? If not, why should you be able to? Do you feel you can do a better job? There's something to be said for not shutting down someone unless they break a law. I do acknowledge the court would need to be much faster and easier to access for these kinds of things though, you don't want to burden a provider with enormous legal bills just to deal with this kind of thing.
- epolanski 5y ago
  Platforms can have any arbitrary rule. If I host a service for manchester city fans, why would I not be able to ban annoying united fans? Who cares if what they do is legal. What if I post NSFW content here on hn. It's not illegal so it's okay? Just this month content creators from Russia or belarus have been banned from dozen of services, they did not violate any law. It's ridiculous to think that yout platform isn't free to apply it's own rules.
  - ars 5y ago
    That's not the same question though, that's basically a strawman. We're talking about platforms that are not so restrictive in their topics.
    - epolanski 5y ago
      But my point doesn't change, on my platform I'm judge, jury and executioner too. Unless you can prove in a court of law you're being restricted for illegal reasons, there's not much you can do. Internet is full of stories of people losing their livehood overnight in these services and there isn't much one can do.
- zuminator 5y ago
  Setting "is it illegal?" as the bar would allow nigh any content whatsoever as creators could just go host-shopping until we found a country where our objectionable material was legal.
- remram 5y ago

2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago

Harassment is against the law. Maybe your platform shouldn't allow such abuse? They can fix their platform so this isn't possible without banning anybody. I'm just brainstorming here.

shadowgovt 5y ago
> They can fix their platform so this isn't possible without banning anybody. How? You can't preemptively determine the output of a Turing-complete program without solving the halting problem, so while Google will always try to do their damnedest to predict a bad actor before they get to the store, they will definitely always fail to find some. If they can't ban them when they find them, what should the alternative be?
- wheresmycraisin 5y ago
  Don't allow free-form communication and ban toxic users. That's what nintendo does.
andybak 5y ago
> Maybe your platform shouldn't allow such abuse? They can fix their platform so this isn't possible without banning anybody. This feels more like handwaving than brainstorming ;-) It's a tricky problem and I think your suggestions should try and reflect that as much as possible.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
  Are all platforms equally abusable?
  - andybak 5y ago
    Taking your question literally - no. Obviously not.
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
      Right. What makes some less abusable than others? Do more of that. You obviously can't eliminate all abuse but it can be managed to an acceptable degree with thoughtful design. This is getting away from my larger point that the incentives here are screwed up. Why is that? Why doesn't Google fix their shit? What is blocking this from fixing itself? Usually there is an incentive like threat of lawsuit or people leaving the platform.
throwaway684936 5y ago
> Maybe your platform shouldn't allow such abuse? Yes, perhaps we could come up with a set of rules that users must abide by to use the service, such as not being abusive. And if they're found to be breaking these rules, we could then restrict their access to the service. The worst actors would have their access restricted permanently. If you're suggesting "stop 100% of all abusive content before it happens," that's just silly.

ars 5y ago

Is the government allowed to shut them down without a court order? If not, why should you be able to? Do you feel you can do a better job? There's something to be said for not shutting down someone unless they break a law. I do acknowledge the court would need to be much faster and easier to access for these kinds of things though, you don't want to burden a provider with enormous legal bills just to deal with this kind of thing.

epolanski 5y ago
Platforms can have any arbitrary rule. If I host a service for manchester city fans, why would I not be able to ban annoying united fans? Who cares if what they do is legal. What if I post NSFW content here on hn. It's not illegal so it's okay? Just this month content creators from Russia or belarus have been banned from dozen of services, they did not violate any law. It's ridiculous to think that yout platform isn't free to apply it's own rules.
- ars 5y ago
  That's not the same question though, that's basically a strawman. We're talking about platforms that are not so restrictive in their topics.
  - epolanski 5y ago
    But my point doesn't change, on my platform I'm judge, jury and executioner too. Unless you can prove in a court of law you're being restricted for illegal reasons, there's not much you can do. Internet is full of stories of people losing their livehood overnight in these services and there isn't much one can do.
zuminator 5y ago
Setting "is it illegal?" as the bar would allow nigh any content whatsoever as creators could just go host-shopping until we found a country where our objectionable material was legal.
remram 5y ago