7 ms·

Yet another way to suppress expression that one doesn't like. This is not how the world should be.

by tomc1985 5y ago

reincarnate0x14 5y ago
What do you expect when dealing with an environment as deliberately toxic as Twitter, with millions of bots fake-networking all over the place to be later used to generate fake hype or fake support, and the engagement schemes optimized for three minute hates.
bluescrn 5y ago
At times it goes beyond suppressing objectionable ideas and into the outright denial of reality. If you silence all opposing ideas, you can start to believe things that appear quite ridiculous to those exposed to a wider spectrum of thought.
knowaveragejoe 5y ago
eek2121 5y ago
So, if someone is celebrating Hitler, and 100,000 people "love" it, you don't think you should be allowed to block those toxic people? Hey, I get they need, help, but many of them, if not all, are too far gone. The only thing that gives these people power is their voice.
csee 5y ago
People have very finite bandwidth. You already suppress voices by consciously deciding not to follow them. This tool just improves curation effectiveness.
mjmsmith 5y ago
How is your expression suppressed? Free speech doesn’t mean I’m obliged to listen to you.
- tomc1985 5y ago
  This isn't about free speech. People NEED to hear, read, and see conflicting viewpoints and opinions they don't agree with. They NEED to see the ugly realities of life. The opposite is a culture of censorship, which is absolutely unacceptable.
  - floodyberry- 5y ago
    you have a point, you don't appear to have read that you're a fucking idiot enough
    - tomc1985 5y ago
    - dang 5y ago
      Hey, can you please not post like this to HN? This is way, way beyond what's allowed here, no matter how bad someone's comment is or you feel it is. Also, your account unfortunately has a history of posting unsubstantive and flamebait comments. We ban accounts that do that—we have to, because they destroy the curious conversation that HN is supposed to be for. I don't want to ban you, so if you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd appreciate it.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
eminence32 5y ago
Surely there is a spectrum here. On one side is vaguely annoying expressions that are just... well, annoying. They're not the types of things that you'd say, and not the types of things you'd prefer others say, but you generally put up with them (i.e. ignore them) because that's the expected thing to do in polite society. On the far other side are things that you really find very distasteful or upsetting or offensive. Things that you would very much not like to see. Everyone is going to have a different threshold within this spectrum regarding where they deploy a "megablock", and people are naturally going to disagree about if that was the right threshold to apply. I don't use twitter, but my first reaction is: it's plausible that I might find sufficiently disturbing things on twitter such that I would deploy such a tool.
- tomc1985 5y ago
  My original intent here was to point out an increasingly-common stance that many people -- particularly gen Z -- seem to take, which is essentially, "why should I expose myself to things I don't like?" The problem is that it creates monocultures, and it helps the ignorant remain in a state of ignorance. We should always be striving to empower people, and we should aspire to building up their minds so that they can encounter expression they don't like without feeling the need to suppress or otherwise entertain it. We need to be showing the ugly realities of war, and we need to be shining light on the ugliest and most brutal expressions of our political enemies. To say nothing of the fact that guilt-by-association is one of the cruelest punishments that can be inflicted on innocent bystanders, and the fact that allowing individual tools for censhorship suppresses the open exchange of ideas that make us all richer. I am in favor of individuals suffering through unpleasant experiences because it enhances society overall, and it in line with the true spirit of free speech. "I may not like what you have to say, but I will fight for your right to say it"
  - notreallyserio 5y ago
    This is hardly increasingly common nor is it something gen-z is accelerating. It's been going on since well before our grandparents were born. You're just seeing it happen more publicly now that we're all on the Internet together.

Yet another way to suppress expression that one doesn't like. This is not how the world should be.

What do you expect when dealing with an environment as deliberately toxic as Twitter, with millions of bots fake-networking all over the place to be later used to generate fake hype or fake support, and the engagement schemes optimized for three minute hates.

bluescrn 5y ago

At times it goes beyond suppressing objectionable ideas and into the outright denial of reality. If you silence all opposing ideas, you can start to believe things that appear quite ridiculous to those exposed to a wider spectrum of thought.

knowaveragejoe 5y ago

eek2121 5y ago

So, if someone is celebrating Hitler, and 100,000 people "love" it, you don't think you should be allowed to block those toxic people? Hey, I get they need, help, but many of them, if not all, are too far gone. The only thing that gives these people power is their voice.

csee 5y ago

People have very finite bandwidth. You already suppress voices by consciously deciding not to follow them. This tool just improves curation effectiveness.

mjmsmith 5y ago

How is your expression suppressed? Free speech doesn’t mean I’m obliged to listen to you.

tomc1985 5y ago
This isn't about free speech. People NEED to hear, read, and see conflicting viewpoints and opinions they don't agree with. They NEED to see the ugly realities of life. The opposite is a culture of censorship, which is absolutely unacceptable.
- floodyberry- 5y ago
  you have a point, you don't appear to have read that you're a fucking idiot enough
  - tomc1985 5y ago
  - dang 5y ago
    Hey, can you please not post like this to HN? This is way, way beyond what's allowed here, no matter how bad someone's comment is or you feel it is. Also, your account unfortunately has a history of posting unsubstantive and flamebait comments. We ban accounts that do that—we have to, because they destroy the curious conversation that HN is supposed to be for. I don't want to ban you, so if you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd appreciate it.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

eminence32 5y ago

Surely there is a spectrum here. On one side is vaguely annoying expressions that are just... well, annoying. They're not the types of things that you'd say, and not the types of things you'd prefer others say, but you generally put up with them (i.e. ignore them) because that's the expected thing to do in polite society. On the far other side are things that you really find very distasteful or upsetting or offensive. Things that you would very much not like to see. Everyone is going to have a different threshold within this spectrum regarding where they deploy a "megablock", and people are naturally going to disagree about if that was the right threshold to apply. I don't use twitter, but my first reaction is: it's plausible that I might find sufficiently disturbing things on twitter such that I would deploy such a tool.

tomc1985 5y ago
My original intent here was to point out an increasingly-common stance that many people -- particularly gen Z -- seem to take, which is essentially, "why should I expose myself to things I don't like?" The problem is that it creates monocultures, and it helps the ignorant remain in a state of ignorance. We should always be striving to empower people, and we should aspire to building up their minds so that they can encounter expression they don't like without feeling the need to suppress or otherwise entertain it. We need to be showing the ugly realities of war, and we need to be shining light on the ugliest and most brutal expressions of our political enemies. To say nothing of the fact that guilt-by-association is one of the cruelest punishments that can be inflicted on innocent bystanders, and the fact that allowing individual tools for censhorship suppresses the open exchange of ideas that make us all richer. I am in favor of individuals suffering through unpleasant experiences because it enhances society overall, and it in line with the true spirit of free speech. "I may not like what you have to say, but I will fight for your right to say it"
- notreallyserio 5y ago
  This is hardly increasingly common nor is it something gen-z is accelerating. It's been going on since well before our grandparents were born. You're just seeing it happen more publicly now that we're all on the Internet together.