3 ms·

Free speech is free speech and must be protected at all costs, even if 99% of people think an idea is reprehensible. These people aren't going to shrug and walk

by Liquix 4y ago

Free speech is free speech and must be protected at all costs, even if 99% of people think an idea is reprehensible. These people aren't going to shrug and walk away because a website goes down, they'll congregate somewhere else. The cycle will repeat. If folks aren't exposed to radical ideologies regularly - if everything they read on a screen is True and Safe - what happens when they stumble across a dark corner of the internet and are exposed for the first time? Censorship erodes our ability to critically evaluate, without actually stamping out the censored topic.

ethanbond 4y ago
I’m not pro censorship but you’re making a huge leap saying we need to be regularly exposed to radical ideologies in order to identify radical ideologies? Why would that be true? Frequent exposure to something normalizes that thing, it doesn’t make it stick out and be more identifiable.
- bobzimuta 4y ago
  The best, recent example I have is Nick Fuentes. I'd only read from journo pieces making vague accusations (referencing other journo pieces) that he's a white nationalist, or seen clips of him trolling CPAC, so I've always been curious what he's actually about. Seeing a mainstream interview with Louis Theroux and debate livestream with Destiny quickly outs him as a white nationalist with an incoherent worldview. If the only way to hear his ideas, directly from his mouth, are on his platform in a dark corner of the internet you're only going to get his one-sided propaganda.
  - krainboltgreene 4y ago
    I love that your conclusion is the only way to determine if someone is a nazi is if you've personally see that nazi platformed. Can't figure it out from the numerous things they've been quoted as saying, they gotta get in front of 5k people first.
    - bobzimuta 4y ago
      > I'd only read from journo pieces making vague accusations (referencing other journo pieces) Do I just take journos word for it? Hell no.
      - krainboltgreene 4y ago
        So how do you know historical events happened? Things you can't observe anymore? Are there any major atrocities in the past you'd like to deny real quick?
        bobzimuta 4y ago
        > So how do you know historical events happened? I go to the Smithsonian archives and read the source material in Latin Anyway, back to the point. I whole heartedly believe that exposing someone like Nick Fuentes on a livestream is a net positive that turns more people away from him than gains him followers. It's a cynical person who thinks platforming bad ideas will make them spread. Sunlight.. disinfectant...
        krainboltgreene 4y ago
        > I go to the Smithsonian archives and read the source material in Latin pft you take those people at their word? hell no > Sunlight.. disinfectant... Go ahead, name a case where this happened.
shadowgovt 4y ago
> Free speech is free speech and must be protected at all costs [citation needed]. Even IRL law in extremely pro-free-speech nations is rife with "imminent threat of danger" exceptions to their laws.
- wholinator2 4y ago
  What do you think free speech is? Do you think it should be protected?
  - shadowgovt 4y ago
    I'd love to tell you, but the number of times I may post per day on this site is rate-limited. ;) One definition of free speech is the freedom of a people to speak their minds openly that power may be held to account. In that regard, it's an extremely useful tool for a free democracy to remain free; it minimizes the risk of the systems of power becoming unquestionable, which tends to create bad feedback loops that ultimately detach such power from its utility in serving the people. Another definition is saying whatever one wants on any topic without consequences. This is not the same as the first, and has questionable utility in a free society.
canucklady 4y ago
The criticism of these sites is also "free speech". Refusing to associate with bigots is "free speech". It's funny how free speech absolutists only seem to care about offensive and harmful speech, and not the rights of everyone else involved.
- edgineer 4y ago
  It's important to define who we are talking about. Should corporations expect the same rights as individuals?
sgarland 4y ago
> Free speech is free speech and must be protected at all costs, even if 99% of people think an idea is reprehensible. Opinion. But also, no one's First Amendment rights was violated here. No one has a right to post on a website. I've spent quite a bit of time trying to compare the idea of a physical building for discussion (privately owned, to make the comparison fair) to a website like Twitter. I've come to the conclusion that if I ran a physical building where anyone could rent it out, and it came to light that neo-Nazis or other horrible people were using it, there would probably be protests. People would gather outside, or forcibly enter the building to disrupt it, or make my life difficult. While you can argue that this is mob rule, this is how society functions. If you're doing something a lot of people find reprehensible, they're going to let you know about it, and they're going to encourage others to join them. > These people aren't going to shrug and walk away because a website goes down, they'll congregate somewhere else. That might seem to be the case at first glance. [0], 6.3: >By shutting down these echo chambers of hate, Reddit caused the people participating to either leave the site or dramatically change their linguistic behavior (as measured via our hate lexicons). [0], 6.6: > Recent work has shown that some banned subreddit users migrated to other social media sites like Voat, Snapzu, and Empeopled. However, the numbers were smaller than expected: [1], 7: > Despite the hysteria concerning a mass exodus from Reddit, our behavior trend analysis shows that no such exodus occurred, though a small user migration was apparent. Furthermore, of the sites listed, the one that was most notorious for free speech absolutism (Voat) was shut down due to lack of funding. The others appear to all be up, albeit Empeopled is apparently being rebuilt on the blockchain - I'm sure that will go well. [0] https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3134666 https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3134666 [1] https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/ICWSM/article/view/14750/14599 https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/ICWSM/article/view/14750/1459...
wasmitnetzen 4y ago
We don't need current examples of radical ideologies, history has more than enough examples you can read about, and should be taught about in school.
tsukikage 4y ago
Does anyone know, incidentally, whether kiwifarms permits posting child porn, or whether their commitment to free speech does, in fact, have some limits?

by Liquix 4y ago

ethanbond 4y ago

I’m not pro censorship but you’re making a huge leap saying we need to be regularly exposed to radical ideologies in order to identify radical ideologies? Why would that be true? Frequent exposure to something normalizes that thing, it doesn’t make it stick out and be more identifiable.

bobzimuta 4y ago
The best, recent example I have is Nick Fuentes. I'd only read from journo pieces making vague accusations (referencing other journo pieces) that he's a white nationalist, or seen clips of him trolling CPAC, so I've always been curious what he's actually about. Seeing a mainstream interview with Louis Theroux and debate livestream with Destiny quickly outs him as a white nationalist with an incoherent worldview. If the only way to hear his ideas, directly from his mouth, are on his platform in a dark corner of the internet you're only going to get his one-sided propaganda.
- krainboltgreene 4y ago
  I love that your conclusion is the only way to determine if someone is a nazi is if you've personally see that nazi platformed. Can't figure it out from the numerous things they've been quoted as saying, they gotta get in front of 5k people first.
  - bobzimuta 4y ago
    > I'd only read from journo pieces making vague accusations (referencing other journo pieces) Do I just take journos word for it? Hell no.
    - krainboltgreene 4y ago
      So how do you know historical events happened? Things you can't observe anymore? Are there any major atrocities in the past you'd like to deny real quick?
      - bobzimuta 4y ago
        > So how do you know historical events happened? I go to the Smithsonian archives and read the source material in Latin Anyway, back to the point. I whole heartedly believe that exposing someone like Nick Fuentes on a livestream is a net positive that turns more people away from him than gains him followers. It's a cynical person who thinks platforming bad ideas will make them spread. Sunlight.. disinfectant...
        krainboltgreene 4y ago
        > I go to the Smithsonian archives and read the source material in Latin pft you take those people at their word? hell no > Sunlight.. disinfectant... Go ahead, name a case where this happened.

shadowgovt 4y ago

> Free speech is free speech and must be protected at all costs [citation needed]. Even IRL law in extremely pro-free-speech nations is rife with "imminent threat of danger" exceptions to their laws.

wholinator2 4y ago
What do you think free speech is? Do you think it should be protected?
- shadowgovt 4y ago
  I'd love to tell you, but the number of times I may post per day on this site is rate-limited. ;) One definition of free speech is the freedom of a people to speak their minds openly that power may be held to account. In that regard, it's an extremely useful tool for a free democracy to remain free; it minimizes the risk of the systems of power becoming unquestionable, which tends to create bad feedback loops that ultimately detach such power from its utility in serving the people. Another definition is saying whatever one wants on any topic without consequences. This is not the same as the first, and has questionable utility in a free society.

canucklady 4y ago

The criticism of these sites is also "free speech". Refusing to associate with bigots is "free speech". It's funny how free speech absolutists only seem to care about offensive and harmful speech, and not the rights of everyone else involved.

edgineer 4y ago
It's important to define who we are talking about. Should corporations expect the same rights as individuals?

sgarland 4y ago

> Free speech is free speech and must be protected at all costs, even if 99% of people think an idea is reprehensible. Opinion. But also, no one's First Amendment rights was violated here. No one has a right to post on a website. I've spent quite a bit of time trying to compare the idea of a physical building for discussion (privately owned, to make the comparison fair) to a website like Twitter. I've come to the conclusion that if I ran a physical building where anyone could rent it out, and it came to light that neo-Nazis or other horrible people were using it, there would probably be protests. People would gather outside, or forcibly enter the building to disrupt it, or make my life difficult. While you can argue that this is mob rule, this is how society functions. If you're doing something a lot of people find reprehensible, they're going to let you know about it, and they're going to encourage others to join them. > These people aren't going to shrug and walk away because a website goes down, they'll congregate somewhere else. That might seem to be the case at first glance. [0], 6.3: >By shutting down these echo chambers of hate, Reddit caused the people participating to either leave the site or dramatically change their linguistic behavior (as measured via our hate lexicons). [0], 6.6: > Recent work has shown that some banned subreddit users migrated to other social media sites like Voat, Snapzu, and Empeopled. However, the numbers were smaller than expected: [1], 7: > Despite the hysteria concerning a mass exodus from Reddit, our behavior trend analysis shows that no such exodus occurred, though a small user migration was apparent. Furthermore, of the sites listed, the one that was most notorious for free speech absolutism (Voat) was shut down due to lack of funding. The others appear to all be up, albeit Empeopled is apparently being rebuilt on the blockchain - I'm sure that will go well. [0] https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3134666 https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3134666 [1] https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/ICWSM/article/view/14750/14599 https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/ICWSM/article/view/14750/1459...

wasmitnetzen 4y ago

We don't need current examples of radical ideologies, history has more than enough examples you can read about, and should be taught about in school.

tsukikage 4y ago

Does anyone know, incidentally, whether kiwifarms permits posting child porn, or whether their commitment to free speech does, in fact, have some limits?