3 ms·

Internet residents aren't government. They can't arrest people, lock anyone up, or sentence anyone to death for anything, let alone for saying something. There'

by kgwxd 4y ago

Internet residents aren't government. They can't arrest people, lock anyone up, or sentence anyone to death for anything, let alone for saying something. There's nothing there for speech to be free from.

OrangeMonkey 4y ago
I respectfully disagree. Internet residents can, quite successfully, remove people from the internet and silence their speech on the internet. Consider Kiwifarms. I am purposefully NOT going to talk about if something is deserved or not. I am not touching that one again. I am tired of it. That said, internet outrage of a minority led to misinformation (both for and against it) and ultimately resulted in the DDOS protection vendor no longer protecting it. Once that was done, to noones surprise, someone ddos'ed it and removed the ability of others to see it. Its not that internet residents are trying to stop from hearing certain things - in some cases, they are purposefully stopping anyone else from hearing certain things also. I don't know that I believe this fully but it seems, some days, the internet itself is a country.
seydor 4y ago
what about monetization. i.e. livelihood, the thing that keeps people from starving etc
- wpietri 4y ago
  That's not new in the digital realm. Speech has always had social consequences: https://www.popehat.com/2013/09/10/speech-and-consequences/ https://www.popehat.com/2013/09/10/speech-and-consequences/
  - seydor 4y ago
    it did not have the legal consequence of depriving one of their money.
    - wpietri 4y ago
      Your belief is that before the internet nobody ever got fired for something they said?
      - seydor 4y ago
        I believe classes of people have not systematically been demonetized because of their work or the morals of some other class in any liberal state. Yes
illuminerdy 4y ago
But to be clear, just because we're not talking about government abuse (i.e. violating the First Amendment) doesn't mean that "there's nothing there for speech to be free from." The mob can be just as dangerous as a out of control or abusive government. First, the right to freedom of speech only enshrines a right which already existed and which the Founders wanted to ensure would be protected to the greatest extent possible. The free and open exchange of ideas in an open society. Because you cannot have open and honest debate without the free and open exchange of ideas. Second, we have seen recently that, if someone dares say something that a particular group of people don't like, then they had better prepare to be doxxed, deplatformed, harassed, and for people to harass their employer until they are fired from their job. All while those harassers profess that "freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences". Those "consequences" are nothing less than outright intimidation and suppression of the free and open exchange of ideas. And they can be just as damaging as arresting someone and locking them up.

by kgwxd 4y ago

OrangeMonkey 4y ago

I respectfully disagree. Internet residents can, quite successfully, remove people from the internet and silence their speech on the internet. Consider Kiwifarms. I am purposefully NOT going to talk about if something is deserved or not. I am not touching that one again. I am tired of it. That said, internet outrage of a minority led to misinformation (both for and against it) and ultimately resulted in the DDOS protection vendor no longer protecting it. Once that was done, to noones surprise, someone ddos'ed it and removed the ability of others to see it. Its not that internet residents are trying to stop from hearing certain things - in some cases, they are purposefully stopping anyone else from hearing certain things also. I don't know that I believe this fully but it seems, some days, the internet itself is a country.

seydor 4y ago

what about monetization. i.e. livelihood, the thing that keeps people from starving etc

wpietri 4y ago
That's not new in the digital realm. Speech has always had social consequences: https://www.popehat.com/2013/09/10/speech-and-consequences/ https://www.popehat.com/2013/09/10/speech-and-consequences/
- seydor 4y ago
  it did not have the legal consequence of depriving one of their money.
  - wpietri 4y ago
    Your belief is that before the internet nobody ever got fired for something they said?
    - seydor 4y ago
      I believe classes of people have not systematically been demonetized because of their work or the morals of some other class in any liberal state. Yes

illuminerdy 4y ago

But to be clear, just because we're not talking about government abuse (i.e. violating the First Amendment) doesn't mean that "there's nothing there for speech to be free from." The mob can be just as dangerous as a out of control or abusive government. First, the right to freedom of speech only enshrines a right which already existed and which the Founders wanted to ensure would be protected to the greatest extent possible. The free and open exchange of ideas in an open society. Because you cannot have open and honest debate without the free and open exchange of ideas. Second, we have seen recently that, if someone dares say something that a particular group of people don't like, then they had better prepare to be doxxed, deplatformed, harassed, and for people to harass their employer until they are fired from their job. All while those harassers profess that "freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences". Those "consequences" are nothing less than outright intimidation and suppression of the free and open exchange of ideas. And they can be just as damaging as arresting someone and locking them up.