3 ms·

I have not heard any group calling for free speech to be blocked. Who is calling for people to be arrested for what they say? Or to be blocked from being able t

I have not heard any group calling for free speech to be blocked. Who is calling for people to be arrested for what they say? Or to be blocked from being able to say it out loud? I think you'll find a significant portion of the HN userbase supports the idea of the police arresting people for saying racist things on the internet. Mostly Europeans who live in places where that's already the law, but Americans as well. Unfortunately even in the US the people defending your right to be a big meanie are also the same ones who want the police to arrest teachers for telling kids that transgenderism and systemic racism exist. Those of us who think freedom of speech applies even to people and opinions we despise are a shrinking minority.

d23 4y ago
> I think you'll find a significant portion of the HN userbase supports the idea of the police arresting people for saying racist things on the internet. I genuinely can't wrap my head around how someone could possibly think this is true.
- causality0 4y ago
  You can do a search for "hate speech" in the HN archive and find plenty of examples. Going down the first page of results, it's about half supporting hate speech as free speech and half against, although the supporting comments have much higher scores. You could make the argument those people think something should be illegal without thinking you should be arrested for doing it, but that's calling them a pack of ignoramuses who don't understand how laws work.
  - michaelmrose 4y ago
    Literally every covid thread has someone how thinks its not real. They post extensively on every thread that brings up their trigger topic unless actually banned. This isn't a good way to discern public sentiment among hacker news readers. Punishing people for "free speech" is a complex topic not a binary decision. Plenty of hateful speech that threatens or harasses could already be deemed a crime if its specific enough. I have no problem with punishing people for saying the same damn things about groups of people. If you say kill all the jews, straight to jail. If you say kill all the Texans likewise straight to jail. It's fundamentally dangerous to leave that unpunished because from like minded people reinforcing each others hate and violence is born both the crazies that pop off and do it and the societal movements which ultimately enact hate on a grand scale. Everyone has a line. We just disagree where to draw it.
    - causality0 4y ago
      Punishing people for "free speech" is a complex topic not a binary decision. Plenty of hateful speech that threatens or harasses could already be deemed a crime if its specific enough. Certainly, which is why I used the specific example of "saying racist things on the internet". It isn't a threat or harassment to tweet about how "those filthy stinking Norwegians keep sneaking into our country on reindeer-back and we need to deport them all before they molest our horses" but it would still be a crime in the UK as hate speech.
      - michaelmrose 4y ago
        If they aren't actually sneaking into your country on reindeer-back and you are just trying to stir up hate for blonds I have no problem with you being punished for inciting hate.
        causality0 4y ago
        See? You are the answer to Who is calling for people to be arrested for what they say? Or to be blocked from being able to say it out loud? I said a significant fraction of the HN user base shares your opinion and user D23 said he didn't understand how anyone could think that was true. Well, Q.E.D.
        michaelmrose 4y ago
        If speech is provably false and part of a pattern of disinformation designed to stir up hate and violence why is it a problem to police it? See the disinfo about jewish people followed thereafter by the mass murder of jewish people.
        causality0 4y ago
        If speech is provably false and part of a pattern of disinformation designed to stir up hate and violence why is it a problem to police it? My opinion on that is irrelevant because that isn't the topic of discussion. This comment chain regards d23's disagreement with my assertion that a significant fraction of the HN user base (like you) believe hate speech should be illegal. I'm not saying you're right or wrong; I'm just saying you exist on this website.

d23 4y ago

> I think you'll find a significant portion of the HN userbase supports the idea of the police arresting people for saying racist things on the internet. I genuinely can't wrap my head around how someone could possibly think this is true.

causality0 4y ago
You can do a search for "hate speech" in the HN archive and find plenty of examples. Going down the first page of results, it's about half supporting hate speech as free speech and half against, although the supporting comments have much higher scores. You could make the argument those people think something should be illegal without thinking you should be arrested for doing it, but that's calling them a pack of ignoramuses who don't understand how laws work.
- michaelmrose 4y ago
  Literally every covid thread has someone how thinks its not real. They post extensively on every thread that brings up their trigger topic unless actually banned. This isn't a good way to discern public sentiment among hacker news readers. Punishing people for "free speech" is a complex topic not a binary decision. Plenty of hateful speech that threatens or harasses could already be deemed a crime if its specific enough. I have no problem with punishing people for saying the same damn things about groups of people. If you say kill all the jews, straight to jail. If you say kill all the Texans likewise straight to jail. It's fundamentally dangerous to leave that unpunished because from like minded people reinforcing each others hate and violence is born both the crazies that pop off and do it and the societal movements which ultimately enact hate on a grand scale. Everyone has a line. We just disagree where to draw it.
  - causality0 4y ago
    Punishing people for "free speech" is a complex topic not a binary decision. Plenty of hateful speech that threatens or harasses could already be deemed a crime if its specific enough. Certainly, which is why I used the specific example of "saying racist things on the internet". It isn't a threat or harassment to tweet about how "those filthy stinking Norwegians keep sneaking into our country on reindeer-back and we need to deport them all before they molest our horses" but it would still be a crime in the UK as hate speech.
    - michaelmrose 4y ago
      If they aren't actually sneaking into your country on reindeer-back and you are just trying to stir up hate for blonds I have no problem with you being punished for inciting hate.
      - causality0 4y ago
        See? You are the answer to Who is calling for people to be arrested for what they say? Or to be blocked from being able to say it out loud? I said a significant fraction of the HN user base shares your opinion and user D23 said he didn't understand how anyone could think that was true. Well, Q.E.D.
        michaelmrose 4y ago
        If speech is provably false and part of a pattern of disinformation designed to stir up hate and violence why is it a problem to police it? See the disinfo about jewish people followed thereafter by the mass murder of jewish people.
        causality0 4y ago
        If speech is provably false and part of a pattern of disinformation designed to stir up hate and violence why is it a problem to police it? My opinion on that is irrelevant because that isn't the topic of discussion. This comment chain regards d23's disagreement with my assertion that a significant fraction of the HN user base (like you) believe hate speech should be illegal. I'm not saying you're right or wrong; I'm just saying you exist on this website.