6 ms·

The alternative is having the government decide whether or not a private company can block a particular person for a particular reason. Everyone is generally o

The alternative is having the government decide whether or not a private company can block a particular person for a particular reason. Everyone is generally ok with companies blocking content that is irrelevant/off-topic, but there is a very, very large gray area. Do you want the government deciding what is acceptable?

swayvil 4y ago
Have you seen the typical social media censorship (bans, deletions, shadowbans... no explanations... secret forbidden words lists...) and appeals process lately? It makes 1984 look like a church camp. At least the government has checks and balances. And a working appeals process. And is, ostensibly, democratically determined. Yes, I prefer the government here.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  I think you may need to re-read 1984.
fallingknife 4y ago
They already are. It came out recently that the FBI leaned on Mark Zuckerberg to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story.
- ModernMech 4y ago
  Zuckerberg was free not to listen to anything the FBI had to say. No one forced him to do anything.
  - RichardCNormos 4y ago
    This is either dishonest or naive. Federal law enforcement "advice" always comes with a hidden message of "Nice company you've got there. It would be a shame if something were to happen to it."
    - ModernMech 4y ago
      And what, exactly, would the FBI have done? File a lawsuit? As if Facebook doesn't know how to handle a lawsuit?
- themitigating 4y ago
  Source?
  - fallingknife 4y ago
    Zuckerberg said so in an interview. Google it and you can see the video. The FBI did not deny it, so safe to say it's true.
emerged 4y ago
unity1001 4y ago
> Do you want the government deciding what is acceptable? Yes. Entire world except the US does. People elect parliaments, who make laws according to their voters' agendas. Then the laws are enforced. What's acceptable and what's not acceptable are decided in the same manner. Like how going out naked in any city in the civilized world constitutes an offense unless you have a mental disorder. You already obey with a zillion of things in which 'the government' decides to be acceptable or not acceptable.
- sseagull 4y ago
  I mean, sure. But there’s a reason this stuff was invented in the US and not elsewhere. I want everyone to think about how increasing the difficulty in moderation will affect all your favorite forums/platforms, including HN. And if you think these laws can be written so they easily apply only to “the big ones”, or that it will stop there, you are being naive. Government will always take a mile if you give them an inch.
  - unity1001 4y ago
    > But there’s a reason this stuff was invented in the US and not elsewhere. And that reason is the immense amounts of liquidity that both the US Federal Reserve and the private banks who are allowed to do fractional reserve lending, pump into the US economy. Thanks to the US dollar not losing value when that happens because it is (or was) used as the exclusive reserve currency due to the Gulf countries exclusively selling their oil for dollars until recently. When you have THAT much free money, its impossible to not invest and innovate. And now that the reserve currency status of the US is challenged and some of the dollars that were used to buy stuff in the international trade is flowing back to the US and causing inflation, we are seeing how the investment landscape totally changed. With SV firms trying to reach profitability, doing layoffs, Twitter and Facebook being questioned as to the profitability etc. This is before the fact that there is immense innovation elsewhere but you just are not aware of that since the US media need to sell US stocks. Therefore they drum the US businesses up. All of them talk about Elon Musk or whatever hot investment unicorn is coming up incessantly instead of what anyone in any other tech ecosystem is doing.
throwaway0asd 4y ago
The way it works absolutely everywhere else in the US is you hire a lawyer and sue the shit of them, but since they are immune from that alternative are worthy of consideration.

swayvil 4y ago

Have you seen the typical social media censorship (bans, deletions, shadowbans... no explanations... secret forbidden words lists...) and appeals process lately? It makes 1984 look like a church camp. At least the government has checks and balances. And a working appeals process. And is, ostensibly, democratically determined. Yes, I prefer the government here.

ceejayoz 4y ago
I think you may need to re-read 1984.

fallingknife 4y ago

They already are. It came out recently that the FBI leaned on Mark Zuckerberg to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story.

ModernMech 4y ago
Zuckerberg was free not to listen to anything the FBI had to say. No one forced him to do anything.
- RichardCNormos 4y ago
  This is either dishonest or naive. Federal law enforcement "advice" always comes with a hidden message of "Nice company you've got there. It would be a shame if something were to happen to it."
  - ModernMech 4y ago
    And what, exactly, would the FBI have done? File a lawsuit? As if Facebook doesn't know how to handle a lawsuit?
themitigating 4y ago
Source?
- fallingknife 4y ago
  Zuckerberg said so in an interview. Google it and you can see the video. The FBI did not deny it, so safe to say it's true.

emerged 4y ago

unity1001 4y ago

> Do you want the government deciding what is acceptable? Yes. Entire world except the US does. People elect parliaments, who make laws according to their voters' agendas. Then the laws are enforced. What's acceptable and what's not acceptable are decided in the same manner. Like how going out naked in any city in the civilized world constitutes an offense unless you have a mental disorder. You already obey with a zillion of things in which 'the government' decides to be acceptable or not acceptable.

sseagull 4y ago
I mean, sure. But there’s a reason this stuff was invented in the US and not elsewhere. I want everyone to think about how increasing the difficulty in moderation will affect all your favorite forums/platforms, including HN. And if you think these laws can be written so they easily apply only to “the big ones”, or that it will stop there, you are being naive. Government will always take a mile if you give them an inch.
- unity1001 4y ago
  > But there’s a reason this stuff was invented in the US and not elsewhere. And that reason is the immense amounts of liquidity that both the US Federal Reserve and the private banks who are allowed to do fractional reserve lending, pump into the US economy. Thanks to the US dollar not losing value when that happens because it is (or was) used as the exclusive reserve currency due to the Gulf countries exclusively selling their oil for dollars until recently. When you have THAT much free money, its impossible to not invest and innovate. And now that the reserve currency status of the US is challenged and some of the dollars that were used to buy stuff in the international trade is flowing back to the US and causing inflation, we are seeing how the investment landscape totally changed. With SV firms trying to reach profitability, doing layoffs, Twitter and Facebook being questioned as to the profitability etc. This is before the fact that there is immense innovation elsewhere but you just are not aware of that since the US media need to sell US stocks. Therefore they drum the US businesses up. All of them talk about Elon Musk or whatever hot investment unicorn is coming up incessantly instead of what anyone in any other tech ecosystem is doing.

throwaway0asd 4y ago

The way it works absolutely everywhere else in the US is you hire a lawyer and sue the shit of them, but since they are immune from that alternative are worthy of consideration.