5 ms·

>I don't get why it's not banned or heavily restricted What's up with this authoritarian discourse on HN? Since when are we casually calling for censorship of

>I don't get why it's not banned or heavily restricted What's up with this authoritarian discourse on HN? Since when are we casually calling for censorship of things that are "disliked"? The megacorps are having videos taken down off so-called private clouds for calling out the rulling class too much. I worry for the Orwellian direction we are heading into.

ceejayoz 4y ago
> Since when are we casually calling for censorship of things that are "disliked"? Some would argue: since technological progress outpaced society's capacity to cope with it. One of the possible answers for the Fermi Paradox is "everyone invents Facebook shortly after computers", and it seems a lot more plausible than it did ten years ago. It's hard not to see surveillance capitalism as a variant of what Orwell was warning about - Facebook etc. are the telescreens and two-minutes-hate from 1984. As megacorps start to rival governments in reach and power, who exactly controls them is somewhat less important than their overall impact on the civilization.
- MomoXenosaga 4y ago
  TikTok is nothing compared to the millennia of religious wars that books have caused.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    Nah; social media's speed of dissemination is a key part of the problem. You can rile up millions of people in a matter of hours, now.
  - lm28469 4y ago
    It's religion on steroid, only ten or so years of it and we can already see the awful consequences, give it a few decades and we'll see where it goes, I'm personally not very optimistic
Nasrudith 4y ago
The Zeitgeist has gotten especially stupid ever since Trump got elected. A very unpopular opinion. Rather than accept that people are horrible they look to technology for scapegoats. That and pretending the media conglomerates were the good ole days of accuracy instead of tremendously fucked up. You wouldn't see an entire coasts deliberately kept ignorant of a warcrimes confessional (Winter Soldier Hearings).
- pennaMan 4y ago
  This resonates with me a lot. I find it quite odd that people are happy to blame facebook, twitter, instagram and etc. for the things people do on those platforms. It's like blaming the public square or the coffee shop or whatever place "problematic" people gather and discuss "problematic" ideas. No. The platform is just a place just like a sidewalk is a place. The problem is society itself. But I guess that's a hard pill to swallow for people and making up imaginary enemies then laying down the regulations on those imaginary enemies is preferred to addressing issues with society itself.
  - ryandrake 4y ago
    Using your metaphor, the sidewalk is your ISP. Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram are not the sidewalk, but instead a megaphone given to these people. The problem is society, but these platforms are not just places, they are giant amplifiers of this problematic society, and they are absolutely choosing (algorithmically) who to amplify.
  - kthejoker2 4y ago
    Your error is declaring these platforms are "just a place." There is a ton of evidence YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc. deliberately push inflammatory / extremist material to people to increase engagement. My 8 year old daughter exclusively watches Let's Play and "how to draw" / DIY crafting videos on YouTube, and still gets recommended content on why vaccinations are dangerous and junk health pseudoscience, flat earth and New World Order conspiracy theories, and a ton of comparatively vanilla highly biased political "commentary." Their algorithm tells them if they can get her interest on these videos (instead of others) she will spend more time on their site. They do not care why she is spending more time on their site, or if there is any societal harm from the content she is consuming - it's a "free country, after all." If every time you went to your coffee shop, they introduced you to another customer peddling snake oil or handed you a newspaper full of extreme left or right wing talking points, you wouldn't say "it's just a coffee shop."
hotpotamus 4y ago
You are aware that HN is moderated, right? Some might even say heavily, though I suppose that's an opinion.
- pennaMan 4y ago
  So you are equaling forum moderation to prohibition of an entire platform?
  - hotpotamus 4y ago
    I don't know where I would have given that impression. I am saying that HN is censored, so it would seem that the people who participate here are OK with it. I am.
Bakary 4y ago
On the surface, places like HN or the software world in general sound libertarian in a limited sense. Capable people with the resources and skills to make things happen and tinker with projects. There is constant talk of reform or how to engineer the world into a more sensible and freer place. However, this freedom is only aimed at the users themselves. In reality, venture capitalists, highly-paid software workers, digital nomads and other gentrifying forces are by and large on the side of authoritarianism in the role they play in the world. They produce systems that reward them greatly while increasing surveillance and quantification of the rest of the population. It's not uncommon to see employees of adtech FAANG companies here wonder, without any trace of irony or self-awareness, why more people don't use ad blockers on their router or browser. There's a reason why the "make the world a better place" phrase is so heavily parodied.
throwamon 4y ago
Maybe in the same sense that meth or krokodil are "disliked".
- pennaMan 4y ago
  Ah yes, krokodil, meaning clandestine made desomorphine with skin lesion causing impurities in it the very existence of which is a direct result of authoritarian prohibition.
- fallingknife 4y ago
  And because banning them has also worked so well, right?

ceejayoz 4y ago

> Since when are we casually calling for censorship of things that are "disliked"? Some would argue: since technological progress outpaced society's capacity to cope with it. One of the possible answers for the Fermi Paradox is "everyone invents Facebook shortly after computers", and it seems a lot more plausible than it did ten years ago. It's hard not to see surveillance capitalism as a variant of what Orwell was warning about - Facebook etc. are the telescreens and two-minutes-hate from 1984. As megacorps start to rival governments in reach and power, who exactly controls them is somewhat less important than their overall impact on the civilization.

MomoXenosaga 4y ago
TikTok is nothing compared to the millennia of religious wars that books have caused.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  Nah; social media's speed of dissemination is a key part of the problem. You can rile up millions of people in a matter of hours, now.
- lm28469 4y ago
  It's religion on steroid, only ten or so years of it and we can already see the awful consequences, give it a few decades and we'll see where it goes, I'm personally not very optimistic

Nasrudith 4y ago

The Zeitgeist has gotten especially stupid ever since Trump got elected. A very unpopular opinion. Rather than accept that people are horrible they look to technology for scapegoats. That and pretending the media conglomerates were the good ole days of accuracy instead of tremendously fucked up. You wouldn't see an entire coasts deliberately kept ignorant of a warcrimes confessional (Winter Soldier Hearings).

pennaMan 4y ago
This resonates with me a lot. I find it quite odd that people are happy to blame facebook, twitter, instagram and etc. for the things people do on those platforms. It's like blaming the public square or the coffee shop or whatever place "problematic" people gather and discuss "problematic" ideas. No. The platform is just a place just like a sidewalk is a place. The problem is society itself. But I guess that's a hard pill to swallow for people and making up imaginary enemies then laying down the regulations on those imaginary enemies is preferred to addressing issues with society itself.
- ryandrake 4y ago
  Using your metaphor, the sidewalk is your ISP. Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram are not the sidewalk, but instead a megaphone given to these people. The problem is society, but these platforms are not just places, they are giant amplifiers of this problematic society, and they are absolutely choosing (algorithmically) who to amplify.
- kthejoker2 4y ago
  Your error is declaring these platforms are "just a place." There is a ton of evidence YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc. deliberately push inflammatory / extremist material to people to increase engagement. My 8 year old daughter exclusively watches Let's Play and "how to draw" / DIY crafting videos on YouTube, and still gets recommended content on why vaccinations are dangerous and junk health pseudoscience, flat earth and New World Order conspiracy theories, and a ton of comparatively vanilla highly biased political "commentary." Their algorithm tells them if they can get her interest on these videos (instead of others) she will spend more time on their site. They do not care why she is spending more time on their site, or if there is any societal harm from the content she is consuming - it's a "free country, after all." If every time you went to your coffee shop, they introduced you to another customer peddling snake oil or handed you a newspaper full of extreme left or right wing talking points, you wouldn't say "it's just a coffee shop."

hotpotamus 4y ago

You are aware that HN is moderated, right? Some might even say heavily, though I suppose that's an opinion.

pennaMan 4y ago
So you are equaling forum moderation to prohibition of an entire platform?
- hotpotamus 4y ago
  I don't know where I would have given that impression. I am saying that HN is censored, so it would seem that the people who participate here are OK with it. I am.

Bakary 4y ago

On the surface, places like HN or the software world in general sound libertarian in a limited sense. Capable people with the resources and skills to make things happen and tinker with projects. There is constant talk of reform or how to engineer the world into a more sensible and freer place. However, this freedom is only aimed at the users themselves. In reality, venture capitalists, highly-paid software workers, digital nomads and other gentrifying forces are by and large on the side of authoritarianism in the role they play in the world. They produce systems that reward them greatly while increasing surveillance and quantification of the rest of the population. It's not uncommon to see employees of adtech FAANG companies here wonder, without any trace of irony or self-awareness, why more people don't use ad blockers on their router or browser. There's a reason why the "make the world a better place" phrase is so heavily parodied.

throwamon 4y ago

Maybe in the same sense that meth or krokodil are "disliked".

pennaMan 4y ago
Ah yes, krokodil, meaning clandestine made desomorphine with skin lesion causing impurities in it the very existence of which is a direct result of authoritarian prohibition.
fallingknife 4y ago
And because banning them has also worked so well, right?