3 ms·

I don't get how this "free speech absolutism" stuff has exceptions. Seems contradictory For example the more left wing people don't call themselves that bc the

I don't get how this "free speech absolutism" stuff has exceptions. Seems contradictory For example the more left wing people don't call themselves that bc they know that banning hate speech means not having total free speech. Why do people like Elon and his fans argue that they can still vouch for total free speech while banning certain forms of expression? EDIT: I'm rate limited so can't reply. Elon Musk has called himself a "free speech absolutist" multiple times

prepend 4y ago
I don’t think anyone claims to be a “free speech absolutist.” And this instead seems to be a straw man label applied. So it seems confusing when people talk about free speech absolutism as it’s a one sided argument. My interpretation is that there’s a free speech principle and it’s always had limits (eg, threatening someone’s life, inciting immediate violence). But it’s about drawing the line of what speech is allowed or disallowed.
- asadotzler 4y ago
  https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1499976967105433600 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1499976967105433600
- fzeroracer 4y ago
  Musk literally called himself a free speech absolutist and I can point to any number of HN commentators on threads involving Twitter, free speech etc that said the same thing.
- encryptluks2 4y ago
  There are pretty clear legal guidelines what is free speech, but I think people want to test the theory on if they ban accounts that don't violate the legal guidelines. Racism in itself isn't illegal nor being homophobic. There are plenty of right-wing grifters that make up stuff and call people pedos for being trans or gay on Twitter, and they don't get banned... I've even seen groups advocate for violence against these groups and not get banned for it. What I know for sure is that advertisers aren't going to want to deal with it becoming a polarized topic at congressional hearings.
- Y-bar 4y ago
  > I don’t think anyone claims to be a “free speech absolutist." Musk claims he is: https://www.npr.org/2022/10/08/1127689351/elon-musk-calls-himself-a-free-speech-absolutist-what-could-twitter-look-like-un https://www.npr.org/2022/10/08/1127689351/elon-musk-calls-hi...
  - prepend 4y ago
    This claim is not from Musk, but the author of that article. > But the latest twist in this ongoing saga has resurfaced questions about what the popular social media site will look like under the leadership of a so-called free speech absolutist. I think he’s being labeled as one in this article but it doesn’t seem like Musk is claiming to be an absolutist.
- krapp 4y ago
  > I don’t think anyone claims to be a “free speech absolutist.” And this instead seems to be a straw man label applied. I've seen more than a few people claim that verbatim, so no.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- dathinab 4y ago
  The line is obvious and well known: - don't allow hate speech - don't allow harassment - reduce spread of (likely intentionally created) misinformation The think is a lot of the complains come from people doing one of the points above _intentionally and knowing_ and then complain "but free speech". In their mind it is okay to spread hate speech and harass or push harassment of certain groups of people because they _do not see them as people_. They often also come up with stupid argument why their harassment is supposedly no harassment, with nonsense like "we should be allowed to always remind a traumatized person of their trauma because thats just free speach and purely informative we don't insult them" often taking advantage of 3rd parties potentially not understanding why its harassment far worse then some childish insults. EDIT: Or complains from people which intentional spread misinformation for other political and often market manipulation reasons and don't like when twitter labeled their tweet as misinformation.
- tchaffee 4y ago
  > I don’t think anyone claims to be a “free speech absolutist.” "Starlink has been told by some governments (not Ukraine) to block Russian news sources. We will not do so unless at gunpoint. Sorry to be a free speech absolutist." [1] [1] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1499976967105433600 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1499976967105433600
inglor_cz 4y ago
Impersonation is somewhat different from core free speech issues. It was less of a problem in tight 18th century societies where people knew one another and strangers were viewed with suspicion anyway. On the Internet, though...
dathinab 4y ago
Because that thing you call "free speech absolutism" isn't about free speech. It comes from: - people not understanding their own constitution - people in privileged positions not understanding why we can't tolerate hate speech, harassment and similar - a ton of modern fascists complaining that their posts where removed by moderation, or their accounts have been suspended, when spreading hate speech and misinformation. Some of this people are rather influential in conservative circles and/or wealthy.

prepend 4y ago

I don’t think anyone claims to be a “free speech absolutist.” And this instead seems to be a straw man label applied. So it seems confusing when people talk about free speech absolutism as it’s a one sided argument. My interpretation is that there’s a free speech principle and it’s always had limits (eg, threatening someone’s life, inciting immediate violence). But it’s about drawing the line of what speech is allowed or disallowed.

asadotzler 4y ago
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1499976967105433600 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1499976967105433600
fzeroracer 4y ago
Musk literally called himself a free speech absolutist and I can point to any number of HN commentators on threads involving Twitter, free speech etc that said the same thing.
encryptluks2 4y ago
There are pretty clear legal guidelines what is free speech, but I think people want to test the theory on if they ban accounts that don't violate the legal guidelines. Racism in itself isn't illegal nor being homophobic. There are plenty of right-wing grifters that make up stuff and call people pedos for being trans or gay on Twitter, and they don't get banned... I've even seen groups advocate for violence against these groups and not get banned for it. What I know for sure is that advertisers aren't going to want to deal with it becoming a polarized topic at congressional hearings.
Y-bar 4y ago
> I don’t think anyone claims to be a “free speech absolutist." Musk claims he is: https://www.npr.org/2022/10/08/1127689351/elon-musk-calls-himself-a-free-speech-absolutist-what-could-twitter-look-like-un https://www.npr.org/2022/10/08/1127689351/elon-musk-calls-hi...
- prepend 4y ago
  This claim is not from Musk, but the author of that article. > But the latest twist in this ongoing saga has resurfaced questions about what the popular social media site will look like under the leadership of a so-called free speech absolutist. I think he’s being labeled as one in this article but it doesn’t seem like Musk is claiming to be an absolutist.
krapp 4y ago
> I don’t think anyone claims to be a “free speech absolutist.” And this instead seems to be a straw man label applied. I've seen more than a few people claim that verbatim, so no.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
dathinab 4y ago
The line is obvious and well known: - don't allow hate speech - don't allow harassment - reduce spread of (likely intentionally created) misinformation The think is a lot of the complains come from people doing one of the points above _intentionally and knowing_ and then complain "but free speech". In their mind it is okay to spread hate speech and harass or push harassment of certain groups of people because they _do not see them as people_. They often also come up with stupid argument why their harassment is supposedly no harassment, with nonsense like "we should be allowed to always remind a traumatized person of their trauma because thats just free speach and purely informative we don't insult them" often taking advantage of 3rd parties potentially not understanding why its harassment far worse then some childish insults. EDIT: Or complains from people which intentional spread misinformation for other political and often market manipulation reasons and don't like when twitter labeled their tweet as misinformation.
tchaffee 4y ago
> I don’t think anyone claims to be a “free speech absolutist.” "Starlink has been told by some governments (not Ukraine) to block Russian news sources. We will not do so unless at gunpoint. Sorry to be a free speech absolutist." [1] [1] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1499976967105433600 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1499976967105433600

inglor_cz 4y ago

Impersonation is somewhat different from core free speech issues. It was less of a problem in tight 18th century societies where people knew one another and strangers were viewed with suspicion anyway. On the Internet, though...

dathinab 4y ago

Because that thing you call "free speech absolutism" isn't about free speech. It comes from: - people not understanding their own constitution - people in privileged positions not understanding why we can't tolerate hate speech, harassment and similar - a ton of modern fascists complaining that their posts where removed by moderation, or their accounts have been suspended, when spreading hate speech and misinformation. Some of this people are rather influential in conservative circles and/or wealthy.