4 ms·
The same people who created the environment where the police was knocking on the doors for tweets and wanted to restrict the speech significantly suddenly decid
by mrtksn 4y ago
The same people who created the environment where the police was knocking on the doors for tweets and wanted to restrict the speech significantly suddenly decided to restrict platforms from restricting speech? This doesn't sound right to me, even if right doesn't sound stable to me.
IMHO no content should be removed unless the existence of content creates tangible issues. For example hosting copyrighted material creates the issue of copyright holders not getting paid for their work, therefore removable but the record of someone saying saying something bigoted doesn't actually harm anyone(if there's a harm it has been done at the moment of expressing it) therefore should not be removed and kept as an evidence of the character and actions of the person. Any content is a historical record, thanks to that we can look what Hitler said and we can reason over it and know why he is despised. This gives fidelity and understanding of the situation. We don't say Hitler was bad because he violated rule 4.1 in the TOS, the same must be true for everyone.
If UK does something like that, it can be a huge win.
- shapefrog 4y ago
- mrtksn 4y agoThis sounds like there might be a tangible risk for me because its written from a position of person with influence OR simply a rambling of an internet hobo if its written by a nobody therefore no risk. Also, am I a known person who might be located and harmed by a fan of this high influence person? I guess, it depends. I wouldn't want it removed unless it has realistic risk of making someone harm me. It would serve as a record that I can use to build my narrative when discussing stuff.
- shapefrog 4y agoWhat if Alex Jones wrote it ... What if TikTok famous for dancing with rabbid fanbase wrote it?
- mrtksn 4y agoThen I probably want it removed.
- Ensorceled 4y agoOk ... but what if _you_ were getting dozens of these a day, from an endless stream of terrible people who are openly celebrating a genocide against your ancestors?
- mrtksn 4y agoDefine “getting”. Are they sending me direct messages?
- Ensorceled 4y agoThis answers my question, thanks.
- mrtksn 4y agoIt doesn't actually. You need to define what getting stream of dozens of people celebrating a genocide means because the appropriate action will depend on it. Is it an organised campaign? Is it you being targeted because of who you are? Is it happening on 4chan? Is it happening in a whatsapp group? What are the nature of the content? Do they claim stuff about you? Do they threaten you? Are they writing alternative history? Simply deleting doesn't help with anything. Remember PewDiePie who was cancelled for making antisemitic jokes? He probably didn't know what he was doing because of his perspective there are no more nazis around and all that stuff is history from 50 years ago so it's just a joke. Deleting content gives the impression that these don't exist or that it's not a real danger.
- mrguyorama 4y agoThat's a poor take. PewDiePie ABSOLUTELY knew what he was doing. He simply banked on it being edgy enough to only piss off some people. He knows his numbers and analytics, he knows straddling the line between what is acceptable or not gets the most outrage, clickbait, and views. Meanwhile a history teacher and film maker on youtube dresses up as a literal nazi in several videos, including swastika, and does not get cancelled because it's pretty good satire. Freedom of speech means you get to tell any joke you want, but freedom of speech does not mean people have to treat your actions as a joke just because you meant it as a joke. You don't get to be the sole arbiter of the "goodness" of your actions, because not meaning to hurt people doesn't let you off the hook for hurting people.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]