7 ms·

Why not? Do you think that the customs of your tribe and island are the laws of nature?

rektide 4y ago
First we're talking about open versus closed societies, not tribes. The repression of spirit closed societies impose on their members is a humanitarian concern, imperils the soul, eats away at becoming ourselves. Open society all the way. Society has to be allowed to consider itself. Second, this isn't laws of the land. It's the internet, the unplace where different places can meet & connect. Your suggestion proposes that it's the pro-speech folk forcing themselves upon the world. Not so. What's actually happening in this story is the small authoritarian lowest-common-denominators of the world are imposing their views on all interconnectivity, on everyone else. They are constraining everyone else. And tech bosses keep letting it happen, keep letting ourselves be bullied. And the governments of open societies are not stepping up to illuminate & push these issues as the threats to open society that they are. Two absurd inconsistencies. Human rights are amazing. The suppression of humanity is dreadful. That's the "tribe" you are defending.
- snapcaster 4y ago
  These are all your opinions and personal values. I agree with all of them on a personal level. Where I think we disagree is that this is some kind of "pro speech" vs. "anti speech" battle. I see it more as a global US led Imperium attempting to impose their opinions and personal values on people throughout the world regardless of what those citizens or governments think. I'm in the US, me and my countrypeople shouldn't get a say in what happens in Hong Kong. Just like China shouldn't get a say in what happens in the US. Why isn't that enough?
  - rektide 4y ago
    This is a atopical line of inquiry & ignores what is happening. It's an ad-hominem argument against the US. Open society is far more than the US. 43% of the nations of the world are democratic according to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index#By_regime_type https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index#By_regime_ty.... And it continues the filter of seeing this as open society being an imposition. If you have a closed society & the open society of the internet doesn't fit your society, you shouldnt be on the internet. Your closed society doesn't want to participate, then fine, if it must: go elsewhere.
    - snapcaster 4y ago
      You've decided "Open society" == good. This is a value judgement not a law of nature. "if you have a closed society... you shouldn't be on the internet" Again, according to you. what lengths would you be willing to go to impose this on other people?
      - andsoitis 4y ago
        In a more open society, members can choose for themselves, i.e. they have more autonomy. In a more closed society, more choice is taken away from you.
      - rektide 4y ago
        I don't want anyone in a closed society and I'd go through great lengths to help people trapped in close societies have access to open connectivities like the internet. If a society wants to be closed though, your society has the onus of responsibility to enforce closing. Your society can't impose that position on everyone. Hence me saying the society probably shouldnt be on the most open connected free connectivity on the planet, one created by open society & which enables open social values. > You've decided... It looks like you have decided here friend. I never openly said that, although heck the words I use build a pretty lopsided case. I think everyone should decide for themselves though, and come to their conclusions. To me the choice seems obvious & it's hard to see what is to respect about closed, but I'm open. I'm open to learning.
  - matthewrobertso 4y ago
    The title of this post is "Tech Bosses Are Letting Dictators Censor What Americans See", the article is about China getting a say in what happens in the US.
  - User23 4y ago
    We don't get a say in what happens in Washington either. Frankly, in the present day USA, it's a minor miracle when the county road commissioner will fill a pothole in a timely fashion.
  - Xeoncross 4y ago
    > ...people shouldn't get a say Perhaps people should get a say and the governments should take a turn being forced to serve the people instead.
  - mensetmanusman 4y ago
    “ I'm in the US, me and my countrypeople shouldn't get a say in what happens in Hong Kong.” This is only if you assume all people are not created equal.
  - nradov 4y ago
    We don't know what Chinese citizens think because it's impossible to conduct independent opinion polls on political topics. So, how do you know that the majority of Chinese don't agree with our opinions and personal values on freedom of expression? Countries always seek to extend their influence. The USA and China play the same game, just with different tactics. There will never be "enough".
  - clouddrover 4y ago
    > shouldn't get a say in what happens in Hong Kong I guess it's just too bad that Hong Kongers don't get a say in what happens in Hong Kong.
shadowgovt 4y ago
Do you think that the customs of China's tribe and island are the laws of nature? For that matter, in the era of nearlight communication around the planet, how important even are things like "island" anymore, and how is "tribe" defined?
- snapcaster 4y ago
  No, i think the customs of chinas tribe and island should reign supreme in china and the customs of my tribe and island in mine
  - rektide 4y ago
    Should your tribe & China tribe have say over what every company online does? Should they have sway over what US companies do? Seems like you are saying no, that you seem to agree with the frustration shared by the article.
  - bacchusracine 4y ago
    >No, i think the customs of chinas tribe and island should reign supreme in china and the customs of my tribe and island in mine Isn't that the point? The problem is that the customs of others is infringing on the customs of others. If some places insist on a policy for their people, that is fine for their people. But what we have here is an insistence that those people can control how other people outside of their place and people can see and access technology.
clouddrover 4y ago
No, not the laws of Nature, just Better. And made better through centuries of hard work and sacrifice. It's what it takes.
- snapcaster 4y ago
  I also agree they're better (probably coincidence that I was raised in a society and education system praising them nonstop). But to what lengths are you willing to go to impose them on people who don't want them? edit: If we're comparing china, i'm not sure you want to use length of time the society was built as a metric demonstrating chinese inferiority lol
  - clouddrover 4y ago
    It's pretty funny that you equate the oppressive actions of an authoritarian regime with what the people want. It's even funnier that you've failed to understand that the whole point of the article is that an authoritarian regime is imposing itself on others. You contradict yourself but convince yourself you're being rational. That's the problem with being an unprincipled apologist. You end up compromised.
- shadowgovt 4y ago
  China has had, in terms of national continuity, a couple millenia more hard-work-and-sacrifice-time than the US, FWIW, if those qualities are inputs to being "better." It may not be wise to categorically dismiss the shared philosophy and cultural experience of billions of people. We Westerners have a philosophical concept inherited from our ancestors that describes that attitude: "hubris."
  - clouddrover 4y ago
    > China has had, in terms of national continuity, a couple millenia more hard-work-and-sacrifice-time Yes, and China ended up very far behind. China's progress has come through Westernization. China needs more of it. > It may not be wise to categorically dismiss the shared philosophy and cultural experience of billions of people. Billions more know better.
acomjean 4y ago
I becomes an issue in the global world and tolerance and intolerance... EG Danish cartooons of religious figures. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_carto...
- snapcaster 4y ago
  So who should decide how this issue is handled? The Danish? product managers at facebook? techbros?
  - mhoad 4y ago
    We actually have already had this debate already and came to a whole bunch of conclusions on the topic https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-huma...
    - gadders 4y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Liberty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Liberty
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
  - mrguyorama 4y ago
    Definitely not the people who say that a non-believer of Islam cannot depict the prophet Muhammad. That's both a trample on my rights as an individual to do what I want, and a trampling of my rights to not participate in religion.

First we're talking about open versus closed societies, not tribes. The repression of spirit closed societies impose on their members is a humanitarian concern, imperils the soul, eats away at becoming ourselves. Open society all the way. Society has to be allowed to consider itself. Second, this isn't laws of the land. It's the internet, the unplace where different places can meet & connect. Your suggestion proposes that it's the pro-speech folk forcing themselves upon the world. Not so. What's actually happening in this story is the small authoritarian lowest-common-denominators of the world are imposing their views on all interconnectivity, on everyone else. They are constraining everyone else. And tech bosses keep letting it happen, keep letting ourselves be bullied. And the governments of open societies are not stepping up to illuminate & push these issues as the threats to open society that they are. Two absurd inconsistencies. Human rights are amazing. The suppression of humanity is dreadful. That's the "tribe" you are defending.

snapcaster 4y ago
These are all your opinions and personal values. I agree with all of them on a personal level. Where I think we disagree is that this is some kind of "pro speech" vs. "anti speech" battle. I see it more as a global US led Imperium attempting to impose their opinions and personal values on people throughout the world regardless of what those citizens or governments think. I'm in the US, me and my countrypeople shouldn't get a say in what happens in Hong Kong. Just like China shouldn't get a say in what happens in the US. Why isn't that enough?
- rektide 4y ago
  This is a atopical line of inquiry & ignores what is happening. It's an ad-hominem argument against the US. Open society is far more than the US. 43% of the nations of the world are democratic according to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index#By_regime_type https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index#By_regime_ty.... And it continues the filter of seeing this as open society being an imposition. If you have a closed society & the open society of the internet doesn't fit your society, you shouldnt be on the internet. Your closed society doesn't want to participate, then fine, if it must: go elsewhere.
  - snapcaster 4y ago
    You've decided "Open society" == good. This is a value judgement not a law of nature. "if you have a closed society... you shouldn't be on the internet" Again, according to you. what lengths would you be willing to go to impose this on other people?
    - andsoitis 4y ago
      In a more open society, members can choose for themselves, i.e. they have more autonomy. In a more closed society, more choice is taken away from you.
    - rektide 4y ago
      I don't want anyone in a closed society and I'd go through great lengths to help people trapped in close societies have access to open connectivities like the internet. If a society wants to be closed though, your society has the onus of responsibility to enforce closing. Your society can't impose that position on everyone. Hence me saying the society probably shouldnt be on the most open connected free connectivity on the planet, one created by open society & which enables open social values. > You've decided... It looks like you have decided here friend. I never openly said that, although heck the words I use build a pretty lopsided case. I think everyone should decide for themselves though, and come to their conclusions. To me the choice seems obvious & it's hard to see what is to respect about closed, but I'm open. I'm open to learning.
- matthewrobertso 4y ago
  The title of this post is "Tech Bosses Are Letting Dictators Censor What Americans See", the article is about China getting a say in what happens in the US.
- User23 4y ago
  We don't get a say in what happens in Washington either. Frankly, in the present day USA, it's a minor miracle when the county road commissioner will fill a pothole in a timely fashion.
- Xeoncross 4y ago
  > ...people shouldn't get a say Perhaps people should get a say and the governments should take a turn being forced to serve the people instead.
- mensetmanusman 4y ago
  “ I'm in the US, me and my countrypeople shouldn't get a say in what happens in Hong Kong.” This is only if you assume all people are not created equal.
- nradov 4y ago
  We don't know what Chinese citizens think because it's impossible to conduct independent opinion polls on political topics. So, how do you know that the majority of Chinese don't agree with our opinions and personal values on freedom of expression? Countries always seek to extend their influence. The USA and China play the same game, just with different tactics. There will never be "enough".
- clouddrover 4y ago
  > shouldn't get a say in what happens in Hong Kong I guess it's just too bad that Hong Kongers don't get a say in what happens in Hong Kong.

shadowgovt 4y ago

Do you think that the customs of China's tribe and island are the laws of nature? For that matter, in the era of nearlight communication around the planet, how important even are things like "island" anymore, and how is "tribe" defined?

snapcaster 4y ago
No, i think the customs of chinas tribe and island should reign supreme in china and the customs of my tribe and island in mine
- rektide 4y ago
  Should your tribe & China tribe have say over what every company online does? Should they have sway over what US companies do? Seems like you are saying no, that you seem to agree with the frustration shared by the article.
- bacchusracine 4y ago
  >No, i think the customs of chinas tribe and island should reign supreme in china and the customs of my tribe and island in mine Isn't that the point? The problem is that the customs of others is infringing on the customs of others. If some places insist on a policy for their people, that is fine for their people. But what we have here is an insistence that those people can control how other people outside of their place and people can see and access technology.

clouddrover 4y ago

No, not the laws of Nature, just Better. And made better through centuries of hard work and sacrifice. It's what it takes.

snapcaster 4y ago
I also agree they're better (probably coincidence that I was raised in a society and education system praising them nonstop). But to what lengths are you willing to go to impose them on people who don't want them? edit: If we're comparing china, i'm not sure you want to use length of time the society was built as a metric demonstrating chinese inferiority lol
- clouddrover 4y ago
  It's pretty funny that you equate the oppressive actions of an authoritarian regime with what the people want. It's even funnier that you've failed to understand that the whole point of the article is that an authoritarian regime is imposing itself on others. You contradict yourself but convince yourself you're being rational. That's the problem with being an unprincipled apologist. You end up compromised.
shadowgovt 4y ago
China has had, in terms of national continuity, a couple millenia more hard-work-and-sacrifice-time than the US, FWIW, if those qualities are inputs to being "better." It may not be wise to categorically dismiss the shared philosophy and cultural experience of billions of people. We Westerners have a philosophical concept inherited from our ancestors that describes that attitude: "hubris."
- clouddrover 4y ago
  > China has had, in terms of national continuity, a couple millenia more hard-work-and-sacrifice-time Yes, and China ended up very far behind. China's progress has come through Westernization. China needs more of it. > It may not be wise to categorically dismiss the shared philosophy and cultural experience of billions of people. Billions more know better.

acomjean 4y ago

I becomes an issue in the global world and tolerance and intolerance... EG Danish cartooons of religious figures. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_carto...

snapcaster 4y ago
So who should decide how this issue is handled? The Danish? product managers at facebook? techbros?
- mhoad 4y ago
  We actually have already had this debate already and came to a whole bunch of conclusions on the topic https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-huma...
  - gadders 4y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Liberty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Liberty
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- mrguyorama 4y ago
  Definitely not the people who say that a non-believer of Islam cannot depict the prophet Muhammad. That's both a trample on my rights as an individual to do what I want, and a trampling of my rights to not participate in religion.