3 ms·

You should know that your position is societally untenable. Excellent example: in the early days of Reddit, they very much had a "you can post anything that is

You should know that your position is societally untenable. Excellent example: in the early days of Reddit, they very much had a "you can post anything that is not illegal" policy, and this led to subreddits like jailbait, fatpeoplehate, etc. Around 2012 I think (someone can look up the exact date) there was a coordinated effort to shine a bright media spotlight on the "underbelly" subreddits that made a ton of Internet and national news, e.g. features by Anderson Cooper on CNN, prominent op eds in NY Times, etc. Reddit changed course and specifically banned sexually suggestive pictures of minors and those without consent. I have an opinion, but I am not arguing here for whether the decision was "right" or "wrong". I am simply pointing out that Reddit had 0 choice in the matter. If they had held firm with their "anything that's legal" policy, they would simply not exist today. They would have been deplatformed to the nth degree, and furthermore laws would have (and actually have, e.g. in the case of revenge porn) changed to make their existence untenable. E.g. platforms like Reddit can't exist without Section 230, which is already under attack and I guarantee would have been removed if you had lots of platforms saying they're fine with people posting unknown, sexually suggestive pictures of minors. Nevermind having 0 advertisers willing to pay their bills. I'm not crazy about "SV moral arbiters" either, but I don't like posts like yours because they pretend a reality that doesn't exist.

hanselot 3y ago
Ah you mean that time before reddit was entirely hivemind? The most valuable information on the Internet will always come from the chans. You just need to be able to evaluate everything with critical thinking. You know, that thing where you can reason about something without necessarily agreeing with it. Please don't interpret this as bait. From my perspective a vast majority of people have embraced outsourcing their reason. Things like fph exist exactly because people are told day in and day out that diabetes is healthy. Its perhaps the most ugly manifestation of the natural reaction to this polar opposite called body positivity. But banishing thought doesn't eradicate it. It simply validates all those driven away. Sadly that is something vitally absent from borg based Internet.
- hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
  > Things like fph exist exactly because people are told day in and day out that diabetes is healthy. I don't believe this deserves any serious consideration.
- narrator 3y ago
  Some anonymous Swedish guy said that a virus was coming early next year in September 2019 and pleaded with people to not take the vaccine that would come in late 2020.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    I don't know what point you're trying to make. The baseline rate for schizophrenia means I should expect about 24 million people saying equivalent things about each year.
    - narrator 3y ago
      That's as stupid as me assuming you were schizophrenic and ignoring your argument.
      - ben_w 3y ago
        You have still completely failed to communicate whatever point you were trying to make. I have absolutely no idea what idea you were attempting to convey.
        narrator 3y ago
        This was on 4chan. See link below. Just showing the value of 4chan.
        ben_w 3y ago
        If you think that shows value, that just shows you don't know value.
deelly 3y ago
> I'm not crazy about "SV moral arbiters" either, but I don't like posts like yours because they pretend a reality that doesn't exist. I`m not OP, but I don't like posts like yours because they pretend that current status (not even status, your idea about current status) will never-ever change.
- hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
  > I`m not OP, but I don't like posts like yours because they pretend that current status (not even status, your idea about current status) will never-ever change. I'm all ears listening to suggestions for how to realistically change the current status, I just haven't heard any reasonable ones that are actually tenable. Also, while I think there are plenty of annoyances with the current status, I rarely think they are as catastrophic as their detractors make them out to be.
- pixl97 3y ago
  I mean to address your questions we have to answer more complex questions of what society and culture is. At least in my thinking, which may be incorrect, is that you cannot have a society that allows everything. Because allowing oneself to be destroyed is in the set of everything. I'm not sure how your idealism doesn't fall foul of the paradox of tolerance?
michaelt 3y ago
Right, we shouldn't lie to ourselves here. The corporate-controlled image generation models will block sexually suggestive images and gore. They'll also block images of Xi Jinping and Mickey Mouse. It'll still be good enough for a lot of applications; that guy photoshopping together an ad for Mountain Dew doesn't need images of Xi Jinping anyway.
- raxxorraxor 3y ago
  But these aren't really the successful models that further creativity. On the contrary, we see a buzzing community that create thousands of models and they specifically chose base models that are not lobotomized because they simply provide better results. So you might not want to stifle that with corporate control.
AnthonyMouse 3y ago
They did have a choice though. They could have built a federated system in which they as the developers have no ability to censor. If each subreddit could be hosted by its moderators, you can't apply pressure to the developers because they have no control over it. You can apply pressure to the moderators hosting that subreddit, but they don't care more about ad revenue than keeping their subreddit up because if it's not up there's no ad revenue.
raxxorraxor 3y ago
I heavily doubt they would have deplatformed and I don't think there ever was a pandemic of CSAM on reddit. This is a mischaracterization usually the argument to enact greater control. Could be that reddit did indeed have no choice here, there was a media campaign against more open platforms. The situation is indeed tenable if platforms just do not cooperate with external pressure of content moderation. There are such platforms and they still operate today.

hanselot 3y ago

Ah you mean that time before reddit was entirely hivemind? The most valuable information on the Internet will always come from the chans. You just need to be able to evaluate everything with critical thinking. You know, that thing where you can reason about something without necessarily agreeing with it. Please don't interpret this as bait. From my perspective a vast majority of people have embraced outsourcing their reason. Things like fph exist exactly because people are told day in and day out that diabetes is healthy. Its perhaps the most ugly manifestation of the natural reaction to this polar opposite called body positivity. But banishing thought doesn't eradicate it. It simply validates all those driven away. Sadly that is something vitally absent from borg based Internet.

hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
> Things like fph exist exactly because people are told day in and day out that diabetes is healthy. I don't believe this deserves any serious consideration.
narrator 3y ago
Some anonymous Swedish guy said that a virus was coming early next year in September 2019 and pleaded with people to not take the vaccine that would come in late 2020.
- ben_w 3y ago
  I don't know what point you're trying to make. The baseline rate for schizophrenia means I should expect about 24 million people saying equivalent things about each year.
  - narrator 3y ago
    That's as stupid as me assuming you were schizophrenic and ignoring your argument.
    - ben_w 3y ago
      You have still completely failed to communicate whatever point you were trying to make. I have absolutely no idea what idea you were attempting to convey.
      - narrator 3y ago
        This was on 4chan. See link below. Just showing the value of 4chan.
        ben_w 3y ago
        If you think that shows value, that just shows you don't know value.

deelly 3y ago

> I'm not crazy about "SV moral arbiters" either, but I don't like posts like yours because they pretend a reality that doesn't exist. I`m not OP, but I don't like posts like yours because they pretend that current status (not even status, your idea about current status) will never-ever change.

hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
> I`m not OP, but I don't like posts like yours because they pretend that current status (not even status, your idea about current status) will never-ever change. I'm all ears listening to suggestions for how to realistically change the current status, I just haven't heard any reasonable ones that are actually tenable. Also, while I think there are plenty of annoyances with the current status, I rarely think they are as catastrophic as their detractors make them out to be.
pixl97 3y ago
I mean to address your questions we have to answer more complex questions of what society and culture is. At least in my thinking, which may be incorrect, is that you cannot have a society that allows everything. Because allowing oneself to be destroyed is in the set of everything. I'm not sure how your idealism doesn't fall foul of the paradox of tolerance?

michaelt 3y ago

Right, we shouldn't lie to ourselves here. The corporate-controlled image generation models will block sexually suggestive images and gore. They'll also block images of Xi Jinping and Mickey Mouse. It'll still be good enough for a lot of applications; that guy photoshopping together an ad for Mountain Dew doesn't need images of Xi Jinping anyway.

raxxorraxor 3y ago
But these aren't really the successful models that further creativity. On the contrary, we see a buzzing community that create thousands of models and they specifically chose base models that are not lobotomized because they simply provide better results. So you might not want to stifle that with corporate control.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago

They did have a choice though. They could have built a federated system in which they as the developers have no ability to censor. If each subreddit could be hosted by its moderators, you can't apply pressure to the developers because they have no control over it. You can apply pressure to the moderators hosting that subreddit, but they don't care more about ad revenue than keeping their subreddit up because if it's not up there's no ad revenue.

raxxorraxor 3y ago

I heavily doubt they would have deplatformed and I don't think there ever was a pandemic of CSAM on reddit. This is a mischaracterization usually the argument to enact greater control. Could be that reddit did indeed have no choice here, there was a media campaign against more open platforms. The situation is indeed tenable if platforms just do not cooperate with external pressure of content moderation. There are such platforms and they still operate today.