5 ms·

It's concerning how much of the "opposition" are only upset that this bill doesn't restrict freedom of espression enough. Including the author of this article,

It's concerning how much of the "opposition" are only upset that this bill doesn't restrict freedom of espression enough. Including the author of this article, it seems, including the obligatory claim that disagreeing with one's personally preferred form of urban planning is a "far-right conspiracy theory" An easy test the sanity of measures to combat "misinformation" is to mentally replace that term with "fake news"

mdp2021 3y ago
> Including the author of this article, it seems, including the obligatory claim that disagreeing with one's personally preferred form of urban planning is a "far-right conspiracy theory" Sorry could you point to the referenced passage?
- Amezarak 3y ago
  The GP is probably referring to this: > After the worst of the pandemic was over, those same falsehoods fed into other conspiracy theories that continue to disrupt society. The original white paper that was the bill’s foundation included proposals for compelling platforms to tackle this kind of content—which individually might not be illegal but which en masse creates dangers. That’s not in the final legislation, although the act does create a new offense of “false communications,” criminalizing deliberately causing harm by communicating something the sender knows to be untrue. [...] The act includes strict rules forcing platforms to move swiftly to remove any illegal post—such as terrorist content or child sexual abuse material—but not on disinformation campaigns comprised of a drip-drip of misleading content, failing to understand that “when that turns into things going viral and spreading, then the harm can occur cumulatively.” In the article, "other conspiracy theories" is a link to an article discussing people who oppose 15-minute cities, apparently because they regard that level of city planning as excessively authoritarian. It definitely seems to be true that the "opposition" here is complaining this bill did not yet give the government remit to ban "misinformation" and "disinformation", which is indeed depressing. I often wonder whether most such people really believe broad categories like this, which historically encompass everything from legitimately insane conspiracy theories to true facts about the world that the ruling class finds annoying, are something the government should be cracking down on...are they not aware "public order" is the excuse every regime has used to suppress speech?
- aklju90709 3y ago
  He's referring to this article by the same author: https://www.wired.com/story/15-minute-cities-conspiracy-climate-denier/ https://www.wired.com/story/15-minute-cities-conspiracy-clim... There are very valid criticisms of the "15 minute city" including the widespread surveillance required to enforce certain proposed traffic restrictions (by personally identifying drivers and only allowing access to some areas at certain times). Councils and national governments in the UK have long abused data gathering to the detriment of its citizens. Unfortunately the Guardian and its ilk have derided critics of these plans as far right extremists and conspiracy theories.
  - kamilner 3y ago
    Traffic restrictions are not part of the "15 minute city" initiatives. I think they are often confused because of Oxford's traffic filter scheme. As the article you link says, tying walkable city initiatives to one particular city's traffic scheme is indeed a conspiracy theory. If you have valid criticisms of the traffic filter trial in Oxford then that's fair enough, although I imagine Oxonians won't be particularly interested in hearing it unless you're a local resident.
  - arlort 3y ago
    > including the widespread surveillance required to enforce certain proposed traffic restrictions But 15-minutes cities aren't about traffic restrictions. I might be wrong but this seems like people are conflating low traffic zones (which can involve the kind of automated system to limit traffic that you seem to refer to) with 15 minutes cities, which is an idea in urban planning to decentralize services (the "15 minutes" is intended as "you can reach anything you need every day with 15 minutes of walk", not "you won't be allowed to travel more than 15 minutes")
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - lol768 3y ago
    The 15-minute neighbourhoods proposal (and similar proposals) are centered around ensuring that every resident has all the essentials (shops, healthcare, parks) within a 15-minute walk of their home. It has absolutely nothing to do with traffic filtering or traffic restrictions, and this is simply misinformation (sadly, misinformation perpetuated by the political party with a majority in the United Kingdom). Nobody is going to be confined to a distance-based-radius of their home, and anyone stupid enough to believe this is a damning indictment of the UK's education system.
krapp 3y ago
>including the obligatory claim that disagreeing with one's personally preferred form of urban planning is a "far-right conspiracy theory" You're talking about the "15 minute city" conspiracy theory[0,1], which posits that the design of cities such that amenities are available within a 15 minute walk from citizens (in other words, built for pedestrians rather than cars) is, in reality, an authoritarian plot to restrict freedom of movement and control people en masse, often linked with COVID conspiracy theories which implied pandemic measures were simply a pretext by a cabal of global elites to stage a world takeover. How is that not a "far-right conspiracy theory?" It's literally every other "new world order" conspiracy theory promulgated by the far right, just applied to whatever new thing Twitter and Reddit decide is a globalist plot this week. [0]https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-15-minute-city-conspiracy-162fd388f0c435a8289cc9ea213f92ee https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-15-minute-city-conspir... [1]https://www.wired.com/story/15-minute-city-conspiracy-uk-politics/ https://www.wired.com/story/15-minute-city-conspiracy-uk-pol...
- ajvs 3y ago
  Because you're missing the context of what's actually happening in the UK such as ULEZ making travel more expensive (thus monetarily restricting your movement) and councils implementing 15-minute city-aligned schemes which also limit movement.
  - seagullriffic 3y ago
    > missing the context of what's actually happening in the UK such as ULEZ making travel more expensive I'm more than 95% sure that you, a Hacker News commenter, do not have a non-compliant vehicle in the UK which you "need" to visit London, which has the best public transport in Europe. So why spread this FUD except to make it harder to enact these policies to clean the air? Why, just why, are people against clean air? "Yes, but not like that!" > councils implementing 15-minute city-aligned schemes which also limit movement. Just where does this come from. If you want to visit or live in a city, then you appreciate density. Private cars are anathema to density. The logic is not hard.
    - 3y ago

mdp2021 3y ago

> Including the author of this article, it seems, including the obligatory claim that disagreeing with one's personally preferred form of urban planning is a "far-right conspiracy theory" Sorry could you point to the referenced passage?

Amezarak 3y ago
The GP is probably referring to this: > After the worst of the pandemic was over, those same falsehoods fed into other conspiracy theories that continue to disrupt society. The original white paper that was the bill’s foundation included proposals for compelling platforms to tackle this kind of content—which individually might not be illegal but which en masse creates dangers. That’s not in the final legislation, although the act does create a new offense of “false communications,” criminalizing deliberately causing harm by communicating something the sender knows to be untrue. [...] The act includes strict rules forcing platforms to move swiftly to remove any illegal post—such as terrorist content or child sexual abuse material—but not on disinformation campaigns comprised of a drip-drip of misleading content, failing to understand that “when that turns into things going viral and spreading, then the harm can occur cumulatively.” In the article, "other conspiracy theories" is a link to an article discussing people who oppose 15-minute cities, apparently because they regard that level of city planning as excessively authoritarian. It definitely seems to be true that the "opposition" here is complaining this bill did not yet give the government remit to ban "misinformation" and "disinformation", which is indeed depressing. I often wonder whether most such people really believe broad categories like this, which historically encompass everything from legitimately insane conspiracy theories to true facts about the world that the ruling class finds annoying, are something the government should be cracking down on...are they not aware "public order" is the excuse every regime has used to suppress speech?
aklju90709 3y ago
He's referring to this article by the same author: https://www.wired.com/story/15-minute-cities-conspiracy-climate-denier/ https://www.wired.com/story/15-minute-cities-conspiracy-clim... There are very valid criticisms of the "15 minute city" including the widespread surveillance required to enforce certain proposed traffic restrictions (by personally identifying drivers and only allowing access to some areas at certain times). Councils and national governments in the UK have long abused data gathering to the detriment of its citizens. Unfortunately the Guardian and its ilk have derided critics of these plans as far right extremists and conspiracy theories.
- kamilner 3y ago
  Traffic restrictions are not part of the "15 minute city" initiatives. I think they are often confused because of Oxford's traffic filter scheme. As the article you link says, tying walkable city initiatives to one particular city's traffic scheme is indeed a conspiracy theory. If you have valid criticisms of the traffic filter trial in Oxford then that's fair enough, although I imagine Oxonians won't be particularly interested in hearing it unless you're a local resident.
- arlort 3y ago
  > including the widespread surveillance required to enforce certain proposed traffic restrictions But 15-minutes cities aren't about traffic restrictions. I might be wrong but this seems like people are conflating low traffic zones (which can involve the kind of automated system to limit traffic that you seem to refer to) with 15 minutes cities, which is an idea in urban planning to decentralize services (the "15 minutes" is intended as "you can reach anything you need every day with 15 minutes of walk", not "you won't be allowed to travel more than 15 minutes")
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- lol768 3y ago
  The 15-minute neighbourhoods proposal (and similar proposals) are centered around ensuring that every resident has all the essentials (shops, healthcare, parks) within a 15-minute walk of their home. It has absolutely nothing to do with traffic filtering or traffic restrictions, and this is simply misinformation (sadly, misinformation perpetuated by the political party with a majority in the United Kingdom). Nobody is going to be confined to a distance-based-radius of their home, and anyone stupid enough to believe this is a damning indictment of the UK's education system.

krapp 3y ago

>including the obligatory claim that disagreeing with one's personally preferred form of urban planning is a "far-right conspiracy theory" You're talking about the "15 minute city" conspiracy theory[0,1], which posits that the design of cities such that amenities are available within a 15 minute walk from citizens (in other words, built for pedestrians rather than cars) is, in reality, an authoritarian plot to restrict freedom of movement and control people en masse, often linked with COVID conspiracy theories which implied pandemic measures were simply a pretext by a cabal of global elites to stage a world takeover. How is that not a "far-right conspiracy theory?" It's literally every other "new world order" conspiracy theory promulgated by the far right, just applied to whatever new thing Twitter and Reddit decide is a globalist plot this week. [0]https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-15-minute-city-conspiracy-162fd388f0c435a8289cc9ea213f92ee https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-15-minute-city-conspir... [1]https://www.wired.com/story/15-minute-city-conspiracy-uk-politics/ https://www.wired.com/story/15-minute-city-conspiracy-uk-pol...

ajvs 3y ago
Because you're missing the context of what's actually happening in the UK such as ULEZ making travel more expensive (thus monetarily restricting your movement) and councils implementing 15-minute city-aligned schemes which also limit movement.
- seagullriffic 3y ago
  > missing the context of what's actually happening in the UK such as ULEZ making travel more expensive I'm more than 95% sure that you, a Hacker News commenter, do not have a non-compliant vehicle in the UK which you "need" to visit London, which has the best public transport in Europe. So why spread this FUD except to make it harder to enact these policies to clean the air? Why, just why, are people against clean air? "Yes, but not like that!" > councils implementing 15-minute city-aligned schemes which also limit movement. Just where does this come from. If you want to visit or live in a city, then you appreciate density. Private cars are anathema to density. The logic is not hard.
  - 3y ago