4 ms·

I dunno, it sounds to me like more right-wingers complaining that their disinformation is being disrupted.

HappySweeney 3y ago
Same, but isn't disseminating disinfo a constitutionally-protected activity (modulo fraud, ofc)?
lettergram 3y ago
"disinformation" is protected first amendment speech. Who decides what's "disinformation"? You don't want it to be the government or anyone really to decide what you can or cannot read? You battle bad speech with good speech.
- aaroninsf 3y ago
  False, you meaning all of us do want a government that takes active measures to prevent weaponized speech. That we don't have a Constitutional framework for distinguishing this is the same sort of catastrophic zero day in our democracy that the comically shitty second amendment language is. That these are unpatchable is a consequence of and overwhelmingly serves bad actors, specifically, right wing antidemocratic bad faith actors, and operates in no small part over the "free speech" being mechanically reproduced by they and their allies in such lovely institutions as the GRU and other centers of literally anti-American memetic warfare.
  - analognoise 3y ago
    If people are dumb enough to succumb to “memetic warfare” (whatever that is) we deserve to lose. I would rather have the “threat” of having to actually convince people we’re right rather than have the government tell people something can’t be said. That’s far more horrifying. People are allowed to be wrong. They’re people. They disagree. If our society is so weak it crumbles when people hear certain things, it deserves to crumble. I don’t think it is and I don’t think we will, however.
- kelseyfrog 3y ago
  Lies spread faster than truth and repetition legitimizes, repetition legitimizes, repetition legitimizes. Those two axioms are enough to guarantee that, all things being equal, lies will be legitimated over truth. I''ll graciously ask for proof that truth is born out of debate in greater than 50% of cases and baring evidence, cannot take it to be true.
  - nathanaldensr 3y ago
    Regardless of your personal perspective on the definition of "truth," the issue here is not said definition but the First Amendment.
    - kelseyfrog 3y ago
      "Lies spread faster than truth" does not depend on my definition of truth nor does it depend on the 1st amendment, sorry. It's perfectly fine to prioritize free speech protection over lies, but it's delusional (though everyone's right) to believe that we can have both. It's simply not based in reality. More power to those who stick by their principles.
swsdsailor 3y ago
[flagged]
- snapcaster 3y ago
  This comment is really giving off "the internet has melted my brain" vibes. Can you try to make your point without sarcasm?
nathanaldensr 3y ago
Being a "right-winger" is not grounds for violating the First Amendment. "Disinformation" is also not grounds for violating the First Amendment. You're basically proving your opposition correct with your casual dismissals.
MrStonedOne 3y ago
[dead]
theryan 3y ago
This line of thinking is how you could end up having your speech censored. Information or disinformation should be free to flow without consequences. Whoever is in power deems what is information or disinformation which could be extremely dangerous.
motohagiography 3y ago
> In 2020, CISA officials and personnel from EIP were often on emails together, and CISA’s personnel had access to EIP’s tickets through an internal messaging system, Jira, which EIP used to flag and report social media posts to Twitter, Facebook, and other platforms. Sharing jira tickets is pretty much the definition of collaboration in every single other organization on the planet. The tickets were opened with the express purpose of suppressing opposition party voices, and it was between a domestic security and intelligence agency and a platform, using an ostensibly "academic" project to do it. You should be more principled. Speech protections don't just protect the right to be disagreeable, they protect your right to be that intellectually lazy as well.
- orwin 3y ago
  > Sharing jira tickets is pretty much the definition of collaboration in every single other organization on the planet. You're lucky enough to not have used Jira (or Trello :/) as a method of communication between your users and your org. Depends on your meaning of "collaboration" i guess.
- belltaco 3y ago
  > The tickets were opened with the express purpose of suppressing opposition party voices Source(s)?
  - motohagiography 3y ago
    Subpoenad committee testimony from Roth and co that was covered in the twitter files. Troll.
    - belltaco 3y ago
      The Trump administration was in power in 2020, so I guess your claim is that they were trying to suppress Democratic party voices. Makes sense.
PKop 3y ago
Disinformation is an Orwellian term that equates to "opposition political speech and interests". When was it officially enacted that bureaucracies, universities, or social media corporation were the arbiters of public discourse? What is disinformation exactly? I can remember very recently when later proven to be true "information" around COVID was determined at the time to be some insane verboten "disinformation" and was banned on social media platforms. Things like efficacy of masks, whether vaccines prevented the spread or any other manner of debatable political discussions. But who cares if you think this or that thing is false? Of course right-wingers are opposed to violations of their 1st amendment rights. Because being able to communicate freely (or not) has direct bearing on political power.
- 303uru 3y ago
  So tired of right wingers trying to rewrite history. Shouting "it's a China lab leak", "masks don't work", "masks make it so you can't breathe", "muzzle muzzle muzzle", "the mRNA vaccine is activated by 5G to kill you!!!", etc... is disinformation. Some of it may even in retrospect be true or partially true, but it was being disseminated as fact with zero evidence to back it. Right wingers love shouting FIRE FIRE FIRE to incite fear.
  - PKop 3y ago
    >Some of it may even in retrospect be true or partially true Insanity lol. A person that thinks like this is exactly the type of political danger it is prudent to fear and oppose. Again, "disinformation" is nearly meaningless. That you oppose or disagree with one's opinions or political views is not grounds for that person to be OK with you censoring them. In fact they should view you as a political enemy. It is the fundamental rationale for the 1st amendment. The China lab-leak is likely true. Masks don't work. What a weird position to hold whereby completely rational views are legitimate grounds for complete subversion of the 1st amendment. This is Dunning–Kruger-like in it's complete inversion of who should be deemed crazy, stupid, or politically dangerous.
    - 303uru 3y ago

Same, but isn't disseminating disinfo a constitutionally-protected activity (modulo fraud, ofc)?

"disinformation" is protected first amendment speech. Who decides what's "disinformation"? You don't want it to be the government or anyone really to decide what you can or cannot read? You battle bad speech with good speech.

aaroninsf 3y ago
False, you meaning all of us do want a government that takes active measures to prevent weaponized speech. That we don't have a Constitutional framework for distinguishing this is the same sort of catastrophic zero day in our democracy that the comically shitty second amendment language is. That these are unpatchable is a consequence of and overwhelmingly serves bad actors, specifically, right wing antidemocratic bad faith actors, and operates in no small part over the "free speech" being mechanically reproduced by they and their allies in such lovely institutions as the GRU and other centers of literally anti-American memetic warfare.
- analognoise 3y ago
  If people are dumb enough to succumb to “memetic warfare” (whatever that is) we deserve to lose. I would rather have the “threat” of having to actually convince people we’re right rather than have the government tell people something can’t be said. That’s far more horrifying. People are allowed to be wrong. They’re people. They disagree. If our society is so weak it crumbles when people hear certain things, it deserves to crumble. I don’t think it is and I don’t think we will, however.
kelseyfrog 3y ago
Lies spread faster than truth and repetition legitimizes, repetition legitimizes, repetition legitimizes. Those two axioms are enough to guarantee that, all things being equal, lies will be legitimated over truth. I''ll graciously ask for proof that truth is born out of debate in greater than 50% of cases and baring evidence, cannot take it to be true.
- nathanaldensr 3y ago
  Regardless of your personal perspective on the definition of "truth," the issue here is not said definition but the First Amendment.
  - kelseyfrog 3y ago
    "Lies spread faster than truth" does not depend on my definition of truth nor does it depend on the 1st amendment, sorry. It's perfectly fine to prioritize free speech protection over lies, but it's delusional (though everyone's right) to believe that we can have both. It's simply not based in reality. More power to those who stick by their principles.

swsdsailor 3y ago

[flagged]

snapcaster 3y ago
This comment is really giving off "the internet has melted my brain" vibes. Can you try to make your point without sarcasm?

nathanaldensr 3y ago

Being a "right-winger" is not grounds for violating the First Amendment. "Disinformation" is also not grounds for violating the First Amendment. You're basically proving your opposition correct with your casual dismissals.

MrStonedOne 3y ago

[dead]

theryan 3y ago

This line of thinking is how you could end up having your speech censored. Information or disinformation should be free to flow without consequences. Whoever is in power deems what is information or disinformation which could be extremely dangerous.

motohagiography 3y ago

> In 2020, CISA officials and personnel from EIP were often on emails together, and CISA’s personnel had access to EIP’s tickets through an internal messaging system, Jira, which EIP used to flag and report social media posts to Twitter, Facebook, and other platforms. Sharing jira tickets is pretty much the definition of collaboration in every single other organization on the planet. The tickets were opened with the express purpose of suppressing opposition party voices, and it was between a domestic security and intelligence agency and a platform, using an ostensibly "academic" project to do it. You should be more principled. Speech protections don't just protect the right to be disagreeable, they protect your right to be that intellectually lazy as well.

orwin 3y ago
> Sharing jira tickets is pretty much the definition of collaboration in every single other organization on the planet. You're lucky enough to not have used Jira (or Trello :/) as a method of communication between your users and your org. Depends on your meaning of "collaboration" i guess.
belltaco 3y ago
> The tickets were opened with the express purpose of suppressing opposition party voices Source(s)?
- motohagiography 3y ago
  Subpoenad committee testimony from Roth and co that was covered in the twitter files. Troll.
  - belltaco 3y ago
    The Trump administration was in power in 2020, so I guess your claim is that they were trying to suppress Democratic party voices. Makes sense.

PKop 3y ago

Disinformation is an Orwellian term that equates to "opposition political speech and interests". When was it officially enacted that bureaucracies, universities, or social media corporation were the arbiters of public discourse? What is disinformation exactly? I can remember very recently when later proven to be true "information" around COVID was determined at the time to be some insane verboten "disinformation" and was banned on social media platforms. Things like efficacy of masks, whether vaccines prevented the spread or any other manner of debatable political discussions. But who cares if you think this or that thing is false? Of course right-wingers are opposed to violations of their 1st amendment rights. Because being able to communicate freely (or not) has direct bearing on political power.

303uru 3y ago
So tired of right wingers trying to rewrite history. Shouting "it's a China lab leak", "masks don't work", "masks make it so you can't breathe", "muzzle muzzle muzzle", "the mRNA vaccine is activated by 5G to kill you!!!", etc... is disinformation. Some of it may even in retrospect be true or partially true, but it was being disseminated as fact with zero evidence to back it. Right wingers love shouting FIRE FIRE FIRE to incite fear.
- PKop 3y ago
  >Some of it may even in retrospect be true or partially true Insanity lol. A person that thinks like this is exactly the type of political danger it is prudent to fear and oppose. Again, "disinformation" is nearly meaningless. That you oppose or disagree with one's opinions or political views is not grounds for that person to be OK with you censoring them. In fact they should view you as a political enemy. It is the fundamental rationale for the 1st amendment. The China lab-leak is likely true. Masks don't work. What a weird position to hold whereby completely rational views are legitimate grounds for complete subversion of the 1st amendment. This is Dunning–Kruger-like in it's complete inversion of who should be deemed crazy, stupid, or politically dangerous.
  - 303uru 3y ago