3 ms·

And innocent people that get harmed by non action are irrelevant? Laws can and will always be abused but if they are about online discourse the only possibility

And innocent people that get harmed by non action are irrelevant? Laws can and will always be abused but if they are about online discourse the only possibility seems to be that there will be nothing but abuse. As long as you are in a country with an intact democracy and separation of power you'll be fine and if not vote against it.

_heimdall 2y ago
Who is harmed specifically by online speech? Speech can certainly lead to people deciding to take some kind of action, but that action is what harms people and those actions are very likely already illegal. When it comes to separation of powers, that's a much bigger discussion but I have concerns over how our three branches operate in the US today. Our legislative branch has outsourced much of their power to the executive branch, though the overturn of Chevron may eventually help that. I wish it were as simply as voting, but I'm generally only offered one or two options for most elected positions and when it comes down to it neither party will allow anyone on the ballot that wants to actually reform anything meaningful about how the system works.
- BoredPositron 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    Dismissing others opinions by rolling them up into some faceless group of guys and refusing to discuss or consider your views is helpful to no one. You haven't get explained how speech online itself hurts anyone, I'd be interested to hear how that might work. I only brought up the US because you specifically referenced voting and separation of powers. I can only vote in the US so my context is limited, and the separation of powers is very much an American idea that has since been adopted in various ways in other countries.
    - BoredPositron 2y ago
      You're not even voicing an opinion. You're "just asking questions." Online hate speech isn't just words on a screen; it can seriously mess people up mentally and emotionally. That's why we've got laws like the Network Enforcement Act in Germany and the EU's Code of Conduct on Countering Illegal Hate Speech Online. These aren't for show – they're there because hate speech can lead to real-world violence and discrimination. If you're so curious, look up the studies on how online harassment affects mental health. But let's be real, you're probably not interested in facts, just in stirring up trouble. Well, I'm not biting. The laws are there, the research is there, and people's lived experiences are there. Deal with it.
      - _heimdall 2y ago
        I understand that we have different opinions on the risk of speech, there's nothing wrong with that. But how do you see my comments here as not voicing an opinion? I pretty clearly raised my view that speech itself can't cause harm and shouldn't be regulated, though that actions taken by people should be.
        BoredPositron 2y ago
        Okay, you are clearly missing the context of what we’re discussing in this thread. Here’s a primer: - The UK has experienced racial riots over the past few weeks. - There was a mass murder in the last weeks. - During these racial riots, someone "identified" an immigrant as the attacker, which turned out to be misinformation and incited a manhunt. - This individual was apprehended. - 4chan went full "fr33d0m" and launched a DDoS attack against the police website. - In response, the UK police blocked international IPs to mitigate this attack. The law is clear-cut: it defines illegal hate speech as public incitement to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group, defined by reference to race, color, religion, descent, or national or ethnic origin. This is the situation we’re discussing. Your stance may be that you believe the woman had the right to lie and incite violence, but that still violates the specific law we're addressing, and my initial comment was directed at this particular issue, this law. You might not agree with the law and may argue that saying "Kill all illegal immigrants." or "Kill this specific immigrant." is acceptable online or even offline. While Elon might be on board with that perspective, I’m glad the governing bodies of the UK and EU are not. It's the libertè thing again...

_heimdall 2y ago

Who is harmed specifically by online speech? Speech can certainly lead to people deciding to take some kind of action, but that action is what harms people and those actions are very likely already illegal. When it comes to separation of powers, that's a much bigger discussion but I have concerns over how our three branches operate in the US today. Our legislative branch has outsourced much of their power to the executive branch, though the overturn of Chevron may eventually help that. I wish it were as simply as voting, but I'm generally only offered one or two options for most elected positions and when it comes down to it neither party will allow anyone on the ballot that wants to actually reform anything meaningful about how the system works.

BoredPositron 2y ago
[flagged]
- _heimdall 2y ago
  Dismissing others opinions by rolling them up into some faceless group of guys and refusing to discuss or consider your views is helpful to no one. You haven't get explained how speech online itself hurts anyone, I'd be interested to hear how that might work. I only brought up the US because you specifically referenced voting and separation of powers. I can only vote in the US so my context is limited, and the separation of powers is very much an American idea that has since been adopted in various ways in other countries.
  - BoredPositron 2y ago
    You're not even voicing an opinion. You're "just asking questions." Online hate speech isn't just words on a screen; it can seriously mess people up mentally and emotionally. That's why we've got laws like the Network Enforcement Act in Germany and the EU's Code of Conduct on Countering Illegal Hate Speech Online. These aren't for show – they're there because hate speech can lead to real-world violence and discrimination. If you're so curious, look up the studies on how online harassment affects mental health. But let's be real, you're probably not interested in facts, just in stirring up trouble. Well, I'm not biting. The laws are there, the research is there, and people's lived experiences are there. Deal with it.
    - _heimdall 2y ago
      I understand that we have different opinions on the risk of speech, there's nothing wrong with that. But how do you see my comments here as not voicing an opinion? I pretty clearly raised my view that speech itself can't cause harm and shouldn't be regulated, though that actions taken by people should be.
      - BoredPositron 2y ago
        Okay, you are clearly missing the context of what we’re discussing in this thread. Here’s a primer: - The UK has experienced racial riots over the past few weeks. - There was a mass murder in the last weeks. - During these racial riots, someone "identified" an immigrant as the attacker, which turned out to be misinformation and incited a manhunt. - This individual was apprehended. - 4chan went full "fr33d0m" and launched a DDoS attack against the police website. - In response, the UK police blocked international IPs to mitigate this attack. The law is clear-cut: it defines illegal hate speech as public incitement to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group, defined by reference to race, color, religion, descent, or national or ethnic origin. This is the situation we’re discussing. Your stance may be that you believe the woman had the right to lie and incite violence, but that still violates the specific law we're addressing, and my initial comment was directed at this particular issue, this law. You might not agree with the law and may argue that saying "Kill all illegal immigrants." or "Kill this specific immigrant." is acceptable online or even offline. While Elon might be on board with that perspective, I’m glad the governing bodies of the UK and EU are not. It's the libertè thing again...