4 ms·

> Censorship, beyond what’s required by law, is doomed to fail. Censorship, as you call it, is a requirement for any platform. It's better to call it moderatio

> Censorship, beyond what’s required by law, is doomed to fail. Censorship, as you call it, is a requirement for any platform. It's better to call it moderation. Without it platforms would be 99% spam. I assume you support "censoring" spam so that means you support some level of moderation.

dilap 2y ago
Spam is a real problem, but when your platform is doing things like disallowing linking to a NY Post article on the Hunter Biden laptop or mentioning the possibility that COVID originated from a lab-leak, then I think pretty clearly the term "censorship" is more apt than "moderation". Also, to the extent that a platform is surfacing content based on a friend or follow model, then that itself is intrinsically sufficient moderation for the spam problem (because you can simply unfriend or unfollow spam accounts). (Spam friend requests and follows still need to be addressed, however.)
- BlueTemplar 2y ago
  Sounds like it's the FBI's credibility that is shot - imagine Facebook had done nothing and it HAD been a Russian propaganda operation ?
  - dilap 2y ago
    I think it's completely reasonable for FB to take the position of "it is not our job to block links to newspapers". Similarly I don't blame FB for failing to block links to the Steele dossier, even though I think it was bogus.
  - SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
    > HAD been a Russian propaganda operation But it wasn’t. And everyone who looked the videos of Hunter smoking crack, and his text messages discussing Joe Biden involved in business dealings, and his relationship with his 24yo niece knew it wasn’t “Russian Disinformation”. It was obviously real, and hidden from everyone in order to influence the election. It was censorship at request of the government and election interference. We don’t need the WHAT-IF it wasn’t.
    - wredue 2y ago
      None of this stuff was censored from reasonable sources. Don’t know what to tell ya. If you share breitbart hot takes, expect possible takedown for disinformation.
      - SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
        >None of this stuff was censored from reasonable sources Even for HN, this is an ideologues bridge too far.
        wredue 2y ago
        Stop sharing legitimate news that comes with outright disinformation. You’re not being taken down for the legitimate take. You are being taken down for the other wild assertions, conspiracy theories and lies that you cook up with them. You people will write like “some stupid n*** shot up a grocery store” Then you get taken down and whine that “I just made a comment about news that really happened”. And then the real reason it was taken down was the n-bomb you dropped. The posts you claim are censored are not being censored for the reasons you are claiming.
        SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
        >You people will write like “some stupid n** shot up a grocery store” Wow. Well, I can tell how your mind works. Go ahead and keep all that to yourself, yea?
        wredue 2y ago
        You can keep your conspiracy theories to yourself. I am gleeful to respond to your nonsense and call it out for the lie that it is.
    - laidoffamazon 2y ago
      It was almost definitely an iCloud hack laundered through a laptop (last Mac of its kind to not have at rest encryption on by default IIRC) provided to a conveniently blind computer technician who happened to know Rudy Giuliani personally. I think anybody can tell this information wasn’t obtained fraudulently. It is notable though that the same press is currently sitting on hacked documents from Iran from the Trump campaign…
  - flanked-evergl 2y ago
    By this logic nobody should ever publish anything.
    - BlueTemplar 2y ago
      I'm pretty sure the FBI didn't came knocking discussing this comment of yours ?
      - flanked-evergl 2y ago
        Imagine if YC didn't delete my comments and I was some Russian sock puppet.
Dig1t 2y ago
We're not talking about censoring spam, we're talking about real, verified people who are obviously not spamming being censored. The two are unrelated, and Zuck is admitting here that the current administration pushed them to censor things they fully knew were not spam.

dilap 2y ago

Spam is a real problem, but when your platform is doing things like disallowing linking to a NY Post article on the Hunter Biden laptop or mentioning the possibility that COVID originated from a lab-leak, then I think pretty clearly the term "censorship" is more apt than "moderation". Also, to the extent that a platform is surfacing content based on a friend or follow model, then that itself is intrinsically sufficient moderation for the spam problem (because you can simply unfriend or unfollow spam accounts). (Spam friend requests and follows still need to be addressed, however.)

BlueTemplar 2y ago
Sounds like it's the FBI's credibility that is shot - imagine Facebook had done nothing and it HAD been a Russian propaganda operation ?
- dilap 2y ago
  I think it's completely reasonable for FB to take the position of "it is not our job to block links to newspapers". Similarly I don't blame FB for failing to block links to the Steele dossier, even though I think it was bogus.
- SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
  > HAD been a Russian propaganda operation But it wasn’t. And everyone who looked the videos of Hunter smoking crack, and his text messages discussing Joe Biden involved in business dealings, and his relationship with his 24yo niece knew it wasn’t “Russian Disinformation”. It was obviously real, and hidden from everyone in order to influence the election. It was censorship at request of the government and election interference. We don’t need the WHAT-IF it wasn’t.
  - wredue 2y ago
    None of this stuff was censored from reasonable sources. Don’t know what to tell ya. If you share breitbart hot takes, expect possible takedown for disinformation.
    - SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
      >None of this stuff was censored from reasonable sources Even for HN, this is an ideologues bridge too far.
      - wredue 2y ago
        Stop sharing legitimate news that comes with outright disinformation. You’re not being taken down for the legitimate take. You are being taken down for the other wild assertions, conspiracy theories and lies that you cook up with them. You people will write like “some stupid n*** shot up a grocery store” Then you get taken down and whine that “I just made a comment about news that really happened”. And then the real reason it was taken down was the n-bomb you dropped. The posts you claim are censored are not being censored for the reasons you are claiming.
        SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
        >You people will write like “some stupid n** shot up a grocery store” Wow. Well, I can tell how your mind works. Go ahead and keep all that to yourself, yea?
        wredue 2y ago
        You can keep your conspiracy theories to yourself. I am gleeful to respond to your nonsense and call it out for the lie that it is.
  - laidoffamazon 2y ago
    It was almost definitely an iCloud hack laundered through a laptop (last Mac of its kind to not have at rest encryption on by default IIRC) provided to a conveniently blind computer technician who happened to know Rudy Giuliani personally. I think anybody can tell this information wasn’t obtained fraudulently. It is notable though that the same press is currently sitting on hacked documents from Iran from the Trump campaign…
- flanked-evergl 2y ago
  By this logic nobody should ever publish anything.
  - BlueTemplar 2y ago
    I'm pretty sure the FBI didn't came knocking discussing this comment of yours ?
    - flanked-evergl 2y ago
      Imagine if YC didn't delete my comments and I was some Russian sock puppet.

Dig1t 2y ago

We're not talking about censoring spam, we're talking about real, verified people who are obviously not spamming being censored. The two are unrelated, and Zuck is admitting here that the current administration pushed them to censor things they fully knew were not spam.