4 ms·

The EFF is on the wrong side of history on this one. Sad to see it.

by influx 2y ago

freen 2y ago
Yup: MLK’s moral arc of the history definitely bends towards making fun of disabled people.
beej71 2y ago
How do you figure? The only thing I see that's wrong about this is that I don't pay the EFF to tell private companies what to do. I pay them to stop the government from turning fascist. They're not wrong about Facebook being a POS and these new policies making it moreso, though.
- Over2Chars 2y ago
  The EFF won't stop anyone from turning fascist. That's not their mission. It sounds nice though. I wouldn't give the EFF a dime.
- cratermoon 2y ago
  Out of curiosity, do you propose any remedy for companies being acting badly? What would you do, if anything, to curb companies doing things like what FB does? What sort of organizations have a role in watching over private companies, informing the public about their activities, and provide guidance on corrective actions?
  - beej71 2y ago
    I haven't been able to think of solutions that aren't worse than what they're doing. I'm extremely wary of the government forcing Facebook to behave a certain way because of the First Amendment.
    - cratermoon 2y ago
      Suggested viewing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_V_AZRZfu9I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_V_AZRZfu9I
      - beej71 2y ago
        I like the free market when it works, and think it should be regulated when it fails. So I'm not really a government versus free market person. What is a massive red flag to me is the government telling a business what they can and can't publish. Putin, for example, loves to do that. Still recommended viewing?
LightHugger 2y ago
For profit companies, especially facebook will just follow whatever is popular at the time, they have no morality at all. They had no morality when treating people like absolute shit under oppressive moderation and censoring people like crazy and they will have no morality while ignoring abuses on the platform while using current politics as an excuse to spend less on moderation. The EFF however is at least supposed to stand for basic human rights. Like free speech. At least it got a mention in the title, but frankly the author of this article doesn't care at all about it, and doesn't understand the basic principle of why it's important to protect the speech of people they disagree with. So taking a plain view, they're a hateful anti-human rights activist. Not sure why i'd listen to what an anti human rights activist has to say.
- fzeroracer 2y ago
  > So taking a plain view, they're a hateful anti-human rights activist. Not sure why i'd listen to what an anti human rights activist has to say. You are posting this in a thread and a story about Meta literally saying a certain class of people are considered second class citizens and thus it's perfectly okay to sling slurs and harassment at them. You do realize this, right? Like you are saying that the company with zero morality telling it's users it's okay to harass people is better than the EFF calling them out. Like if you actually stand for human rights you should be horrified at Meta's actions.
  - LightHugger 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - fzeroracer 2y ago
      Again, how is any of this relevant exactly to Meta explicitly condoning harassment against people they seem second class citizens? None of what you said has any bearing on my argument at all beyond being a generic free speech argument.
      - 2y ago

The EFF is on the wrong side of history on this one. Sad to see it.

by influx 2y ago

The EFF is on the wrong side of history on this one. Sad to see it.

freen 2y ago

Yup: MLK’s moral arc of the history definitely bends towards making fun of disabled people.

beej71 2y ago

How do you figure? The only thing I see that's wrong about this is that I don't pay the EFF to tell private companies what to do. I pay them to stop the government from turning fascist. They're not wrong about Facebook being a POS and these new policies making it moreso, though.

Over2Chars 2y ago
The EFF won't stop anyone from turning fascist. That's not their mission. It sounds nice though. I wouldn't give the EFF a dime.
cratermoon 2y ago
Out of curiosity, do you propose any remedy for companies being acting badly? What would you do, if anything, to curb companies doing things like what FB does? What sort of organizations have a role in watching over private companies, informing the public about their activities, and provide guidance on corrective actions?
- beej71 2y ago
  I haven't been able to think of solutions that aren't worse than what they're doing. I'm extremely wary of the government forcing Facebook to behave a certain way because of the First Amendment.
  - cratermoon 2y ago
    Suggested viewing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_V_AZRZfu9I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_V_AZRZfu9I
    - beej71 2y ago
      I like the free market when it works, and think it should be regulated when it fails. So I'm not really a government versus free market person. What is a massive red flag to me is the government telling a business what they can and can't publish. Putin, for example, loves to do that. Still recommended viewing?

LightHugger 2y ago

For profit companies, especially facebook will just follow whatever is popular at the time, they have no morality at all. They had no morality when treating people like absolute shit under oppressive moderation and censoring people like crazy and they will have no morality while ignoring abuses on the platform while using current politics as an excuse to spend less on moderation. The EFF however is at least supposed to stand for basic human rights. Like free speech. At least it got a mention in the title, but frankly the author of this article doesn't care at all about it, and doesn't understand the basic principle of why it's important to protect the speech of people they disagree with. So taking a plain view, they're a hateful anti-human rights activist. Not sure why i'd listen to what an anti human rights activist has to say.

fzeroracer 2y ago
> So taking a plain view, they're a hateful anti-human rights activist. Not sure why i'd listen to what an anti human rights activist has to say. You are posting this in a thread and a story about Meta literally saying a certain class of people are considered second class citizens and thus it's perfectly okay to sling slurs and harassment at them. You do realize this, right? Like you are saying that the company with zero morality telling it's users it's okay to harass people is better than the EFF calling them out. Like if you actually stand for human rights you should be horrified at Meta's actions.
- LightHugger 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - fzeroracer 2y ago
    Again, how is any of this relevant exactly to Meta explicitly condoning harassment against people they seem second class citizens? None of what you said has any bearing on my argument at all beyond being a generic free speech argument.
    - 2y ago