4 ms·
The amount of money made from those sites (and spent for good) is surely infinitesimal to the bad they do by spreading hate. Much better to just not host the c
by Mistletoe 2y ago
The amount of money made from those sites (and spent for good) is surely infinitesimal to the bad they do by spreading hate. Much better to just not host the content. I don’t believe in slippery slope nonsense, it’s easy to know what sort of speech is about harming other people and no I don’t believe in publishing that.
- craftkiller 2y ago> it’s easy to know what sort of speech is about harming other people Is it? If you just mean explicit "lets go kill <group>" messages, then sure. But, we also have: - People who think the existence of trans people is harming children - People who think alternative medical practices like homeopathy is harming people - People who think vaccines are harming people - People who think 5G towers are harming people - People who think discussing methods of suicide is harming people - People who think abortion is harming people
- stevage 2y agoAnd it gets a lot greyer than that.
- valicord 2y agoOne of these is not like the others
- craftkiller 2y agoI think if you ask enough people, you will find people will have differing answers on which one(s) are different than the others. I intentionally included both things I agree with and disagree with.
- xigoi 2y agoA hosting service is not a publisher. They don’t want to restrict speech, but still want to punish hateful sites, and this is the compromise they came up with.