10 ms·
More odious nannying by silly civil servants. If Britain is to restore cultural leadership it needs to move policy away from this horrible trend of policing wha
by riazrizvi 1y ago
More odious nannying by silly civil servants. If Britain is to restore cultural leadership it needs to move policy away from this horrible trend of policing what people say and think, and focus its energy on better policing what people do.
- Razengan 1y agoPut anyone in charge of any space and they'll want to control what people say and think there. Hell look at HN and literally anywhere. Everybody has their own "ideal" world. I for instance don't want anybody talking shit about anime or video games ever.
- bawolff 1y agoWell yes, because those who don't quickly lose users due to bad signal-noise ratio When was the last time anyone visited an unmoderated usenet group?
- cft 1y ago4chan is well, moderated, but it's outlived Facebook with real names.
- throwaway48476 1y agoDid the government ever moderate usenet?
- Razengan 1y agoFrankly, LLMs with transparent prompts, as well as user-side filters based on LLM prompts (e.g. "Don't show me comment threads talking shit about Attack on Titan") could do a better and more "fair" job than meat-based moderators now. They won't have personal biases, don't need to sleep (ending the infamous "mods are asleep, post xxx" waves), their prompts would be visible to everyone, and there could be ways for the users themselves to update the space's rules/prompts.
- squigz 1y agoLLMs have their own biases. But either way, I want people like dang to be the ones moderating and managing a community - call it "personal bias" if you'd like, but they have a vision for the space, and as long as I as a user think that that vision is of a community I want to be in, then it's fine. If I no longer think it is... I leave.
- pureagave 1y ago100%. We need to look no further than what the US government tried to do to Twitter, YouTube and Facebook during the pandemic.
- Razengan 1y agoAnd what they're doing to TikTok now
- femiagbabiaka 1y agoIf speech in the U.K. was moderated like HN, the situation would be greatly improved.
- pessimizer 1y agoI imagine you'll be saying this with tears flowing from your eyes after the UK blocks HN.
- femiagbabiaka 1y agoGod forbid.
- ryeats 1y agoNope, just the Ministry of Truth, God doesn't even have to get involved.
- RobotToaster 1y agoUntil you get put in prison for reading out a headline wrong lol
- martin-t 1y agoThe evolution of governance of online communities mirrors that of the real-world. First, everyone did what they wanted. As conflict became more common, power hierarchies started to emerge. we're now at a stage where every place needs to be governed, yet its members have no influence over who does it. I have online communities will transition into something resembling democracy where moderators are elected from members by members. --- While HN is fairly lenient, moderators in pretty much all online spaces are effectively dictators, they are not elected and they cannot be removed by ordinary users, no matter how many disagree. And of course, such positions attract people who want power for its own sake and who have agendas they want to push.
- mrkstu 1y agoYou vote for the moderation you like with your digital feet- see X vs BlueSky
- martin-t 1y agoThat's like saying you vote for the government by moving to a different state. This[0] blog post puts it nicely - you _can_ move but you lose all your connections and sometimes even you data. [0]: https://overreacted.io/open-social/ https://overreacted.io/open-social/
- Razengan 1y ago> moderators in pretty much all online spaces are effectively dictators This. How do 1-10 or 20 or even 100 people get the "right" to decide what millions of people talk about and see? What's keeping them from burying/boosting opinions about shit they have strong personal feelings about? Steve Huffman/Spez of Reddit literally edited users' comments, and they autoban anyone saying "Fuck Spez"
- Yeul 1y agoIf HN had existed in 1800 abolitionists would have been banned. Society does not progress by people being nice and hugging eachother.
- pstuart 1y agoThe moderation of this site is top notch and a key component of its quality, and I say that as someone admonished by dang more than once.
- Razengan 1y agoOh please. Vote-based social networks are way too vulnerable to burying the truth and boosting lies. It just takes the first 3-4 viewers to downvote you to prevent the next 10000 people from seeing what you said. There's no downside to downvoting just because you don't like what someone says, even if it's true. And usually no amount of corrections can outshout a lie/mistake with 100+ votes.
- econ 1y agoThere has to be a better formula to design this game. It seems valuable enough to explore. It will be hard to design a formula that can only be gamed by making quality contributions. A quality discussion requires parties who disagree, exchange of ideas and facts and ideally some kind of eventual agreement. The hardest part is to make it enjoyable to use.
- Razengan 1y agoMaybe transparent AI is the only way to fairly govern masses of people? Let people regularly vote on which prompts should be added/removed, and have the AI justify all of its decisions, show which information it used etc.
- integralid 1y agoThat's the most dystopian thing I've read today
- Razengan 1y agoDystopia is the status quo: A handful of people controlling access for millions.
- SunshineTheCat 1y agoI don't mean this to be as insulting as it may, but the UK government trying to police US businesses has always felt like a toddler trying to ground his mom.
- mikkupikku 1y agoMaybe a very elderly parent, trying to ground their adult child who they are now dependent on.
- busterarm 1y agoAs an adult child in such a situation, it's actually worse than a toddler...
- riazrizvi 1y agoI see it as a problem of inconsistency that is common in situations where a parochial performer has their moments on the big stage, and follows it up with faceplants.
- watwut 1y agoUnder no circumstances should be US businesses treated as authorities. They are not mom nor should have any kind of leadership position.
- michaelt 1y agoOn the other hand, the limited size of the British market limits Parliament’s ability to pressure foreign companies. China may be able to bully Apple into letting it snoop on its citizens’ icloud backups, but when the UK wants the same illiberal snooping powers, with 10% the population it’s 90% easier to walk away.
- throwaway48476 1y agoSignificantly less than 10%.
- 1y ago
- gchamonlive 1y agoOn the one hand if you police what people say and think you risk moderation being weponized into censorship. On the other hand if you don't you risk big corp weaponizing free speech into misinformation. It's not a simple problem to solve, and it's not like having one problem is better than the other, because both devolve outside the boundaries of democracy.
- ok123456 1y agoIt's a very simple problem to solve. Free speech is absolute. Anyone who claims otherwise is a temporarily embarrassed hall monitor.
- dathinab 1y agobut it isn't absolute anywhere It's not absolute in the US because the US constitution only protects from the governmental limiting it, which means there is a lot of potential to effectively and fully legally limit free speech. And even the government gave itself a lot of limitations where through excuses and loopholes it can limit free speech (e.g. from teachers in public schools). Then there is the question of what even is "speech", in the us spending money can be an act of speech but wouldn't that make bribing an act of free speech even though it clearly shouldn't be legal? Should systematically harassing/mobbing people with the intent to drive them into suicide be protected by free speech? It's speech, but you would need to be a very cold hearted person to think that this shouldn't be a crime. Is leaking trade secrets free speech when you do it vocally? It would be strange if that where no crime but technically you do so by speech. What if you systematically rail up people with deep fakes and all kind of misinformation? Is that free speech? Before WW2 many intellectual would probably have argued that people aren't that easy to mass rail up and as such it should be free speech. But after Hitler gained power in exactly that way the position is more one of "if people systematic rail up the population and spreed misinformation en mass with the intend to overthrow the government" then letting them do that is pretty dump thing to do. So no "speech" not only is free speech not absolute, it's a pretty bad idea create absolute free speech protection. And both in small and large cases this has been proven again and again through history. This doesn't mean that censorship is right either. Like with everything in live "extremes" are close to never a good thing to peruse. Anyway you know what is even more embarrassing then being a hall way monitor, it's to never question your believes and insisting they are right even when its repeatedly shown to you that there seems to be some problem with them. But seriously, why edit you response to add an insult against anyone who doesn't share your opinion??
- cyanydeez 1y agoUnfortunately, Britain, like America, is seized by the worst of both worlds because conservatives and business interests have captured the electorate and narrowly agree on authoritarian nonsense.
- wtcactus 1y agoBritain is ruled by a far left government.
- stephen_g 1y agoWhat nonsense - Starmer and co are as neoliberal as they come…
- account42 1y agoLeft and right doesn't really matter - all western politicians do what benefits the rich at the expense of everyone else. If they didn't they wouldn't even make it on the poll.
- wtcactus 1y agoCorrection. They benefit everyone else at the expense of the middle class. They might benefit the rich, but they also benefit the lower classes very much as those are the ones they need to vote for them. And they take all that from the middle class that had to pay for mostly everything for mostly everyone.
- riazrizvi 1y agoI’ve come to align with Trump’s right wing politics, based on their direct announcements on Youtube and policy decisions. What they are doing makes economic and strategic sense. I have also come to see the general hostility as emanating from people who are fed deranged distortions on the Trump admin’s decisions, likely fostered by narrow business interests and foreign entities who don’t care about the plight of America. This is after 23 years of Democrat support, since I moved to this country.
- kjellsbells 1y agoImportant correction: s/civil servants/lawmakers/g Civil servants didn't create, write, or pass the law. They simply got handed a flaming, bad smelling paper bag and got told to implement it.
- mothballed 1y agoIn this case no. Interestingly, in the US in agencies like the ATF the civil servants make the regulation and enforce it, binding as law. In immigration it's even crazier -- civil servants create the policies, enforce them, and act as the judge.
- manquer 1y agoThe Chevron doctrine - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevron_U.S.A.,_Inc._v._Natural_Resources_Defense_Council,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevron_U.S.A.,_Inc._v._Natura.... This concept in the U.S. is also evolving since 2024 decision reducing the strength of this legal protection. Practically all countries have some version of this, few hundred lawmakers and their staff cannot reasonably set every single policy and micromanage its execution for every for government function. Civil servants always have a lot of say in direction of governance even if not directly enshrined in law or recognized by the court. The classic 80s satire Yes, Minister is good illustration of the parliamentary version of how it happens in say England even if not enshrined in law so to speak.
- rbanffy 1y ago> Civil servants didn't create, write, or pass the law. They simply got handed a flaming, bad smelling paper bag and got told to implement it. The bag is handed by the legally elected government body in charge of making laws. I assume the UK citizens who elected their representatives agree with the policy.
- account42 1y agoCivil servants aren't slaves. At the very least they have the option to quit.
- downrightmike 1y agoEngland was cooked in WW2. While the USA was landing on hte moon and back, the UK borrowed $1Billion dollars because they caused a deficit after the war. Rather than moving forward, the monarchy held the UK back from progress. And they still are, Brexit was the latest scheme. charlie isn't going to help them get out of the 18th Century.
- subscribed 1y agoBrexit was as much Putin's achievement as the second term of Trump is. I agree it was enabled by the corrupt class, but initiated elsewhere.
- wtcactus 1y agoPutin was doing just fine under Biden. In fact, if you take into account these last weeks, Trump is taking a much tougher stance on Putin than Biden did.