undefined | Better HN

0 pointshungie1y ago0 comments

I don't know what content was requested to be removed. If the opposition was spreading lies about elections being stolen, that seems like reasonable content to moderate.

Not all moderation is bad, and different places have different tolerances for it. I keep seeing people say "silencing the opposition" but not actually providing what that means in practice.

Could be authoritarian, could be not.

Given musk's history as a right wing agitator, I want to see data before coming to any conclusions here.

0 comments

Georgelemental1y ago

> that seems like reasonable content to moderate

Why should the government be the one to make that decision? If anyone has a conflict of interest, it's them, no?

meiraleal1y ago

It definitely shouldn't be the richest man in the world, a foreigner.

Georgelemental1y ago

You are not forced to use his platform if you don’t like it.

meiraleal1y ago

Yes and I don't use it but he is forced to respond to court orders :)

1 more reply

hungieOP1y ago

I mean, Germany bans nazi imagery in media. Many countries ban false advertising. A number consider it not ok to discriminate against people based on their characteristics. Fringe health statements are often disallowed. TikTok just got hit with a speech case about a girl hanging herself to death because of a video.

Government moderates speech all the time, and yes, there's obviously grey areas and opportunities for abuse with those systems. I want to see the examples. Not someone grinding an axe with "the opposition"... show me what was not allowed.

robertlagrant1y ago

False advertising (and libel/slander) are about not saying probably false things in contexts where truth is required.

They're a bit different to people being allowed to have an opinion and say it without a tech giant (then) or judge (now) stopping them.

As for banning images - sure. Tricky. Don't particularly like nazi symbols, but I personally wouldn't ban them. They aren't magically evil symbols that trigger awful behaviour.

robertlagrant1y ago

> If the opposition was spreading lies about elections being stolen, that seems like reasonable content to moderate.

Absolutely not. That might be the absolute world's last content that should be touched.

hungieOP1y ago

Come off the hyperbole. You don't believe that. I guarantee you you can think of content that's something we should moderate less.

What about opposition candidates spreading truthful information. You'd really moderate the truth away before you'd moderate blatant misinformation?

robertlagrant1y ago

Fair point - I mean opposing speech in general, and not just that specific phrase. I wasn't clear.

hungieOP1y ago

Right. Oppositional speech is worth keeping.

But when oppositional speech is like, "Covid vaccines are made from dead children, so you must not vote for whomever", I start to be like, a whole lot less sympathetic to the idea that we should not moderate at all.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

Georgelemental1y ago

> that seems like reasonable content to moderate

Why should the government be the one to make that decision? If anyone has a conflict of interest, it's them, no?

meiraleal1y ago

It definitely shouldn't be the richest man in the world, a foreigner.

Georgelemental1y ago

You are not forced to use his platform if you don’t like it.

meiraleal1y ago

Yes and I don't use it but he is forced to respond to court orders :)

1 more reply

hungieOP1y ago

robertlagrant1y ago

False advertising (and libel/slander) are about not saying probably false things in contexts where truth is required.

They're a bit different to people being allowed to have an opinion and say it without a tech giant (then) or judge (now) stopping them.

As for banning images - sure. Tricky. Don't particularly like nazi symbols, but I personally wouldn't ban them. They aren't magically evil symbols that trigger awful behaviour.

robertlagrant1y ago

> If the opposition was spreading lies about elections being stolen, that seems like reasonable content to moderate.

Absolutely not. That might be the absolute world's last content that should be touched.

hungieOP1y ago

Come off the hyperbole. You don't believe that. I guarantee you you can think of content that's something we should moderate less.

What about opposition candidates spreading truthful information. You'd really moderate the truth away before you'd moderate blatant misinformation?

robertlagrant1y ago

Fair point - I mean opposing speech in general, and not just that specific phrase. I wasn't clear.

hungieOP1y ago

Right. Oppositional speech is worth keeping.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse