By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
 

Is free speech suppressed on the internet's main public squares

Yes 56 53.85%
 
No 44 42.31%
 
Undecided 4 3.85%
 
Total:104
method114 said:
the-pi-guy said:

They are?

Yep Alex Berenson sued and was able to prove that the white house was consistently pushing twitter to ban him until the finally complied and did. I think the scariest thing to me about this is it puts the government in a position to use these companies to violate our first amendment rights. That way they government can say "we aren't violating your free speech rights these companies can do what they want". Meanwhile they are in the back room calling these companies begging them to ban you and who knows what else goes on in these back room conversations. 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/twitter-becomes-a-tool-of-government-censors-alex-berenson-twitter-facebook-ban-covid-misinformation-first-amendment-psaki-murthy-section-230-antitrust-11660732095

I’m not seeing anything in your source saying some guy in a White House back room was calling up Twitter to ban this reporter. The article says the Biden administration put pressure on Twitter to stop COVID misinformation.

It sounds like the White House and Twitter were doing their jobs.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Around the Network
Jumpin said:
method114 said:

Yep Alex Berenson sued and was able to prove that the white house was consistently pushing twitter to ban him until the finally complied and did. I think the scariest thing to me about this is it puts the government in a position to use these companies to violate our first amendment rights. That way they government can say "we aren't violating your free speech rights these companies can do what they want". Meanwhile they are in the back room calling these companies begging them to ban you and who knows what else goes on in these back room conversations. 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/twitter-becomes-a-tool-of-government-censors-alex-berenson-twitter-facebook-ban-covid-misinformation-first-amendment-psaki-murthy-section-230-antitrust-11660732095

I’m not seeing anything in your source saying some guy in a White House back room was calling up Twitter to ban this reporter. The article says the Biden administration put pressure on Twitter to stop COVID misinformation.

It sounds like the White House and Twitter were doing their jobs.

The white house is specifically asking why certain people aren't banned yet. Naming this reporter specifically.  If this isn't the white house putting pressure on you I don't know what is. You think it's the Governments job to silence people they believe are spreading disinformation? You do realize the Government is one of the top entities when it comes to spreading disinformation throughout history correct? These are the last people you want in charge of deciding what is or isn't disinformation. I wont even get into all the things they claimed were true only to be proven false later on. 

It's scary to me that people think the Government should be involved in deciding what people can discuss online.



method114 said:
Jumpin said:

I’m not seeing anything in your source saying some guy in a White House back room was calling up Twitter to ban this reporter. The article says the Biden administration put pressure on Twitter to stop COVID misinformation.

It sounds like the White House and Twitter were doing their jobs.

The white house is specifically asking why certain people aren't banned yet. Naming this reporter specifically.  If this isn't the white house putting pressure on you I don't know what is. You think it's the Governments job to silence people they believe are spreading disinformation? You do realize the Government is one of the top entities when it comes to spreading disinformation throughout history correct? These are the last people you want in charge of deciding what is or isn't disinformation. I wont even get into all the things they claimed were true only to be proven false later on. 

It's scary to me that people think the Government should be involved in deciding what people can discuss online.

What is your position on 47 U.S.C. § 230 of the Communication Decency Act?



method114 said:
Jumpin said:

I’m not seeing anything in your source saying some guy in a White House back room was calling up Twitter to ban this reporter. The article says the Biden administration put pressure on Twitter to stop COVID misinformation.

It sounds like the White House and Twitter were doing their jobs.

The white house is specifically asking why certain people aren't banned yet. Naming this reporter specifically.  If this isn't the white house putting pressure on you I don't know what is. You think it's the Governments job to silence people they believe are spreading disinformation? You do realize the Government is one of the top entities when it comes to spreading disinformation throughout history correct? These are the last people you want in charge of deciding what is or isn't disinformation. I wont even get into all the things they claimed were true only to be proven false later on. 

It's scary to me that people think the Government should be involved in deciding what people can discuss online.

Well, at least in democracy it's the people's will. I think much bigger problem is, that the speech is governed by people with financial intrests. You can't trust governments you elected yourself, but a shady billionaire is somehow trustworthy. 

Anyway, biggest problem is, that US-based social media companies with US government influence get to govern speech elsewhere in the world. I'm surprised there aren't many laws that govern social media around the world, as you'd expect people and politicians wanting to express themselves in important matters without it being "hate speech" or "against platform policy". 



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

TallSilhouette said:

A link in Jumpin's article led me to another I recommend to everyone. More than Musk it's about the history and necessity of platform moderation and how most every platform that scales ends up adopting similar content standards eventually for a reason:

https://www.techdirt.com/2022/04/15/elon-musk-demonstrates-how-little-he-understands-about-content-moderation/

"As anyone who has lived through (or read up on) the history of content moderation knows, platforms all went through this exact process. The process that Musk thinks no one has actually done. They all started with a fundamental default towards allowing more speech and moderating less. And they all realized over time that it’s a lot more nuanced than that.

They all realized that there are massive trade-offs to every decision, but that some decisions still need to be made in order to stop “making the product worse” and to figure out ways to build “maximal trust” and to be “broadly inclusive.” In other words, for all of Musk’s complaining, Twitter has already done all the work he seems to pretend it hasn’t done. And his “solution” is to go back to square one while ignoring all the people who learned about the pitfalls, challenges, nuances, and trade-offs of the various approaches to dealing with these things… and to pretend that no one has done any work in this area."

It's not that there wasn't tradeoffs, it's just that the social media is incredibly biased because of these tradeoffs, because you change your policy to favour the most vocal ones. Social media is often a shithole because it's not banning people for being assholes, but it bans people for being moderate - that is if you don't align with the vocal ones, who attack you with hate speech and report you for one.

When I was more active on this site, it was easy to get yourself banned for being asshole towards other people, which is why the forum has been quite civil as long as I remember, but the social media companies don't work that way. 



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

Around the Network
method114 said:
Jumpin said:

I’m not seeing anything in your source saying some guy in a White House back room was calling up Twitter to ban this reporter. The article says the Biden administration put pressure on Twitter to stop COVID misinformation.

It sounds like the White House and Twitter were doing their jobs.

The white house is specifically asking why certain people aren't banned yet. Naming this reporter specifically.  If this isn't the white house putting pressure on you I don't know what is. You think it's the Governments job to silence people they believe are spreading disinformation? You do realize the Government is one of the top entities when it comes to spreading disinformation throughout history correct? These are the last people you want in charge of deciding what is or isn't disinformation. I wont even get into all the things they claimed were true only to be proven false later on. 

It's scary to me that people think the Government should be involved in deciding what people can discuss online.

Once again, that’s not what the opinion piece you posted even says. And I didn’t say it was the government’s job to silence people—you literally quoted my post and somehow still got it wrong.

It’s common sense to heed epidemiologists during epidemics and pandemics. Common sense that, during a pandemic, epidemiologists would advise media and platforms against the spread of hazardous misinformation. And common sense for platforms to ban egregious ToS offenders like Alex Berenstain (or whatever that douche-nozzle’s name is).

“Government deciding what people discuss online” is a wide canyon away from a government encouraging platforms to heed epidemiologists during an epidemic. It’s just common sense.

But don’t worry, you’re allowed to find common sense scary.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

I've lost a lot of respect for Elon in recent years, but stuff like this is still pretty cool:

Tl;dw: basic cell connection coming just about anywhere that Starlink orbits, no special hardware required on your end.



I can't help but take Elon + Twitter + Starlink + T-Mobile and see a broader connection.

It was made pretty clear it's only supposed to be for text and calls early on, and maybe some pics.
Other than attached vids, could this be useful for Twitter? If not now, maybe in the future when there's plenty of sats?



Anyone following the latest on Twitter? Sounds like a complete and utter shitshow.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/17/media/twitter-exodus-reliable-sources/index.html
https://www.npr.org/2022/11/17/1137413251/twitter-employees-quit-elon-musk
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-63672307
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/18/twitter-planned-to-close-offices-friday-but-musk-asks-engineers-in.html



Yeah I don't like his style either. This is rare that I agree with the mainstream, but a broken clock is still right twice in a day. While I generally like Elon's unconventional ideas, in this case he's just being a PoS to employees who have given heart to the business, he doesn't deserve the good ones he treated badly, and isn't showing any remorse which I don't like.