• AVincentInSpace
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    No I’m pretty sure those are actual problems. I do not believe, for example, that people with megaphones should be free to tell the masses that Donald Trump won the 2016 election.

    • Not every “conspiracy theory” is something stupid and made up. Have you not heard of MK Ultra?

      There’s a good chance some governments are still doing stuff like that, and I’m sure if you found some evidence of something like that and started talking about it, you would be silenced on any major platform because of these laws.

      Also, if someone posts something online you think is dumb, do you really think it should just be deleted? Do you think that helps anyone?

        • Hard disagree. Hate speech shouldn’t be censored. I believe in freedom of speech. Prosecuting people for “hate speech” misunderstands what freedom of speech is.

          As long as you don’t threaten direct harm to a particular individual, you should not be censored or punished for it. If you do threaten harm to a particular person, you should not be censored but instead restrained, and what you said should be noted down and preserved for the date of a fair trial.

          One person being upset shouldn’t mean the other (who didn’t know any better) has to spend the rest of their formative years in prison.

          • threeganzi@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            I think it’s easier to have to position that absolute free speech is the best solution if you are not part of a minority group who is the target of hate speech. (Not saying you aren’t)

            The definition is tricky and if such law should exist it should have a good margin from being used for arbitrary “I was offended” type of offenses.

            I don’t think prison, as you suggested, is a reasonable consequence either.

            • growingentropy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              The repercussion to bad speech and ideas is inherent to the current paradigm of the internet: downvotes and ostracization.

              Maybe they will wind up on their own forum saying despicable shit, but they were probably going to do that anyway. Bad ideas love a vacuum away from prying eyes and outsiders.

              • Pissipissini Johnson 🩵! :D@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                It can lead to prison in some countries (more than I imagine you’d think), which I think is very bad.

                Also, the opposite of what you’re describing can happen. Governments and big media/tech companies can use censorship to prevent ideas they don’t like from spreading online.

          • AVincentInSpace
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Stuff like “gay people are unnatural and should be corrected” and “drag queens/trans people/[insert bogeyman here] are pedophiles coming for our children” and “n***ers oughta be whipped”

            • Manmoth@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              My point is that it’s a moving target that will be abused. The government should not and thankfully cannot regulate speech based on the grounds of “hate”. Hate is also not illegal. (At least in the US)

              For example, Christians are taught to love the sinner but hate the sin. Homosexuality, drag queens, transgenderism are sins in Christianity. With your new law Christians are now censored because their worldview disagrees with yours.

              Whoever has the right to define that term has immense power and that power will be abused just like the other labels in the meme.

              • AVincentInSpace
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                They aren’t censored for believing those things are sinful. They’re being punished for trying to enforce their views on what a person should be on people who aren’t them. The minute I start having to care about what the Christian sitting next to me thinks is sinful because he might hurt me if I don’t, he loses the right to free speech, you get me?

                  • AVincentInSpace
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    As long as I get to tell him just as calmly to fuck off and leave me alone, and he does, we’re good.

                • Manmoth@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  While not pacifistic Christianity is non-violent. If someone claims to be a Christian and beats up a homosexual for “no reason” then they are sinning. This, also, is completely irrelevant to the argument I was making.

                  Everyone tries to enforce their views. You, I assume, want to enforce your world view of radical tolerance for [issue here] at the expense of someone elses ability to criticize it. Your neighbor might want to define hate speech as anything that violates Sharia law.

                  What we have now (which is no restriction on hate speech) is actually the best policy.

                  • AVincentInSpace
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 months ago

                    You, I assume, want to enforce your world view of radical tolerance for [issue here] at the expense of someone elses ability to criticize it

                    If that’s how you want to define the opinion that people shouldn’t be thrown in jail for providing abortions or gender affirming care, or that Tucker Carlson shouldn’t be allowed to go on TV and tell his followers that all drag queens are pedophiles, then so be it.

                    Sin is whatever. You can believe that all gays are going to go to turbo-hell, you can tell all your facebook friends, you can say you feel pity for us, I don’t care. As long as I’m allowed to live my life however I want, and you don’t come into my face and tell me not to, we’re good. But your right to swing your arms stops at my face. As soon as you start codifying your opinions into law, or advocating for violence against people who hold different beliefs than you live their lives in a way contrary to your religion (which strangely only seems to come from people who self-identify as being on the right), we’re gonna have a problem.

          • threeganzi@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            Yeah, fair, definition can be hard. But to give an example that I think is pretty clear cut: people standing outside of a mosque/synagogue/church arguing that those [certain people] deserve to be dead or put in labor camp.

            You could argue that those are just words, and be correct, but for the individuals that are targeted it’s not just words. They know for a fact that those words and ideologies do turn in to actions.

            I think it’s easier to have to position that absolute free speech is the best solution if you are not part of a minority group who is the target of hate speech.

      • AVincentInSpace
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Have you not heard of MK Ultra?

        Of course I have. Because it was declassified. And that means it’s no longer a conspiracy theory.

        Also, if someone posts something online you think is dumb, do you really think it should just be deleted? Do you think that helps anyone?

        Tell me with a straight face that you have never even thought about blocking a single other social media user. Tell me you think troll comments like “What’s a major turn off when dating?” “If she’s black” should not be removed by moderators.

        • Pissipissini Johnson 🩵! :D@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          It was a conspiracy theory. So were Edward Snowden’s documents. Hating conspiracy theories in general is an incredibly stupid take.

          Yes to all your questions.

          I’ve never blocked anyone. Maybe I would if they were spamming me on a chat for a very long time or getting super personal, and I would probably stop engaging if I didn’t have the time or energy for them anyway, but that’s pretty much irrelevant to what I think your point is.

          I wouldn’t care if I encountered your hypothetical forum post. Granted, I’m not black, but that doesn’t affect what I’m saying much, especially when so many black people have already encountered a lot of racism in their lives.

          Anyway, people can have whatever dating preferences they want. Just because you don’t want to date someone doesn’t mean you think of them as less of a person than anyone else. Do you hate your parents because you don’t want to fuck them? The comment was admittedly written almost certainly by a racist, but I actually still don’t think racist comments should be removed. Most mods do a little bit too much in my eyes, because it’s kind of in their nature.

          Usually it’s highly uneducated people who go online trying to upset people or spread hate all the time, so why don’t more educated community members try to teach them? They might not want to listen, but they’ll probably go away if they don’t.

          Generally I think people need to stay level-headed on forums. Your mental health is always more important than what some idiot says online, so remember to take a break whenever you need to. Welcome to forums.

          • AVincentInSpace
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Every ounce of energy a person spends watching their back, making sure their fellow man isn’t out to get them, hardening their armor against the thousands of people trying to find a chink, find the one thing they can say that gets them to have a mental breakdown just because they think it’s funny watching them have a mental breakdown, is an ounce of energy they don’t spend creating, caring for each other, making the life of their fellow man just that little bit better, and unapologetically being themselves.

            But if you’re so insistent that words on a screen can’t affect you unless you let them, Mr. Forumite, I guess you won’t mind if I end this conversation by telling you to go to the hardware store and buy a rope and a bucket, providing exhaustive instructions for how to tie a noose, and telling you to end your worthless life before you ruin anyone else’s, because your parents clearly never loved you and there’s no way anyone else who’s sane ever will.

            • Yeah. I don’t mind. I don’t care whether or not you say anything else to me, whether or not it’s intended to be hurtful.

              What you don’t seem to me like you understand is that some people are far more prone to mental breakdowns than others, but it could happen to anyone. It could happen to you or I at some point in the future. If I were incredibly sensitive and easy to manipulate, then I could be going off to follow your instructions right now and end my life.

              Some people can be manipulated with silver tongues. Look at what politicians do, and the media that mock different sides when they say certain things.

              Nobody wants to be manipulated, and “hardening” yourself emotionally is what I think to be a very important and natural part of maturing.

              I don’t think people should be erasing any information they even slightly disagree with though. The media only show you certain things to make you believe certain things, which is the point OP seems to have been making. Mods could also make a pretty good argument to delete your comment because you just told me to kill myself, but I still don’t personally think they should.

              Genuinely, though, calm down, mate. This is just a space to have discussions in your spare time. We should all be friends here. My advice would be to take a break, especially if you don’t want the mods to come in and ban your account.

              Deep breaths. Most things people say don’t matter very much. It should usually be that simple.

              • AVincentInSpace
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                So you believe that, since there are a large number of people who can be easily manipulated by words into believing or doing certain things, and there likely always will be, words may as well inherently have power and we should be careful with how we use them, but you simultaneously believe that the solution to this is just to make everyone grow thicker skin?

                For the record, though, I don’t believe anyone should kill themselves, or anything that I said about you personally in the second paragraph. Quite the opposite, in fact. I only said that to make the point that “just words on a screen” can do horrible things to the right people, which I’m glad you seem to understand.

                • Yes. Exactly. :)

                  Feel free to disagree, but you’d probably need a much longer argument to convince me otherwise.

                  Also, that’s the reason it is a bit difficult to decide how justified someone is in deleting/hiding information or saying something that might be a bit wrong.

                  If everyone were trying to spread knowledge and understand each other all the time, the world would be a much safer and much better place by most standards.

                  • AVincentInSpace
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 months ago

                    If everyone were trying to spread knowledge and understand each other all the time, the world would be a much safer and much better place by most standards.

                    The fact that this is not the case is why forums need moderation. Very rarely, I find, do people engage in good faith when a more emotionally satisfying alternative is available. People troll. People argue in bad faith. People deliberately try to get each other riled up and post misinformation (by which I mean statements that can be disproved by a single Google search) in the hopes that those who see it will be too lazy to check. People take one of those misinformation posts saying something they already agree with as irrefutable proof that it is true and refuse to listen to reason.

                    I agree that whether any given post constitutes some of the above is much more often than not a matter of personal opinion, and that therefore people who can be trusted to decide accurately every single time are rare indeed if they truly exist at all. That said, anyone who’s ever browsed 4chan for a while can plainly see that removing nothing does much more harm than good, especially in forums that discuss topics commonly frequented by people who are vulnerable and therefore easy to manipulate (forums discussing trans issues immediately come to mind).

                    I personally would MUCH rather use a forum moderated by an imperfect human whose heart is in the right place than a forum with no moderators whatsoever. The beautiful thing about the Internet, though, is that we do not all have to agree on which is best. Some forums are moderated, some are not, and we can use one or the other or both as we choose.

                  • Related: you should try and explain to yourself how and why you think you could become the best person you could possibly be.

                    People who had thought enough about certain things were seen throughout history as being strongly in touch with the divine and mysticism.

                • growingentropy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  I’m just going to throw in a bit at the end of this thread here, as I find the conversation fascinating.

                  This is how fascism starts. “We have to control speech for your own good” becomes “hateful speech comes from [insert group]” becomes “we have to stop them.”

                  We are all being weaponized by the internet. Free speech is important. You don’t fight fascism with more fascism, you fight it with better ideas.

    • jaybone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      Should that homeless guy on the corner with a megaphone be allowed to tell people he is Jesus?

      • AVincentInSpace
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        You’d think the answer would be “of course he should” until you realize that basically every cult that has ever existed has started that way.

        • jaybone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Nah. Koresh, Jones, Manson, they weren’t yelling at people through a megaphone on the street corner. They were smart and knew how to manipulate people. Scientology, Mormons, same thing. I guess this argues against my original point, but how are you going to stop these people but still allow for free speech?

    • XTL@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Although the actual implemented measures are still privacy and free speech violation and arbitrarily enforceable laws and less oversight for government and police.

      Just because the wrapper says less made up things doesn’t sadly make the package any different.

      • AVincentInSpace
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I don’t disagree. I do believe that censorship of any kind is a very slippery slope. I’m just tired of the right-wing narrative that people telling them that their opinions are not welcome in certain spaces is censorship.