And of course as long as you agree with FB's determination of who is a Nazi and who isn't, it's all fine and peachy?

If they overreach then we circle back, basic iterative process. I see nothing in their statement to indicate that they're going to overreach.

"Move fast and break things" doesn't quite work even in the SV bubble. Letting somebody as demonstrably immoral as Zuck do it in real life does not look like a good idea.

Better not let him iterate the overreach in the first place.

Not if 'not iterating' means letting literal Nazis have a soapbox in the tech equivalent of the town square.

Even assuming that this premise were true, FB, Google, or any other tech company deciding who is a "literal Nazi" is a terrible idea.

And of all the ways FB is making the world worse, "letting Nazis have a soapbox" is least of their problems.

> You don't solve nazi ideology with reasoned debate.

How did you reach that conclusion?

1940-1945

Total non sequitur, low effort post. The mods are really showing their bias in this thread.

People respond with their best arguments when they are confronted with bad ideas.

People respond with censorship attempts and violence when they are scared that their own positions are weak.

There was reasoned debate from ballpark 1932-1938, when the Nazis have roughly 40% of the vote to go into a coalition government then somehow levered that into total control of the German state but that's more evidence for your argument.

Yes, exactly my point.

History repeats itself and people on the left want to pretend you solve this problem with the debate club.

Are you advocating for violence against "nazis?"