News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Facebook Bans Louis Farrakhan, Milo Yiannopoulos, InfoWar... by nostromo on Thursday May 02, 2019 @02:51PM (#19811237)
Just because Facebook can do something doesn't mean Facebook should.

Freedom of speech is much more than a legal concept about governments and governed. It's also a guideline on how we should structure an open society going at least back to Ancient Greece.

Re:Facebook Bans Louis Farrakhan, Milo Yiannopoulos, InfoWar... by hashmap on Thursday May 02, 2019 @03:00PM (#19811379)
Right. It means you can't be forced to say anything - Facebook is under no obligation to proliferate things these people want to post.
Re:Facebook Bans Louis Farrakhan, Milo Yiannopoulos, InfoWar... by Rapzid on Thursday May 02, 2019 @04:30PM (#19812512)
Isegoria, the right for every adult male to free political speech(to address the assembly)?

Parrhesia, freedom of speech in the courts and assemblies(and outside public assemblies)?

No, I'm pretty sure it has always had to do with the governments and the governed. It seems popular these days to conflate the general concept tolerance with freedom of speech.

Tolerance has it's limits though as per the tolerance paradox. Freedom of speech says the government shouldn't draw the line, but society at large absolutely should be allowed to.

EDIT: Outside of specific venues and contexts what you could say in Ancient Athens society was much more rigidly defined and there was much less tolerance for breaking those norms than in the USA today.

Re:Facebook Bans Louis Farrakhan, Milo Yiannopoulos, InfoWar... by bilbo0s on Thursday May 02, 2019 @03:25PM (#19811660)
>Freedom of speech is much more than a legal concept about governments and governed...

So tell me, does Facebook have Freedom of Speech in your view?

Re:Facebook Bans Louis Farrakhan, Milo Yiannopoulos, InfoWar... by res0nat0r on Thursday May 02, 2019 @02:54PM (#19811292)
There never has been a right to free speech on some private companies system.
Re:Facebook Bans Louis Farrakhan, Milo Yiannopoulos, InfoWar... by vibrato on Thursday May 02, 2019 @03:12PM (#19811521)
That is true for content publishers. However, if those systems are claimed to be public squares, then there is a right to free speech for citizens of the USA there.

The tech companies cannot have it both ways. They want to be publishers, then take the responsibilities and liabilities of publishers.

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/09/05/jack-dorsey-says-t...

Re:Facebook Bans Louis Farrakhan, Milo Yiannopoulos, InfoWar... by jfk13 on Thursday May 02, 2019 @03:48PM (#19811974)
This is a crucial point, IMO. Facebook et al need to decide (or we as a society need to decide) whether they're a public square - in which case they have no business censoring what people choose to say except in cases speech that is clearly illegal - or a content publisher making choices about what to publish and what not.

(In Facebook's case, at least, I'd say that ever since they moved on from the simple chronological "wall" showing posts as submitted, replacing it with a "timeline" where their algorithms - with plenty of input from "sponsors", etc - decide what you'll see, they have chosen to become a content publisher.)

Fine, in the content publisher role they can decide that certain content, or the speech of certain parties, will not be published through their platform.

But then they must also be held responsible for what they do choose to publish - including liability for harmful content such as libel, false advertising, etc.