News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Blog Anonymously. Parent comment

Re:Blog Anonymously by throwaway894345 on Friday July 10, 2020 @02:41PM (#23794825)
Threats and intimidation don't constitute free speech, even when veiled. Note that I don't think anyone is advocating for more/harsher laws to protect free speech (although these might be welcomed by some), only appealing for a cultural shift away from cancellation and toward free-speech values.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Blog Anonymously by Klinky on Friday July 10, 2020 @05:00PM (#23796394)
I believe free speech does not cover "true threats". I don't think a consumer complaint threatening to not do business is going to be considered a "true threat" against a company.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Blog Anonymously by throwaway894345 on Friday July 10, 2020 @05:30PM (#23796735)
Free speech doesn't cover any kind of threats. We tolerate "veiled threats" to the extent that we can't confirm that they are threats, and they are difficult to confirm by design and definition. They exploit our presumption of innocence.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Blog Anonymously by Klinky on Friday July 10, 2020 @05:54PM (#23796989)
Threats of all kinds are made every day, and often in completely legal contexts. Threats of violence are often less tolerated, but even in some contexts protected under freedom of speech.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Blog Anonymously by throwaway894345 on Friday July 10, 2020 @05:59PM (#23797039)
Take care not to conflate free speech principles with legal protections for free speech.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Blog Anonymously by Klinky on Friday July 10, 2020 @08:16PM (#23798151)
It sounds like you want people to censor themselves in a way you find appropriate, based on what you believe freedom of speech means.
[ Parent | on HN ]