News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Facebook’s experimental hate-speech policy seems to be wo... by ajsnigrutin on Friday November 20, 2020 @06:30PM (#25166407)
But the problem here is the political bias in censorship. If facebook existed 100 years ago, you could say the same thing as now, just the 'good' and the 'bad' groups would be a lot different.

And you don't have to wait a 100 years, in my country, if we overly applied the same rules, at the start of the first covid wave, facebook would censor all the science-deniers, and crazy preppers for using masks (because "masks don't help" - our doctors, depending on where you live, probably yours too). Then one random saturday, our government decided you need a mask and gloves to enter any indoor public place (stores,...), and facebook would censor the anti-mask people.

We also live in a culture, where we have a few "protected groups", where we censor anything (even jokes) about that (eg. rape jokes), but even those rules, we apply very arbitrarily.... in movies, rape bad, rape jokes bad, unless the person raped is a man, then it's not a crime/thriller, but a "satirical erotic romantic comedy" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/40_Days_and_40_Nights ). Again, rape jokes are censorship worthy, unless you change one tiny variable, and that makes it all ok. Today atleast.

Re:Facebook’s experimental hate-speech policy seems to be wo... by logikomaha on Saturday November 21, 2020 @12:52AM (#25168077)
The source of the voice is the only thing that I honestly care about. Again, sympathetic but not practical. Banning a Facebook nut job with a hobby and banning the peer reviewed work of epidemiologists are not equal things. I don’t weigh all speech as equal. By the extension of your logic, all speech has equal value. It doesn’t.
Re:Facebook’s experimental hate-speech policy seems to be wo... by ajsnigrutin on Saturday November 21, 2020 @08:19AM (#25169585)
So who do you ban?

The paranoid prepper advocating for mask use, while all the doctors say masks are useless?

Or antimask denier, who says masks are useless, and doesn't want to wear them, when the doctors say you need to wear a mask?

In my country, you could ban both in a single weekend, when we went from "masks are useless" to "masks are mandatory in public indoor places from monday on".

If you mix politics into this, it makes it even worse... we were listening for four years how the ameican election was stolen, how the russians hacked everything, etc., and now we listen how it's impossible to hack the election, steal the votes, etc. Who do you ban? The conspiracy theorists then or now?

More stupid example? You have religious people in eg. Iran saying that women should cover parts of their bodies, that men don't have to cover. And you have instagram saying that women should cover parts of their bodies, that men don't have to cover. On one side, if you advocate that women should cover up parts of their body, that men don't have to, you're a misogynistic hate group, and get banned, unless we're talking about nipples, then it's instagram itself doing the deleting and banning.

Re:Facebook’s experimental hate-speech policy seems to be wo... by triceratops on Saturday November 21, 2020 @01:28AM (#25168189)
> But the problem here is the political bias in censorship.

Alleged bias.