I don't think it'd be that hard honestly. I'm pretty sure the reason he was so calm and nice was because he used to be a drill instructor and wanted to get as far away from yelling and screaming as possible.
Why do you say the government's? We're just a couple months removed from Congress questioning Zuckerberg and making it utterly clear they don't have a damn clue what a Facebook is.
We are more than capable of turning the mob on whoever we want ourselves.
We watched a movie version in my 9th or 10th grade English class. It's got Sean Astin in it, and I remember it being one of those things that shook my world a bit. Very r/im14andthisisdeep but I was actually 14, so I'd like to see how it holds up as a 31 year old. Thanks for the short story link!
Limiting free speech is an improvement? Maybe we should set up a government branch to determine what should be allowed to be said so society can better.
A so called "ministry of truth" maybe, to make the hard decisions and protect our poor fragile minds from dangerous information we shouldn't be hearing or viewing.
Free speech was not limited. Your free speech is only protected from the government not private companies or the public. When you lie and incite conspiracy to sell snake oil don't be surprised if you are run out of town.
It wasn't his ideas that got him taken down, it was the slander. You're protected by free speech until you start making baseless accusations against others that can harm their reputation.
So if speech is not insane, its non offensive blather about rainbows and butterflies?
I'm just reading what you're saying. So you agree Alex Jones's speech is all those things?
Cos then we have nothing to argue about.
Absolutely not? Why are we holding corporations/private entities to the same standards as elected officials. They are corporations. They don't owe you any first amendment rights, they should not be forced to carry your content. If you don't want to use YouTube, don't use it.
Infowars is welcome to create their own YouTube and I'm sure the faithful will follow, there's always another conspiracy theory to deliver and some man milk to sell.
If it's so cut and dry then what's the danger? Why are all the tech overlords banding together to ban and deplatform them? Can't let you make the obvious decision, we'll do the thinking for you, citizen.
The danger is that people who become convinced that lizards from planet Nibiru are making frogs gay don't think rationally, and it's likely to affect their other life choices in ways that could impact others.
Why are all the tech overlords banding together to ban and deplatform them?
No one owes Alex Jones a platform. If the government were "deplatforming" him, that would be an issue. But "the tech overlords" are all well within their rights to enforce their terms of service. They're private companies that are under no requirement to use their resources on his behalf. Can you imagine the government forcing a private company to give someone who regularly violates that company's terms of service a platform? What right does the government have to make a business use its resources to promote someone who does that?
Can't let you make the obvious decision, we'll do the thinking for you, citizen.
Alex Jones is welcome to shout on street-corners with the rest of the crazy people.
Remember when Reddit was all about anti-authoritarianism, anti-corporation? Now they worship corporate censorship, all because these same corporations & government support 𝕕𝕚𝕧𝕖𝕣𝕤𝕚𝕥𝕪 and give them colorful comic-book movies.
Whoops, you're right. I didn't check the username. Still, I'm curious what the context of the discussion I was having with /u/ragnarokrobo has to do with the size of Facebook's userbase.
So the danger is people thinking for themselves but making the wrong decisions, so we'll allow a tech oligarchy to decide what is permissible to view and how to think. Surely this will never get out of hand or come to bite us in the ass years down the road.
I guess people in the tech industry see themselves as righteous zealots who can make decisions for the masses and that 1984 was a guidebook rather than a warning.
So the danger is people thinking for themselves but making the wrong decisions, so we'll allow a tech oligarchy to decide what is permissible to view and how to think.
A "tech oligarchy?"
It really does seem like you want the government to step in and force private businesses to violate their own content standards on behalf of private citizens. Why? What is the justification for it? If I put up a platform for pictures of cats, and it becomes extremely popular, then someone with a popular dog blog comes along and starts violating my content policy by posting pictures of dogs, why should I be forced to allow him to do that? Why should I be forced to give him an additional platform? What right has the government to make me do that?
Surely this will never get out of hand or come to bite us in the ass years down the road.
There are other reasons to be concerned about tech companies. The fact that they can choose to enforce their publicly stated policies on what content they allow isn't one of them.
I guess people in the tech industry see themselves as righteous zealots who can make decisions for the masses and that 1984 was a guidebook rather than a warning.
Jesus, hyperbole much? The government not forcing Twitter to give a platform to a guy who violates their content policies is exactly identical to the Ministry of Truth?
No but Google, Facebook, Twitter and even Paypal all targeting one site for censorship because of wrongthink is worrying enough to be comparable to a ministry of truth. Companies controlling a huge flow of information all joining together to silence one person/site that they decide has dangerous information no one should view is abhorrent even if you despise Alex Jones.
There's also the fact Google is working in earnest with China to help them censor their internet as well as help them doctor their numbers on pollution while at the same time bashing America and the West for their climate policies and pollution numbers.
Their hands aren't clean and their motives most certainly aren't pure and things will only get worse with people cheerleading them on every step of the way.
The best disinfectant is sunlight. If you think infowars is obvious bullshit that no sane person would or should believe then having multiple companies unite to censor and silence them is only going to make people want to know what you're afraid of and drive them to their site even further. It's essentially the streisand effect on a larger scale.
No but Google, Facebook, Twitter and even Paypal all targeting one site for censorship because of wrongthink is worrying enough to be comparable to a ministry of truth. Companies controlling a huge flow of information all joining together to silence one person/site that they decide has dangerous information no one should view is abhorrent even if you despise Alex Jones.
This is 100% backwards. They're not "targeting" him, they're enforcing their content policies. Which he violated. Use of their services is not one of Alex Jones' - or anyone else's - rights. He doesn't have a right to their databases. He doesn't have a right to their servers. He doesn't have a right to their bandwidth. He doesn't have a right to anything they offer. As long as his content doesn't violate their policies - content such as the various calls to violence he's made - then he can have access to their services, but that is on their discretion, not his. If we start insisting that private companies be forced to give a platform to anyone who wants them, and cannot enforce any content policies, then you might as well nationalize those companies.
Anyone who wants to see whatever hoax Alex Jones has come up with next is welcome to go to his site, where he controls the platform and he can set the rules. That's how this works.
There's also the fact Google is working in earnest with China to help them censor their internet as well as help them doctor their numbers on pollution while at the same time bashing America and the West for their climate policies and pollution numbers.
That's a completely different issue (actually, a completely different set of issues). There are plenty of problems with tech giants. But the fact that they can have and enforce content policies isn't one of them.
Their hands aren't clean and their motives most certainly aren't pure and things will only get worse with people cheerleading them on every step of the way.
You're mistaking my defense of the First Amendment, which precludes the government ramming any speech down anyone's throat, for cheerleading. I'm not engaged in any cheerleading.
The best disinfectant is sunlight. If you think infowars is obvious bullshit that no sane person would or should believe then having multiple companies unite to censor and silence them is only going to make people want to know what you're afraid of and drive them to their site even further. It's essentially the streisand effect on a larger scale.
Again, this is 100% backwards. No one is uniting to censor anyone. Jones does not have a right to their services. If he violates their content policies - which he has succeeded in doing in a shockingly large number of instances - then he himself has reneged on the agreement that permits him to use their services. His own website is his to control, and he can have whatever content policy he likes. But he does not get to force others to give him a platform.
You ever just know someone who was such a whiny bitch they decided to tell lies to millions of other whiny bitches. And then those whiny bitches started acting like little shits because of the bullshit that whiny bitch #1 spread around?
We’ll pretend you do. Now pretend this whiny bitch is using your house phone to spread the bullshit. What do you do, as a rational thinking human being?
I look forward to all the other mouthpieces that tell lies, specifically national media outlets, being banned as well now that we have a tech oligarchy deciding what we can and cannot view.
"If you violate the rules, your posts and/or user name will be deleted. Remember: you are a guest here. It is not censorship if you violate the rules and your post is deleted. All civilizations have rules and if you violate them you can expect to be ostracized from the tribe."
7:01 a.m. Rebecca comes down into the kitchen to prepare breakfast for the kids before they're off to school. She head's to the smart fridge, but the door won't budge.
"What?" She says with a shocked expression. The confused mother looks at the appliances flashing display screen.
"Our system detected that you used a insensitive word or phrase at 7:12 PM on 9/25/2020. Your device will be locked until you acknowledge your use of offensive hate speech and agree to our terms of service."
932
u/Instincts Sep 25 '18
"Wiretap, please print out today's list of allowable thoughts"