Big Tech Authoritarianism

[eggcup]

To the "free speech" advocates here, do you think Jihadists should be allowed to propagate their extremism in schools or online by giving lectures to kids?

And should pedophiles be allowed to post their garbage on twitter ?

 

[Em3bbs]

I can't believe people are moaning about Trump's ban. I know people who have been banned for much less than inciting a riot, wilful destruction of an iconic building, causing 5 deaths and putting a bad stain on a country's legacy. My mate got permabanned for called someone a mean name.

 

[Efour]

To the "free speech" advocates here, do you think Jihadists should be allowed to propagate their extremism in schools or online by giving lectures to kids?

And should pedophiles be allowed to post their garbage on twitter ?

Yes because free speech and illegal things go hand in hand? Why do you think everything is a one or a zero.
Do you not know how to moderate yourself?

I'm pretty sure off of the main social media platforms what you suggest is literally happening everyday In. Afghanistan and other parts of that religions more insane extreme world

 

[Mekrel]

I am a conservative and it's clear I am not welcome on social media and routinely attacked for hardly radical ideas.

Right now on Twitter the trending is calling for the hanging of the vice President. Calling for the death of anyone because they said something you dislike is extremely concerning. If this was calling for the hanging of BLM figures better believe there would be an out cry and would be shut down by the platform instantly.

Big tech has a power beyond reasoning. If you fall on the side of wrong think and shut out of the platform your voice is lost and the world turns into a bigger echo chamber.

Social media has the power to influence billions of people and decide what information they see and what they don't. Payment services like PayPal have the power to shut down any project they like. Google can remove your website from it's engine simply because they dislike you and your traffic is gone.

I never thought I would say this but clearly it's gone to far with the power they have. I'm scared how social media has warped our world view and allowed open attacks and witch hunts on people for no good reason simply because they fall on the wrong side of the political spectrum.

Antifa for example have been burning down buildings, destroying property, doxxing people, making threats, openly calling for people's death and they're still active on Facebook and Twitter. Clearly they're on the correct side.

How on earth do they have power beyond reasoning? It's completely reasonable to suspend, ban and or delete accounts on their platform - especially when those accounts continually break their terms of service.

Two wrongs don't make a right as the old saying goes so I'm not sure what relevance "XYZ" organisation say terrible things has to the conversation, unless you're trying to say it's okay to incite violence because others do?

If those organisations are saying what you claim then they too deserve to be removed from Twitter. Removing Trump is still justified and is at least a good start to removing other figures who misuse the platform according to that platforms T&Cs.

 

[Pottsey]

So is BLM and AntiFa using the same platform to stir up racial hatred and call for violence, including the murder of those they don't agree with, OK or do you think that those two groups should also be banned from social media too?

In that case not the entire group but the individual’s that cross the line should get a ban and in fact do. How are they treating Trump any different to all the many other individual’s that have been suspended?


“Pretty strange how that very same company didn't ban BLM and AntiFa from the platform when they were using it to organise the firebombing of government buildings and the armed take over of a vast swathe of Seattle some months ago. Why did they get a free pass?

If you're going to ban one (Trump) then you have to ban the others. Otherwise it just reeks of censorship and bias.”
But they have treated Trump the same as those groups. There is nothing strange about it. Twitter are being mostly consistent although they gave Trump extra leeway before applying the same rules to him as they did to BLM and AntiFa people.

 

[Efour]

I mean at the end of the day the PRC and North Korea are privately run countries.
Them commuting ethnic genocide is completely fair. Their country, their rules.

I don't really give a fig about trump, I'm much more interested in huge entities having so much power.

 

[Aretak]

Ok so being cut of from payment methods is the next step.

When PayPal MasterCard and visa decide you're not woke enough.

That's also fine because "insert same reply"

That isn't the next step, that's several steps ago. Payment providers have been using their power to shut down and strong-arm services into compliance for years. Many of the same people who were on Parler were kicked off Patreon a few years ago due to Mastercard demanding it under the threat of revocation of services.

 

[sanaxe1]

I mean at the end of the day the PRC and North Korea are privately run countries.
Them commuting ethnic genocide is completely fair. Their country, their rules.

I don't really give a fig about trump, I'm much more interested in huge entities having so much power.

You are seriously comparing committing genocide to not being able to tweet?

 

[Sankari]

Private corporations have always enjoyed the right to decide who uses their service. This is nothing new, and it is certainly not authoritarianism.

 

[LOAM]

Yes because free speech and illegal things go hand in hand? Why do you think everything is a one or a zero.
Do you not know how to moderate yourself?

I'm pretty sure off of the main social media platforms what you suggest is literally happening everyday In. Afghanistan and other parts of that religions more insane extreme world

Well you say that but trump was suspended ultimately (and that's what caused this thread) for sedition and inciting a riot, both I presume are illegal activities. The fact he's president is the only thing preventing him being prosecuted.

 

[eggcup]

Yes because free speech and illegal things go hand in hand? Why do you think everything is a one or a zero.
Do you not know how to moderate yourself?

I'm pretty sure off of the main social media platforms what you suggest is literally happening everyday In. Afghanistan and other parts of that religions more insane extreme world

Yes there are a lot of crazy **** that happens in non civilised societies in other countries, I'm not sure what point you think you are making.

 

[Efour]

You are seriously comparing committing genocide to not being able to tweet?

No. I'm worried about Monopoly of power. Who gets to speak, or live even.

 

[Mekrel]

I mean at the end of the day the PRC and North Korea are privately run countries.
Them commuting ethnic genocide is completely fair. Their country, their rules.

I don't really give a fig about trump, I'm much more interested in huge entities having so much power.

That's such a terrible analogy, they're not even comparable. You're really comparing the removal of a narcissistic idiot from a private platform to the actions of dictator countries who suppress their people? Right...

Considering your point is clearly trying to state that if you support the one, you must support the other. It's entirely possible to support a private company removing access to its services for breaking their T&Cs, whilst not supporting the actions of North Korea.

If there ever was a great example of a post jumping the shark, I'm confident yours would be it.

 

[Aretak]

Private corporations have always enjoyed the right to decide who uses their service. This is nothing new, and it is certainly not authoritarianism.

It's at best a shaky argument when you consider the unfettered control that private corporations, and a small handful of them at that, have been given over the internet. There are few realistic alternatives to dealing with at least one, and usually more of the huge corporations who gatekeep every aspect of online service. You're usually dealing with them indirectly even when you think you aren't. "Just go set up your own Twitter if you don't like the rules" has evolved into "just go set up your own global online backbone if you don't like the rules" in an alarmingly short period of time. You can argue the rights of it on technicalities if you wish, because you will, technically, be correct. However, the reality of the situation is that a handful of corporations essentially run the internet at this point, and you will comply with their wishes or you will be removed. In just a technical enough way that they can claim that's not what they're doing. And this isn't just being accepted, but celebrated. Not least by the governments around the world completely sidestepping any responsibility in the process.

 

[Efour]

@Mekrel

Not really I'm just comparing the cliché of their rules their platform constantly repeated.
If Twitter et Al was some Nazi run nonsense would we all be saying their rules their platform. Like that makes silencing political opposition justified.
I'm getting deja vu here. Yeah I'm going full retard I apologize for that.
a lot of people are just happy trump was shut up, the whole sedition nonsense is like the trump card to trump trump.
Honestly I don't believe a single one of you think or care his speech incited what went down. None of you care about the dead, i certainly don't.
This whole nonsense is the final smug win for his opponents and media enemies.
Trump is a complete moron. He will go down for this because he is on the losing side. Victors write history.
Anyway lol. Do you think it's cool that 4? huge tech companies rule social media. All with the same agenda?

 

[Sankari]

It's at best a shaky argument when you consider the unfettered control that private corporations, and a small handful of them at that, have been given over the internet.

It's really not.

There are few realistic alternatives to dealing with at least one

If people don't like the existing options, they're free to create their own. Alternatively, they can JUST STOP BREAKING THE TERMS OF SERVICE THEY AGREED TO WHEN THEY SIGNED UP.

and usually more of the huge corporations who gatekeep every aspect of online service.

But they don't.

 

[Jono8]

Not really I'm just comparing the cliché of their rules their platform constantly repeated.
If Twitter et Al was some Nazi run nonsense would we all be saying their rules their platform. Like that makes silencing political opposition justified.
I'm getting deja vu here. Yeah I'm going full retard I apologize for that.

If twitter was some nazi run nonsense, you likely wouldn't even know about it and they would be **** poor because hardly anyone would advertise with them.

 

[Hotwired]

If twitter was some nazi run nonsense, you likely wouldn't even know about it and they would be **** poor because hardly anyone would advertise with them.

They enforce moderate behaviour to attract advertisers then get accused of censorship for getting big off it and still enforcing the same things.

Those dammed advertisers, encouraging Twitter to enforce a family friendly atmosphere so they have a good advertising platform.

 

[Efour]

I think I'm actually just peed off with the whole polarization of real and online society in the past nearly a decade.
Woke culture war crap, trump crap, Brexit crap. It really is depressing if you allow yourself to get caught in the currents of BS.
I genuinely need to stop reading and watching.
It's fascinating though.

Oh god I forgot covid... Lol it's basically pinned me to Sweden for a year, no holidays no nothing.

 

[solado]

How on earth do they have power beyond reasoning? It's completely reasonable to suspend, ban and or delete accounts on their platform - especially when those accounts continually break their terms of service.

Two wrongs don't make a right as the old saying goes so I'm not sure what relevance "XYZ" organisation say terrible things has to the conversation, unless you're trying to say it's okay to incite violence because others do?

If those organisations are saying what you claim then they too deserve to be removed from Twitter. Removing Trump is still justified and is at least a good start to removing other figures who misuse the platform according to that platforms T&Cs.

Where did I say the removal of Trump wasn't justified? That's different to the point I was making.

I am AGAINST violence from anyone and Twitter, Facebook and other social media platforms have allowed violence routinely for months on end. People are openly calling for death on speicific groups and encouraging violence daily on social media but no one does a thing about it providing it's encouraging violence aganst a specific group that people deem it okay to do so.

Also falling back on the T&C used to be true, now though the monopology of Google, Facebook, Twitter, PayPal etc are clearly all working together, once someone is removed from one platform they're gone from all platforms. If you want to make a viable alternative you simply can't, the anti-compeition practices of these giants make it near impossible for an alternative to exist.
Below is an example how this has been going on for years and nothing has changed:
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_19_1770