12
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2023
12 points (100.0% liked)
Hacker News
14 readers
2 users here now
This community serves to share top posts on Hacker News with the wider fediverse.
Rules
0. Keep it legal
- Keep it civil and SFW
- Keep it safe for members of marginalised groups
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The bot summary skipped the first and most important paragraph.
Free Speech absolutism is fucking insane. You shouldn’t be able to have your voice amplified while saying demonstrably false statements. There’s a difference between a person being ignorant of the truth of what they’re saying, and protecting the company that chooses to ignore empirical evidence against the factuality of statements that are spreading on their platform. Why is libel/defamation only open to lawsuits if it harms someone’s ability to make a profit? Why is public safety or civil/political unrest not also a concern? Fucking capitalism.
Sorry I misphrased that. I do not believe the real overreach came from the Biden admin pushing to remove demonstrably false information that damages public health. The trump admin however:
“The attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, both Republicans, argued in a lawsuit filed last year that government agencies and officials — including some working in the administration of President Donald J. Trump — had abused their authority by coercing companies like Facebook, Twitter (now called X) and YouTube to silence critics.”
**That is different. **
Compare bush’s “free speech zones” or trump whining for twitter to delete any post calling him names vs removing harmful lies about vaccines, “child sexual abuse, human trafficking and other criminal activity…”
Hmm
I figured since you were being critical of Trump, we were on the same page. The bot skipping that first paragraph paints this whole story in a different light.
It’s weird how mixed up it all is in the article itself.