Troll Posted June 22, 2019 Report Share Posted June 22, 2019 when the internet was granted the exemption I was for it.....and still am... I would not be in favor of eliminating it.... but I would be in favor of revoking it for any entity that does not allow equal access to ALL viewpoints (not just right or left) or silently censors... What you all say? https://humanevents.com/2019/06/19/senator-social-media-twitter-facebook-section-230-immunity/?utm_referrer=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Yb9x2qKZko 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cat_Scratch Posted June 22, 2019 Report Share Posted June 22, 2019 Equal justice and speech for all... 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSFBfan Posted June 22, 2019 Report Share Posted June 22, 2019 1 hour ago, Cat_Scratch said: Equal justice and speech for all... Exactly and if they will not provide that they should be shut down Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted June 22, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2019 On 6/21/2019 at 8:40 PM, HSFBfan said: Exactly and if they will not provide that they should be shut down Negative... Shut down? not. Just opinion speech marked as such...as any other... without free reign to ignore the responsibilities of slander and liable. What are you...a libtard?!? 🤣 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thc6795 Posted June 22, 2019 Report Share Posted June 22, 2019 It is really simple either we have freedom of speech or we don't. Problem is the elites now decide what is "good" speech and what is "hate" speech. Unfortunately it is only going to get worse 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSFBfan Posted June 22, 2019 Report Share Posted June 22, 2019 4 minutes ago, Troll said: Negative... Shut down? not. Just opinion speech marked as such...as any other... without free reign to ignore the responsibilities of slander and liable. What are you...a libtard?!? 🤣 These tech giants are against conservatives. They are liberal loving retards. So why should they have a platform that only caters to liberals. Imagine if conservatives had a place or site or whatever that told all liberals your not welcome here 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSFBfan Posted June 22, 2019 Report Share Posted June 22, 2019 Just now, thc6795 said: It is really simple either we have freedom of speech or we don't. Problem is the elites now decide what is "good" speech and what is "hate" speech. Unfortunately it is only going to get worse Not if we have the balls to stand up. From time to time the tree of liberty must be refreshed with the blood of Patriots Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted June 22, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2019 On 6/21/2019 at 9:24 PM, HSFBfan said: These tech giants are against conservatives. They are liberal loving retards. So why should they have a platform that only caters to liberals. Dozens of reasons, but I'll let you chew on that one for a while... On 6/21/2019 at 9:24 PM, HSFBfan said: Imagine if conservatives had a place or site or whatever that told all liberals your not welcome here now you've just left the building...This has absolutely nothing to do with "welcome"... Try reading before posting. Censorship and legal ramifications of publishing falsehoods take precedence... your "welcome"... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSFBfan Posted June 22, 2019 Report Share Posted June 22, 2019 9 minutes ago, Troll said: Dozens of reasons, but I'll let you chew on that one for a while... now you've just left the building...This has absolutely nothing to do with "welcome"... Try reading before posting. Censorship and legal ramifications of publishing falsehoods take precedence... your "welcome"... I at this point have no idea what you are saying so I'll leave this here lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted June 22, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2019 On 6/21/2019 at 9:24 PM, thc6795 said: It is really simple either we have freedom of speech or we don't. Problem is the elites now decide what is "good" speech and what is "hate" speech. Unfortunately it is only going to get worse Hate speech has always fallen under the free speech umbrella... until it was acceptably used in the courts only against some groups..... I'm with you on the concept, but not so sure how 'elite' the culprits are... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cat_Scratch Posted June 22, 2019 Report Share Posted June 22, 2019 The USA is not going through something it hasn't already been through. It will all work out. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted June 22, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2019 On 6/22/2019 at 6:13 AM, Cat_Scratch said: The USA is not going through something it hasn't already been through. It will all work out. This is VERY true... always new confused little young ones that need to learn... same old same old 😐 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
World Citizen Posted June 22, 2019 Report Share Posted June 22, 2019 20 hours ago, Troll said: when the internet was granted the exemption I was for it.....and still am... I would not be in favor of eliminating it.... but I would be in favor of revoking it for any entity that does not allow equal access to ALL viewpoints (not just right or left) or silently censors... What you all say? https://humanevents.com/2019/06/19/senator-social-media-twitter-facebook-section-230-immunity/?utm_referrer=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Yb9x2qKZko I am fairly conflicted about this. The concept of free speech and all that is great but in practice I see that much damage can be done. As an example- Alex Jones says many things that are 1) Wrong 2) incite violence 3) has no value except to give him a paycheck (sandy-hook shooting being a hoax and made up). Another example would be 'pizza gate'. The affect that hateful and plain wrong information can lead people to do crazy shit like shoot up a pizza place because they read that a child sex trafficking ring was ran by Hillary Clinton. WTF? There may be similar examples from the left but I do not know of any. Point being that people get their news from Facebook and people get way too emotionally involved with what they are reading and assume it to be the truth and then some act on it. At the very least, they form their opinions on it. From that point everything they think they know or have an opinion on has been distorted. Hard to get back to any kind of balance after that. IMO there has been so much damage from hate radio during the past 25 years or so and it is hard to quantify but not hard to see happening. Just my 2 cents. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belly Bob Posted June 25, 2019 Report Share Posted June 25, 2019 On 6/21/2019 at 8:14 PM, Troll said: when the internet was granted the exemption I was for it.....and still am... I would not be in favor of eliminating it.... but I would be in favor of revoking it for any entity that does not allow equal access to ALL viewpoints (not just right or left) or silently censors... What you all say? https://humanevents.com/2019/06/19/senator-social-media-twitter-facebook-section-230-immunity/?utm_referrer=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Yb9x2qKZko I didn't click the link, but I'm all for free speech. If you take care of freedom, the truth can almost always take care of itself. But to @World Citizen's point, there are questions of how far the right to express your thoughts extends, since it might bump up against other rights, like the right to personal safety. Still, I would think that in any disputed case, the burden of proof would lie squarely with those who would want to restrict the right to express your opinion. Safe spaces and campus feminism and much of what the left has been up to in recent years scares me. At least in academia, there has been some pushback. The University of Chicago, for example, has recently announced that they would no longer support safe spaces, which I was happy to read about. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted June 25, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2019 On 6/25/2019 at 11:46 AM, Belly Bob said: I didn't click the link, but I'm all for free speech. If you take care of freedom, the truth can almost always take care of itself. But to @World Citizen's point, there are questions of how far the right to express your thoughts extends, since it might bump up against other rights, like the right to personal safety. Still, I would think that in any disputed case, the burden of proof would lie squarely with those who would want to restrict the right to express your opinion. Safe spaces and campus feminism and much of what the left has been up to in recent years scares me. At least in academia, there has been some pushback. The University of Chicago, for example, has recently announced that they would no longer support safe spaces, which I was happy to read about. Of course there are concerns...would be silly not to have them. I think that is where your 'surroundings' mean everything... That's the basic problem with the internet....trying to fit it into the appropriate 'surrounding'. Is it a place for private clubs to exist, a public street corner, or something people let their kids play on in their living room??? People generally develop their opinion on this topic as to how they see that answer... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belly Bob Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 20 hours ago, Troll said: Of course there are concerns...would be silly not to have them. I think that is where your 'surroundings' mean everything... That's the basic problem with the internet....trying to fit it into the appropriate 'surrounding'. Is it a place for private clubs to exist, a public street corner, or something people let their kids play on in their living room??? People generally develop their opinion on this topic as to how they see that answer... Interesting. I suppose the Internet is in fact all three. I don't have a view on whether it should be one or the other two. But given that it is in part a place where kids play, we might want it to be regulated. It's a tough one. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 I think there is a distinction that needs to be made. There are the content producers/providers and the search engines. I think we need to be careful with regulation of the former. The search engines, however, are a different story. That is where power is truly concentrated and where a small few have the ability to sway what millions and potentially billions see and hear (and thus to a degree, think). This is where Google and FaceBook become so dangerous when they put their fingers on the scales. . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted June 26, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 On 6/26/2019 at 9:10 AM, concha said: I think there is a distinction that needs to be made. There are the content producers/providers and the search engines. I think we need to be careful with regulation of the former. The search engines, however, are a different story. That is where power is truly concentrated and where a small few have the ability to sway what millions and potentially billions see and hear (and thus to a degree, think). This is where Google and FaceBook become so dangerous when they put their fingers on the scales. . very true but content providers such as YouTube run their own search engines with similar results.....aside from censoring and removing certain materials at their whim....others get scarlet letter designations attached. Also these content providers are the employer of their own content producers ( in this case is the public) and pay them monetarily which adds another unique twist... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 17 minutes ago, Troll said: very true but content providers such as YouTube run their own search engines with similar results.....aside from censoring and removing certain materials at their whim....others get scarlet letter designations attached. Also these content providers are the employer of their own content producers ( in this case is the public) and pay them monetarily which adds another unique twist... The content on YouTube is overwhelmingly 3rd party. You log on to YT and search for content from millions of providers/sources. In that sense it is much like the Google search engine or FB. It's the "search" and actual access where they get you. . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted June 26, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 On 6/26/2019 at 9:49 AM, concha said: The content on YouTube is overwhelmingly 3rd party. You log on to YT and search for content from millions of providers/sources. In that sense it is much like the Google search engine or FB. It's the "search" and actual access where they get you. . agree but actual removal of disliked of material (not just misdirecting or not providing a link to) could be considered worse than what most search engines do... Search engines also do not take liberty to frame and scarlet letter some content, present false analytics (to display false popularity etc.) or otherwise misrepresent the material, or withhold or reduce salary for content they consider less acceptable. All these occur on a daily basis presently... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted June 26, 2019 Report Share Posted June 26, 2019 16 minutes ago, Troll said: agree but actual removal of disliked of material (not just misdirecting or not providing a link to) could be considered worse than what most search engines do... Search engines also do not take liberty to frame and scarlet letter some content, present false analytics (to display false popularity etc.) or otherwise misrepresent the material, or withhold or reduce salary for content they consider less acceptable. All these occur on a daily basis presently... The long and the short of it is that these entities have huge power over 3rd party content in some form or fashion (where it lands in searches, monetized/demonetized, flagged...). 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cat_Scratch Posted June 27, 2019 Report Share Posted June 27, 2019 Exactly what FB and Google are fighting in courts now. FB, Google (Chrome), FireFox, Internet Exploder, Navigator, etc... are are learning there are rules to what is right and wrong and excepatble behaviors. The search engine AI is the product of human programing, and biases will be inflected in the programming. As far as I know we have not unleashed AI learning to an unlimited degree of freedoms. Meaning, AI is still watched over and programming changes are common to fit needs. The key words you search are given a priority and websites can pay for that priority that will direct your search to their websites. Also these priorities are programmed into the AI that lead you to sites the Programmers wish you to see first. If what you are looking for doesn't show up after 2 or 3 tries, it could mean that the search engine is programed to make your search difficult. Concha is correct. These entities are the gods of our internet world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On2whls Posted June 27, 2019 Report Share Posted June 27, 2019 Best thread I have seen in a while. Keep up the good work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMaximumHornetSting Posted June 27, 2019 Report Share Posted June 27, 2019 On 6/22/2019 at 5:27 PM, World Citizen said: I am fairly conflicted about this. The concept of free speech and all that is great but in practice I see that much damage can be done. As an example- Alex Jones says many things that are 1) Wrong 2) incite violence 3) has no value except to give him a paycheck (sandy-hook shooting being a hoax and made up). Another example would be 'pizza gate'. The affect that hateful and plain wrong information can lead people to do crazy shit like shoot up a pizza place because they read that a child sex trafficking ring was ran by Hillary Clinton. WTF? There may be similar examples from the left but I do not know of any. Point being that people get their news from Facebook and people get way too emotionally involved with what they are reading and assume it to be the truth and then some act on it. At the very least, they form their opinions on it. From that point everything they think they know or have an opinion on has been distorted. Hard to get back to any kind of balance after that. IMO there has been so much damage from hate radio during the past 25 years or so and it is hard to quantify but not hard to see happening. Just my 2 cents. Alex Jones is the biggest example of people blindly following anything.... People need to learn how to Check things themselves. Both the left and the right have this problem. Problem is the right is more subsceptible.... Sources like Breitbart and other far right sources feed into what the right wants to hear. The left has their problems too they feed into what they want to hear but the difference is they're not as volatile as the right. The left is younger and more tolerant and don't explode as quick as the older right does... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted June 27, 2019 Report Share Posted June 27, 2019 9 minutes ago, TheMaximumHornetSting said: Alex Jones is the biggest example of people blindly following anything.... People need to learn how to Check things themselves. Both the left and the right have this problem. Problem is the right is more subsceptible.... Sources like Breitbart and other far right sources feed into what the right wants to hear. The left has their problems too they feed into what they want to hear but the difference is they're not as volatile as the right. The left is younger and more tolerant and don't explode as quick as the older right does... This post is one of the biggest blind-to-reality howlers I've read in awhile. 🤣 "People blindly following anything"? "More susceptible"? I give you the Russia hoax. Volatility? Younger and more tolerant? Ever heard of Antifa? Ever see what happens with the young, tolerant left when a conservative tries to speak on a college campus? . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.