Europe gives Facebook, Twitter final warning on hate speech

[Fitheach]

Racism, sexism and fascism will never be truly "stamped out" because those types of biases are natural. But hey, you do you, kiddo. I've got better things to do.

If we rescind them from speaking they will be removed. Their ideas have no place.

[Flarelaine]

Better to still have absolute freedom of speech, guns and somewhat small government. ( you guys in europe dont know how good it feels)

Part of it is certainly true. I don't know how it feels to worry about insurance when I need a doctor.

- - - Updated - - -

I wish US was such a marvelous tiny banking heaven to impelent those policies!

Being responsible with guns has nothing to do with banks.

[Acidbaron]

Yes, even if it's from Hitler. Wait is Mein Kampf available in EU? Oh lookitty https://www.amazon.co.uk/Mein-Kampf-.../dp/817224164X

Bad argument considering ages passed since it became legal and a lot of history lessons were dedicated to this, to this day our youth goes visit concentration camps at least once during their time in school. It also very recently became legal in Germany.

Context is what matters here and the problem with muslim extermism is that we look the tools and people to correctly create a context around it on the same time we cannot force a "european islam" since you cannot tell people as an external party what to believe. What we can do is as Belgium did recently is sending back the head imam of a big mosque in brussels or denying his rights to further stay here as he's a pillar of salafism and whabbism.

In any case the matter of ISIS is much more complicated than the of neonazism. If you cannot see that any further words are totally wasted on you as your bias consumed your rationally though process.

[Deleted]

Yes, even if it's from Hitler. Wait is Mein Kampf available in EU? Oh lookitty https://www.amazon.co.uk/Mein-Kampf-.../dp/817224164X

What are you even talking about? Muslim extremists are using Facebook and Twitter to radicalized and recruit new terrorists.

[Poopymonster]

Nobody is saying it is.

But when talking about American politics (or of any other country), makes no sense using the political spectrum of another country as standard, instead of the local political spectrum.

So, it does not matter if democrats would be considered right wing on Europe, since its an american party and by their standards is considered a left wing party.

Its like trying to use american "metrics" to define european politicians and parties. It would make no sense for them because it would be completely out of context.

It's not just Europe, to my knowledge, it's the default setting for most countries. Left/Right scale is kinda like measurements Metric VS Imperial use worldwide.

Almost universally accepted stances of Left/Right, but the US for some reason says a center-right candidate is the reincarnation of Hitler, Mao, and Stalin in one little Kenyan born bundle. And proclaim everyone else is wrong, because "Go fuck yourself"

This isn't an American board, and a majority aren't American. The microcosm of US mislabeling isn't the norm.

[Elim Garak]

Bad argument

If Hitler was alive today - I wouldn't be in favor of censorship.
Forget Hitler, if (Hitler * ISIS)^Holocaust people are using internet to spread their ideas - I will not be in favor of censorship.
Ideas are harmless. If their ideas are so strong that more people join them - than maybe your ideas are weak and need rethinking or repackaging.
Censorship is BAD, as it fosters the environment for reinvention of bad ideas, which you cannot defeat in a debate, they will be hidden from public view and spread covertly. Also it prevents you from seeing people who have bad ideas and be cautious around them. It prevent you from ostracizing and ridiculing BAD PEOPLE.

That's my argument. Not whatever you thought it was and tried to deconstruct.

What are you even talking about? Muslim extremists are using Facebook and Twitter to radicalized and recruit new terrorists.

No, they are not. They don't need Facebook and Twitter to recruit. They did just fine before internet. They are just exploring all venues and I'd rather SEE THEM DOING IT than not seeing them doing it.

[LMuhlen]

Ideas are harmless. If their ideas are so strong that more people join them - than maybe your ideas are weak and need rethinking or repackaging.

I'd say this is the centerpiece of the difference of opinions here. All the people who have died, suffered or lived miserable lives because of opinions would probably oppose to this notion.

And I think bad ideas spread like wildfire because people are ignorant or sociopaths or lack critical thinking. In an ideal world, there would be no need to censorship because bad ideas would find no grounds to spread upon, but until then we need them kept in check. It's analogous to a disease. In an ideal world everyone would be vaccinated or immune and we wouldn't need to wash our hands (or whatever we have to do to prevent contagion), but in the real world we have to play safe.

[Acidbaron]

If Hitler was alive today - I wouldn't be in favor of censorship.
Forget Hitler, if (Hitler * ISIS)^Holocaust people are using internet to spread their ideas - I will not be in favor of censorship.
Ideas are harmless. If their ideas are so strong that more people join them - than maybe your ideas are weak and need rethinking or repackaging.
Censorship is BAD, as it fosters the environment for reinvention of bad ideas, which you cannot defeat in a debate, they will be hidden from public view and spread covertly. Also it prevents you from seeing people who have bad ideas and be cautious around them. It prevent you from ostracizing and ridiculing BAD PEOPLE.

That's my argument. Not whatever you thought it was and tried to deconstruct.

No, they are not. They don't need Facebook and Twitter to recruit. They did just fine before internet. They are just exploring all venues and I'd rather SEE THEM DOING IT than not seeing them doing it.

I agree on the sentiment that censorship alone isn't the answer, therefor as i attempted to explain it is a joint effort. Actually they did not fine before the internet, the internet gave them more avenues. Where you see this as governments dealing with the problem alone through removing said publications, i do not i see the other efforts being made.

And i find it important that these sources are as easily available, although that can be debated cause if one looks for it you'll find it, for me and the complaint is also based on the promotion of that ideology.

[Lahis]

Ideas are harmless.

So I suppose Nazis and Communists never did nothing wrong then.

[Elim Garak]

So I suppose Nazis and Communists never did nothing wrong then.

Were they ideas or people?

[Deleted]

No, they are not. They don't need Facebook and Twitter to recruit. They did just fine before internet. They are just exploring all venues and I'd rather SEE THEM DOING IT than not seeing them doing it.

And yet, they do it with the Facebook and Twitter easily and faster than ever before.

[Lahis]

Were they ideas or people?

They were people with terrible ideas.

You can't say that all ideas are harmless when people will act on them and incite a goddamn genocide.

[urasim]

So I suppose Nazis and Communists never did nothing wrong then.

Ideas are not actions. Ban the actions not thought.

[Jinpachi]

Nice generalizing. Again, another passive/aggressive argument. Plenty of lefties that work and plenty of conservatives that don't. You're just making my point.

- - - Updated - - -

Taxpayer money gets mismanaged all the time. But people only give a shit when it comes to other people getting shit. "Dem lazy ferlerdin' pieces of shit ain't gittin mah money".

Then you're not who I'm talking about. I suggest normal liberals start aggressively separating yourselves from these militard leftists, and the normal conservatives need to separate from the alt-right and their ilk.

[Mistame]

I'd say this is the centerpiece of the difference of opinions here. All the people who have died, suffered or lived miserable lives because of opinions would probably oppose to this notion.

And I think bad ideas spread like wildfire because people are ignorant or sociopaths or lack critical thinking. In an ideal world, there would be no need to censorship because bad ideas would find no grounds to spread upon, but until then we need them kept in check. It's analogous to a disease. In an ideal world everyone would be vaccinated or immune and we wouldn't need to wash our hands (or whatever we have to do to prevent contagion), but in the real world we have to play safe.

Interesting that you mention "opinion", given that ideas are nothing more than opinions. And people have an inherent right to have and express them, regardless of how unpopular. The actual difference here is logic. It's irrational to think you can ban ideas oe police thought. You can only punish action.

[LMuhlen]

And people have an inherent right to have and express them, regardless of how unpopular.

I don't see that as inherent. You may be used to it, but only because you are allowed to express them. All rights are acquired or bestowed upon us, none is inherent.

The action being punished is the expression of the idea, so you are punishing action.

[Direpenguin]

if people (firms) want to go to foreign countries they should abide by their laws!

right guys?

The obvious tactic Facebook should take, is to claim refugee status in Europe. Then the EU will, literally, suck their cock and offer education so the current European population can learn to assimilate Facebook's *hate speech* instead of discriminating against it.

- - - Updated - - -

Facebook and Twitter are working on AI that will filter (as an option) fake news, and "hate speech"; So this should be resolved over time.

Somehow, I'm sure it will overlook any such incidents as long as they are from Leftist sources. I mean, it's not as if Facebook hasn't already been caught tweaking their algorithms in this manner.

[Graeham]

The perks of the internet far outweigh any downsides. I don't particularly like Facebook or Twitter but it feels very much like they're being made into scapegoats in this particular case. Most of the issues linked to extremism in Europe are directly linked to the very flawed policies put in place by various prominent politicians. Who, even after being voted out, will likely never be held accountable for their actions.

[LMuhlen]

The obvious tactic Facebook should take, is to claim refugee status in Europe. Then the EU will, literally, suck their cock and offer education so the current European population can learn to assimilate Facebook's *hate speech* instead of discriminating against it.

- - - Updated - - -



Somehow, I'm sure it will overlook any such incidents as long as they are from Leftist sources. I mean, it's not as if Facebook hasn't already been caught tweaking their algorithms in this manner.

First part was actually funny, made me giggle!

Regarding the second part, I understand if people are against government imposing censorship upon a company, but complaining about how a company censors its own product because of their own ideologies should be against what the corporation worshipers believe, right? All hail the mighty corporation? Or does it only work if the corporation agrees with you?

[Elim Garak]

They were people with terrible ideas.

You can't say that all ideas are harmless when people will act on them and incite a goddamn genocide.

So people, not ideas. And yes I can say all ideas are harmless, I did it twice already. It's a fact. All ideas are harmless. the mere notion that ideas can be harmful is asinine. Humans are dangerous not ideas. People can be dangerous under an influence of a "good" idea. Ideas are just that, ideas.