For me I would hold the social media companies more to account when it comes to hate speech and harassment online and force social media companies to do more to stop online harassment and hate speech.

  • phillaholic@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    That only really works if the government is preventing you from saying it, and it’s not something like slander or causing panic. If your lemmy instance banned talking about Pickles, it’s not a free speech issue. It’s a private instance who can have their own rules.

      • phillaholic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You better be ready to own the consequences of that stance, which I assume you’ve been privileged not to need to. You can look up any number of mass shooters or terrorists who only got there due to online radicalization.

          • phillaholic@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m going to stop you at we don’t have a problem with terrorists. Shit take, I don’t care to continue.

            • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Who is “we”? Where I live we don’t have such things. At least not in a noteworthy quantity. Not everyone is us-american :)

      • darq@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I personally prefer spaces where everyone can voice any shit. Censorship is for lazy minds and a dull audience. IMHO.

        I always find this take to be remarkably short-sighted.

        Because if you actually want to hear diverse opinions, you have to cultivate a space where diverse people, with diverse experiences, feel free to speak.

        Pretty much every space that tolerates open bigotry becomes deeply unpleasant for the targets of that bigotry. Which means those people tend to leave.

        Which in turn means that those spaces soon turn into the dullest echo chamber, populated only by people unaffected the bigotry. Sure no views were censored. You just harass everybody different off the platform. The net effect is the same.

          • darq@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Is it the fault of the principle of free speech, or the legion of stupid people being allowed to talk freely?

            I’m not talking about “the principal of free speech”. I’m pushing back on the foolish assertion that moderation leads to echo chambers for lazy and dull minds. When exactly the opposite is true.

            I’m saying that if you want to hear diverse opinions, a free-for-all is a bad idea. Because that free-for-all leads to echo chambers.

            You probably want restrictions because it would never apply to you. Denying you talking about stuff that doesn’t phase you, is easy.

            No no, don’t make stupid assumptions about me so that you don’t have to confront my point.

            What if that platform bans opinions that you happen to have?

            Most of them do. Your assumptions are wrong.

            Sure, if you point at 4chan or similar…free speech attracts shitnuggets and end up being an echo chamber. But that’s the fault of us humans being crap, and not free speech being inherently bad.

            I never said free speech was inherently bad. Try responding to what I wrote, not what you imagined that I wrote.

              • darq@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                But how can I hear “diverse opinion” if X opinions are banned/blocked/moderated in the first place?

                There is no space where all opinions are welcome. It simply does not exist. Some opinions are going to force out others.

                If you run a space where Nazi opinions are okay to speak, you can’t really expect to hear Jewish opinions. Or opinions of PoC or queer people or disabled people and so on and so on.

                So most places do the calculations. You can ban this one view. And in return an entire spectrum of views becomes more welcome.

                Bigotry is a painfully simple, painfully shallow, and painfully boring viewpoint. It is almost completely one-dimensional, simplifiable to the idea that the “other” is inferior or dangerous and is to be shunned or feared. It is a viewpoint that we all already know, one we have all already heard. Banning it loses us almost nothing, and in return we gain so, so many more valuable insights.

                  • Martin Kelly@infosec.exchange
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    @Dyskolos no. i’m pointing out that your argument is dishonest. nothing is stopping you hearing diverse opinions. you are arguing for nowhere to be able to have their own standards which is a separate, harder lift than “fReAzE PeAcH!?!”

                • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I have no idea where you are to receive such things. I never did, and I’m on the net since it started.

        • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Free speech doesn’t mean free harassment or threats. What is wrong with you? I can say “i hate green hair” but i surely can’t say “i hate everyone with green hair. Let’s kill them!” Is that concept really so hard to grasp?