Comment on Meta rolled back protections. Now hate is surging.

Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

• fyzzlefry@retrolemmy.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  That is the most simplistic, uneducated opinion on the subject that is possible to make. You should be ashamed.

  source

  • Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    If that’s the case, it should be easy enough for you to come up with an actual argument against it.

    source

    • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      There are speech police in the real world. Workplaces don’t allow you to use slurs or to harass your co-workers. That’s just one example. In fact, any social group that I can think of will punish you for saying something. Some are more lenient than others, but every one has a line that you cannot cross.

      source

      • Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

        True which is why I think an upvote/downvote system is the best form of moderation. Of course there are things you cannot allow, but it’s mostly the illegal stuff. I’m for low moderation, not no moderation. Facebook et al were not doing low moderation, it was heavy handed and unnecessary.

        source
      • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

        There are speech police in the real world. Workplaces don’t allow you to use slurs or to harass your co-workers.

        That “speech police” traces to the government in the form of labor laws & regulations in the remit of the EEOC, eg, Title 7 of Civil Rights Act, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Americans with Disabilities Act. Employers didn’t conceive of such workplaces policies on their own to invite lawsuits & put targets on their backs.

        These laws do not apply to social media as a communication platform. Offensive expression doesn’t deny equal access/opportunities to platform resources they are under any legal obligation to provide. Should we put much confidence in social media companies voluntarily assuming unnecessary obligations just because?

        It never made sense.

        source
  • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    Nah, and cool opinion.

    As someone else wrote, why should put much confidence in “some giant/evil megacorp”? They’re not a philanthropic organization & they’re not real authorities. We can expect them to act in their own interest.

    If content is truly illegal or harmful, then the real authorities should handle it. Simply taking down that content doesn’t help real authorities or address credible threats. If it’s not illegal or harmful, then we can block or ignore.

    People already curate their information offline. It seems reasonable to expect the same online.

    source