zlacker

Some moderation isn't censorship, but most is.

Mostly only illegal content should be removed.

>>Ptchd+(OP)
> Mostly only illegal content should be removed.

And that's how you end up with a Nazi bar. Sure a swastica tattoo isn't illegal; nor is saying death to jews. But most people don't want to drink in that environment so if you don't kick (censor) the nazi's out then your business will not get non-nazi patronage (and maybe go under). The "free market" has determined that censorship is desired.

>>lesuor+k8
change the laws then...

>>Ptchd+(OP)
> Mostly only illegal content should be removed.

Did you read the article? Removing illegal content (like how to make a bomb) is a censorship, because sender and receiver are happy with it. We need to bring arguments like "the good of a society" to justify removing illegal content.

But harassment, threats and suchlike no one wants to get. Sender may be happy to send it, while receiver is not happy to receive. We need not to resort to a good for a society explaining, why these should be banned.

>>lesuor+k8
The entire purpose of the article is to refute this exact argument.

>>Ptchd+(OP)
It's the other way around, obviously.

>>lesuor+k8
> Sure a swastica tattoo isn't illegal; nor is saying death to jews.

Idk where u from, but here in Russia it's not only socially unacceptable but is also a literal crime which falls under incitement of violence and rehabilitation of Nazi ideology.

>>csande+Jp
Eh, kind of. The distinction between moderation and censorship he uses doesn't really exist in a physical space. You can't set a flag in your profile to not see Nazis at the next table in the bar. Also, he explicitly avoids the topic of whether Nazis should be censored so they can't spread harmful ideas rather than just because they're unpleasant to be around, which is also applicable to the bar situation even if GP didn't explicitly cite it.

>>lesuor+k8
The difference is that a bar is a physical place, you cannot isolate yourself from the Nazi on the next stool and shut your ears against his tirades.

In the digital space, filters work just fine. Your messages will live in the same database as the Nazi's, but you can be completely isolated from seeing them if you set up your filters accordingly.

>>akamai+Ss
There are plenty of neonazi in Russia. White supremacy is not exactly uncommon there. (And I am not even speaking about what is done by that state abroad here. Just internal groups.)

>>inglor+et
This would work of nazi did not went out of their way to harass target groups. However, they do it constantly until those leave. And then they spread lied about those who left or attempt to move it into IRL.

These groups really like to spread lies about people and events. They love to manipulate third parties or institutions into attacking you too.

>>akamai+Ss
that's a great argument against such laws

>>watwut+dv
Active harassment should probably be a bannable offense, few people will dispute that. What they will dispute is the mechanism used for banning; AI is notoriously bad at discerning human intentions.

>>ordu+kb
> But harassment, threats and suchlike no one wants to get. Sender may be happy to send it, while receiver is not happy to receive. We need not to resort to a good for a society explaining, why these should be banned.

How many people like getting criticism of any form? Should we ban all criticism?

>>bawolf+HC
No we shouldn't.

>>bawolf+HC
While “don’t like to get” isn’t the right principle to decide what to ban, suggesting an equivalence between harassment and criticism is not pretty.

>>andrew+1t
Nazi is a such an overused label that it is bordering hilarious. My personal experience shows that people wearing swastika tattoos are no more dangerous than those dressed openly LGBTQ+.

Evil is more nuanced and resourceful than that.

>>watwut+Hu
This is laughably incorrect. White supremacy is a Western concept.

Russians looking top-down on Caucasians (from Caucasus, not in the American sense of the word) or Central Asians is a thing, but there are nuances, e.g. the relationship with Chechens.

>>sam_lo+DH
Or gypsies or blacks (the few they met) or non Russian whites ... especially Ukrainians. And the straight up hate toward anything lgbt including whole imported cultural war rhetorics. There is quite overlap in ideology, except it whole deal is more aggressive in Russia. I mean, I am talking about people who self define as such.

Like very seriously, I am not saying Russia has Aryan supremacists. But it has strong enough and big enough groups that are so similar in everything except who gets to be on top, that "white supremacy" is perfectly good descriptor in English speaking forum. And neonazi fits perfectly their group behavior. Down to similar symbolism and preferred music.

>>inglor+Rz
Even humans are bad at this, what would you expect of the poor AI.

>>andsoi+iF
I don't think the difference is all that clear cut, or at least there is a lot of behaviour that has overlap where it is unclear which side things fall.

Like take a protest (for whatever issue you want). Is that criticism or harrasment? Or both?

>>sam_lo+fG
Is it possible that you're not in the groups that Nazis tend to discriminate against, and thus their behavior towards you doesn't feel dangerous?

>>Lutger+uq
You are probably right.... why delete illegal evidence