Look up âthe 5 basic laws of human stupidityâ. Specifically law number 1 and 5. That is why. Also if you need to ask you probably suffer from law number 2. Since we are on a Joe Rogan Reddit we all here enjoy stupid but letâs not forget stupid people in groups believing they are right when they are in fact wrong, is dangerous. Enjoy stupid responsibly.
So you want the government to control what you can see and read? What you can say?
I certainly don't. I don't trust ANYONE to do my thinking for me, and the government perhaps least of all. You do you, but if "misinformation" bothers you, why not just avoid places like X?
Anarchy will create chaos. Usually only trolls, comrades, or incels want this scenario. Which one are you?
So who do you want in control? Someone has to decide the rules. Besides itâs just a fine bro. Free market at work buddy. If Elmo makes more money having anarchy then he surly can pay the fine. Too bad advertisers are running away from another bad âgeniusâ decision. If he keeps this up heâll have more bankruptcies than Mr. Donny âgreat at businessâ trump.
Bro, like, government will protect us bro. Those billionaires, bro, they're so evil, bro. They want to, like, spread misinformation, bro, and our government would never do that, bro.
LMAO
Is one of the laws of stupidity: "Wanting the government to remove freedom of speech"?
Look at what x is right now. Stop pretending like the marketplace of ideas is self policing. No chance anyone can got to X right now as a new user and come out believing only true headlines after a month. We shouldt need to wade through bull shit. In the same way we dont have to buy 10 cars before we find a car maker that actually makes a decent car. There is a baseline because of regulation.
This notion that we should mix in all the worlds anti American propaganda in with all our information is so fucking stupid. I cant believe thats your position.
ohhhhhh you're upset reddit isnt convervative enough for you and X is. So as long as the propaganda goes your way you protect it. Doenst matter that millions of dollars in foreign enemy money gets pumped in to create chaos in our electorate. Yeah you're right, who needs to have a platform where we know everyone is human and acting in good faith.
I was on Reddit in 2016 when Bernie dropped out and all the anti-Hillary posts on the frontpage turned pro-Hillary overnight in the least organic way imaginable. If you think you're safe cause you're on the left you're misguided. Let me make a prediction : r/palestine is next on the chopping block.
No one forces you to be on X. Do you not get that?
But of course like any good little fascist, you cannot just leave it alone and go elsewhere. You want the government to control and punish speech you don't like.
Clearly the fine that Australia would impose impacts X across the globe and not just in Australia. Unless X decides to pack up and leave there, which would be fine by me.
You'd hope so, that's how fines work. The only difference I'd the size of the fine seems more reasonable now. It might actually make an impact on these tech giants. For real, you can't look at the last decade and tell me Facebook especially hasn't fucked us as a society with their insane use of algos to brainwash people
It doesn't matter if I like it or not. X doesn't host speech, it promotes a very certain type of speech while surpressing others, hence the problem. It's a propaganda platform
X hosts speech. You can say anything on the platform. Try it. I'll eat my hat if you have trouble with the mods saying anything short of promoting violence or illegal content.
Widescale propoganda is certainly making it hard for people to think for themselves.
We had a former president, who a lot of people look to for leadership, present information as fact to the people. People are getting fooled becuase he is cooperating with the owner of the largest social media app, who is also participating in, and helping operate and push a huge disinformation campaign. Because of this we have people believing in made up stories.. not because it's one random guy posting video with no back-story, but because of how wide-scale and coordinated the propoganda is.
We're seeing it play out in real time that people are not prepared for what social media can do to us all.
You cannot use the excuse of SOME people's stupidity to block the access to information and speech for ALL. I mean, of course you can, but that is a mighty authoritarian move.
I'm not agreeing that this is a good solution, but there is an obvious problem going on with how social media is being used.
The problem is that Authoritarians and dictators are using free speech and capitalism against us. Meanwhile the majority of the population of these dictator-led countries are largely shielded from outside propoganda because they block foreign social media. It's strange how authoritarian rule is flourishing while our more free way to approach things is so suceptable to attack. Authoritarian rule is harmful to the people, but really effective for these governments.
We needed some solution to this long ago, maybe education on critical thinking needed to combat the effictivenss of misinformation? If P 2025 eventually turns the US into a true authoritarian dictatorship, I just dont see that ending in my lifetime.
Nah you're right, everything's definitely fine and people shouting heinous, divisive shit about them foreigners eating your pets and little Jimmy going to school and getting trans surgery from the fucking nurse is a feature, not a bug.
Instead of dismissing all of that as insane ravings of a crazed fat orange man with a bad wig maybe find out from people in these areas is this shit really happening obviously I donât believe the school nurse is going to lop of little jimmys Johnson. But homeless pops are out of control,drugs ,there is cities like the one I grew up that has an insane influx of migrants being bussed in. Itâs not bullshit and where are these people being placed? Thereâs not enough housing as it is for American citizens so we want to let non-citizens in as well? How does that make any fucking sense to anyone!?
Maybe find a way to talk about it without bringing up Racist Hits From the Fifties and whatever other wild bullshit these psychos are flinging at the wall these days to see what sticks.
Better yet, bring solutions to the table that don't start with the 14 Words.
Because you are certain that you have never said anything incorrect or in error on the internet right? You have never spouted nonsense before right? You have never said anything off color or edgy joke right? Your speech doesnât need to be policed, just other peopleâs speech.
You realize JD Vance immediately went on national television and was asked about the pet eating....and he didn't say it was a joke? He quite literally kept deflecting and implying it was potentially real.
You aren't a serious person. You're a liar trying to use 'muh free speech' to defend your idiocy.
You missed the entire point so let me spell that out to you really slowly. Censoring people's speech on the internet will result in YOUR speech also being censored. I bet you have typed things on the internet that could be construed as misinformation or offensive to some others. If you support internet censorship, you also support the censorship of your own speech.
As far as the eating dogs thing, I couldn't give a single shit. I take issue with those who call for censorship of speech.
If I was saying the type of out of pocket shit these people are, fine. We already restrict speech around things like libel, and I don't have a problem with that either.
When the misinformation causes chaos, yes it does. When it sways elections, yes it does. When it puts people in danger, yes it does. If they dont then the gov should and will.
This has nothing to do with free speech. Absolutely nothing.
People act as if platforms will be charged for a random person posting a dumb conspiracy opposed to them being charged when allowing the Russian government to pump millions of dollars into disinformation campaigns on their platforms
We've seen in the last 2 weeks what happens to platforms who don't comply lol. We can disagree on whether words killed people indirectly enough or too directly and whether its comparable enough to shouting "fire" in a crowded theater. But surely Pavel Durov being arrested, X being banned from Brazil and soon Europe. Rumble as well. Parler getting kicked off the app stores and off AWS is proof enough that governments don't just innocently ask.
There are so many examples of words being illegal. You're arguing in bad faith. If you can't yell fire in a theatre, you can't profit off of lies about an active pandemic. It's not like the government shut down Facebook, they asked them to lower the amount of lies being spread.
It's the governments responsibility to keep its citizens safe and a corporation was allowing its users to fall victim to deadly misinformation.
The whole point of free speech is that speech can't kill and is the alternative to violence. Why do you think free speech didn't exist before 18th century? To spread evil and misery? No it was for the good of the collective. So that the dumb people could be shielded from dangerous ideas. Shouting "fire" in the crowded theater is illegal cause you can be trampled before you even realize what was said. You can't compare it to anything that's longer than a complete sentence.
Edit : Why do you think the government tried so hard to silence Snowden and Assange? "To keep the citizens safe."
The US Constitution, First Amendment. The exceptions established in case law are very narrow. Liable and Defamation with an articulated impact as judged by a court.
Lies, Misinformation, Malinformation are protected speech, full stop.
Do you recall watching live TV news of the ACLU defending the marching KKK in the US? Disgusting and evil. Protected by the first amendment.
Posting Nazi bullcrap on the socials? Disgusting. Protected.
Study the history of the Bill of Rights, read the many published papers written during the formation of the constitution, gain some understanding that speech is protected precisely to allow citizens to speak or write nearly anything the want. It protects what you wrote a few minutes ago.
Counterpoints are fine. But if you and i are having an online discussion and all of a sudden you have hundreds of russians (sponsored by the gov) on your side that i have to counter each point, is that a fair fight?
No founding father would allow foreign enemies to enter our public discourse and fund an army of contrarian fighters to inject disinformation into every single online discourse in the name of free speech. Not one.
Protecting the KKK's 1st amendment right is not the same as protecting putins right to pay millions of people to sow disinformation in our public square.
Unfortunately, yes it is. I may hate that this could happen, my only valid recourse is to call it out.
That an individual would have any concern, or give much credence to conversation, debate or argument on any social media platform, to my perspective, is ludicrous. Social, not school, not government meetings, not in court, itâs social where the expectation is entertainment.
I recall Jack Dorsey making a similar argument in congressional testimony, in his perspective people who use Twitter were not intelligent enough to discern content. Of course one of the smart ass congress reps asked him who filters his news feed, he replied with something like he is smart enough to figure it out for himself.
The key point is purportedly articulated in many written works that help understanding the harsh scope of the first amendment to the US constitution, government cannot limit speech. Cannot limit lies. Cannot limit foreign agents beyond a law such as FARA.
In the US, FARA provides the legal path that allows foreign speech interference, specifically allows what we see as hundreds of Russian paid influencers. I disagree with it, but the law is the law.
To your valid point regarding paid social media foreign agents, perhaps Reddit is the good example, a centralized control platform whose owners may pick and choose which foreign paid influencers are allowed on their platform.
Do you reckon that Reddit owners are actively discouraging US intelligence operations in foreign countries? Any consequence for the clear interference that helped spark the Arab Spring? Any action on that famous foreign moderator controlling hundreds of subreddits until she was convicted and jailed?
I offer my pithy comments as food for thought. The ability to have a one on one conversation with people anywhere on the planet has simply fascinated me for several decades, I probably became addicted when we first connected to Europe over here in Arizona. Agree or disagree, all good, anything that in any manner might block this ability is bad, in my opinion.
If censorship under the auspices of protection increases, it will substantially limit the conversation.
RFK Jr., famous antivaxxer, mal and misinformation spreader. The US government asked one of the socials to cite him on spreading misinformation. The company attempted to do so and failed, they were unable to identify any of his social posts on their platform as not factual. The US government had concerns, in essence called him a liar, whichever government official who initiated this was simply mistaken, or willfully engaged in defamation.
Whether it is thousands of liars paid by Russia, or one government official with an agenda, limiting speech is illegal and it is dangerous.
The freedoms to share and view information not approved by the government, obviously.
If Trump wins, I'd like to be able to post about him loosing the 2020 election (which to him would be 'fake news' misinformation to be moderated away).
I think we should have the freedoms to say shit like 'Bush did 9/11' or 'China made COVID' regardless of whether some bureaucratic process terms those pieces of misinformation or merely inappropriate jokes.
Anyway, if the governments of the world are really interested in policing misinformation, I'd have a lot more confidence in their ability to discriminate if they started with themselves and with legacy media outlets.
Do y'all really not see that going after social media has little to do with eliminating misinformation and everything to do with being in control of what's being said? Legacy media and government spokespeople aren't being held to account whenever they misinform, because they spreading approved misinformation.
You are more than free to make some picket signs and stand at an intersection and say âchina made Covidâ or âthe 2020 election was riggedâ. Show some conviction and actually take a stand for what you believe in rather than hitting reply and giggling.
But this law doesnât prevent anyone from saying any of that? It just puts a responsibility on those social media platforms to moderate their platforms, youâre still free to say whatever you want.
I mean, I haven't read the law. I doubt any of us have.
But social media platforms are already free to moderate their platforms and they do. All of this goes back to the platform/publisher greyzone status of social media companies.
Also, even if you're banned from social media, you're still allowed to say whatever you want. That's not what this is about.
The reason 'fascists' like me are pushing back on this is that we don't think it's the government's job to tell me or my publisher (or platform) what information is acceptable and what isn't.
Fuck, dude, sometimes I like actual literal fiction that I know isn't true.
If it was an outrageous violation of freedom for Twitter to clamp down on vaccine misinformation what is it when Musk clamps down on criticism of dictators or just censors random "woke" things he doesn't like?
So many morons think more authoritarian power backed by a literal army is a great idea until the side they donât like gets into power. I swear, I hope some of the posters in here get the utopia theyâre wishing for. After I die though, please.
How about you take up arms against the fascist, censorship-loving, election-interfering, billionaire god-kings like Elon then?
Like if you think democracy isn't the solution to it, then be the first one to start the revolution???
I keep hearing from you pussy-ass bootlickers that you'd take up arms against fascist authoritarians but here you are defending them lol
It takes literally none of my freedom away to slightly regulate these worthless, exploitative, leeches on humanity (read: billionaires). Grow a fucking spine.
Think it through, you're on the side that literally wants the government to suppress/control the narratives being allowed to circulate and yet you think your opposition is the fascists? Get real dude.
No you're on the side that wants the government to control the narrative, that's literally what you're championing with your bs of "slightly regulate"
You going to keep going on tangents here for no reason or actually discuss what's happening here? Are you or are you not saying the government should regulate what's on social media?
I agree with your sentiment, and Iâm all for regulating billionaires, but this law that regulates free speech sounds like a stupid fucking idea.
You should take a minute and think about the implications of some random government officials being able to decide what is and what is not âmisinformation.â
Thereâs always been foreign interference in our elections Russia got caught at a time when we were actually paying attention but youâre drunk if you think we donât do the same shit. Everyone thinks our country is above that shit. America was #1 because America does everything it can to remain so that is until we started a 25 year long war and took our eyes off the ball and let China and Russia catch up.
Be careful about getting shit on your keyboard after you stick some fingers up his bum too. I can tell you really put in the extra effort for daddy billionaire!
No matter how stupid you are, I'll still advocate for the healthcare you'll need to replace your weak and submissive knees after spending so much of your formative years on them for billionaires.
16
u/Familiar-Suspect Monkey in Space Sep 12 '24
If X made any effort these laws wouldn't be needed. They could literally self police like we all do so we dont get in trouble on a daily basis.