X banned in Brazil & Musk goes to war with Brazil

[Joshe]

8 minutes ago, Consept said:

To just say there should be blanket free speech is a very simplistic approach that could never work in reality.

Also spineless and careless. 

For those of us who've connected the dots and seen that many of our serious problems stem from ignorance and falsehood and how those proliferate via incentivized information manipulation, we understand the necessity of implementing reasonable restrictions. Some people lack either the intellect and/or moral development to arrive at this conclusion. 

Someone once asked me why I care that Fox News fucks over our epistemic commons every night on prime time TV. Those are the types of people who are absolutists. People who simply don't care. 

[Jodistrict]

2 hours ago, Consept said:

Have you heard the news about Russia paying some right-wing commentators to spread Russian propaganda including anti-ukraine sentiments? Some of the commentators were Tim Pool and Dave Rubin, although they're still digging into it. 

How would your law deal with this real world scenario? Would you let them spread the disinformation in the name of free speech?

Having right-wing and anti-ukraine sentiments is protected free speech.  A foreign government targeting the U.S. is a different issue and brings in other laws like the Foreign Agents Registration Act and Espionage Laws.  

Edited September 5 by Jodistrict

[Consept]

7 hours ago, Jodistrict said:

Having right-wing and anti-ukraine sentiments is protected free speech.  A foreign government targeting the U.S. is a different issue and brings in other laws like the Foreign Agents Registration Act and Espionage Laws.  

Laws won't save you, Russia specifically did this through 3rd parties to avoid detection and they definitely could've gotten away with it. Apart from espionage, there are people within the society who could promote lies, hate speech etc in an effort to gain power or radicalise people for their own purposes. Think about the fact that most school shooters or mass murderers, have some distorted, hateful ideology that they picked up from the internet. 

These are all very real problems that are not simple to deal with. The sort of free speech you're talking about could only exist successfully if there weren't any bad faith actors. 

Using the forum as an example, if Leo didn't have any rules and regulations, it would work if everyone was posting in good faith and not attacking each other. But in reality if there were no rules and regulations it would attract all sorts of people spamming the forum, if Leo relaxed all rules for a week the site would be unusable and everyone would leave. This is even more important in wider society otherwise society would be unlivable. People that talk about we should be free from government control, don't actually understand the freedom afforded to you by the government, in that they protect your freedom from others. Without that you wouldn't 'have' anything. 

[Consept]

9 hours ago, What Am I said:

This may be a good point. I can imagine a scenario where we're quibbling over minor details as the barbarians at the gate are about to break through. As you said, it'd all be meaningless at that point anyway. It's possible that additional laws against foreign influence would make sense, but it's hard to imagine those laws not being eventually abused. Very unfortunate state of things.

Yeah, I agree. The absolutist view is probably a bit naive. It's true that things always seem to turn out the same way when a certain amount of decorum isn't enforced.

Hopefully one day humans will get to a point where they don't need any rules and their consciousness is high enough where it's not really an issue. Kind of like if you have a kid that's really responsible, you don't need to give them rules really. 

But I commend you on being open to a different perspective, that's what this forum is about 

[Jodistrict]

41 minutes ago, Consept said:

Laws won't save you, Russia specifically did this through 3rd parties to avoid detection and they definitely could've gotten away with it. Apart from espionage, there are people within the society who could promote lies, hate speech etc in an effort to gain power or radicalise people for their own purposes. Think about the fact that most school shooters or mass murderers, have some distorted, hateful ideology that they picked up from the internet. 

These are all very real problems that are not simple to deal with. The sort of free speech you're talking about could only exist successfully if there weren't any bad faith actors. 

Using the forum as an example, if Leo didn't have any rules and regulations, it would work if everyone was posting in good faith and not attacking each other. But in reality if there were no rules and regulations it would attract all sorts of people spamming the forum, if Leo relaxed all rules for a week the site would be unusable and everyone would leave. This is even more important in wider society otherwise society would be unlivable. People that talk about we should be free from government control, don't actually understand the freedom afforded to you by the government, in that they protect your freedom from others. Without that you wouldn't 'have' anything. 

You are giving a version of the "free speech is too dangerous" argument.   The framers of the US Constitution rejected that argument.  And there are already plenty of rules and regulations.  It's a balancing act that's largely driven by the Supreme Court.  It would be worthwhile to educated yourself on Constitution Law.    

[Consept]

1 hour ago, Jodistrict said:

You are giving a version of the "free speech is too dangerous" argument.   The framers of the US Constitution rejected that argument.  And there are already plenty of rules and regulations.  It's a balancing act that's largely driven by the Supreme Court.  It would be worthwhile to educated yourself on Constitution Law.    

So are you saying there are no dangers to blanket free speech, aside from what you mentioned previously about screaming fire in a theatre?

[BlueOak]

The problem with free speech is it isn't free.

1, The platform dictates the speech. Money dictates the platform.
2, He who shouts loudest drowns out others. The internet and communication is designed poorly as a pyramid, as with most of society.
3, Luck and money dictate what is put into the public consciousness and what then becomes largely accepted reality.
4, People don't understand the power of 3. It literally changes your life every second of every day.
5, Skill and expertise is a far greater benefit than a loud voice or a big bank account, thus free speech as an absolute is a detriment to society.
6, I have touched on crisis situations but this applies to all situations with a risk factor. Poor information gets people killed, ruins their financial savings, families, and health. There is a lot of terrible information on social media. I don't mean opinions I disagree with, I mean objectively inaccurate information.
7, Then we can look at all the collective problems absolute free speech encourages, such as the breakdown of social order and cohesion. The polarization of society exists because too much emphasis is given on the individual not the society as a whole.

If this were free speech, individuals need to be balanced with collectives in the public discourse. Not at a ratio of thousands to 1 in the information we are given.  Because information isn't given relative weights of importance, its often purely egoic in who we like the sound of. 
 

Edited September 6 by BlueOak

[Jodistrict]

18 hours ago, Consept said:

So are you saying there are no dangers to blanket free speech, aside from what you mentioned previously about screaming fire in a theatre?

There is more danger to censoring speech.   The correction to bad speech is more free speech.   

[Consept]

5 hours ago, Jodistrict said:

There is more danger to censoring speech.   The correction to bad speech is more free speech.   

So you don't think the danger from absolute free speech is enough that it would be worth working out a balance and have some regulations on free speech? You'd rather go with the binary blanket free speech. 

OK I mean it's an opinion I guess 

 

[lostingenosmaze]

What a shame! Where will the Brazilians find their Brazilian Miku pics now!?

[ici]

Hahahahahah, just stream it from space 

Dare i say based 😄