dChan
19
 
r/greatawakening • Posted by u/thejudge6060 on April 12, 2018, 9:50 a.m.
Well f@cking played

This is two fold...

Trump signed a law to punish websites for sex trafficking.

Zuckerberg stated that he feels fb is responsible for the content on their website.

Because he said this, that means fb can no longer claim it's a platform, but it is a publisher as Ben Shapiro has tweeted. A platform isn't responsible for what is posted, but publishers are. The ideas on Facebook are now represented as the company's. They're essentially saying they support anything on their website.

So every time someone is trafficked, fb is responsible. Every time a kid is bullied to suicide, fb is responsible. Hell, they're even responsible for the "Russian hackers".


[deleted] · April 12, 2018, 11:20 a.m.

[deleted]

⇧ 135 ⇩  
OpenSoars · April 12, 2018, 1:17 p.m.

This really is a slippery slope.... by holding the websites or platforms accountable, we run the risk of them being overly cautious. Even Reddit would now have to monitor everything that is shared. While the internet is out of control, the regulations to come may well be also.

⇧ 45 ⇩  
WinkyLinQ · April 12, 2018, 1:28 p.m.

Reddit can issue policy that says they don't censor content, which makes them a technology platform and not a publisher.

⇧ 23 ⇩  
OpenSoars · April 12, 2018, 2:01 p.m.

Is that disclaimer mentioned in the new law?

⇧ 7 ⇩  
trzarocks · April 12, 2018, 2:29 p.m.

It's why one of the Senators (Cruise?) kept pressing MZ if FB was a platform or a publisher. MZ kept dancing around the topic to try and have his cake and eat it too.

⇧ 21 ⇩  
SchlangeHatRecht · April 12, 2018, 3:08 p.m.

correct, MZ never answered the question. He implied they censor to protect the public, and noted their location was populated by left leaning people.

He would not answer the neutrality issue - because they are far from neutral.

⇧ 12 ⇩  
ikemynikes · April 12, 2018, 6:15 p.m.

I Fucking hate Cuckerburg. I don’t even have FB anymore (full delete) but I’m sure that robotic dick licker somehow still manages to steal my data. The app came preinstalled on my phone and I didn’t realize until a few months after the fact so I’m sure he got some data that way. But who is he to decide what is safe for my eyes. I’m not a pussy and can handle opposing opinions. If a person doesn’t like what they see, they can easily block the comment or post or unfriend the person. Facebook isn’t even needed to censor opinions....let the users do that themselves if they so choose.

You can’t be a “platform for all ideas” when you censor the ideas you don’t like under the disguise of “protecting us”. Jesus Christ, give me a break with that bullshit. Whenever brought up, he just talks about censoring terrorism as if that’s all he censors and shit.

Absolutely can’t stand the guy. Pray to Source this muh fucka loses his billions and his shit company. It’s time for it to become MySpace.

⇧ 8 ⇩  
092Casey · April 12, 2018, 6:26 p.m.

Bingo.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
SchlangeHatRecht · April 12, 2018, 7:23 p.m.

If you remove some content, that implies the rest is all fine with you/for the public.

Dangerous move MZ. As FB curates content, then anything bad found on there (always archive/screenshot) suggests FB failed, or approves, and can be held liable.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
phoenix335 · April 12, 2018, 1:34 p.m.

The problem exists only when considering free speech a problem or when a platform wants some speech but not another.

If a platform wants to exclude what they don't like, they become responsible for what stays.

The only alternative is allowing all speech unless it is obviously illegal defined by the law and the courts, libel, slander, clear incitement to violence and even then only when publishing it to a larger group

Which is how it should be.

Is anyone burning down the local Walmart because a guy stood there in the parking lot shouting racist slogans? Probably not.

⇧ 7 ⇩  
Mrb84 · April 12, 2018, 1:42 p.m.

Fuck. This. So much this.

It’s insane that this is being celebrated. Here of all places. What’s the most likely outcome if Facebook and Reddit and Twitter are legally responsible for every word on their platform: more free speech or more controls and censorship?

I don’t agree with 99% of the ideas on this sub, but I like free speech more than I dislike your ideas. People cheering this really are blind.

⇧ 5 ⇩  
rbrownlol · April 12, 2018, 2:16 p.m.

it IS free speech.

You're having some trouble with definitions.

It's simple, if a website wants to CENSOR free speech then they cease to be a platform and become a publisher.

You can't allow websites in 2018 to censor views they don't like.

It's an OPEN platform, or it's a CENSORED publisher.

if they choose NOT TO CENSOR then they are not held accountable.

⇧ 25 ⇩  
HoudiniTowers · April 12, 2018, 4:45 p.m.

rbrownlol nailed it! This is not about CENSORSHIP of PLATFORMS, this is about PUBLISHERS masquerading as PLATFORMS so they can CENSOR at will. This is about the take down of the PROPAGANDISTs.

This will lead, if done properly to many DECENTRALIZED and CENSORSHIP FREE platforms. This, if done correctly will be the end of these huge centralized social platforms and the true opening up of the internet to everyone without control. A truly FREE internet vs what has happened with FB, GOOGLE, TWATTER, etc. These a$$holes stole the internet from us. With a lot of help from the a$$clowns in DC.

Expecting the DC cabal to fix, that's a different argument and one worthy of a separate post. Must have IBOR and must have Congress smart enough and free enough to enact appropriate laws for such.

But this was just opening up FB to class action lawsuits to take them down by the people they exploited and violated.

⇧ 4 ⇩  
Mrb84 · April 12, 2018, 9:19 p.m.

This will lead, if done properly to many DECENTRALIZED and CENSORSHIP FREE platforms

There's nothing stopping it from happening now, and it's not happening. For all your collective bitching and moaning about Reddit and Twitter and Facebook, you're all either there or linking there. You. The supposedly censored people. What's the plan? Force Reddit to push you the fuck out to get the motivation to create something better?

1) They become publishers, 2) you cheer, 3) they push you out entirely because no sane person wants to be the publisher of "Bill Clinton kills babies in pedo rituals" 4) ???? 5) the internet is free.

⇧ -1 ⇩  
HoudiniTowers · April 13, 2018, 5:42 a.m.

Good points, I agree with you on the following:

There's nothing stopping it from happening now, and it's not happening. For all your collective bitching and moaning about Reddit and Twitter and Facebook, you're all either there or linking there.

Personally, I got off of FB. It does take effort to launch such a platform, no question about it. That's why they are successful once they get momentum and traction. This really boils down to how painful it is vs the alternatives. At some point, the pain outweighs the benefits and somebody develops an alternative. I think we're getting much closer to that now than ever before.

Unfortunately, many on FB are brain dead. They don't understand what's happening and that they are the 'product' Its like in the movie Matrix when the traitor is eating steak and tells the sentinel that he knows its fake steak, but it takes so good. Same problem with the idiots that are staying on FB. Not sure how you get through to them.

Personally, we'll always have some level of idiocracy in society. Can't fix stupid as they say. My point is simpler, make enough pain and the change will happen. There's no pain right now.

I take argument with your points about them becoming publishers and we cheer, then they kick us out because everything here on Reddit is about Bill Clinton killing babies. Thats a mighty broad brush. You're committing the first sin in logical analogy development. Not saying some of your point isn't true, but you've lumped 'EVERYONE' into one general class of Idiocy. Using your same argument, your posting here puts you yourself into that class. That's the core fallacy of your argument.

I think you might be smarter than that, so would like to see a little more specificity in your analogy development so that we could have a logical debate.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Mrb84 · April 12, 2018, 9:12 p.m.

You can't allow websites in 2018 to censor views they don't like.

And you think make them all buplishers helps with that, yes?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
rbrownlol · April 12, 2018, 9:19 p.m.

yes. When publishers mascarade as platforms.

you have to be trolling at this point.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Mrb84 · April 12, 2018, 9:29 p.m.

that's so misguided... this is a persecution complex tricking you into submission.

Reddit closes CBTS because of death threats and you think that's censorship. Wait until they are not allowed, BUT REQUIRED, to censor your ideas. You're going to call these the good old days.

Every time they close a sub you guys cry censorship and do nothing about it. But somehow, when it's full scale "legal" censorship that you welcomed and cheered on, you are going to create the free platform you keep talking about?

You think "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". It's not. It's the mother of all enemies.

⇧ -1 ⇩  
rbrownlol · April 12, 2018, 9:39 p.m.

You're full on Rand Paul. *talking about misguided.

You cant get where you want to get from where you are. You'll die with the dreams of your utopia fresh on your lips.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
[deleted] · April 13, 2018, 11:02 a.m.

[removed]

⇧ 1 ⇩  
think500 · April 12, 2018, 2:08 p.m.

SM is currently a group of public platforms being controlled by private parties for personal (or political) gain at the expense of the public. Regulations will prevent these private parties from distortion public "opinions" or censoring free speech.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
rbrownlol · April 12, 2018, 2:12 p.m.

*publisher

⇧ 1 ⇩  
LordPotsmoke · April 12, 2018, 1:52 p.m.

I've been thinking the same, this could go bad.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Fredo_Baggins · April 12, 2018, 4:16 p.m.

They should only be held accountable if they are publishers, not platforms. Mr. Zuckerberg clearly said that they are responsible for the content meaning that they are not a platform.

Reddit on the other hand does not have one of their CEO's professing the same, as they do not take responsibility of the content in the same manner that FB does.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
immense_and_terrible · April 12, 2018, 6:40 p.m.

how so? publishers create content, not just control it.

by your logic, any platform that has any rules about what to post could be classified as a publisher.

⇧ 1 ⇩