- cross-posted to:
- Technology
- cross-posted to:
- Technology
You must log in or register to comment.
You’re… kidding, right? You can’t possibly be this naive.
If people don’t like something, there are those who will be assholes about it. Legality doesn’t matter at all. People don’t magically stop being assholes just because a law is passed.
“Digital Violence”
Are they playing video games?
Very poor choice of wording if you want people to take it seriously.
because even though the laws changed, people are still bigoted assholes.
Exactly, society != government.
Because there are assholes everywhere
what is the I in LGBTI? I’ve never seen it before
Intersex- people whose sex at birth isn’t clearly male or female
ty that makes sense.
The fuck is digital violence?
Read the article to get more info.
activists in Thailand. Often, those who speak out about human rights are punished for pursuing human rights activism by doxing, threats of violence and hateful anti-LGBTI speech.
Hate sure. Violence? Really?
Hate isn’t violence hate is a byproduct of free speech and liberty. I mean getting doxed and actionable calls/threats of violence should be a crime. But mean words is just life.
Mean words online by people who don’t even dare lift their voices in public.
Ahh yes free speech
people are using stronger words to mean things that are related. Shouting at someone is violence now, inapproprite touching (sexual assult/harrasment) is rape, being an asshole online is digitial violence.
It really devalues the meaning of the words and makes it harder for people to take real accusations seriously. I once read an article of someone claiming they had been sexually assaulted on WoWs text chat. Like what the fuck, mute them, report them, move on. You can call it harrasment if you like but there’s nothing sexual about it, it’s letters on a monitor.
depends what they’re saying, it can be sexual harrassment, but not sexual assult.
Because marriage is the problem not the solution. The state should have no role in enforcing religious ceremonies and privileging those who participate. The idea of “marriage equality” is complete bullshit since marriage overtly favors religion, hetero-normativity, etc. Fuck the state. Fuck religion. Fuck their marriage.
Fuck homophobes too ofc, but “marriage equality” is a problem not a solution. Delusional headline.
Because now starting counting lgtb violence while before was not counting by autorities
Easy. Nationalize social media and turn them into democratic cooperatives with the mandate to enforce strict moderation on hate speech.
nationalize
cooperatives
make up your mind
there’s kids on here , they don’t know what the fuck they’re on about and will grab the most extreme thing they can think of to hang their hat on without knowing what it means.
“I’m an anticapitalist and what’s anticapitalist ? Things being owned by the state! What else? Co-operatives”
Holy fuck the death of free speech. Do u hear urself. Ur on lemmy literally designed to be impossible to do such a thing.
Oh yes, let’s nationalize the communications platforms and give the government direct control over how people express themselves. Surely the government is 100% trustworthy and will not use that power to suppress criticism or political opponents, or track people who are ‘unpatriotic’, or redefine ‘hate speech’ in a way that benefits the current regime. No such thing has ever happened in the history of ever. What could possibly go wrong.
Yes, privatize! That has worked so well every time…
Not privatize, atomize. Centralized control is ripe for abuse, no matter whose control it is.
nationalize social media
Okay buddy, what about the social media that’s literally just servers running in some hobbiest’s basement?
Transitioning companies into co-ops would be a better solution as it gets rid of the worst of capitalism while leaving as much of the existing infrastructure as humanely possible.
Basically just send middle management and up packing.
Yes. Cooperatives = co-ops. Let the workers (and possibly users) elect management and what to invest profits into.
Yes the same heavy moderation that worked wonders for curtailing the rise of hate speech online over the last decade. It did not at all just incentivized the hate mongers to simply build their own platforms and audiences were they cannot be fact checked by anyone sane.
Let people spout and indulge in all the hate speech they want, instead have social mechanisms to dissuade from it. You know, like the real fucking world. The downvotes on reddit are such a simple mechanism that works at a level similar to how social feedback leads to self censorship people do in the real world.
Also fuck outta here with fact checking bs. You don’t hear more disinformation than the kind that gets repeated in barbershops daily, even before the internet and no one ever thought you had to fact check the shit Tony is saying this week. You just learned to take everything with a grain of salt.
What you propose is simple (as in simplistic), but far from easy. Content moderation at scale is extremely difficult, if not impossible. See “Masnick’s Impossibility Theorem.”
Also, deplatforming bigots is difficult and ineffective:
