6 ms·

This does not address the problem of “Michelle Obama is a chimpanzee” or the “holocaust did not happen” going viral in one of those communities!

simiones 5y ago
If that community likes these ideas, that is not anybody else's business. Unless you believe there exists undeniable truth + an algorithm to find it, you have to accept that people can each decide what they believe is true - even [what you and I perceive as] hurtful and misguided ideas such as the above.
- tpush 5y ago
  > If that community likes these ideas, that is not anybody else's business. That's obviously not the case in most countries on this earth. Holocaust denial for example is illegal across the EU.
  - simiones 5y ago
    It is only illegal if done "in public" (whatever that is taken to mean). Arguably, a private Facebook group is not "in public". I will also note that in most cases, these laws don't prohibit such speech unless it is done in a manner likely to lead to harm. How widely or narrowly that is commonly understood is a different question.
tomjen3 5y ago
Sure it would, as it would mean we didn’t have to see it.
mbreese 5y ago
I think the point would be to let these things happen in smaller, isolated communities. You can wall them off from the rest of the world, but still let them share whatever they want. I guess the benefit would be the ability to get updates from your crazy family members while not having to see everything they post? Whether or not this is a net positive for the world is a different question.
- throwawaysea 5y ago
  That seems like an abuse of political power though. That policy would result in limiting exposure of views that are controversial or disagreeable to progressives, since Facebook/Twitter/Reddit/etc. clearly have a highly progressive employee base and moderation policies built around that worldview. Effectively, isolating exposure of some content in this way would tilt the political scales by only allowing other competing (un-isolated) views to benefit from network effects. That to me feels a lot like propaganda and it doesn't make it any more acceptable or holier that it is done by a domestic tech giant rather than a foreign state power.

simiones 5y ago

If that community likes these ideas, that is not anybody else's business. Unless you believe there exists undeniable truth + an algorithm to find it, you have to accept that people can each decide what they believe is true - even [what you and I perceive as] hurtful and misguided ideas such as the above.

tpush 5y ago
> If that community likes these ideas, that is not anybody else's business. That's obviously not the case in most countries on this earth. Holocaust denial for example is illegal across the EU.
- simiones 5y ago
  It is only illegal if done "in public" (whatever that is taken to mean). Arguably, a private Facebook group is not "in public". I will also note that in most cases, these laws don't prohibit such speech unless it is done in a manner likely to lead to harm. How widely or narrowly that is commonly understood is a different question.

tomjen3 5y ago

Sure it would, as it would mean we didn’t have to see it.

mbreese 5y ago

I think the point would be to let these things happen in smaller, isolated communities. You can wall them off from the rest of the world, but still let them share whatever they want. I guess the benefit would be the ability to get updates from your crazy family members while not having to see everything they post? Whether or not this is a net positive for the world is a different question.

throwawaysea 5y ago
That seems like an abuse of political power though. That policy would result in limiting exposure of views that are controversial or disagreeable to progressives, since Facebook/Twitter/Reddit/etc. clearly have a highly progressive employee base and moderation policies built around that worldview. Effectively, isolating exposure of some content in this way would tilt the political scales by only allowing other competing (un-isolated) views to benefit from network effects. That to me feels a lot like propaganda and it doesn't make it any more acceptable or holier that it is done by a domestic tech giant rather than a foreign state power.