darq

I’d suggest a hobby.

I certainly enjoy getting under your skin

So you clearly don’t have better things to care about.

I really could not care less

Clearly, because you didn’t even care enough to read what I originally wrote.

I’ve got better things to care about.

Go do so then.

The idea that your create your world with unfettered freedom and no restrictions is a false notion.

Good thing I didn’t say that then.

But I’m saying you also have to be realistic and face the fact that no one is going to pay you to sit on your bum and play video games all day (in all likelihood).

Who said anything about that?

The world you want to live in is bounded by the stark facts of economic necessities and social pressures.

Except economics is not “facts”, it’s a way of organising that we have the power to change. Specifically referring to economics, the world is the way that it is because some people want it to be this way, it is not a fact of nature.

Go ahead and be that way and see how far you get in life.

Better things are possible. We create our world, there is no reason it has to be as uncaring as it is. And the only way to make a change for the better is to abandon your way of thinking.

I would love to do something like this, except it’s way too goofy with the attached controllers.

Steamdeck in a tablet form factor would be perfect.

Brainworms.

I’d urge you to try and read my comments again.

But how can I hear “diverse opinion” if X opinions are banned/blocked/moderated in the first place?

There is no space where all opinions are welcome. It simply does not exist. Some opinions are going to force out others.

If you run a space where Nazi opinions are okay to speak, you can’t really expect to hear Jewish opinions. Or opinions of PoC or queer people or disabled people and so on and so on.

So most places do the calculations. You can ban this one view. And in return an entire spectrum of views becomes more welcome.

Bigotry is a painfully simple, painfully shallow, and painfully boring viewpoint. It is almost completely one-dimensional, simplifiable to the idea that the “other” is inferior or dangerous and is to be shunned or feared. It is a viewpoint that we all already know, one we have all already heard. Banning it loses us almost nothing, and in return we gain so, so many more valuable insights.

Is it the fault of the principle of free speech, or the legion of stupid people being allowed to talk freely?

I’m not talking about “the principal of free speech”. I’m pushing back on the foolish assertion that moderation leads to echo chambers for lazy and dull minds. When exactly the opposite is true.

I’m saying that if you want to hear diverse opinions, a free-for-all is a bad idea. Because that free-for-all leads to echo chambers.

You probably want restrictions because it would never apply to you. Denying you talking about stuff that doesn’t phase you, is easy.

No no, don’t make stupid assumptions about me so that you don’t have to confront my point.

What if that platform bans opinions that you happen to have?

Most of them do. Your assumptions are wrong.

Sure, if you point at 4chan or similar…free speech attracts shitnuggets and end up being an echo chamber. But that’s the fault of us humans being crap, and not free speech being inherently bad.

I never said free speech was inherently bad. Try responding to what I wrote, not what you imagined that I wrote.

I personally prefer spaces where everyone can voice any shit. Censorship is for lazy minds and a dull audience. IMHO.

I always find this take to be remarkably short-sighted.

Because if you actually want to hear diverse opinions, you have to cultivate a space where diverse people, with diverse experiences, feel free to speak.

Pretty much every space that tolerates open bigotry becomes deeply unpleasant for the targets of that bigotry. Which means those people tend to leave.

Which in turn means that those spaces soon turn into the dullest echo chamber, populated only by people unaffected the bigotry. Sure no views were censored. You just harass everybody different off the platform. The net effect is the same.

Not the OP, but if you are soliciting opinions…

For me it’s the fact that nobody really believes us when we talk about our issues or even the things we personally experience. Even well meaning people, even friends, immediately assume that we are exaggerating or imagining things when we talk, or assume they know better about what is or is not harmful to us.

Like the obvious hateful transphobes are one thing. But getting that attitude from people one knows personally is tiring and more than a little scary.

Of all sad words of tongue or pen,
The saddest are these:
Stallman was right again.

Racism will expand if you censor it.

Literally the exact opposite is true. Deplatforming bigots limits their audience, and limit’s their ability to propagandise.

The EU is a big enough economic bloc that they have the option of at least partially enforcing their laws, even without buy-in, such as with GDPR.

Basically if a company wants to ignore the EU regulations, they need to be content with never doing business in the entirety of the EU. If they already have a presence in the EU, that presence can be fined into a smouldering hole in the ground.

This also maybe presents an opportunity for the EU. AI is a technology that 1) needs creatives to feed it content, 2) tries to replace those creatives, leaving them without a living. It’s a technology that if left unchecked will eat its own tail and die, leaving us without creatives or AI. The EU could find opportunity in either investing in creative pursuits, or creating an environment for more sustainable AI development, even if their initial uptake is slower.

There’s probably only two ways to go about it, either regulate AI and protect creatives, or lean into AI and let the creatives fend for themselves.

But if they decide to regulate AI, they would need to add protections from places with less regulation too. It’s no good protecting your creatives, if US tech companies can gobble up those creative works into their AI datasets anyway.

promised to protect free speech on the platform.

Even as he is currently threatening to ban people who say someone is “cisgender”.
Actual slurs are fine to say, but he’ll claim regular words are the real slurs whenever he likes.