Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

People of color, and LGBT are demographics. White supremacy is an ideology (a reprehensible one at that). People choose their ideology, not their race, or sexuality. They are not the same thing. Third party businesses should not feel any obligation to do business with "dudes who blabber" about the murdering and hate of others.



I think this is shaky ground. Plenty of people think LGBT "choose" their sexuality (though I do not). White supremacists, religious people etc think their beliefs reflect objective reality, which is clearly not something they can choose. I think making "you chose this" a valid reason to censor/attack/etc. something opens the door to some pretty dangerous things, since it's not difficult to accuse things of being a choice that aren't.


> Plenty of people think LGBT "choose" their sexuality

Right. Even this assumption is loaded with ideology both ways. I.e. either they choose or do not choose. Neither is correct.


No one chooses anything since their is no free will and people are biological automatons.


Uhhh, *there.


Except there is an objective reality that LGBT people don't choose their sexuality.


That is not "an objective reality", it's an opinion.


[flagged]


The accusation of "bigotry" is a common and entirely predictable, tiresome move for those without the academic goods. Why not read the actual research? Nope, sorry/not sorry, the prolix pop culture wishful thinking that homosexuality is innate is fiction https://www.thenewatlantis.com/docLib/20160819_TNA50Sexualit...


"The New Atlantis" is not a peer review publication. It's, by its own description, a "small journals of ideas". Very far from "actual research".


I didn't say the New Atlantis was a peer-reviewed publication, and I know the difference. But did you read it? The NA is a summary of the peer reviewed publications and journals such as The Annals of Statistics, Biometrics, American Journal of Political Science, New England Journal of Medicine, Journal of the American Statistical Association, and American Journal of Public Health.

So, nope, it simply won't do to sniff "not peer reviewed!" in response to this and think it's some kind of slam dunk that supports your biases regarding human sexuality.

agent00f 44 days ago [flagged]

Can you explain why you're taking conservative bigots seriously?


People choose their religion, too.


Do they? A key aspect of religion is believing that your beliefs reflect objective reality, e.g. there really is a God that did all this stuff, there really were prophets that performed these specific miracles and said these specific things etcetera. Saying that believing in what you think is objective reality is a choice gives off some strong 1984 vibes.


I think it depends on how you categorize the act of "choosing". It could be cognitive and evidence (more traditional idea of "choosing") based or it could be faith and/or feelings-based (it's not clear if this is "choosing").

There are a thousand religions/sects in the world. Most of them are exclusive (as in the 1st Commandment). You have to make a choice to affiliate yourself with one of them (although not everyone chooses to be specific to one denomination).

I don't think it's reminiscent of "1984" to say that people choose their religion. I think people choose who they want to be around and that tends to be among the largest predictors of religious affiliation.


This is a good argument, but it falls apart when you confront the fact that religious beliefs have no basis in objective reality and are thus entirely unbound from it. People convert all the time, religious beliefs are frequently inherently contradictory, et c.

When your beliefs about objective reality include a bunch of made up delusional shit to satisfy oneself emotionally, it’s pretty straightforward to swap one set of fairy tales that didn’t happen for another set of fairy tales that didn’t happen. No harm, no foul.


Religious groups have a loooooong history of persecution, discrimination, and genocide.


So have ideological groups. The Nazis murdered plenty of communists, too. The communists murdered plenty of critics.


What about communists, anarchists, marxists, mormons, people who believe there are genetically based cognitive differences based on sex/race. What about people who are against abortion, against weed legalization, what about people who consider cops to be a civilian death squad used by the rich to oppress the poor. What about people who think the US Army is an occupation force in every place but America. Is OK to discriminate some of them? All of them? None? Are you going to manage the API so the apps can be built to see who is worthy or not?


I think it's okay to discriminate or moderate against a set of beliefs if you can show that the spread beliefs lead to the widespread harm of others.


Doesn't almost every religious group fall under it then?


No, I wouldn't equate the teachings of ISIS with my neighborhood mosque. Religions have many variations under the larger umbrella.


The point is, who’s gonna be the arbiter of what’s absolute good and what’s absolute bad? What happens if people disagree? Where is the line?

If you find something like 8chan and point it out to Cloudflare, should they ban it? If they say no that’s not as bad, well why is their value judgment worth more than that of other people? If they say okay, then anyone can get anything they judge to be as bad as 8chan ‘banned’ from it.


> I think it's okay to discriminate or moderate against a set of beliefs if you can show that the spread beliefs lead to the widespread harm of others.

Does that also work if you can show that it doesn't cause widespread harm in every country with stricter gun regulations?

Seriously if you make statements like that, you ought to acknowledge the elephant in the room.


> Is OK to discriminate some of them?

If they promote violence and racism. Yes.

> Will you manage the API?

If I thought it would help, sure.


> People choose their ideology

How do you figure that works? Do we wake up, fully equipped with a developed mind but zero preferences and experiences and then ponder which of the available ideologies we would like to subscribe to?


Yes naturally people of color, and LGBT folk can't ascribe to an ideology. Naah .. that's nonsense. They're immune.

Each group will have its own ideologues, its own agenda.


lgbt fanatics aren't much more sane than any other extremists yet they don't have any issues with being on twitter, facebook or reddit. (emphasis on _fanatics_). Widespread propaganda about kids sexualization/abuse and genitalia mutilation on these platform is A-ok and a cause for celebration.

You literally can't express any opinions going against the current flow of ideas without being labelled as hostile (alt-right, nazi, white privileged, whatever the word of the day is, &c.), no matter how valid the point you're making is (even here on HN you can’t have serious discussions about issues like the gender pay gap or immigration). It really isn't a surprise that these loners end up on sketchy websites once they're ridiculed/banned/shut off everywhere else. If you're a man feeling like a girl you'll find a community telling you you should chop off your genitals and ingest a truck load of hormones, if you’re a POC feeling unaccepted they'll tell you it's because of how racist society is [0], if you’re a girl and aren’t successful it’s due to the patriarchy [0], but oh boy if you’re a white man feeling empty inside no one gives a flying fuck about what you have to say.

Anyone thinking these shootings are due to 8chan is a fool, plain and simple, the issues are rooted much more deeply, especially in the US culture, and they've been running for a while. I’d even argue that the root cause of modern white supremacy is very close to the root cause of religious terrorism. But see, no one wants to even consider it through that lens, it's much easier to dismiss it entirely and talk about non-issues ("they're mentally ill", "just an angry loner", "if only he was dating", &c.). Now we can spend days talking about cloudflare, but that's mostly a waste of time, you don't put a bandaid on a broken leg and expects it to heal.

https://www.gwern.net/Terrorism-is-not-about-Terror

---

“These young people find themselves at a time in their life when they are looking to the future with the hope of engaging in meaningful behavior that will be satisfying and get them ahead. Their objective circumstances including opportunities for advancement are virtually nonexistent; they find some direction for their religious collective identity but the desperately disadvantaged state of their community leaves them feeling marginalized and lost without a clearly defined collective identity”

for the individuals who become active terrorists, the initial attraction is often to the group, or community of believers, rather than to an abstract ideology or to violence” ---

[0] Just to be clear I'm not implying these things don't exists or that they're non-issues.


> Widespread propaganda about kids sexualization/abuse and genitalia mutilation on these platform is A-ok and a cause for celebration.

Citation needed.

I see Facebook/Twitter/Reddit in the unenviable role as having to police minimum local standards across the world's largest online community. They also have to do it while running a publicly traded company in the USA, which means they need to optimize for minimum moderation costs.

> You literally can't express any opinions going against the current flow of ideas without being labelled as hostile

s/going against the current flow of ideas //

I straddle the line between US liberal/conservative depending on the issue. I've been labeled lot of things by both the majority opinion holders and minority opinion holders. It doesn't matter. People need to put on their big boy/girl/whatever pants and realize it doesn't matter what you are labeled. People call you far worse behind your back... the internet just allows you to hear it and reduces peoples' social filters.

> Anyone thinking these shootings are due to 8chan is a fool, plain and simple

Citation needed.

I treat {4Chan, 8Chan, 9Gag, etc} as a proxy for "long tail opinion holders" who gather in the same place.

I'm sympathetic to the idea that being a social outlier with no outlet for discourse/self-importance/identity/hope is strongly correlated with those extremism/terrorism, but that doesn't preclude 8Chan from being part of that process of extremification.

I listened to a podcast over the weekend about a Philipino guy who worked as a Facebook moderator. He quit for many reasons, but among them PTSD, nightmares, attraction to sexual images of children, attraction to bestiality, etc. He might well have had those same tendencies before he moderated for Facebook, but the exposure to that content was what accelerated his problems.

The Chans are an exposure channel. They probably help in popularizing fringe ideas, but they also attract window shoppers looking for identity and an ideology that social misfits might be willing to try on. Shutting down the window shopping isn't nothing (although I will admit I don't know that it can be done while preserving the intent of the principle of Free Speech).


You are literally comparing "the chans" to the vile shit Facebook moderators have to endure?? The latter is about an order of magnitude worse, it's literally the worst of Facebook, a constant pressure hose of horrors. People don't need fucking black and white filters to be able to browse 4chan and you don't get PTSD from it. That Facebook moderation feed does.

It's kind of sick, seeing Americans here all ignore the elephant in the room and go "yeah it might be that website" :facepalm:

A whole communications platform just got censored by a private US company (who should NOT have that power), that's pretty big thing. Maybe we should talk about that.

That shooting happened because of America's gun laws and the general way it's been squeezing the life and joy out of its lower and middle class populations. There's some really bleak shit going on there, lives are empty, people are hopeless and fear the future. That's it. The whole world knows it and sees it. Nothing really relevant for HN, either.

> The Chans are an exposure channel. They probably help in popularizing fringe ideas, but they also attract window shoppers looking for identity and an ideology that social misfits might be willing to try on. Shutting down the window shopping isn't nothing (although I will admit I don't know that it can be done while preserving the intent of the principle of Free Speech).

Yeah but no. These "chans" are international places. People outside the US also go ideological window-shopping or hang out around fringes. But somehow the worst we got was, I think years ago .. when a guy (physically) broke into a live news broadcast with a fake gun and then .. nothing much happened and he was taken away. He claimed he was doing it for a hacker collective, or something.

I'm not really sure what site inspired this dude again, but imagine Cloudfare banning it over this.

The difference seems clear as day/night to me, no?

That situation in the live news studio had one glaringly obvious thing missing from it, that saved it from possibly becoming a tragedy and it wasn't a fucking website.

Take away the website, however, and there is a chance this guy would not have gotten inspired by something else, MAYBE--but you still got all those other mass shootings to deal with, USA. I'm totally looking forward reading about the drop in gun violence now that Cloudflare did something about it. I get it, they felt powerless and someone had to do something. But they better hope that the results of their actions were indeed worth the means. It's a pretty brazen act of censorship, that IMHO doesn't weigh up at all to the limited effect it'll have on fringe crazies bouncing hateful ideas off one another.


[flagged]


Don't take time to elaborate, you might be able to actually voice your opinion and add something meaningful to the conversation.

That's exactly what I'm talking about when I say "intelligent discussions are impossible" on these subjects. When someone takes time to write something we can just reply "Lol whatever fam" and continue with our day feeling like we accomplished something. This is level 0 of human communication, you can abstain from it as it doesn't add anything, even a simple down vote would add more value.

Every single time I learned something valuable in life was when I talked with people having diametrically opposed opinions but who were able to have a coherent discourse, the problem is that these people are quickly disappearing and are being replaced by people spewing feel good one liners like yours.


No, it literally makes no sense because you start off with premises that have no correspondence to any sane reality.

There are no "lgbt fanatics". That's not even a concept. I have been around LGBT circles my entire life and the most of extreme forms of advocacy of... anything there, are quite literally incomparable to real, actual extremists. So you're not really off to a good start as far as reasonably informed opinions.

You talk about "a man feeling like a girl", in which you're literally ignoring multiple lifetimes of study of the psychology and clinical evidence, by _very_ qualified experts in the topics who have studied thousands of cases. Again, if you're going to ignore expert advice and call the shots on whatever this isn't exactly helpful.

You continue by claiming that "Anyone thinking these shootings are due to 8chan is a fool, plain and simple". See, again, you ignore strong evidence on the history of deplatforming, going way back to right after WWII.

In what world do you expect to have "reasonable debate" if you spout garbage about subjects that you don't even know where the expert consensus is?


> There are no "lgbt fanatics".

https://mobile.twitter.com/roughly_speakin/status/1083520556...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/new...

Literally kids in bikini around men role playing as women on Netflix : https://imgur.com/a/haqn5NY

https://youtu.be/397hRrQWa_c

Come to Berlin gay pride and enjoy kids walking among naked seniors, progress am I right?

All these are applauded by the lgbt community, publicly, every day. I don't know where you stand morally but these things are definitely way out of my acceptance zone and way past the "let people do what they want". Closing your eyes and saying they don't exists is one step under active support.

> You talk about "a man feeling like a girl", in which you're literally ignoring multiple lifetimes of study of the psychology and clinical evidence, by _very_ qualified experts in the topics who have studied thousands of cases.

I just said these people currently have a huge network of public communities to help them through whatever they go through, same for POCs, they're on the current "good side". Not sure what you're hinting here.


You are quoting garbage websites. This "Life site" page is literally nothing more than hot garbage that is about as good as the Enquirer as far as the validity of its reporting goes.

And the idea that trans and POC have "huge networks of support" has no correspondence with real life. You've ever met real trans people? Clearly not, otherwise you would know how their traumas come from intolerant families that disown them, find no support networks and turn to drugs and prostitution as a means of subsistence. The median life expectancy of a trans person is of 35 years, dying from conditions related to drug abuse, STDs, and psychological issues where abandonment is the primary cause of these.

So before copying a bullshit website that seems unhealthily obsessed with trans people, George Soros, and the signs of the antichrist, I dunno, go do some research and try to distinguish real journalism from garbage. This is not even worth our time debating.


Well, you’re quoting precisely nothing, and if you were to quote anything then who’s to say that’s not also just “hot garbage that is about as good as the Enquirer as far as the validity of its reporting goes”?


> You are quoting garbage websites.

I'm well aware of that, but do you happen to know why I have to do that ? Because they're the only ones talking about it (and they're doing a piss poor job at it btw), fortunately there are pics and videos of these events so we can have a glimpse of what's happening. Mainstream medias and "experts" are too busy telling how being fat is healthy and spewing bs stats about the gender pay gap, why would they talk about contrarian ideas ? To get shut off and deplatformed ?

> The median life expectancy of a trans person is of 35 years, dying from conditions related to drug abuse, STDs, and psychological issues where abandonment is the primary cause of these.

Unhealthy behaviors leading to unhealthy behaviors ? Who would have thought.

Do you know what we were telling teenagers looking for a meaning in life in the past ? "Suck it up kiddo it'll get better", and for the vast majority of the time it worked. What do we tell them now ? "Oh my dear, you're simply not in the right body", no wonder they get depressed there is 0 chance of a successful "transition" unless you start before puberty...(and even then you have to go through body mutilation and life long treatments to suppress your natural body processed). When I was 10 I wanted to be a trash trucker driver, at 15 I wanted to be an indiana jones style archaeologist, it was fun for my parents. But somehow if it gets sexual all of a sudden it's DEFCON 1 and you have to comply with their will ?

Feel free to link your experts studies btw, I'm yet to see any of them pointing something out other than "look at all the suicides, you should feel bad".


You totally can still become a trash trucker driver, don't let your parents hold you back, man.


> Come to Berlin gay pride and enjoy kids walking among naked seniors, progress am I right?

Who cares??

(also, who's gonna be the extremist mass shooter in that picture, the kid or the senior?)

> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/new....

This article mentions no "LGBT fanatics" cheering it on, just people from the LGBT community condemning it.

> https://mobile.twitter.com/roughly_speakin/status/1083520556....

Who cares, unless the parents are that super controlling "my child is a star" type--which is the only thing that worries me about that situation, who cares if the kid wears a dress and make up.

> Literally kids in bikini around men role playing as women on Netflix : https://imgur.com/a/haqn5NY

So .... ?

> https://youtu.be/397hRrQWa_c

I know it feels bad when you watch something super cringy and you wish it did not exist, but I don't see anybody shooting up people, which is a feeling that is objectively worse than cringe.


>Come to Berlin gay pride and enjoy kids walking among naked seniors, progress am I right?

Are you sexualizing the seniors nudity or the kids viewing of non-sexual nudity? Either way I think you should see a shrink.


> non-sexual nudity

There are videos of dudes having sex on gay pride carts in broad day light in major cities. Let's not pretend that the gay community isn't the most promiscuous community (stds stats, amount of partners stats, &c.) and that half naked dudes in bdsm outfit are "non-sexual". The whole thing is about "sexual liberation". It's not even about being gay or not, it's about decency, I'd have the same discourse for a "straight pride" with straight people having similar behaviors.




Applications are open for YC Winter 2020

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: