this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2025
734 points (95.5% liked)

Technology

68918 readers
4448 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] rimjob_rainer@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Some might argue that calling what happens in Gaza a genocide might be hate speach against Israel, and it should be censored. So who decides what is "hate" and what is not?

[–] timmy_dean_sausage@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (7 children)

In your example, there is clear, observable evidence of genocide occurring. They are killing civilians and demolishing critical civilian infrastructure. So, saying Israel is committing genocide has a certain amount of truth/accuracy in it, and the intent isn't to smear Israel, it's to point out what they are actively doing, while the world is receiving constant updates. In other words, there is objective evidence behind the claims.

Hate speech is the opposite. It has no objective evidence behind it, and the intent is to make specific people/groups look a certain way. We can typically infer the intent of hate speech by the words they choose to use, and the way they frame their "argument". We employ critical thinking to do this. This process can also be peer reviewed for further accuracy.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

He just wants more censorship. They will ban “hateful” content, and then reclassify anything they don’t like as hateful. We’re already seeing a number of platforms and institutions labeling criticism of Israel as hate speech.

[–] brown567@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 months ago (5 children)

I feel like it is still censorship, but a degree of censorship required for public safety is tolerable...

Unless he's saying that social media sites policing content on their platform isn't censorship, because it's not. It's only censorship if it's a government doing it, you have the right to control what is said on a platform you own

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Here on Lemmy, people who claim to advocate for freedom of speech and information, demanding for social networks to be shutdown and people to be censored based on unknown and ambiguous criteria, without even understanding the implications of it.

Details at six

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›