Hacker News Reader

Comment by pjc50 | Hacker News Reader

Campaigning that Facebook should not be allowed to remove porn or spam is a non-starter. And at most s230 is going to apply to the US, not to Canada.

> platform picks and chooses what goes on its platform

That means everything, not just the corner cases.

View on HN

I think the problem lies in the vague definition of "obscene" material. Nobody would have a problem blocking gratuitous nudity/violence from making it on their platform. But that's a very wide distinction from political/religious messaging.

I’m annoyed that Apple requires Telegram to block sexual content. I perceive sex as a generally positive thing, a common source of joy.

I strongly dislike realistic violence, to the extent that the poster adverts for the Saw films are things I wish I had not seen. I think the frequency of it in popular entertainment reflects badly on the human condition.

Nevertheless, I have recently seen there is evidence showing that violent media reduces real life violence, so even despite my visceral reaction I wouldn’t make a general censorship against violence just to satisfy my personal preferences: https://edition.cnn.com/2019/08/05/health/video-games-violen...

That said, simply because everyone is different, I think there is a place in the future for automated filtering on a personal basis. Perhaps a social media plug-in that stops me seeing violence, while somebody else has a different one that stopped them seeing nudity — and not the built-in ones! When Twitter started using “likes” as an alternative retweet, they kept showing me BDSM[1] that someone else liked.

[1] For me, S&M in particular pattern matches to “violence” rather than “sex”, but (unlike the mere existence of gore films) that doesn’t mean I think it reflects badly on anyone. Like boxing, I don’t need to grok it: I trust the people-I-perceive-as-victims saying they enjoy it.

> problem blocking gratuitous nudity/violence from making it on their platform. But that's a very wide distinction from political/religious messaging.

It absolutely isn't! This famous Vietnam photo got banned at one point: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42864421 .. because it shows violence. Is the famous "Piss Christ" photo obscene, political, religious, or all of those? https://creativetimereports.org/2015/01/30/free-speech-piss-... - so controversial it began the Republican movement to defund the arts, as if to prevent it ever having been made.

Wherever you have a boundary, you can have a controversy.

I would.

And you would too, take your favorite instant messaging app and imagine it started blocking nudity/violence. Or email.

Spam detection is quite distinct from content moderation. Your email provider most likely does have some form of spam detection, but probably not much content moderation.

Also, I think most of us are not that puritan, and don't think that platforms should ban all porn.

And at most s230 is going to apply to the US, not to Canada.

Facebook is an American company.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com