1. Hi there, Guest

    Only registered users can really experience what DLP has to offer. Many forums are only accessible if you have an account. Why don't you register?
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Hey DLP authors, there's a bit less than a month left to wow us with your story about Daphne or Azkaban.

    The Author applies the words to the paper or it gets the hose. Write or die! The more the merrier.

    Click here for more information!
    Dismiss Notice

News (that doesn't deserve its own thread)

Discussion in 'Real Life Discussion' started by Taure, Aug 27, 2014.

  1. Lindsey

    Lindsey Headmaster DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    1,096
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    I've seen various studies suggesting that cyber bullying is far worse than RL bullying as you can't escape it.

    Most times when you are being bullied at school, you can go home and have a place to escape from it all. With the internet you can't escape it. Yes, you can deactivate social media but it doesn't mean you aren't being made fun of online (which can translate to rl bullying).

    Plus, it reaches far more people... I'd much rather have secrets about me whispered from person to person than it posted online for it to remain forever in the public view.

    Edit: and let's be honest, if you are being bullied online, chances are you are being bullied in real life too. These kids literally aren't being able to escape it.

    Secondly, as to blaming companies for not doing enough... Schools and kid organizations get in trouble all the time for not doing enough. Is it not the same concept with social media? I'm not exactly sure how I personally feel about this, just wanted to provide an example to why people might be for it.
     
  2. VanRopen

    VanRopen Order Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
    Messages:
    861
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    And yet the FCC exists and we've long since accepted the idea we can put certain burdens on broadcast companies. Saying Facebook also has a certain duty of care doesn't seem like a big break.


    Yeah, I think "harms" would be a stupid final definition to work with. But the whole point of using harms is because this supposedly proportional framework hasn’t actually been crafted.


    The white paper itself is the expected sequence of words that mean nothing.
     
  3. awinarock

    awinarock Fourth Champion

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,150
    Location:
    Texas
    It's the modern "violent video games school shootings" phenomenon. Even if they do, those games are rated M and it's up to the parents to realize that the rating is there for a reason but that would mean that they would actually have to parent and they can't have that. That's what schools and the government is apparently there for.

    Sex talks are icky, telling your kid that they cant buy the latest CoD sucks, and warning your kids that the internet is full of creeps, cunts, and assholes that will make your life hell for no reason given the chance is tough. So let's just have the government do it for us by banning everything or regulating shit so broadly that we won't ever have to make these tough decisions, and it's okay because just think of all the kids (and not the slow creeping death of free speech on the internet). /s

    Edit:

    The FCC? You mean the regulatory board run by a bunch of blatantly corrupt fucks who gobble AT&T's and Time Warners' dicks for a living? The same guys who won't stop those broadcasting companies from establishing monopolies in all but name?



    You'll have to forgive if I don't trust politicians to follow through with those broad definitions either because they're old as fuck and don't know shit about technology and the internet, or because they're power hungry dicks who'll use any means necessary to suppress free speech and stay in office.
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2019
  4. Agayek

    Agayek Totally Sirius DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,250
    I'm not. I'm saying Facebook has the same duty of care as, for example, TV networks. They should be beholden to the same restrictions, and the same freedoms, as those. Which is, functionally, "if it's illegal IRL, you can't broadcast it. Otherwise, have fun.".

    The law being proposed doesn't do that, it's substantially more broad, with several components that flat-out can't have a set definition, but are instead "I know it when I see it". That is the problem.

    I'm not opposed to making companies responsible for illegal material on their platforms. There's some minor concerns there, but I don't see any major issue with laying out clear, legal definitions of what is not allowed, things that are straight up not allowed anywhere, and then holding internet companies responsible for violations of that.

    I am opposed to making companies responsible for policing interpersonal interactions, especially if the exact same conversation had face-to-face would have been perfectly legal.

    Edit:
    At the end of the day, my problem is that if you're going to make it illegal to call someone a cunt on the internet, you had better make it illegal to call them a cunt to their face. Anything else is rank hypocrisy, on top of a gross intrusion of the government where it does not belong.
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2019
  5. awinarock

    awinarock Fourth Champion

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,150
    Location:
    Texas
    If I post the following meme on DLP and a UK user opens it, would DLP be fined as a result (under the proposed regulation) for hate speech or trolling or whatever?

    [​IMG]
     
  6. Agayek

    Agayek Totally Sirius DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,250
    Just turn off Twitter (or <insert social media platform here>) then. It's not like anyone's forcing you to be on it. Go read a book, or a different website or something. Or hell, go outside. If someone's being a shitstain to you on the internet, just report them and go do literally anything else, and you've escaped from it entirely.

    Now to be clear, I totally get why people want regulation like this. There's only so many times you can hear about the bullied kid eating a bullet or whatever and not want to respond in some fashion. It's just... the gut-reaction emotional response is rarely the right response, and while this kind of thing makes people feel good, it doesn't actually address the underlying problem, while introducing several more, so I've gotta poo-poo it.
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2019
  7. Oment

    Oment The Betrayer

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    2,515
    The thing about cyberbullying is that, if you reduce it to extremely bare basics, it's bullying with an 'actual' paper trail, in an area that parents (if we're talking about the children/teenager angle) are often just not very savvy in. This makes it both pretty fucking easy to get out of hand because there's no real backstop, yet at the same time, it's somewhat easy to point out that it's happening should someone get a whiff. (Unlike the more classic verbal denigration that's between the bullies and the bullied. Obviously, physical altercations are different.) And for all the growing up people do: bullying is too prevalent and has enough emotional baggage attached to it for those who were that it's just extremely unlikely you'll find a suffiicently large group in which nobody was a victim, and I'm not even including first degree acquaintance with someone who was in that boat in this. Combine everything, and you've got a problem (bullying) that is now 'feasible' (or thought of to be that) to actually take serious action against at a level above schools/sports/neighbourhoods (etc) while also having the easiest hop to child exploitation this side of finding an actual physical server with pictures on it. Free political points for those who can take (or fake) a legitimate stand on this.

    Adding to the fracas is that the internet isn't exactly making the best case for a / the previous laissez-faire approach, between the various Youtube things around child exploitation and more general video algorithms, Facebook's fake news infestation, Reddit's problems with various subreddits and their actions, Twitter's bot issues, and let's not even get started on what some less ubiquitous sites have gotten up to. Call it growing pains or a post-honeymoon period, but people are coming to realise that there are downsides involved in this whole 'world at your fingertips' concept. Calls for regulation are to be expected due to the complexity of what you're dealing with, but exactly that is also why regulation is going to be hell to calibrate properly. (If it is at all possible. I genuinely do not know. Calling it a Gordian knot might be simplifying matters.)

    And that's not even taking the average age and digital nous of most politicians into account, because that ends up being best summarised with picardfacepalm.gif .

    Something has got to give somewhere. Not sure what, not sure where, not sure when, but the tension cannot be increased forever.

    Disclaimer: Have been called an authoritarian bigot before by people in this discussion on somewhat related topic.
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2019
  8. ScottPress

    ScottPress The Horny Sovereign Prestige

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2013
    Messages:
    3,321
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Holy Moose Empire
    High Score:
    1,826
    Nah.

    What do you mean "you can't escape it"? What the actual fuck. It has an "off" button. You don't have to be on Twitter.

    You can't flip between "muh private company can ban Alex Jones and his gay frogs" and "it's a public space that must be a hugbox". You can't flip between those two positions and treat Twitter as privately owned when they do something you approve of and treat them as a public space when they don't ban PDP or whatever.

    If it's a private company, they can tell you to go suck a dick. The only reason they don't is because you're the product they sell to advertisers. If it's a public space (even if privately owned) then "muh freeze peach" absolutely fucking applies. And Fb isn't school or your job. Hell, it's not even email or your online banking service (those two are pretty much necessary to function in modern society). You don't need to be on Fb/Twitter/Insta/Reddit/YT. And it's a private company, they don't have to kowtow to your safe space needs. Go to your therapist for that.

    I'm frankly sick of being called an immoral asshole by people who seem to have turned their brains off.

    Re: cyberbullying, everything that needs to be said about that has already been said 9 years ago, neatly packaged into 5 minutes:



    You know what happened when I was bullied in primary school? I told my parents and--holy shit--my parents did something about it. That should be the default, not outsourcing being a parent to the government.
     
  9. Arthellion

    Arthellion Alchemist

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2017
    Messages:
    2,381
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    High Score:
    0
    When making a law, you should always ask, how would a corrupt person take advantage of this law? If that results in an extreme violation of rights, you need to narrow your law down.

    Broad laws are dangerous and how you get police states.

    Also, cyber bullying sucks...but deal with it. Hell, look at how we treat each other here on DLP.

    Imagine if bitmyfinger went and committed suicide bc he was “bullied” and banned. Under these kind of laws the government could shut down DLP or fine Raven or something.
     
  10. Agayek

    Agayek Totally Sirius DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,250
    Well yeah. Regulation of the internet is inevitable at this point, and it's even a good thing with precise, targeted laws for specific things (see: child porn).

    What isn't good is trying to impose regulation on internet communications that aren't imposed over phone calls, face-to-face interactions, or any of the million and one other ways people interact with each other.

    Edit:
    If you want to legislate interpersonal interactions, fine, that's on you. But at least be bloody consistent with it.
     
  11. Silirt

    Silirt High Inquisitor DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2018
    Messages:
    582
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    District of Columbia
    [​IMG]
    It's old news, but it definitely doesn't deserve its own thread.
     
  12. Stenstyren

    Stenstyren Professor

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    446
    The law is absolutely retarded. The cyberbullying part is shit, but even more worrying is the "fake news or misleading information". WTF does that mean?

    Just one quick point to the people saying that you can just turn of the internet if you are a bullied teen, I think you guys are a little old and do not have the relationship with social media that today's kids have. To them, their online presence is most likely more important then their physical one. If they were to disconnect from all social media, they are also disconnecting from all their friends (if they have any) or any type of cred they may have built up in some niche-instagram-group or whatever.

    Having said that, the answer is obviously not to make the bullying illegal. Perhaps you could come up with some method wherein the large social media apps are required to have a proper reporting system where you can actually get someone banned if they are bullying you through pm's etc?

    EDIT: Posts such as Silirts one just above me just seem disingenuous. Have you actually tried to think and empathise with anyone in that situation?
     
  13. ScottPress

    ScottPress The Horny Sovereign Prestige

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2013
    Messages:
    3,321
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Holy Moose Empire
    High Score:
    1,826
    @Everyone, I figure this deserves its own thread at this point, so I made one.
     
  14. Agayek

    Agayek Totally Sirius DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,250
    You know what that's exactly the same as? Not going to a social event because the people bullying you will be there. Speaking as someone who did exactly that, it's not fun, but it's well within the realm of possibility, fairly easy even, and takes about as much work as turning off your phone for a few hours.

    If a kid is addicted enough to the internet that they can't step back from toxic socializing, they have a much bigger problem than some fucksticks being assholes to them.
     
  15. Arthellion

    Arthellion Alchemist

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2017
    Messages:
    2,381
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    High Score:
    0
    I disagree with @Stenstyren conclusuon, but he does bring up a good point.

    Most teens today -are- addicted to the Internet and would feel extremely isolated by turning off social media.
     
  16. Darth_Revan

    Darth_Revan Secret Squirrel Prestige DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,370
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New England
    High Score:
    2810
    Blaming parents for not teaching their emotionally developing teens how to be emotionally mature 25 year olds is not a realistic solution.
     
  17. Arthellion

    Arthellion Alchemist

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2017
    Messages:
    2,381
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    High Score:
    0
    Eh...I'd argue it is a matter of degrees. Children one hundred years ago dealt with severe abuse, both physical and verbal, but you didn't see the suicide issues happening as often back then.

    I don't think it requires you to be an emotionally mature 25 year old to be able to deal with bullying.
     
  18. Darth_Revan

    Darth_Revan Secret Squirrel Prestige DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,370
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New England
    High Score:
    2810
    I am not an advocate of a police state, I'm an advocate of people acting responsibly. It just so happens that sometimes people have to be forced to act responsibly.

    Are planes designed to kill you? No? Bad analogy.

    Slippery slope fallacy.
     
  19. Agayek

    Agayek Totally Sirius DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,250
    You don't have to be emotionally mature to not spiral into depression because some fuckstick likes to make your life hell.

    Basically, parents need to, y'know, parent and make sure the kid has a support network they can fall back on.
     
  20. Oment

    Oment The Betrayer

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    2,515
    Can we keep this shit in one thread after one was specifically made for it? (Even if it might fit in a different thread entirely.)
     
Loading...