Slashdot Mirror


SAP Founder Hasso Plattner Fears the Scourge of Social Media (afr.com)

In a wide-ranging interview, Hasso Plattner, the 74-year-old co-founder and chairman of global business software powerhouse SAP, talked about his apprehension of the social media. From the story: He saves his greatest condemnation for the scourge of fake news and societal manipulation on large social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter. Despite the founders of the social giants pledging to do more to ensure public debate is not artificially skewed, Plattner believes the solution will have to come from law enforcement and criminal penalties. He says humans are genetically wired to thrive on rumours, dating back to ancient times when rumours about what was going on in the next village would be on everyone's mind. He fears social platforms have simply become rumour distribution machines of unbelievable power.

"I was very optimistic that social networks would improve access to information and democracy in general, but I am very disappointed that the opposite is happening," he says. "Professional information producers undermine the social networks, undermine states and elections. It is unbelievable what is happening and we have a huge problem." Plattner draws a parallel with insider trading, which he says is as easy to commit as social media manipulation, but is not so common because people know they will be slugged with criminal convictions. "This is all before we look at the exploitation of personal data, where we are naked in front of the social networks, because we undress ourselves, and not only literally," he says. "I think this will continue until we have the legal systems properly looking at it, and have strong laws that people have to obey."

125 comments

  1. "the scourge of social media" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Donald Trump? I guess that's a rational fear given the insanity circumstances.

  2. doubtful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not just the large social media platforms who can be faulted
    It's mostly all the other media and marketing companies who want their slice of the pie.
    Can't let them big tech giant have their cake and eat it now, can we.

    passphrase === "subset"

    1. Re: doubtful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The free market dictates anything up for grabs: your private data, your network, your history and realtime data, your eyeballs, your interests, your purchases, your vote, elections, your political views, worldview, meaning of life, your time, your beloveds, your enemies, your fauna, your flora, your environment, your life, life itself.

    2. Re: doubtful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be crazy.

      The market isn't free.

    3. Re:doubtful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not just the large social media platforms who can be faulted

      If you accept the guy's argument in the summary (which seems to contain more meat than the two-paragraph-long article), it's not about platforms at all. (The amount of "fault" that you would allocation to social media platforms would be zero, and 100% goes to the users.) Any mass interpersonal communication would be just as bad. If we went back to 1990s social media, people might be making the same complaints about Usenet.

      And there's really no reason you can't spread a rumor by email or Compuserve forums. Or word of mouth, though that wouldn't be in the same league of performance.

      If you've got decentralized speech that's also free, you've got a problem. (Perhaps the US should repeal the first amendment? Seems like a terrible idea but for pretty much every part of the bill of rights, a signficantly large fraction of people who would like it repealed. Some of them, I'm pretty sure more than 50% of voters would vote to repeal.)

  3. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    You nazi faggots still have Der Sturmer, right? Why do you need to rely on the goodwill of Zuckerbergs to reach your audience of morons and inbreds? Talk about a design flaw to your reichtard movement, relying on Facebook? Heh.

    It's kind of hard to sell your supremacy when you're so retarded and easily foiled, right? Think things through better.
     

  4. It's not manipulation when we do it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Calls for censorship, corporations deciding what's truth and what's not, or who gets to speak and who not, mainstream media colluding to push a narrative, using law enforcement to enforce political bias, etc.

    And you want to lecture others about manipulation? The whole basis of these discussions is manipulation, i.e. bolstering one political leaning while suppressing others.

    1. Re:It's not manipulation when we do it! by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 2

      happening in Brazil as well. While the country is being systematically dismantled and enslaved, the "old" media sells a "wonderful world" for the masses, in the Internet a troop of fake accounts fills the social media with rumors, lies and misinformation to criminalize all the leaders of the country who can do something against the country's dismantling.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    2. Re:It's not manipulation when we do it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's what happened to Russia as well. The country was being looted on a massive scale when the US-installed Yeltsin was in power. When he failed to give the reigns to another puppet and the money stream was endangered, the US lost their shit. Ever since it's been a constant attack on anything they do and anyone who stands up for their country.

    3. Re:It's not manipulation when we do it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      happening in Brazil as well. While the country is being systematically dismantled and enslaved, the "old" media sells a "wonderful world" for the masses, in the Internet a troop of fake accounts fills the social media with rumors, lies and misinformation to criminalize all the leaders of the country who can do something against the country's dismantling.

      The proverbial Brazilian Marxist. I feel shame for you. How come somebody who can speak English be wanting be part of the unwashed Brazilian masses, who make their own disgrace. Brazilians have allergy to work, and are a bunch of free loaders. The country's mentality is forever damaged by the excessive incapacity to work or think. The orgy and chaos of the god damned Carnaval is the root of all evils in this country, and has been ingrained in the minds of the populace for eons. There is no salvation. They deserve every single bit of misfortune they are going thru.

      Signed: a rare Brazilian with real Western mentality and ashamed of his country.

    4. Re:It's not manipulation when we do it! by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      Do you guys see this, guys? This AC is an example of classic socketpuppet winning some peanuts by post, using generic and automatic offenses "patrolling" anyone who tries to post facts, trying to hide these facts under the piles of shit they shit on their keyboards.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    5. Re:It's not manipulation when we do it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US didn't install Yeltsin the Soviet military did. The Soviet military was more than capable of squashing the protesting masses. After the high ranking military leadership negotiated and received a large piece of the state owned industries that were divided up when the USSR went belly up.

      "He says humans are genetically wired to thrive on rumours"

      Rumours are an effect not the cause. The root problem from which all other problems are born is that humans are genetically for conflict. Conflict breeds aggression and is a key part of why the human species was able to become the worlds number one apex predator. Humans satisfy their ingrained need for conflict with innocuous games, contests, sports and not so innocuous wars. Someone will offer up an argument against everything I write in this post and provide a perfect example of how humans crave conflict. Social media are the perfect vehicle for conflicts starting with words to conflicts escalating to violence. We just can't help ourselves when it comes to creating conflicts from the benign to the genocidal.

    6. Re:It's not manipulation when we do it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you guys see this, guys? This AC is an example of classic socketpuppet winning some peanuts by post, using generic and automatic offenses "patrolling" anyone who tries to post facts, trying to hide these facts under the piles of shit they shit on their keyboards.

      I am working now, earning a money that you can't even grasp, you communist motherfucker. Do you even know what work is, you parasite, PT's cocksucker? I'm sick to death of people like you. I am a liberal, but I really hope Bolsonaro shove a big carrot up your ass next month, fucking ignoramus prick.

    7. Re:It's not manipulation when we do it! by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      Cry a whole river poor monkey , you still remain a socketpuppet winning peanuts :-) You're nothing, you're nobody, reduced to getting shit posted on the internet at the behest of someone rs... Poor crybaby.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    8. Re:It's not manipulation when we do it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cry a whole river poor monkey , you still remain a socketpuppet winning peanuts :-) You're nothing, you're nobody, reduced to getting shit posted on the internet at the behest of someone rs... Poor crybaby.

      Fuck yourself, deplorable favelado, petista de merda.

      You and your kind deserve to die mired in filth. I'll be smiling when they come for you at night. Can't wait to see it happening.

    9. Re:It's not manipulation when we do it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dark Master, eh?

      I'll be watching you.

      *Never pick a fight with strangers on the Internet, you miserable fuckwit. You never know.

    10. Re:It's not manipulation when we do it! by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      Ooooooooohhhh.... go home to cry more, socketpuppet. ;-)

      Did you guys just see that? Classic socketpuppet like I had said. More generic offenses such as being a "Petista" (member of the worker's party) would be a "crime" (it never was) and the typical class offense of the slave owners, which is to call others "favelados" (slum dwellers). The Brazilian internet has a small but noisy amount of these creatures hidden in the most sordid corners accepting any offer to get some extra money.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    11. Re:It's not manipulation when we do it! by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      I don't give a shit.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    12. Re:It's not manipulation when we do it! by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      Not exactly. The problem with the human species is that you always have that odd individual who wants to own everything and everyone and who can not see any problem in that. It worsens when these individuals achieve positions of power like the command of companies or countries.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
  5. Old man shakes fist at young people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Back in his days, people listened to good old government propaganda, like they ought to do!

  6. He's got reason to fear. by dwywit · · Score: 3, Informative

    But not social media. He should fear the wrath of anyone who's ever had to use or support his software.

    --
    They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    1. Re:He's got reason to fear. by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Besides being the father of the much reviled scourge upon humanity that is SAP, what are Plattner's qualifications in this matter? Why should we listen to him instead of any random punter on the social media that he fears so much?

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    2. Re: He's got reason to fear. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The right to free speech isn't the right to post on social media.

      The right to freely move about the country isn't the right to use someone else's car without their permission.

      Etc.

      All the people so concerned about MUH RITES sure have a limited understanding of them.

    3. Re:He's got reason to fear. by sg_oneill · · Score: 4, Informative

      Whetever his qualifications are, he's right about one thing. The human capacity for conspiracy theories is ancient,

      Back in the early days of Anthropology, anthropologists and the general public where fairly convinced canibalism was *everywhere* in the "primative" world. But as it turned out, whenever they'd actually try and find canibals, well they where no where to be found. In fact with a couple of notable exceptions, canibalism is more or less a myth. What was ACTUALLY going on, was many tribes where convinced the neighboring enemy tribe was in fact canibalism, and that made THEM the bad guys. Everytime someone went missing on a hunt, well , canibals. Got mauled by an animal? Canibals. And if it wasn't canibals, it was evil sorcerers. But the key here is, every village they'd ask would say they where not canibals, the OTHER guys where the canibals.

      I kinf of think conspiracy theories work the same way. Its a way of reasoning about mysterious or unexplainable shit, by positing that everything bad that happens, was some guys evil plot. Nothing bad happens by chance, theres always SOMEONE to blame. Its a convenient way to hold onto viewpoints unsupported by the evidence. Don't like climate change? Well just blame a vast spooky c,onspiracy of scientists lying about physics. Any evidence presented to the contrary is just the man lying to you. Confused about why there seems to be lots more people with autism? MUST BE VACCINES. Sure the docs will tell you "theres more diagnoses of autism because the definition changed" , but thats just what THEY want you to believe. Its a perfectly sealed mode of thinking, all evidence your wrong just proves how vast the conspiracy is.Theres no escape from it.

      And yeaah, the internets making that shit a lot worse. In the olden days, oral folk-myths travelled about as far as the edge of town. Nowdays, its global. You can chose from *all sorts* of crazy now.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    4. Re: He's got reason to fear. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When the means to exercise any right you possess become completely privatized and commercialized, a restricted good that is sold only to those who have a favorable social score with the establishment party, what will you say then? "Mission accomplished"?

    5. Re:He's got reason to fear. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Posting as AC for a reason.

      With the way things are, I wonder if his end goal is to hide all news about bad implementations of SAP. Granted not all SAP's fault, but I believe SAP is one of the causes of companies having large financial issues due to installing an over priced monolith

    6. Re:He's got reason to fear. by BrianMarshall · · Score: 1

      You can chose from *all sorts* of crazy now.

      Yeah - "crazy" as a noun. InfoWars produces news/crap with an extra large helping of crazy. It is scary how many people buy into it.

      --
      "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro" -- HST
  7. We all saw this coming with flash mobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Social media has killed people, and will kill again.

    1. Re:We all saw this coming with flash mobs by sxpert · · Score: 1

      so does SAP when this shit software ends up bankrupting good companies

  8. SAP... by sxpert · · Score: 0

    Most people fear SAP for what this piece of shit software is...
    the reason why a bunch of good companies folded with unwiedly SAP deployments from hell !

    1. Re:SAP... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With news like this...

  9. utterly irresponsible by ooloorie · · Score: 4, Interesting

    [Hasso Plattner] saves his greatest condemnation for the scourge of fake news and societal manipulation on large social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter. Despite the founders of the social giants pledging to do more to ensure public debate is not artificially skewed, Plattner believes the solution will have to come from law enforcement and criminal penalties.

    The fall of the Weimar Republic and the rise of the Nazi regime shows how futile and counterproductive such approaches are. The Weimar Republic had strong laws regulating speech and the press. Far from shutting down the Nazis, the Nazis made a fight against "fake news" part of their own platform ("We demand legal opposition to known lies and their promulgation through the press."). Given Germany's history, for a German to propose criminalizing speech is a sign of profound historical ignorance and irresponsibility.

    And let's not kid ourselves why billionaires and political elites in Europe and the US bristle at social networks and blogs: since Edward Bernays, they have used control over the press to “control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it" (his words). In case you don't know, Bernays is responsible for overcoming the resistance of Americans to enter WWI and for addicting American women to tobacco.

    1. Re:utterly irresponsible by Kiuas · · Score: 5, Informative

      Given Germany's history, for a German to propose criminalizing speech is a sign of profound historical ignorance and irresponsibility.

      You're obviously not up to date on German history. Hate speech has been criminalized in Germany for a long time, precisely because of the 2nd world war. It's one of the few countries where you can get fined or imprisoned for denying the holocaust, or wearing any nazi insignia in public etc. And the Americans should not take the moral high ground here, because this behavior has its roots in post-war Allied control of West Germany. The occupational forces exercised censorship to control what could and couldn't be said about them:

      During the post World War II period, the West German media was subject to censorship by the Allied occupational forces. Criticism of the occupational forces and of the emerging government were not tolerated. Publications which were expected to have a negative effect on the general public were not printed. A list of over 30,000 titles, including works by such authors as Carl von Clausewitz, was drawn up. All the millions of copies of these books were to be confiscated and destroyed. The representative of the Military Directorate admitted that the order in principle was no different from the Nazi book burnings, although unlike the burnings, the measure was seen as a temporary part of the denazification program. [4]

      When the official government, the Federal Republic of Germany (Bundesrepublik Deutschland) took over, these limits were relaxed. The new German constitution guaranteed freedom of press, speech, and opinion. Since Germany kept the West German constitution after East Germany joined its jurisdiction, the same protections and restrictions in West Germany apply to contemporary Germany. However, continued globalization and the advent of Internet marketing present a new host of complications to German censorship and information laws.

      Publications violating laws (e.g., such promoting Volksverhetzung or slander and libel) can be censored in today's Germany, with authors and publishers probable subjects to penalties. Strafgesetzbuch section 86a rather strictly prohibits the public display of "symbols of unconstitutional organizations" such as the NSDAP and affiliates. Materials written or printed by organizations ruled to be anti-constitutional, like the NSDAP or the Red Army Faction (Baader-Meinhof Gang), have also been placed on the index. Public Holocaust denial is also prohibited and may be severely punished with up to five years in prison.[5] A decision of a court that assumes that a publication is violating another person's personal rights may also lead to censoring (a newspaper for example can be forced not to publish private pictures).

      'Volksverhetzung' is the German hate speech law prohibiting targeting of racial and ethnic groups. Quoting the translation from the wiki:

      Whosoever, in a manner capable of disturbing the public peace:

      1. incites hatred against a national, racial, religious group or a group defined by their ethnic origins, against segments of the population or individuals because of their belonging to one of the aforementioned groups or segments of the population or calls for violent or arbitrary measures against them; or

      2. assaults the human dignity of others by insulting, maliciously maligning an aforementioned group, segments of the population or individuals because of their belonging to one of the aforementioned groups or segments of the population, or defaming segments of the population,

      shall be liable to imprisonment from three months to five years.

      Similar (though usually less strict) laws exist in other European countries, including my own (Finland), the UK, Ireland and Sw

      --
      "It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
    2. Re:utterly irresponsible by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's nothing wrong about opposing known lies being presented by media as truths. The only problem is that this would require shutting down Fox News, and many people would be grievously butthurt if that happened.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:utterly irresponsible by Gonoff · · Score: 1, Troll

      There's nothing wrong about opposing known lies being presented by media as truths. The only problem is that this would require shutting down Fox News, and many people would be grievously butthurt if that happened.

      If you could shut down the Daily Mail, Sun and the like over here while you are at it, that would be nice...

      --
      I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
    4. Re: utterly irresponsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well written post. Thank you! You inform, and also share your belief and perspective. I'm an American, but spent a lot of time in Europe on biz, and the knowledge y'all have of the US is disproportionate to the amount the typical American has of y'all.

    5. Re:utterly irresponsible by Kiuas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not that you're going to read it since you're probably a troll either in their mom's basement or the troll brigade of st. Petersburg, but on the off-chance that you're an actual holocaust denier I have 2 pieces of advice for you:

      1. Stop drinking bleach, it's not good for you.
      2. Read this XKCD

      --
      "It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
    6. Re:utterly irresponsible by ooloorie · · Score: 2

      It's one of the few countries where you can get fined or imprisoned for denying the holocaust, or wearing any nazi insignia in public etc. And the Americans should not take the moral high ground here, because this behavior has its roots in post-war Allied control of West Germany. The occupational forces exercised censorship to control what could and couldn't be said about them ... laws that have roots stretching back to the Allied occupation

      It was moral, justifiable, and reasonable for Americans to criminalize speech in Germany after WWII as part of the occupation of Germany. It was part of an attempt to transform a nation of fascists and totalitarian mass murderers into something even remotely resembling a democracy.

      It is very different for self-governing post-occupation Germany to adopt new anti-speech legislation Therefore: Given Germany's history, for a German to propose criminalizing speech is a sign of profound historical ignorance and irresponsibility.

      (In addition, I'm not defending 1930's to 1950's America either; there were strong authoritarian tendencies in the US at the time.)

      The reason hate speech laws exist is because rarely if ever do totalitarian movements begin with 'exterminate [the enemy ethnic/religious group]'

      Yes, and the Weimar Republic had such laws. Did it help them?

      Anti-speech laws were effective and useful as part of America's military occupation of post-WWII Germany, which involved mass surveillance and political interference on German affairs on a massive scale for decades. It is an entirely different matter for a democracy to support such laws as part of a functioning democracy.

      However, in the current political climate in Europe and with the historical context, the groups fighting against these laws are all on the hard right side, so politically campaigning for the reversal of the laws is a career suicide for anyone except those on the (far) right. And especially in Germany with them having taken about a million refugees, the removal of said laws now would pour gasoline to the flames of the rising far-right which is salivating at the thought of being able to amp up their rhetoric against both the muslims and the jews and try a re-run of the 30s.

      A "re-run of the 30's" is what Germany is headed for because Germany is making the same mistakes now as it did back then: Germany's political elites think they can suppress political unrest and anger through laws and authoritarian measures and controlling the media. It failed back then and it is failing now: trying to restrict speech only energizes extreme voices. And in the day of the Internet, widespread encryption, and international connectivity, such censorship won't even reduce undesirable speech.

      So in reality what has been happening within Germany is not 'them proposing to criminalize speech', but rather them trying to implement already existing laws

      Plattner isn't proposing to criminalize more hate speech, he is proposing to criminalize "fake new" and propaganda that deviates from government propaganda. Regardless of what you think of the anti-Nazi laws, that is both qualitatively and quantitatively very different.

    7. Re:utterly irresponsible by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      There's nothing wrong about opposing known lies being presented by media as truths.

      Plattner isn't proposing opposing known lies, an act of free speech, he is proposing censoring known lies.

      Opposing known lies is quite effective. Government censorship is incompatible with democracy and leads to its downfall.

    8. Re:utterly irresponsible by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      It was moral, justifiable, and reasonable for Americans to criminalize speech in Germany after WWII as part of the occupation of Germany.

      Wrong, wrong, and wrong.

      It was not moral because it is never moral.

      It was not justifiable because all you ever do with laws criminalizing free speech is drive the offenders underground. You make it illegal to plan a hate crime, and you use the free speech to tell you who to surveil*.

      It was not reasonable specifically because it was neither moral nor justifiable.

      It was part of an attempt to transform a nation of fascists and totalitarian mass murderers into something even remotely resembling a democracy.

      Perhaps we should have tried not selling the Nazis fuel, and not selling the Japanese the Aluminum from which they built Zeroes, if we were trying to stop the Third Reich and not simply to choose its timing so that we could profit from the holocaust.

      * Why is the word "surveil" not in the Mozilla dictionary? Suspicious.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:utterly irresponsible by Kiuas · · Score: 1

      It failed back then and it is failing now: trying to restrict speech only energizes extreme voices. And in the day of the Internet, widespread encryption, and international connectivity, such censorship won't even reduce undesirable speech.

      As I said I'm not in favour of the laws myself because I tend to agree that the martyrdom status that it grants to those it affects is in many ways making the problem worse. However especially in Germany since the laws have been in place pretty much since the 2nd world war, their reversal in the near future is unlikely because of the highly politically charged nature of the topic.

      Plattner isn't proposing to criminalize more hate speech, he is proposing to criminalize "fake new" and propaganda that deviates from government propaganda.Regardless of what you think of the anti-Nazi laws, that is both qualitatively and quantitatively very different.

      Well that depends on what is actually done, but in essence the principle behind such mentality is the same: since the (social) media can be used to disseminate false and misleading information which can then be used to manipulate people when it comes to politics, he seems to want more control of what kind of information can be shared. Needless to say I'm not in support of this either, even though at the same time I do believe that the social media sites themselves are free to set rules on what kind of content they wish to allow on their platforms. That is, I do not believe the government should legally mandate these things, but that doesn't mean that Facebook & al have to allow any type of content to be shared via their services.

      When I said 'what has been happening in Germany' I wasn't referring to Plattner's (very vague) proposal (should have been clearer on that, my bad), but rather the recent laws that imposed more duties on social media sites to take down content that violates existing German laws.

      --
      "It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
    10. Re:utterly irresponsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow.

      There's a lot of crazy in your post, so I'm just going to correct your history here as the rest would take too long. America entered the war due to:

      1) A massive naval buildup across all countries including the US
      2) the geopolitics of the US desiring a balance of power, and when the Russians got knocked out Germany appeared to have the upper hand
      3) German unrestricted submarine warfare, sinking US ships

      The US entered WW1 due to geopolitics, not some propagandist.

    11. Re:utterly irresponsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, you've fallen for the manipulation tactic of "we can prove one conspiracy theory a lie, therefore you can discredit all of them as a lie."

      If you want argue with a conspiracy theorist, then you have to use facts to refute their claims. Name-calling, ridicule, and personal attacks will not work and only come off as a defensive weakness that damages your own position and strengthens theirs.

    12. Re:utterly irresponsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Butthurt is one thing, but imagine the riotous, epic tantrum the #resist left will throw when the same rules shut down CNN.

    13. Re:utterly irresponsible by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      It was not moral because it is never moral.

      US imposed speech restrictions were part of the occupation of a totalitarian, genocidal, conquered nation. Of course they were moral as part of such an occupation. And that occupation lasted 40 years, as it should, it was simply a quiet, benign occupation.

      It was not justifiable because all you ever do with laws criminalizing free speech is drive the offenders underground.

      That was the point in Germany. Actual, genuine Nazis didn't disappear from the face of the earth in 1945, many millions of them remained part of German society for decades to come, working in government, schools, universities, police, and business. Americans wanted the next generations of Germans not to grow up immersed in Nazi propaganda, and that was a good decision.

      What Germans should do is now free themselves of this legacy of allied occupation. Instead, they are going the other way, with increasingly authoritarian laws and increasing restrictions on individual liberties.

    14. Re:utterly irresponsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut up you fake news faggot shill INCEL deplorable uneducated cis-hetero gaylord running dog trumptard Russian NAZI alt-right bolshevik anti-Semitic Zionist Chinese cock-gobbling fascist mansplaining French fundamentalist SJW shitfucker MRA strawman trailer trash inbred lesbian Hillaryist feminazi richie rich ghetto alt-left white supremacist PEDOPHILE wetback spic mick wop nlgger chink kike redneck dago camel jockey bourgeois puritanical crackhead liberturdian commie poopy-head TRAITOR!

    15. Re:utterly irresponsible by Kiuas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you want argue with a conspiracy theorist, then you have to use facts to refute their claims.

      You're making a mistake in assuming I want to argue with him.

      Once the conspiracy is something as ridiculous as claiming that the biggest orchestrated genocide did not happen and is all an elaborate hoax by all historians and academics, facts will do no good. I know 'cause I have debated these people before, and just like debating with hardcore creationists they will not believe any evidence you throw at them, because they're operating in an entirely different reality. They will ignore any evidence presented and then just move on to their next ridiculous claim in a Gish gallop, and I have better things to do with my time than to waste my time arguing with someone like that.

      --
      "It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
    16. Re:utterly irresponsible by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Hate speech has been criminalized in Germany for a long time, precisely because of the 2nd world war. It's one of the few countries where you can get fined or imprisoned for denying the holocaust, or wearing any nazi insignia in public etc. And the Americans should not take the moral high ground here, because this behavior has its roots in post-war Allied control of West Germany

      Please note that this was entirely in an attempt to control the populace. It was anti-freedom, and they knew it. People who propose anti-speech laws, without exception as far as I've found, are trying to control others.

      That's why freedom of speech is important.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    17. Re:utterly irresponsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not that you're going to read it since you're probably a troll either in their mom's basement or the troll brigade of st. Petersburg, but on the off-chance that you're an actual holocaust denier I have 2 pieces of advice for you:

      1. Stop drinking bleach, it's not good for you.
      2. Read this XKCD

      Let's reorder & modify those instructions to optimise the code:

      1. Read XKCD
      2. Start drinking bleach

    18. Re:utterly irresponsible by BigDogCH · · Score: 1

      There is a difference between CNN and Fox. Fox news is a marketing platform pretending to be a news channel. It doesn't provide any version of the news, either right or left. What it offers is marketing. The station is designed to promote the RNC (not conservatives). It is fake news.

      CNN, is bias news. They report one side of any opinion, however it is actually one side. It is a true opinion.

      If you cannot see how these are different, i suggest watching some other news stations then see the spin put on both. CNN will support one side that you saw earlier. Fox will support the RNC, and throw out the facts.

      I am all for free speech, but this is no different than yelling fire in a crowded theater. Fox needs to be shut down. It isn't promoting healthy dialog, it is as harmful as any other terrorist propaganda.

      If you still have confusion about the target audience of the two, look at the commercials on Fox. They are mostly marketing scams, just like the news they offer. Get this authentic $100 silver coin replica for only $20!

    19. Re:utterly irresponsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no evidence other than hearsay.

  10. just a moment sonny.... by gDLL · · Score: 0

    Between the fall of the Weimar republic and the rise of the nat-socialists you forgot one "small" key detail, the rise of the Communists. Which made the natsies look good.

    1. Re:just a moment sonny.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      the rise of the Communists

      Antifa originated as the militant wing of the KPD (German Communist Party).

      Communists calling everyone a fascist / nazi and attacking people in the street was the historic pathway to actual fascists seizing power.

  11. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by barc0001 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think it's time Slashdot started thinking about banning ACs. Seems lately all the shit comments that roll in on each story are posted by those who can't even stand to hide behind a screen name.

  12. Re:Social Media Users Fear Hasso Plattners by Sique · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The elite still gets away with spreading their rumors. That's the whole point of Mr. Plattner's interview. Now they don't bribe the classical media, now they pay software companies to operate social bots.

    --
    .sig: Sique *sigh*
  13. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Banning AC wouldn't actually solve the problem without more effort. The nazi troll crew does have a lot of regular named accounts to spam from also. Only a well tied knot can solve what ails them.

  14. Re:Social Media Users Fear Hasso Plattners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now they don't bribe the classical media

    They OWN the classical media.

  15. Re:Social Media Users Fear Hasso Plattners by Sique · · Score: 2

    At least you know that they own the classical media. But on Facebook, you don't get told that this is not just a rumor, but a paid for campaign to influence your views, economical and political decisions.

    --
    .sig: Sique *sigh*
  16. Rich guy demands world comply by Tailhook · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This sort of thing is music to the ears of the establishment. One more powerful voice to stand with with ruling class as they screw up the courage to criminalize those that annoy. It's been taken so far that Plattner has lost his inhibition to openly state his intentions.

    Realize who you're climbing in bed with. This is the quintessential Captain of Industry; a man that has spent his life capturing regulators and leveraging IP law to propel himself to the 0.0001% bar in the wealth histogram. But hes singing the right song so you look past all that because you lost an election and if the criminal ban hammer is what it takes to make sure that never happens again well then all hail Mr. Plattner and any other Great and Good that join him.

    --
    Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    1. Re:Rich guy demands world comply by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      I doubt the establishment cares. They can use Facebook to sway the opinions of people, or they can use censorship to sway the opinions of people. Either affect is the same, because the people are too stupid to know whether it is happening either way. All the trustworthy media outlets that are going bankrupt because people find them too boring and slow to justify the expense of actually being reliable, are really the only defender of the people.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    2. Re:Rich guy demands world comply by Tailhook · · Score: 1

      All the trustworthy media outlets that are going bankrupt because

      They're going bankrupt because they peddle the Wooden Language of the official narrative. Having not yet become the victims of actual tyranny people are free to leave establishment mouth pieces behind and seek alternatives that aren't beholden to beltway and corporate group-think.

      I doubt the establishment cares.

      Oh, they care. That's what this story is about and why it's bouncing around the progressive echo chamber today. We were just subjected to four+ days of establishment backlash in the form of Trump Derangement Syndrome on public display over McCain's carcass. It's why coordinated deplatforming operations are being conducted every day and why that nasty business goes unquestioned by anyone of the establishment.

      The establishment cares and Plattner will be given accolades for his courage rationalizing the criminalization of wrong-think.

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
  17. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, that showed me. Very cogently argued.
    I see that you didn't rebut anything I said - Facebook and Twitter are censoring conservative voices, which is CLEARLY going to influence the outcome of the next election. Why else do you think they are doing it?

    "Call him a Jew and watch how he recoils in horror - I've been found out!"

  18. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    I think it's time Slashdot started thinking about banning ACs. Seems lately all the shit comments that roll in on each story are posted by those who can't even stand to hide behind a screen name.

    You can't just tolerate or ignore stuff you don't like so you want to BAN it ?

    I doubt you can even grasp how wrongheaded our desire to ban stuff because you don't like it really is.

    If you don't like a comment, SCROLL ON DOWN THE PAGE. Or quit using the website.

    The world is not going to bend to your will, little child, and the sooner you realize this the sooner you can start becoming an adult.

  19. Re:Irony by butzwonker · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Merkel does not have anything with this, no matter what she says. Due to Germany's Nazi past and because allied authorities like the US insisted on it, Germany has applicable hate speech laws that every company doing business in Germany has to respect. Using Nazi symbols, instigating violence by racist slurs, showing the Hitler greeting, and denying the Holocaust is illegal in Germany, and Facebook has to provide the means to comply with the law or close their business in Germany. It's as simple as that.

    The US, France, and the UK insisted on these kind of mechanisms and gave Western Germany a constitution that can defend itself against inner threats, because the Weimarer Republic failed due to inner threats - by the Nazis abusing constitutional flaws and spreading hate and terror on the street and in media. For example, in Germany a Nazi party (SRP - the successor of the NSDAP) and a communist party (KPD - largely under Soviet control) were prohibited in the 50s.

    If you really, really want to go to war against Germany again in 50-100 years from now and if you enjoyed the total destruction of Europe by the Nazis or the communist occupation of Eastern Europe, then please continue to insist that Germans should enjoy full freedom and speech, no matter how despicable, and to abolish constitutional safeguards against inner takeover by totalitarians.

    For what it's worth, German authorities are much too tame about the current threats. They should definitely surveille the AfD and other right-wing wackos, just like they watched and infiltrated anarchist and communist groups in the past, but unfortunately they are a bit blind on the right eye (as the NSU murders and the involvement of the Verfassungsschutz in them have aptly illustrated).

  20. Paywalled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Anyone happen to have an alternative Link?

  21. Wow! by DaMattster · · Score: 1

    Just what we need: another wealthy baby boomer selling to criminalize more behavior and lock up more people. This seems to be more about class control than any real and tangible fear since the largest userbase are the poor and working classes. Passing laws like these just take freedoms away, and if you're wondering, I'm a Gen Xer and an anarchist.

    1. Re:Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a Gen Xer and an anarchist

      Usually one or the other is required. You don't need to lower your IQ twice.

      Love the generational troll though. Usually it is the baby boomers trolling the Xers.

    2. Re:Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think his comparison to insider trading is apt. Manipulation of financial markets us one are where I donâ(TM)t hear a lot of condemnation of laws against âoefree expressionâ. People have come to accept that rules are required in this domain.

      As an âoeanarchistâ, do you feel that the SEC should be abolished? Is it a tool used by rich baby boomers to exert class control?

      Personally, it seem to me like the opposite in that it primarily constrains the wealthy.

      BTW, Iâ(TM)m pretty sure that the super rich would do just fine if global anarchy broke out tomorrow.

  22. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems lately all the shit comments that roll in on each story are posted by those who can't even stand to hide behind a screen name.

    You must be new here?

    We're supposed to live in liberal societies, there's plenty of totalitarian countries you can pick from if you want to live somewhere that censors speech. Take Plattner with you!

  23. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The desire is to ban stuff that has no value, which would be your entire life.

  24. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ahhh... classical fear mongering - because you don't want to read statistics correctly and cherry pick date ranges or crime categories and count on the idea that others don't understand statistics either. There were more homicides in Germany during the 80s and early 90s. Overall, crime rates in Germany are fairly low. Moreover, for a fair comparison you'd need to take into account the age classes and incomes, too. Here is some more information on potential correlations between crime and immigration.

    The vast majority of immigrants does not commit any crimes whatsoever, just like the vast majority of Germans don't. Increase living standards and education, and the crime rate sinks, too. Get more elderly or more female immigrants, and the crime rate sinks, too. Just like with Germans citizens without immigration background.

  25. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're welcome.

  26. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fake news are usually made from private interest groups trying to manipulate mass perception to provoke a responde... Like all those are tools used by PR companies and marketing.

  27. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ahhh... classical fear mongering - because you don't want to read statistics correctly

    Moron!

  28. Re:Irony by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

    If you really, really want to go to war against Germany again in 50-100 years from now and if you enjoyed the total destruction of Europe by the Nazis or the communist occupation of Eastern Europe, then please continue to insist that Germans should enjoy full freedom and speech, no matter how despicable, and to abolish constitutional safeguards against inner takeover by totalitarians.

    Oh, my sweet, summer child. What makes you think we're not going to get into that position anyway? Even though it's illegal to publicly be a Nazi, Germany still has Nazis, in part because these laws only hide the truth.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  29. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

    You can't just tolerate or ignore stuff you don't like so you want to BAN it ?
    I doubt you can even grasp how wrongheaded our desire to ban stuff because you don't like it really is.

    Banning things that people really believe is wrong. That's why I get annoyed when something I believe is modded as troll. No, I really meant that, so by definition I'm not trolling. But banning things that people are just shitposting because they want to shit on the discussion is something different. It's preserving a resource so that it can be used by others. Garbage comments make using the site more difficult for those users who act in good faith.

    However, eliminating ACs would not be banning content. It would be making it harder to troll. Learn the difference, kid.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  30. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by alvinrod · · Score: 1

    Lately? It's always been that way. Also, banning anonymous comments wouldn't fix anything either since there's nothing that stops a person from signing up for a new account. Look at all of the different creimer troll accounts that sprang up a while back, and there are a few around now that are trying to impersonate the editors.

    If you don't want to wade through the mud, browse at 1 and you'll avoid most of it. Most of the really annoying spam posts get moderated down quite quickly, so unless you've set it to browse at -1, you'll see almost none of it. There are also a lot of good comments from anonymous posters as well. On some stories they're better than anything you get from a registered account.

  31. The elite fear free speech... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... in case their slaves start exposing them, organising, and fighting back. We can't have that!
    Google 'Ursula Haverbeck' to find out what is happening.

  32. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "However, eliminating ACs would not be banning content. It would be making it harder to troll. Learn the difference, kid."

    You could not be more wrong.
    The trolls would just make more fake accounts causing more long term problems.

    Learn the difference, you known Troll.

  33. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    "However, eliminating ACs would not be banning content. It would be making it harder to troll. Learn the difference, kid."

    The trolls would just make more fake accounts causing more long term problems.

    Fake accounts don't cause problems, son. They take up a tiny amount of database space, and in exchange we get a posting history included with the account that tells us if it's been used to troll in the past.

    Learn the difference, you known Troll.

    I have a posting history that proves that I'm not a troll, since it contains so very many comments clearly made in good faith. You, on the other hand, are an AC accusing me of trolling, which all-but-conclusively proves that you are a troll all day.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  34. Social?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WTF is the word "Social" doing in TFA title?

  35. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Bearhouse · · Score: 1

    I think the mod system works OK; there's always enough sane people with points to mod.the dumbasses down.

  36. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No man, it's gotten much worse during the past few years. Browsing at -1 has become unbearable for halfway decent human beings.

  37. Free Speech != guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    When you ban free speech; then only criminals will have a voice.
    - Gordon

  38. Re:Irony by butzwonker · · Score: 1

    Drinkypoo, Germany has plenty of Nazis and purpose of these laws is certainly not to prevent the occurrence of Nazis. On the contrary, those laws and constitutional safeguards were invented at a time when Germany was arguably full of Nazis and Nazi enablers. If you don't even understand the purpose of such laws and/or the history of Germany, you really have nothing to contribute.

    Oh, my sweet, summer child.

    You would appear less childish if you kept such snippets to yourself, drinkypoo!

  39. Re: "fake news and societal manipulation" by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 2

    We need a filter on slashdot. When the words 'nazi' and 'faggot' appear in a comment it is automatically modded to -2 and a 5 day ip ban is imposed.

    People who accuse another of being a nazi and who call somebody else a 'faggot' are completely different. Antifaschists are not homophobes. It's just a crapflooder who needs an ip ban.

  40. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Again you fail to refute the point and resort to name calling. If you really are on the side of right, you'll have truth and facts on your side instead of hate and violence.

  41. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You're free to browse at +5 if you want a groupthink echochamber circle jerk that serves no purpose other than to reaffrim the viewpoints that have been spoonfed to you.

  42. Re:Irony by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    On the contrary, those laws and constitutional safeguards were invented at a time when Germany was arguably full of Nazis and Nazi enablers. If you don't even understand the purpose of such laws and/or the history of Germany, you really have nothing to contribute.

    I do understand the purpose of such laws. It was to subjugate Germany.

    If you don't even understand the purpose of such laws and/or the history of Germany, you really have nothing to contribute.

    If you don't even understand that the USA profited from the holocaust, then you have less than nothing to contribute.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  43. Re: Social Media Users Fear Hasso Plattners by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

    On Facebook, what else would it be?

  44. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I do understand the purpose of such laws. It was to subjugate Germany.

    *sigh* So you understand nothing. I know I'm throwing pearls before the swine, as we say in Germany, but I will still explain. Totalitarian regimes rise to power by a mixture of propaganda and terror/fear. The latter is created by mobs, enforced uniformity, beating up people, death squadrons, etc. The former, the propaganda needs to distract from real discourse and understanding and therefore involves plenty of hate speech, ridiculing opponents, celebrating cruelty, and political 'cartoons' that demonize the opponent. Apart from many other factors such as the unfavorable clauses of the Versaille Treaty, the Nazis came to power by using the SA to instill fear and terror and by disrupting civil discourse using the Stürmer and similar publications.

    That's why Germany has relatively strong hate speech laws and constitutional safeguards. Coincidentally, a very small minority in Germany and elsewhere is currently trying to do the same as what the Nazis did in online forums worldwide - with sizeable though in the end only very moderate success.

  45. social media is a mirror to reflects us by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    And it reflects the baseness and egocentric behavior of nearly everyone when they go online. There is a switch that flips when people feel they are anonymous or can suffer limited social consequences for their behavior and they behave like borderline sociopaths in that situation.

    This is the dawn of the information age. And a widely connected society is something very new for us. Unfortunately few have adjusted to the change well, and most people are in a social infancy. An infancy where they struggle to find acceptable behavior because they are unable to read social cues online. The Internet has become Lord of the Flies, and the Simon's of the world are few and far between.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  46. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems lately all the shit comments that roll in on each story are posted by those who can't even stand to hide behind a screen name...

    ... for totally understandable reasons. Why should I give up my anonymity?

    On the other hand, some of the best material on /. is also from AC's.

  47. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you think that copy&paste swastikas and APK rants give you better viewpoints???

  48. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by jedidiah · · Score: 2

    Yes.

    That noise is just the price you pay for not living in a total bubble. It turns out that Liberty is somewhat "untidy".

    Liberty requires tolerating things you hate and defending your enemies.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  49. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by LucasBC · · Score: 2

    Seriously, what's with all the idiots on Slashdot using the derogatory term "faggots" ?

  50. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why do the jews hate Venezuela? Until you can figure that out, you need to seriously question your world view.

  51. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn it, i knew Slashdot was owned by the government...\s

  52. Re: "fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Donyou have something against gangstas and pimps?

  53. Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the world needs to be more worries about the scourge of SAP. Ever hear of a smooth implementation of SAP that came in on time and under budget? No? Neither have I...

  54. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by barc0001 · · Score: 1

    > You can't just tolerate or ignore stuff you don't like so you want to BAN it ?

    Where did I say that? I just said make them use actual accounts. Raise the bar to posting a bit more than clicking a checkbox, to help slow down the torrent of shit.

  55. There's one thing even more powerful and ancient: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Blind gullability and livestock-like herd behavior. Which leads to the worst type of conspiracy theorist there is: The anticonspiracy theorist.
    Somebody who, ignoring all facts and all of reality if he has to, believes there can never ever be any conspiracy of any kind whatsoever, and everyone is just either nice and happy-clappy or merely dumb and incompetent.

    It's the exact same thing as a conspiracy theorist: Somebody who can't handle reality, and has to cling to a delusion that makes everything make sense and be acceptable to his feeble mind.

    The best example of that, is the NSA leaks denier. Who just ignores everything published about it, never read the documents himself, yet claims everything written in there is made up, when you tell him about it.

    These are people that make the time cube 'tards look like reasonable people. You can stab them in the back with a knife so large it comes out the front, say "whoops, sorry" and they will not only write it off as clumsiness, but attack anyone who points out that it might be deliberate, as a "tin foil hatter" or "nutjob". You can then stab them again, and use the exact same trick as before. They will deny it to their literal death.

    It's amazingly close to schizophrenia.

  56. I would have agreed, but the worst theorist is ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... the anticonspiracy theorist. People like you, who aren't holocaust deniers (one point for you), but definitely NSA leak deniers (aand it's gone). People, who, even after that whole shit, still break out the "tin foil hat" attack.
    Just like a conspiracy theorist, with merely the opposing polarity (so blind gullibility and groveling obedience), and hence the worst kind of smug arrogance this planet has ever seen.

    Which is as sad, as seeing a 1980s-style "cool kid" try to ridicule and bully "nerds" in 2018.The cringe could collapse an universe.

  57. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Think things through better.

    Some day you're going to get what you deserve when you talk shit.

    And it's not going to be a medal for being a good little cocksucker.

  58. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're welcome.

    That's a propaganda movie made by Hollywood.

    You seem to think it represents reality.

    It doesn't.

    Some day your mouth is going to get you in serious trouble and you aren't going to be able to talk your way out of it.

  59. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by barc0001 · · Score: 1

    > Banning things that people really believe is wrong. That's why I get annoyed when something I believe is modded as troll.

    Context can be king. YOU might believe it, but that doesn't exclude someone else from using that viewpoint or belief to troll. For example, you might believe wholeheartedly the Earth is flat (and a disturbing number of people apparently do believe this exact thing). But *I* don't believe that. That wouldn't preclude me from posting a flat-Earth oriented snark/troll comment and it being correctly voted down, because the context and intent of my post would have been to troll.

  60. Re:There's one thing even more powerful and ancien by sg_oneill · · Score: 1

    [quote]Blind gullability and livestock-like herd behavior. Which leads to the worst type of conspiracy theorist there is: The anticonspiracy theorist.[/quote]

    Yeah but thats a bit of a strawman dude. Nobody really believes that *no* conspiracies exist. I mean maybe one or two folks genuinely believe that spy agencies dont.... uh.... spy or whatever.

    But lets be honest. 99% of conspiracy theories are blatent bullshit.

    There was never a pizza sex dungeon run by Hillary from her lizard spacecraft.
    Q is a 4 chan troll who has no idea what happens in washington , and every prediction he's made has come false.

    Climate change actually is real and caused by humans, and theres no vast conspiracy of scientists to lie about physics dating back to the 1800s.

    September 11 really was done by Bin Laden boys, just like bin laden said they did.

    And we *know* these things to be true because the alternative just isn't how the world actually works.

    --
    Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
  61. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It does have far fewer nazis than some countries without hate speech laws, though (e.g. the US).

  62. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you really, really want to go to war against Germany again in 50-100 years from now and if you enjoyed the total destruction of Europe by the Nazis or the communist occupation of Eastern Europe, then please continue to insist that Germans should enjoy full freedom and speech, no matter how despicable, and to abolish constitutional safeguards against inner takeover by totalitarians.

    If Germany is in your top-20 list of countries most likely to cause a major war in the coming 50-100 years, you are batshit insane. If you are convinced hate speech restrictions are useful against nazi-like terror, I would strongly suggest that you focus on getting such laws enacted in the US, Russia and Middle Eastern countries.

  63. Japan too. Forced Moralization. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The JSDF and blurred genitals in cinema/anime/etc are both holdovers of the American occupation. And while there is talk of things changing now, you will note they have also signficantly raised age of consent across the country.

    Japanese society had always been self-repressive in certain matters, but the US pushed a good deal of 'christian' values on them as part of the surrender.

  64. Hi, by rodia · · Score: 1

    one of the lesser human beings here. One of those who, according to you, shouldn't have the right to free speech that people in the US enjoy.

    > If you really, really want to go to war against Germany again in 50-100 years from now and if you enjoyed the total destruction of Europe by the Nazis or the communist occupation of Eastern Europe, then please continue to insist that Germans should enjoy full freedom and speech, no matter how despicable, and to abolish constitutional safeguards against inner takeover by totalitarians.

    Sure, just make bad words illegal and the underlying problems magically disappear. I wish it was that simple. No constitutional safeguard can stop a desperate and disenfranchised population. Like those people in Germany who lost their jobs due to the financial crisis of the late twenties and then had their unenployment benefits cancelled in the name of austerity.

    If you really, really want to see the rise of the next Nazis and if you enjoyed the total destruction of Europe, then make sure the next financial crisis devastates people's lives and then hit them with "austerity" and don't forget to dump some more problems on them, like masses of refugees from a never-ending colonial war. Oh wait, you are already doing that. And then, when their jobs go away and the rent is going up, which apparently has started to happen in Germany and Sweden partly due to unplanned mass imigration, tell them that their real problem is their xenophobia. The Nazis are waiting for them with open arms and will be very happy when you censor them, because then they can paint themselves as prosecuted martyrs.

  65. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unlikely, as a law-abiding citizen who not a Nazi I'd just call the police and get the trouble maker(s) arrested. Pretty simple concept.

  66. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No need to argue with Nazis, just get rid of them. :)

  67. Re:"fake news and societal manipulation" by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Context can be king. YOU might believe it, but that doesn't exclude someone else from using that viewpoint or belief to troll.

    So what? Moderation is applied to individual comments, not to Slashdot as a [w]hole. If I am not trolling, then my comment is not a troll, regardless of what other people might have used similar words for.

    This is why Slashdot has become such a shithole. Even basic reasoning is beyond the people who get modpoints.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  68. Tech guru prognosticatorfactor off the charts here by DulcetTone · · Score: 1

    You had me at "he invented SAP", and then you told me that he was 74 years old.

    --
    tone
  69. True, also scary how many ppl buy into CNN ... by gDLL · · Score: 1

    .. or the former newspaper NYT....