I would normally be sympathetic to their stand except earlier this year when this first started, they called on Trump to use all available political leverages to prevent this and protect free speech. Calling on Trump to protect free speech is just absolutely ridiculous.
this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2025
294 points (98.7% liked)
Technology
76133 readers
3057 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Free pepe
I never thought I'd be siding with 4chan.
Just to let you know I was never a 4chan user.
That's exactly what a 4chan user would say... *narrows eyes in suspicion*
I love you, my coin operated boy!
the UK is fucked
At least they are a little less fucked now lmao
United Kondom
Welp, i agree with 4chan.
Inb4 major Lemmy instances get banned
Let's start with who they going to fine, and which domains will they Ban!
But yea, it could happen.
Having Fedi folks agreeing with 4chan is not on my bingo card this year, or ever.
Deferent but similar
load more comments
(9 replies)
I might not like what you have to say, but I'll defend to death, your right to say it kinda shit
Within reason. Libel, incitement to violence, hate speech, etc, should be illegal for obvious reasons
Maybe, but what about when governments start saying being anti-israel is hate speech?
Once your govt has been captured by foreign interests, it doesn't really matter what laws are on the books anyway, they'll find a way to screw you over.
Early this year Rümeysa Öztürk was kidnapped and deported from USA with precisely that excuse. Anti-Israel hence pro Hamas hence enemy of USA.
There is an obvious reason why countries like Germany make a strong stance against any "trolling" nazi joke/imagery/salute.
But America's First Amendment seems to not understand that reason (or only understand when it is weaponized against communism, black people, trans rights and all the "woke culture" stuff)
America's first amendment doesn't grant a total right to free speech. Conspiracy to commit murder is just speech, but is very much illegal, and so is copyright infringement.
Everyone has a different definition, but yeah generally free speech in an ideal sense extends to just before you start causing what a reasonable person would concern harm to someone.
Fuck that. People spreading racial hate and public lies with the intention to mislead the public should be locked up.
I would say intent matters and while it's impossible to truly determine it, we still have a distinction for murder/manslaughter and negligence.
If a politician lies or hides something for personal gain, that should be illegal, but there's so much stuff the state does where it's best if the general public don't know, public order would probably break down pretty quickly otherwise.
Same with racial hate. If it's just stating an opinion, fine, I probably don't agree but go ahead. If you're actively trying to harm (mentally, economically, socially or physically) that group, or inciting others to do the same, then that's not fine.
I can't think of where "racial hate" could possibly be "just stating an opinion" without also causing harm that is both mental and social.
It depends how you define "racial hate" and how you define mental or social harm. I also do mean social harm, not societal, meaning to catch things like sunset communities (ie restricting where people can live, or where they can go), rather than "society is worse off because of people's opinions."
Again, in my opinion, it depends on intent. If you make a post on your blog with 200 followers saying "I'm tired of X race moving to my city," I don't think that should be illegal, even if it is disgusting behaviour. If you post it to (eg) a community group for those people, I'd say it should be illegal.
That said, I'm very liberal on policing, so believe that the state shouldn't be responsible for policing morality, which people may not like when they realise it involves making things that are pretty much objectively immoral legal, regardless of what they are.
You seem to think that if something is indirect it isn't harmful, so being openly racist with your friends is OK as long as you're not telling the people you're dehumanizing directly? Sounds like you would think cheating on your wife is OK as long as she didn't find out.
Personally, I don't think there is any good or acceptable racial hatred, and pretending that there is is what got the neofascists so much political clout around the world.
I don't think it's ok.
I think it's not the state's job to dictate whether people can do it. I have the exact same opinion for cheating.
I hate agreeing with fucking 4chan but fair
It's ridiculous for the UK to issue fines to a company who doesn't operate in the country. Just block access if that's whatever your stupid laws dictate.
What? And let loose what is basically an opportunity for a bribe?
load more comments
(4 replies)
view more: next ›