Google can now censor anything, other browser options

[orthodox]

Google and other engines have every right to block questionable content. Would you be OK with racist material and paedophilia being easily accessible on the internet? What is it exactly that you are trying to hide by keeping your web presence completely anonymous.

The right to decide what is allowed and what is not belongs to the existing democratic institutions, namely, to the legislative bodies of various states. You can enact laws to prohibit racism or paedophilia. Google and the engines usurp that right to restrict the freedom of speech and go far beyond the law, thus violating it in some countries where the censorship is forbidden.

[EdwardKiy]

Brave blocks ads which deprives bloggers and website owners of a decent income for their often free services. Why do you think many news sites these days have paywalls?

Google and other engines have every right to block questionable content. Would you be OK with racist material and paedophilia being easily accessible on the internet? What is it exactly that you are trying to hide.

Bloggers make pennies on ads. They make money on sponsors, affiliate sales and services. News sites have paywalls so they can pretend to be independent.

Google and other engines should have very limited rights of censorship, if any at all. In case you didn't know, paedophilia and racist materials are prohibited and banned in most countries on the planet and have been for decades. There is no paedophilia online because if there had been a) the people responsible would be immediately identified and put to jail or executed b) porn sites have terms and conditions based on legality. Good luck finding paedophilia materials online.

As far as I'm concerned, racism is just uneducated people shouting nonsense, which is just a bunch of nonsense until they move to action, at which point the law will put them behind bars. The US is a good example of the opposite approach being dysfunctional: they now have rampant racist groups physically killing people, coercing officials into submission (textbook terrorism) that were not punished or barred in any way, but online they have censorship, so these facts can't even be pointed out.

And what I want to hide or am hiding is nobody's business unless it hurts someone, at which point I will be judged based on my deeds. Law and order function under presumption of innocence and not presumption of guilt. That would be tyranny.

[EdwardKiy]

hah all you guys beat me to it))

[guitfnky]

nobody is defending big corporations. their size doesn’t change he fact that they’re free to run their products and services how they see fit, as long as they continue operating within the law.

I’ll say it again. there are still plenty of options for shitty people to find shitty content if they want to.

[jam-s]

Big, giant corporations are good for the planet. Everybody knows that.

The OCP agrees and e corp as well...

[bxbrkrz]

Coal mining is good for Gagl's giant servers around the world. Also Gagl helps the planet keep its cool at the same time. Everybody knows that.

[Andy]

I cannot wait for censorship to be applied to violent movies, music etc. Just imagine, your R+ subscription is canceled because you make "hateful" music.

[DaveyG]

I cannot wait for censorship to be applied to violent movies, music etc. Just imagine, your R+ subscription is canceled because you make "hateful" music.

Or because you make a rude post on this forum!

[orthodox]

I cannot wait for censorship to be applied to violent movies, music etc. Just imagine, your R+ subscription is canceled because you make "hateful" music.

That is not enough, they should be sentenced to some special treatment for that:

[Andy]

I cannot wait for censorship to be applied to violent movies, music etc. Just imagine, your R+ subscription is canceled because you make "hateful" music.

Or because you make a rude post on this forum!

Yep. I really want this censorship trend to go further especially regarding artistic expression. Art influences people, that influence can be negative or positive depending on the subject. So with that, violent, misogynistic, hateful music in particular should be censored as it may inspire individuals to cause harm making society less safe. The individuals who make such art should not be allowed to use tools to make them. Fair?

[Andy]

double post sorry

[guitfnky]

some real conspiracy stuff in here. if you actually read the info, it looks like it only applies to their News and Discover feeds. pretty sure nobody expects to see porn on a major site’s news feed.

but bE aFrAiD bIg Br07hEr iZ wAtCh1nG

[EdwardKiy]

But I really want this censorship to go further especially regarding artistic expression. Art influences people, that influence can be negative or positive depending on the subject. So with that, violent, misogynistic, hateful music in particular should be censored as it may inspire individuals to cause harm making society less safe. The individuals who make such art should not be allowed to use tools to make them. Fair?

Absolutely not. Allowing a recipient of art to experience an emotion or thought that is otherwise unavailable IS the function of art. There is no real logic in your statement, but you still present it as fact. This is potentially dangerous/misleading to others and so is subject to censorship by google, according to their current new policies. If it doesn't fit whatever agenda they are currently pushing, that is. And yet I wouldn't want you to be censored or banned, but rather have you voice your opinion so it can be discussed and so you could learn from it. Being uninformed is not a sin and is easily remedied by knowledge.



Catharsis: The Power of Music in Aristotle’s Politics

DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199242399.003.0012

This chapter focuses on book 8 of Aristotle's Politics and its discussion of mousike in education or paideia. It argues that in this context we should understand the term in the strict sense of music without words. Aristotle is concerned not so much with poetry and its place in society, but with the natural powers of music — of tunes, harmoniai, and rhythms — and how they affect ordinary people. According to this argument music is a leisure activity providing relaxation from labour and freedom from care, not a means of communicating deeper truths and values. Similarly, catharsis should be understood as a harmless release of the emotions (however that worked) rather than as an intellectual refinement which educated audiences in the proper use of the emotions.

[bxbrkrz]

[orthodox]

Yep. I really want this censorship trend to go further especially regarding artistic expression. Art influences people, that influence can be negative or positive depending on the subject. So with that, violent, misogynistic, hateful music in particular should be censored as it may inspire individuals to cause harm making society less safe. The individuals who make such art should not be allowed to use tools to make them. Fair?

I can feel like being inspired to make the society less safe

[Andy]

But I really want this censorship to go further especially regarding artistic expression. Art influences people, that influence can be negative or positive depending on the subject. So with that, violent, misogynistic, hateful music in particular should be censored as it may inspire individuals to cause harm making society less safe. The individuals who make such art should not be allowed to use tools to make them. Fair?

Absolutely not. Allowing a recipient of art to experience an emotion or thought that is otherwise unavailable IS the function of art. There is no real logic in your statement, but you still present it as fact. This is potentially dangerous/misleading to others and so is subject to censorship by google, according to their current new policies. If it doesn't fit whatever agenda they are currently pushing, that is. And yet I wouldn't want you to be censored or banned, but rather have you voice your opinion so it can be discussed and so you could learn from it. Being uninformed is not a sin and is easily remedied by knowledge.



Catharsis: The Power of Music in Aristotle’s Politics

DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199242399.003.0012

This chapter focuses on book 8 of Aristotle's Politics and its discussion of mousike in education or paideia. It argues that in this context we should understand the term in the strict sense of music without words. Aristotle is concerned not so much with poetry and its place in society, but with the natural powers of music — of tunes, harmoniai, and rhythms — and how they affect ordinary people. According to this argument music is a leisure activity providing relaxation from labour and freedom from care, not a means of communicating deeper truths and values. Similarly, catharsis should be understood as a harmless release of the emotions (however that worked) rather than as an intellectual refinement which educated audiences in the proper use of the emotions.

You didn't pick up on the sarcasm. Carry on.

[EdwardKiy]

You didn't pick up on the sarcasm. Carry on.

sarcasm.jpg (65.55 KiB) Viewed 11908 times

[Andy]

You didn't pick up on the sarcasm. Carry on.

sarcasm.jpg

LOL

[bxbrkrz]

For Gagl's AI Sarcasm must be a sin and be eradicated, because you cannot code Irony vs Sarcasm vs Satire. Since we failed at detecting it too we must be codes ourselves, pretending to love or hate Gagl on a forum thread

[EdwardKiy]

For Gagl's AI Sarcasm must be a sin and be eradicated, because you cannot code Irony vs Sarcasm vs Satire. Since we failed at detecting it too we must be codes ourselves, pretending to love or hate Gagl on a forum thread.

Could be. I was told by several women (hetero-consensually) that I have a Big Deep. Didn't give it much attention at the time.

[bxbrkrz]

For Gagl's AI Sarcasm must be a sin and be eradicated, because you cannot code Irony vs Sarcasm vs Satire. Since we failed at detecting it too we must be codes ourselves, pretending to love or hate Gagl on a forum thread.

Could be. I was told by several women (hetero-consensually) that I have a Big Deep. Didn't give it much attention at the time.

Typical autocorrect fail by the Simulation and its several_women.exe.
We won't remember it after our next Gagl auto update.

[orthodox]

I was told by several women (hetero-consensually) that I have a Big Deep.

Showing one's deep exclusively to women may amount to homophobia by community standards these days. That's where Google gets you.

[WarStar]

I get a very small chuckle about private companies and censorship.

First, there has always been some form of censorship on the net and Google. Search rankings are one form. Reporting someone for noncompliance on FB or Twitter for personal pots is another form. In light of this entire last year you can see Google and others platforms rational. And with talk of repealing the legal protections of social media platforms, it is a real possibility they can become liable for the content that is posted on various platforms.

Secondly, and as lame as it is to say, this is how it's going to be from here in out. Even platforms that have publicly stated they don't censor in fact do. It's now about the "brand" of censorship and this can be corporate, political, or state sponsored.

Thirdly, the common refrain, "they're monitoring us and stealing personal info and data. Well that's been going on for decades now and 90% of the time we give it away knowing that we are infact, giving it away lol
Ironically, this one too "how does the government collect all this data...? " They don't, they buy it from private companies primarily.

Lastly, unless we break these companies up, like we did with Oil, Trains, telecom, etc.. this is the norm. They are private companies and have the right to censor. So it comes down to how will governments chose to classify these platforms going forward? Is web access and the use of social media a new public trust/right of way..? That really is the biggy because if we do classify them as such they will then be censored by the government like radio and TV is... Then you get into that whole "fairness doctrine" debate lol

All I can say is 1984 and A Brave New World lol

[plaamook]

You didn't pick up on the sarcasm. Carry on.

sarcasm.jpg

Yep, that's usually me. Way to subtle for the average human I am...

[plaamook]

I wonder if the section 230 shenannigans could be inspiring companies to may these littel adjustments. They may be trying to cover a new potentially exposed bit of their asses.

https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/17/2107 ... act-revoke

Though obvs it's not certain this will go through.

Edit: Ah...I just noticed that was mentioned in the previous reply...