Voltaire : "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it"
113 views
Skip to first unread message
Dante-Gabryell Monson
Jan 10, 2015, 8:31:23 AM1/10/15
to econ...@googlegroups.com
- Melvin C to Pavlik E I agree that offensive material, not just cartoons, but any offensive material it is probably not a good idea to share. I just dont think it's easy to be the judge of what is fair game or not. Not sure that anecdotal evidence from friends solves the problem. I would rather think about *how* something is shared to make it less offensive, instead of *what* to share and what *not* to share ...
Dante-Gabryell Monson I agree with Melvin Carvalho , and others on here. Again , Voltaire's quote :
"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
http://simple.wikiquote.org/wiki/Voltaire
Simple: I do not have to agree with what you believe and what you say, but I will make sure that you are allowed to say what you want.
François-Marie Arouet (November 21, 1694 – May 30, 1778), better known by his pen name Voltaire, was a...- Dante-Gabryell Monson As for "Trolling" , which again can be relative , we can surely find ways to enable people to express themselves while adding additional layers of information to enable contextualisations and personal choice. For example, some forums have upvote and downvote approaches, one can have the same but positioned differently on a page, moving a reply more on the right or the left depending on if people consider it in one way or another, without necessarily requiring censure. If there is too much information, people can choose themselves in such a system, based on available metadata , to change the algorithms of visualization. Actually, this is already what facebook does in its algorithms, and we have little choice on what algorithms are being adopted, which in many ways may also be seen as a form of quasi censure. Up to us to empower ourselves, which is what may lead some of us to work on information architecture approaches. In the case of Charlie Hebdo, they had their separate magazine / newspaper. As porn have their separate magazines , right wing catholics have their own magazines, left wing catholics have their own magazines , and so forth. It does become dangerous when hate is brought forward, as it may directly lead to committing a crime. In such case, talking and bringing greater understanding to all involved by certain feelings to find deliberative non violent ways can be suggested, and in worst case scenarios, situational awareness can enable identifying who may be more likely to commit a violent crime and how to reduce the likelihood of being exposed to it.
- Dante-Gabryell Monson You can be supportive of people expressing opposing views, while allowing those who oppose your own views to express their views too, and open up a debate. Non violently. This can be the case in demonstrations and counter demonstrations, too. Adding information and contextualizations, for increased choice, not subtracting.
Melvin C Pavlik E ... you cant play the Nazi card in a censorship debate, and then leave! Now that's offensive!
I actually find all the fuss about the Paris attacks on my time line offensive. Why? Because I wake up every morning knowing that 35.000 children under the age of 5 die every day from preventable causes. And I wonder what I and technology can do to help. Doesnt make many time lines tho, does it? It's offensive because another plight is elevated above them, because they dont have access to wealth or media. But I learn to be tolerant of others views, this is really what we'd like to try and increase.
Apart from the event. As a talking point, the ideas of censorship, media, tolerance and offensiveness may be helpful tho to understand the wider issue and help with a solution.
As the world gets more connected (Global Village) inevitably tensions will be played out through new media, and often in ways that rub people up against each other. Tools for media should be found so that we can optimize how to diffuse these tensions.
I really think technology can play a role here by allowing people to not take things so seriously an diffusing violence. To giving people good feedback on what's welcome and what's not. And allowing people to grow online identities and reputations independent of facebook. This is where I see Henry Story's WebID to be pivotal. Pavlik Elf would do well to devote some of his scarce spare time to getting his web 2.0 following to join forces with that, and we may move to a friendlier, less offensive and more fun world ...
Peace!- Dante-Gabryell Monson Yes, hence us converging to develop distributed communication tools that can be used to facilitate situational awareness in an emergent approach while also mutually empowering layers of data for suggestions, and then engagements in relation to such suggestions and about broader contextual data, as to enable economic networks and distributed forms of emergent governance. Freedom of information is central in this. Including freedom at the level of communication of information via the internet, which is now in question at a french but also at a european level, as the charlie hebdo attacks are now instrumentalized to put forward directives that may limit our ability to communicate with each other.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages