<story><title>Huawei phones automatically deleting videos of the protests?</title><url>https://twitter.com/msmelchen/status/1597807914395500545</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>slg</author><text>&amp;gt;A significant proportion of our society has become totally OK with censorship, cancellation&lt;p&gt;This specific phrasing jumped out to me because being against both censorship and cancellation should be a contradiction.  Cancellation is an example of the exercising of free speech.&lt;p&gt;Should I not have the freedom to organize a protest of my local theater for hosting a controversial figure that I think is worthy of cancellation? Isn&amp;#x27;t that a very basic and fundamental example of free speech?&lt;p&gt;Comments like yours seems to reveal a lack of a consistent principle underlying your argument.  Instead, you seem to be defining free speech as some narrow window of speech that you agree with and speech outside that isn&amp;#x27;t worth protecting.  Ironically it ends up making your comment a good example of the exact thing you were decrying.</text></item><item><author>throwaway23597</author><text>The thing I&amp;#x27;m starting to get increasingly scared about is what these US companies will do with the data that&amp;#x27;s &lt;i&gt;already there&lt;/i&gt;. A significant proportion of our society has become totally OK with censorship, cancellation, and ostracizing of those who they politically disagree with. One could easily imagine a situation where this intensifies and suddenly political ideologues are analyzing all the voice recordings Alexa ever made in order to out political enemies. Keeping all this data around, in my view, means it will inevitably get misused over a long time scale.</text></item><item><author>Vt71fcAqt7</author><text>And people wonder why the US has blocked Huawei infrastructure in the US. They have no qualms silencing their own population and invest heavily in surveillance technology. Why would anyone want their equipment?&lt;p&gt;What worries me is that the US itself will go in the same direction. The surveillance is already there, but it is not acted on for the most part in everyday life. But there may be a clock on how long that will last.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Vt71fcAqt7</author><text>&amp;gt;you seem to be defining free speech&lt;p&gt;GP didn&amp;#x27;t mention free speach anywhere. Yet you still take the liberty of defining words they didn&amp;#x27;t use for them.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt;Comments like yours seems to reveal a lack of a consistent principle underlying your argument&lt;p&gt;cancellation is a societal issue, free speech is a legal issue. GP didn&amp;#x27;t say &amp;quot;we should make cancellation illegal&amp;quot; they said cancellation, which &amp;quot;a significant proportion of our society has become totally OK with&amp;quot; combined with surveilance, will cause even more cancelation. That is bad. (And I agree, btw.)&lt;p&gt;You can have fair laws and still have an unfair population obsessed with censorship and cancellation. That&amp;#x27;s bad, but doesn&amp;#x27;t mean we should make it illegal. Complaining about societal failaings does not have to mean advocating for those people&amp;#x27;s views to be made illegal. That seems to be something that censorship and cancellation advocates can&amp;#x27;t seem to understand.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt;Should I not have the freedom to organize a protest of my local theater for hosting a controversial figure that I think is worthy of cancellation?&lt;p&gt;You have complete freedom to do that, but it doesn&amp;#x27;t mean you should or shouldn&amp;#x27;t. That&amp;#x27;s what GP is saying. And cancellation can be over extremely petty or unfounded things. Obviously there is a line but people have taken a &amp;quot;cancel first, ask questions later&amp;quot; approach, and over increasingly petty reasons. One can advocate against that without being against free speech, which means that the government cannot make speech illegal.</text></comment>
<story><title>Huawei phones automatically deleting videos of the protests?</title><url>https://twitter.com/msmelchen/status/1597807914395500545</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>slg</author><text>&amp;gt;A significant proportion of our society has become totally OK with censorship, cancellation&lt;p&gt;This specific phrasing jumped out to me because being against both censorship and cancellation should be a contradiction.  Cancellation is an example of the exercising of free speech.&lt;p&gt;Should I not have the freedom to organize a protest of my local theater for hosting a controversial figure that I think is worthy of cancellation? Isn&amp;#x27;t that a very basic and fundamental example of free speech?&lt;p&gt;Comments like yours seems to reveal a lack of a consistent principle underlying your argument.  Instead, you seem to be defining free speech as some narrow window of speech that you agree with and speech outside that isn&amp;#x27;t worth protecting.  Ironically it ends up making your comment a good example of the exact thing you were decrying.</text></item><item><author>throwaway23597</author><text>The thing I&amp;#x27;m starting to get increasingly scared about is what these US companies will do with the data that&amp;#x27;s &lt;i&gt;already there&lt;/i&gt;. A significant proportion of our society has become totally OK with censorship, cancellation, and ostracizing of those who they politically disagree with. One could easily imagine a situation where this intensifies and suddenly political ideologues are analyzing all the voice recordings Alexa ever made in order to out political enemies. Keeping all this data around, in my view, means it will inevitably get misused over a long time scale.</text></item><item><author>Vt71fcAqt7</author><text>And people wonder why the US has blocked Huawei infrastructure in the US. They have no qualms silencing their own population and invest heavily in surveillance technology. Why would anyone want their equipment?&lt;p&gt;What worries me is that the US itself will go in the same direction. The surveillance is already there, but it is not acted on for the most part in everyday life. But there may be a clock on how long that will last.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>throwaway23597</author><text>You&amp;#x27;re reading too much into my comment. I specifically tried to stay neutral because this sort of tactical escalation could come from either side. In no way am I attempting to &amp;quot;define free speech as some narrow window of speech that I agree with&amp;quot;. I&amp;#x27;m specifically talking about people using seemingly private data to comb over people&amp;#x27;s private statements, which is a bad thing regardless of the content of those private statements.</text></comment>