| Nat Gravenor via nettime-l on Sat, 12 Oct 2024 12:24:51 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| Re: <nettime> Sign the BAN X in EUROPE petition and join the |
> Banning X is a last resort and might become necessary. > > But why on Earth are governments, cultural institutions, halfway serious > media outlets etc. still sporting an X icon next to the f, the camera, the > YouTube screen/play button etc. in their social media share sections? If > there had been a major X-odus right after Musk bought and tainted the > platform, it might have just disintegrated. > > Power of boycotts, anyone? > > > > <[email protected]> schrieb am Fr., 11. Okt. 2024, > 22:31: > >> Send nettime-l mailing list submissions to >> [email protected] >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> https://lists.servus.at/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> [email protected] >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> [email protected] >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of nettime-l digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Sign the BAN X in EUROPE petition and join the campaign >> (Harv Stanic Staalman) >> 2. Re: Sign the BAN X in EUROPE petition and join the campaign >> (Fr?d?ric Neyrat) >> 3. Re: Sign the BAN X in EUROPE petition and join the campaign >> (Cade Diehm) >> 4. Re: Sign the BAN X in EUROPE petition and join the campaign >> (Akshay Khobragade) >> 5. Re: Sign the BAN X in EUROPE petition and join the campaign >> (Keith Sanborn) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 10:55:31 +0200 (GMT+02:00) >> From: Harv Stanic Staalman <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: <nettime> Sign the BAN X in EUROPE petition and join the >> campaign >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >> Oh, how democratic and advanced. Asking for a censorship in a 21st >> century, after 40 years of fighting for internet freedoms certainly brings >> memories of the >> //Reichsministerium//// f?r Volksaufkl?rung und Propaganda//. >> I wonder which EU funding scheme sponsors this? >> Geert should know better. >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 07:48:37 -0500 >> From: Fr?d?ric Neyrat <[email protected]> >> To: "<nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, >> collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets" >> <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: <nettime> Sign the BAN X in EUROPE petition and join the >> campaign >> Message-ID: >> < >> CABB5BS2fU9snShW_68Z_+GOxA_1YRxZJDD2J55LC6Nv8OODNZA@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" >> >> Thank you Geert, yes we need to ban what destroys our lives, our psyches >> (a >> question of courage and politics), the internet is dead and we follow it >> into its death - it's time to create an externet >> >> in solidarity, >> >> Fr?d?ric >> __________________________________ >> ________________ Website: Atopies <https://atoposophie.wordpress.com/> >> _______ ALienstagram <https://www.instagram.com/alienocene/> >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 7:34?AM Harv Stanic Staalman via nettime-l < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Oh, how democratic and advanced. Asking for a censorship in a 21st >> > century, after 40 years of fighting for internet freedoms certainly >> brings >> > memories of the >> > //Reichsministerium//// f?r Volksaufkl?rung und Propaganda//. >> > I wonder which EU funding scheme sponsors this? >> > Geert should know better. >> > -- >> > # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission >> > # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, >> > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets >> > # more info: https://www.nettime.org >> > # contact: [email protected] >> > >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 23:11:15 +1000 >> From: Cade Diehm <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: <nettime> Sign the BAN X in EUROPE petition and join the >> campaign >> Message-ID: >> <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed >> >> Hi nettime, >> >> In the years to come, the digital rights community will need to answer >> for the conflation of free speech of a democratic society with the >> formats and operations of the private platforms for which we interact on. >> >> Indeed, the US-borne legal stance enshrined by Section 230 ? that the >> platform is (within reason) not broadly responsible for the content of >> what its users post ? is something that should be heeded by the wider >> democratic world. But what continues to be missed is the interface as it >> relates to speech: the editorialised algorithmic timeline, the scaffolds >> that dictate and shape platform speech (be it short form video, 200 >> characters, or pictures with filters), or what one must give up in order >> to participate. >> >> Turns out, all of these properties are just as important in the context >> of speech, and how they shape what is said, who gets to say it, and how >> they say it. And yet, beyond meandering gestures towards >> interoperability by the EU, or the endless protest by NGOs against >> endless social-media accelerated genocides, we widely continue to equate >> the platform with the speech. The two could not be further from each >> other. >> >> Put simply, the democratic enshrinement of free speech is the cloak that >> has successfully kept these controllers of discourse firmly in the seats >> of power. That has been the mantra, to attack the platform is to attack >> speech itself, what a convenient reality for these now-juggernaughts! >> >> Forgive me, but in 2024 this kind of free speech discourse rings as >> hollow as Musks' facile speech absolutism. A digitalised democracy must >> evolve beyond the infantile technolibertariancore EFF understanding of >> free speech, where the platform and its designed constraints and rules >> are invisible to the demands of a free press. There is a very real >> accelerationist attack underway that leverages this very flaw in the 30+ >> years of digital discourse, driven by a flaw we have all perpetuated to >> varying degrees. Killing a platform for being run by a Epstein-adjacent >> hyper-criminal who once flashed a woman on an aeroplane and then offered >> to buy her a horse is not the same as kicking in the doors of citizens >> who post on the platform owned by?Epstein-adjacent hyper-criminal who >> once flashed a woman on an aeroplane and then offered to buy her a >> horse. Frankly I'm tired of the claims that these are one and the same. >> >> I am not an authoritarian, I don't give a fuck about the Nazis on X. >> What I care about is that, after 40 years of fighting for internet >> freedoms, the Nazis are now freely flowing into the timelines of >> everyone you care about. To continue to parrot this 20th century idea of >> free speech without considering the infrastructure actor is to be in >> denial as this information warfare submerges us. It is exactly the >> belief here, cloaking the corpo platform in the dream of the democratic >> voice, that has kept us from the nuance needed to navigate these >> pathetic implementations of mass media we are still just beginning to >> grapple with. >> >> Thanks for reading. >> >> Cade >> >> ~ >> >> Founder, New Design Congress >> https://newdesigncongress.org/en/join >> >> On 11.10.24 18:55, Harv Stanic Staalman via nettime-l wrote: >> > Oh, how democratic and advanced. Asking for a censorship in a 21st >> century, after 40 years of fighting for internet freedoms certainly brings >> memories of the >> > //Reichsministerium//// f?r Volksaufkl?rung und Propaganda//. >> > I wonder which EU funding scheme sponsors this? >> > Geert should know better. >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2024 00:00:49 +0530 >> From: Akshay Khobragade <[email protected]> >> To: "<nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, >> collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets" >> <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: <nettime> Sign the BAN X in EUROPE petition and join the >> campaign >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 >> >> I concur hard with Harv. Wouldn?t want to look at such a ban in >> retrospect and regret taking an easy way out. >> >> ?What would Gandhi do?? ? As much as I understand of the Indian >> independence struggles of the previous century, Gandhi?s focus on >> nonviolence, when all the brits ever did was violently suppress and jail >> whoever opposed, was to never validate the behavior of the other side. >> Otherwise it entails a perpetual fight where the deciding factors become >> strength in numbers, not strength in morals and ideas. >> >> Instead of the ban, rather focus on building the utopia that cares for >> everyone. Even the other side. >> >> Fostering healthy communication, pulling the crowd into a better place, >> instead of sloshing everyone around with bans, will be sustainable. >> >> Lets not feed them the hate they depend on. >> >> ? Akshay >> >> >> > On 11 Oct 2024, at 14:25, Harv Stanic Staalman via nettime-l < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > Oh, how democratic and advanced. Asking for a censorship in a 21st >> century, after 40 years of fighting for internet freedoms certainly brings >> memories of the >> > //Reichsministerium//// f?r Volksaufkl?rung und Propaganda//. >> > I wonder which EU funding scheme sponsors this? >> > Geert should know better. >> > -- >> > # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission >> > # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, >> > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets >> > # more info: https://www.nettime.org >> > # contact: [email protected] >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 16:30:20 -0400 >> From: Keith Sanborn <[email protected]> >> To: "<nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, >> collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets" >> <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: <nettime> Sign the BAN X in EUROPE petition and join the >> campaign >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 >> >> Musk is a fascist who promotes damaging lies and amplifies them. X is a >> vehicle for much damaging of the public sphere. I guess you must really >> love them nazis! Trying to defend them by standards they wd never adhere >> to. J D Vance made the same point about Trump?s damaging claims he won the >> 2020 election. All in the name of ?free speech.? This is the moral >> equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theater. And Musk is a repeat >> offender. That is not free speech but something akin to linguistic >> terrorism. >> >> > On Oct 11, 2024, at 9:12?AM, Cade Diehm via nettime-l < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > ?Hi nettime, >> > >> > In the years to come, the digital rights community will need to answer >> for the conflation of free speech of a democratic society with the formats >> and operations of the private platforms for which we interact on. >> > >> > Indeed, the US-borne legal stance enshrined by Section 230 ? that the >> platform is (within reason) not broadly responsible for the content of what >> its users post ? is something that should be heeded by the wider democratic >> world. But what continues to be missed is the interface as it relates to >> speech: the editorialised algorithmic timeline, the scaffolds that dictate >> and shape platform speech (be it short form video, 200 characters, or >> pictures with filters), or what one must give up in order to participate. >> > >> > Turns out, all of these properties are just as important in the context >> of speech, and how they shape what is said, who gets to say it, and how >> they say it. And yet, beyond meandering gestures towards interoperability >> by the EU, or the endless protest by NGOs against endless social-media >> accelerated genocides, we widely continue to equate the platform with the >> speech. The two could not be further from each other. >> > >> > Put simply, the democratic enshrinement of free speech is the cloak >> that has successfully kept these controllers of discourse firmly in the >> seats of power. That has been the mantra, to attack the platform is to >> attack speech itself, what a convenient reality for these now-juggernaughts! >> > >> > Forgive me, but in 2024 this kind of free speech discourse rings as >> hollow as Musks' facile speech absolutism. A digitalised democracy must >> evolve beyond the infantile technolibertariancore EFF understanding of free >> speech, where the platform and its designed constraints and rules are >> invisible to the demands of a free press. There is a very real >> accelerationist attack underway that leverages this very flaw in the 30+ >> years of digital discourse, driven by a flaw we have all perpetuated to >> varying degrees. Killing a platform for being run by a Epstein-adjacent >> hyper-criminal who once flashed a woman on an aeroplane and then offered to >> buy her a horse is not the same as kicking in the doors of citizens who >> post on the platform owned by Epstein-adjacent hyper-criminal who once >> flashed a woman on an aeroplane and then offered to buy her a horse. >> Frankly I'm tired of the claims that these are one and the same. >> > >> > I am not an authoritarian, I don't give a fuck about the Nazis on X. >> What I care about is that, after 40 years of fighting for internet >> freedoms, the Nazis are now freely flowing into the timelines of everyone >> you care about. To continue to parrot this 20th century idea of free speech >> without considering the infrastructure actor is to be in denial as this >> information warfare submerges us. It is exactly the belief here, cloaking >> the corpo platform in the dream of the democratic voice, that has kept us >> from the nuance needed to navigate these pathetic implementations of mass >> media we are still just beginning to grapple with. >> > >> > Thanks for reading. >> > >> > Cade >> > >> > ~ >> > >> > Founder, New Design Congress >> > https://newdesigncongress.org/en/join >> > >> >> On 11.10.24 18:55, Harv Stanic Staalman via nettime-l wrote: >> >> Oh, how democratic and advanced. Asking for a censorship in a 21st >> century, after 40 years of fighting for internet freedoms certainly brings >> memories of the >> >> //Reichsministerium//// f?r Volksaufkl?rung und Propaganda//. >> >> I wonder which EU funding scheme sponsors this? >> >> Geert should know better. >> > -- >> > # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission >> > # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, >> > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets >> > # more info: https://www.nettime.org >> > # contact: [email protected] >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Subject: Digest Footer >> >> -- >> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission >> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, >> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets >> # more info: https://www.nettime.org >> # contact: [email protected] >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> End of nettime-l Digest, Vol 16, Issue 5 >> **************************************** >> > -- # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: https://www.nettime.org # contact: [email protected]