Tweet

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	3 h
	In risposta a @gershuni @AlexG04012881 @EconTalker דווקא כן. גרינלנד תגרום לעליה של כששה-שבעה מטר (שזו קטסטרופה בפני עצמה). 60 מטר יגיעו אם אנטארקטיקה תימס.
	Visualizza conversazione ·

	Zeev Suraski ha ritwittato
	Bethany S. Mandel @bethanyshondark	12 giu
	Lots of conversation today about Anne Frank on the occasion of her 90th birthday today. Close to ten years ago, I was a 5th teacher in rural Cambodia at a Western-run elementary school for gifted local kids. My students are now studying in universities across the world.
	Visualizza dettagli ·

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	12 giu
	In risposta a @miriamschwab @miss_jwo @GeeH Sounds like a form of torture 🙂
	Visualizza conversazione ·

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	12 giu
	In risposta a @miriamschwab @miss_jwo @GeeH Oh no, I have way too big of a herd to be considered 🙂
	Visualizza conversazione ·

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	9 giu
	In risposta a @NadavEyalDesk ואי אפשר לנתק אותו מהאנטישמיות הגואה בלייבור, אותה הוא מנסה להכחיש בכל הזדמנות.
	Visualizza conversazione ·

	Zeev Suraski ha ritwittato
	Matthieu Napoli @matthieunapoli	7 giu
	Bref is now a project backed by a company: null 🎉 I've been working on securing Bref's future since January and I'm really happy to finally share the news! #serverless #brefphp Read more here: mnapoli.fr/bref-is-backed…
	Visualizza riepilogo ·

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	7 giu
	In risposta a @chrisking We'll agree to disagree.
	Visualizza conversazione ·

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	7 giu
	In risposta a @chrisking I'm not talking about the first amendment rights, but about the violence that results from incitement (which doesn't fall under the direct definition of incitement to violence, but still results in It).
	Visualizza conversazione ·

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	7 giu
	In risposta a @chrisking Indoctrinating people that others are sub human, born evil, or are all out to get you - will result in violence, even if it doesn't spell it out. That's what Göbbels did, and I think courts should be equipped to stop it.
	Visualizza conversazione ·

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	7 giu
	In risposta a @chrisking Read my other responses on this thread. It's clear people claim "violence!" to shut down debate all over nowadays, which I'm firmly against. But incitement to violence may not be the bar we need.
	Visualizza conversazione ·

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	7 giu
	In risposta a @chrisking You're not deterred by it, I presume, because for you it's theoretical. For me, it'd not.
	Visualizza conversazione ·

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	7 giu
	In risposta a @chrisking Valid absolutist stance, and one that provides no protection to the ones incited against (and that actually get physically hurt). Rallies are 20th century. In the online world, folks can easily live in siloed bubbles where they’d never hear about your “counter rally”.
	Visualizza conversazione ·

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	7 giu
	In risposta a @chrisking I’m pretty sure what your view about it would be, and it’s legit - but let’s not pretend it’s a street corner, or that it can be controlled by the forces of the free market. It’s unchecked (albeit indirect) incitement to violence en-masse, made possible only by modern platforms.
	Visualizza conversazione ·

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	7 giu
	In risposta a @chrisking Street corners are meaningless today. Anybody can have access to platforms that reach millions of people. So what you should really think about is a charismatic person (like Göbbels was) spewing hatred in their channel with a million (or more) followers.
	Visualizza conversazione ·

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	6 giu
	In risposta a @Nurflet I have a great suspicion that neither of us will be able to convince the other even one bit, so at that point I'll bid you a good day - I enjoyed the exchange.
	Visualizza conversazione ·

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	6 giu
	In risposta a @Nurflet Well thankfully you don't get to decide (and neither do I). There's speech that doesn't "happen to incite genocide", but that's purposely designed to do that. I agree that drawing the line is tough. Direct incitement to violence clearly crosses it, but there are more cases.
	Visualizza conversazione ·

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	6 giu
	In risposta a @Nurflet The point isn't that Nazis used free speech. The point is that the speech they used back then (that was a key ingredient in the extermination of millions) IS being used today under the free speech umbrella - and at a growing pace. Is speech that incites violence indirectly legit?
	Visualizza conversazione ·

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	6 giu
	In risposta a @Nurflet As long as you realize that you're advocating for a tool that was used to exterminate. It works both ways.
	Visualizza conversazione ·

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	6 giu
	In risposta a @Nurflet @caroljsroth I wish you were right, but the rise of both the extreme right and the extreme left (and the me bracing of antisemitism on both) suggest that's not always the case.
	Visualizza conversazione ·

	Zeev Suraski @zeevs	6 giu
	In risposta a @Nurflet And don't get me wrong - the VAST majority of speech that's called hate speech today isn't, IMHO. But that doesn't mean hate speech doesn't exist. It means the lines are difficult to draw.
	Visualizza conversazione ·