Notices by switching.social (switchingsocial@mastodon.at), page 79

@one @jeff @lucy

People aren't forced to use a particular instance, it's not like being stuck in your house.

If someone is bothered by a particular block, they can open an account on another instance.

@erikstl

There are also a number of proprietary apps that use openstreetmap, but I don't know anything about their privacy levels.

@erikstl

Hmm...

Do you have access to F-droid?

There's a privacy-friendly version of Maps.me on there, I think it's just called Maps?

Don't use Maps.me though, it was bought by a tech giant and is full of trackers.

@one @jeff @lucy

I wasn't referring to you but to Gab. Gab certainly does contain Nazi and racial supremacist imagery.

No one is silencing anyone, all we are talking about is not helping them spread their message.

If you ask to put up a poster on the side of a building, the building owner is allowed to refuse permission. That is not censorship.

Blocking violent groups shouldn't be controversial. I think most of us would block an instance run by ISIS, for example?

@erikstl

Sorry to hear that 😕

Do you know if the problem is with the app itself, or the mapping?

If it's the mapping, it can be a bit of a lottery depending on where you live.

@one @jeff @lucy

Anyone who promotes Nazism and Nazi imagery is promoting mass murder. That's what these groups and symbols stand for.

It's the equivalent of promoting ISIS or Al Qaeda.

@one @jeff @lucy

No, the issue is that they want to kill people, and I don't.

People who advocate murder don't deserve a place in debates.

Murder is wrong, genocide is wrong, that should never EVER be up for debate.

@jeff @lucy @one

To put this bluntly: I belong to one of the minorities that were slaughtered by the Nazis in the 1930s.

They literally want to kill me and everyone like me, not because they know anything about me, but because it fulfils their perverted emotional fantasy. I doubt they regard me as human.

I cannot carry on debating patiently while watching them gain ever larger amounts of power, as they spread their poison to ever-larger audiences.

@jeff @lucy @one

To put this bluntly: I belong to one of the minorities that were slaughtered by the Nazis in the 1930s.

They literally want to kill me and everyone like me, not because they know anything about me, but because it fulfils their perverted emotional fantasy. I doubt they regard me as human.

I cannot carry on debating patiently while watching them gain ever larger amounts of power, as they spread their poison to ever-larger audiences.

@jeff @lucy @one

Nazis aren't being censored, at all. Not any more.

Before the internet, it was almost impossible for Nazi group to get onto TV or radio or in a newspaper. Printing books cost money, and no major distributor would touch such publications. They were isolated.

Now, it's incredibly easy for Nazis to spread their ideas. Any Nazi can set up a website, social network, internet radio/TV station, ebooks, podcasts etc.

And that is gaining them support.

@jeff @lucy @one

I'm not giving up, I'm saying that debating things intellectually doesn't work with most extremists, especially in the age of fake news.

They will usually find some fake news site to back up their claims, and will eventually say that everyone is just doing stuff on faith anyway, so why can't I respect their faith?

Again, I *really* don't want to be correct about this, it scares me shitless, but it is my experience of life online now.

@jeff @lucy @one

I have tried, but the internet seems to make things worse because people lack the ability/education to judge real from fake.

For example, the anti-vaccination movement has greatly risen due to the internet, despite actual scientific evidence remaining clearly in favour of vaccines.

I have tried many many many times to debate with anti-vaxxers, but they always end up pointing me to some dubious site that has fake or highly misleading credentials.

@jeff @lucy @one

Again, I used to believe that but IMHO it's not turned out that way. The internet makes things much worse.

In the old days, it cost money to set up a TV station, or newspaper or publish a book. It took a lot of effort and skill to reach out to people.

Now, it costs nothing to set up fake sites with fake credentials, and the people most likely to be fooled by fake sites are also the people most likely to be fooled by snake oil salesmen.

@jeff @lucy @one

It would be great if true, but I've seen this time and time again fail to work. 😟

You give a platform to extremists, they gain support despite losing the debate intellectually, because they appeal directly to emotions instead.

The reason it doesn't work is that in times of economic uncertainty (such as 1930s Europe) people get angry with the status quo and look for people to blame. Extremists offer them easy scapegoats to attack.

@jeff @lucy @one

Yes, I agree. Many lonely people are taken advantage of, and that makes them a kind of victim too.

@jeff @lucy @one

I don't want the world to be like this. If I'm wrong about most extremists, that would be great because it would mean there's a lot more hope for the world.

I don't have any problems befriending an extremist, but it is a difficult task if they are advocating my death. There isn't a huge amount of common ground there to link arms across.

@jeff @lucy @one

I do hope I am wrong.

@jeff @lucy @one

Debunking doesn't work with most extremists, because they aren't following their cause for intellectual reasons.

They're following it for emotional reasons, becaues it makes them feel good inside, and they respond to the fantasies that are being dangled in front of their noses by charlatans.

Even if the truth is literally in front of them, they will deny it or say that their opponents are worse.

Debunking just makes them grip the fantasy more tightly.

@louisoft01 @wowaname

Sorry, I got my threads mixed up.

@jeff @wowaname @louisoft01

Fair enough, apologies, I thought I was on another thread.