Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 923 posts

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#301

Post by Zenst »

gamblor956 wrote: post #119
Zenst wrote: post #18

Yay another extremist swept under the digital carpet, problem solved - well NO. This will just shift this extremist content to other unregulated and unmonitored platforms that will not engage in debate, but blindly accept such things. After all, if people believe this kinda stuff, cutting of the head won't stop them believing, just shifts the problem out of the public glare, at least on the surface.

This will just shift this extremist content to other unregulated and unmonitored platforms that will not engage in debate, but blindly accept such things. We already have this. It's called 4chan and 8chan. And you know what? It's absolutely better to keep this shit to their echo chamber, where they have limited exposure, than Youtube, where they have a potential audience of billions.

True, though even those outlets grow and bubble over into the mainstream in various manifestations.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#302

Post by giantDinosaur »

floatingatoll wrote: post #142
Gatsky wrote: post #99

I don’t understand the free speech arguments here. Youtube is an advertising platform. They can do what they want with their platform. If I own a billboard, and someone wants to advertise their bags for dead kittens, I can say no. There needs to be some sense of proportionality. If the government bashed down Icke’s door and smashed his computer then sure, we should worry about free speech. But getting banned from You…

The argument is that people’s individual freedom to speak anything should be held in higher regard than the welfare of society, regardless of what harmful outcomes may come from that speech. It’s a core tenet of American racists and fascists (and, I suspect, conspiracy theorists), because otherwise they wouldn’t be able to convert others to their cause without being silenced by their platforms.

You could have applied those arguments to all social progressive movements of the 20th century. Gay rights? Those were considered fundamentally abhorrent perversions, suitable for prison & physical elimination. The 'welfare of society'? We define that as much after the fact as anything else. At one point, that was down to censoring anti-slavery positions. How can you possibly consistently make that determination without censoring, at various points, everything good we've worked for? If you're pro abortion, are you 'converting to the cause' of nihilistic extremism, or are you making reasonable arguments? Who determines that, government censors? Private corporations with effective monopolies on communication channels? That only sounds good if they're run by the people you agree with. They will not always be run by people you agree with.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#303

Post by lovehashbrowns »

Zenst wrote: post #288
lovehashbrowns wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The key component is them having access to a platform with global reach. Exposing and debating hasn't been working all that well, has it? These 5G conspiracy theories are absurdly easy to bust. Yet here we are, with people attacking 5G towers and threatening employees. 9/11 conspiracy theories are still popular. Moon landing conspiracy theories. Debating in an of itself doesn't work. Humans aren't perfectly logical.…

>ugh there are literally people who think the Earth is flat. There are literally people who think the Earth is flat! True, should they ban that as well? Though they havn't been going around flattening mountains or any other harm, so there is that. Not all those who believe conspiracy stuff, act upon it. Some will, those are more the ones who will engage in lesser, more niche platforms in which such content will run,…

When flat Earthers start protesting quarantines during a pandemic, try to intimidate elected officials with guns, try to destroy 5g towers, and threaten employees of a private company, yeah we can talk about taking them off youtube. I don't understand how you think these channels aren't echo chambers already. They are... Them being on youtube doesn't change that. It only allows them to easily reach millions of people who they otherwise wouldn't reach.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#304

Post by ultrarunner »

knzhou wrote: post #279
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've never seen a bad or immoral or harmful idea die out when more people learn about it and scrutinize it. Leaded gasoline, phlogiston, cold fusion, phrenology, scientific racism, basically the entire history of the progress of science. But let's also not forget that you're asking for a list of discredited ideas, so you wouldn't have heard of them, by definition, if things are working as they should, because they'…

> Leaded gasoline, phlogiston, cold fusion, phrenology, scientific racism, basically the entire history of the progress of science. The progress of science wasn't driven by nutjobs delivering spittle-flecked rants on Youtube. Almost all of it was driven by careful peer review of ideas -- which is the exact opposite of unrestricted speech.

Those ideas were originated by careful peer review of ideas— they were put into practice by unrestricted discussion proliferating throughout the populous.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#305

Post by knzhou »

zozbot234 wrote: post #290
knzhou wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Leaded gasoline, phlogiston, cold fusion, phrenology, scientific racism, basically the entire history of the progress of science. The progress of science wasn't driven by nutjobs delivering spittle-flecked rants on Youtube. Almost all of it was driven by careful peer review of ideas -- which is the exact opposite of unrestricted speech.

" E pur si muove...! "

Galileo didn't deliver spittle-flecked rants either. He carefully gathered evidence and wrote it up, and his ideas gained acceptance by peer review.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#306

Post by Jeema101 »

ryankemper wrote: post #259
cmckn wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first amendment is about the government. Your speech is not illegal. The government cannot persecute you for your opinion or beliefs. It has absolutely nothing to do with your ability to be heard on the internet.

I must admit I find your reply a bit frustrating, because I literally began my comment by addressing what I feel is exactly your argument : > I very strongly feel that we should be very careful to avoid adopting a legalistic attitude towards freedom of speech . That is, I am opposed to the argument that private corporations are not bound by the first amendment, and therefore it's okay for them to suppress content. I…

You're completely ignoring the fact that corporations are comprised of people, and as such have First Amendment rights of free speech and self-expression of their own.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#307

Post by colordrops »

knzhou wrote: post #228
colordrops wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, there should not be a standard of truth, that's the point. It's a market place of free ideas.

It's not a "marketplace of ideas", in practice it's a used car dealership. Just about anybody with the slightest bit of cleverness and free time can convince any trusting person of anything whatsoever, no matter how horrible, given enough exposure.

But it is, assuming you are in the US. That is how the legal framework is laid out. It is extremely difficult and near impossible to restrict speech in public forms.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#308

Post by unishark »

stevebmark wrote: post #171
ryankemper wrote: post #46

I very strongly feel that we should be very careful to avoid adopting a legalistic attitude towards freedom of speech. That is, I am opposed to the argument that private corporations are not bound by the first amendment, and therefore it's okay for them to suppress content. I agree that they're not bound by the first amendment (I don't claim to understand the nuances of the "platform" laws so I won't address that), b…

> I believe in shining a light on them I hear this a lot. Light is the best disinfectant. What evidence do you have for this? I've never seen a bad or immoral or harmful idea die out when more people learn about it and scrutinize it. However, I have repeatedly seen the opposite: Sharing bad ideas increases their audience, increases ignorance, hate, fear, and human suffering. You're looking at an article describing th…

I think it's a silly analogy because sunlight won't do squat for many infections. There are clearly better disinfectants out there.

But in terms of speech, a better quote is: the best response to bad speech is good speech.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#309

Post by knzhou »

unishark wrote: post #308
stevebmark wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I believe in shining a light on them I hear this a lot. Light is the best disinfectant. What evidence do you have for this? I've never seen a bad or immoral or harmful idea die out when more people learn about it and scrutinize it. However, I have repeatedly seen the opposite: Sharing bad ideas increases their audience, increases ignorance, hate, fear, and human suffering. You're looking at an article describing th…

I think it's a silly analogy because sunlight won't do squat for many infections. There are clearly better disinfectants out there. But in terms of speech, a better quote is: the best response to bad speech is good speech.

That's an idealistic statement but a false one. Bullshit is much easier to produce than truth, and is inherently much more appealing, because it isn't constrained by having to be true.

For example, the "good speech" counterpart of David Icke is a number of real experts who are taking to Twitter and blogs. I've seen a few. They usually have single digit reach. In five minutes, Icke can reach a larger audience than all of them combined throughout their entire lives.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#310

Post by Frondo »

Zenst wrote: post #202
harimau777 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose it would depend on what you mean by equivalent. It seems plausible that they stem from the same or similar social, psychological, and/or moral defects.

Most stems from ignorance. Of which education and constructive debate style education are the best solutions and what you have left, that is the pure hate that need more than blocking in society.

I don't believe racism "stems from ignorance," and I'm curious why you think so. What makes you say that? Is there some evidence of it, or are you arguing that from hypotheticals or first principles?
Post reply on HN