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

311–320 of 923 posts

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#311

Post by stevebmark »

throwaway829 wrote: post #295
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…

The problem is who decides what's a "bad idea"? Every group has its own list, whether it's Scientology, the CCP, NAMBLA, PITA, etc. What group do you trust with defining your list of "bad ideas"? Historically the "bad idea" list has been generated by whoever rules/controls you. Why do you think it's different this time?

Yes, this is a completely valid question. In this specific case: Do you think it's bad for YouTube to be active in reducing the spread of this information? Because to me it's almost self evident it shouldn't be entertained as a valid idea.

I might also ask why you aren't protesting Hacker News having moderators? Content is deleted from this platform all the time.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#312

Post by Frondo »

Mirioron wrote: post #191
hyperbovine wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps you are genuinely not old enough to remember a time before YouTube and Twitter, but there were way fewer conspiracy theories floating around, and they didn't have nearly the social impact that they do today. A coordinated misinformation campaign could never have swayed elections in the US and UK before social media. Why? Because there were institutions in place that acted as a filter. Say what you will about…

NASA faked the moon landings, UFOs, Elvis is not dead, JFK second shooter, Marilyn Monroe murdered by FBI/CIA. These are examples of some of the most popular conspiracy theories from the US from over half a century ago. Apparently early 19th century US politics was also rife with conspiracy theories.[0] This even happened in Rome: Mark Antony and Octavian battled with each other using misinformation. [1] [0] https://…

You didn't used to be able to find communities of like-minded David Icke fans, either. My father was a big David Icke fan, and he talked to my brother and me about it all the time; I can't even imagine how all-consuming it would have been for him if he'd ever have been able to get on a forum and talk to people about it.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#313

Post by aantthony »

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…

> 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.

There is a significant amount of evidence for it. For example, one could measure the effects of showing people fact-checks, and it has been demonstrated that it does indeed work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact-checking#Effects

And there are countless ideas that have died out when more people learn. It's easy to forget about them, precisely because they do die off. A few big ones that were held by the majority but died out:

- flat earth (before Galileo)

- pro-slavery views

- human sacrifice

- caning children

- hanging

- smoking is good for you

- communism

- laws against gay marriage

> In fact, social pressure is one of the most effective tools against hate and ignorance like this

It can be used to enforce hate and ignorance as well. It's naive to think that the way you propose enforcing it would be different to all other times in history when it was used.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#314

Post by AnthonyMouse »

knzhou wrote: post #305
zozbot234 wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" 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.

Let's have a word about gay rights then. Once upon a time a pride parade full of rainbow hair dye and BDSM leather and face paint and drag queens and hairy-chested shirtless men would have been right next to your "spittle-flecked rants" in the proper gentleman's book of ways not to get your message out, but I wouldn't want to be the one to say that they should have been censored over it.

Not everybody is a traditional upperclass gentleman and not everybody who isn't is wrong.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#315

Post by cambalache »

mythrwy wrote: post #169
DonHopkins wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If something _you_ like is censored for the same reason David Icke was censored, then you can get the fuck off YouTube and Facebook yourself, and throw your little right wing victimhood hissy fit as the door hits you on the way out, just like Milo Yiannopoulos did, then subscribe to his mailing list or read his blog or buy his book. YouTube and Facebook aren't obligated to tolerate him spreading his filth on their se…

What a strange comment. Is David Icke a right winger? A nut and probably an anti-Semite ya, I would agree with that. Would it be ok then for left wing nuts to get the boot also? Or only certain political leanings get booted with the cheering section saying "good"!

It is always only the people that I dont agree with. If you censor other people is totalitarianism and a scandal. That is why I laugh when techies criticize politicians. As abysmal and corrupt as the politicians are I would prefer 100 times to live in this world compared to one ruled by "benevolent" techies. Can you imagine, Facebook, Google, the Ycombinator partners, Thiel and company setting the rules and managing the government? Shudders!

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#317

Post by imgabe »

quazeekotl wrote: post #289
imgabe wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are responsible for their own actions. "Hitler told me to" or "David Icke told me to" do not excuse anything someone does. I believe we established particularly after WWII that "I was just following orders" is not a valid defense to committing atrocities. You might also want to remember that one of the first things Hitler did after getting power was to outlaw any opposition parties and violently break up meeti…

So Hitler was guilty of no crimes then? It would have been a good, or at least morally obligated thing that nobody stopped him, yes?

Is giving a speech a crime? Which speeches are crimes? Who is going to determine that? You? More importantly, who would you like to put in charge of determining whether your speech is a crime?

Contrary to what is expressed above, Hitler did much more than give speeches. He also gave orders which is a different thing entirely.

Saying "Gee I wish so-and-so were dead" is not a crime in any reasonable democracy. Telling your subordinate "I order you to go and kill so-and-so" is. Do you see the difference? The person following and the person giving the order are both responsible.

Are you arguing that the people who physically pulled the triggers or shoved prisoners into gas chamber do not bear any responsibility? At any point, all that was necessary to stop Hitler was for people to not listen to him. What would help that is providing an environment of healthy dissent, not stifling it.

I also mentioned above specifically that we should hold people accountable for the actual consequences of their speech. How you get from that to "Hitler did nothing wrong" is completely beyond me. Actual consequences mean real things that occur in reality. Not "I think something might possibly happen because of this" or "You dared to contradict an authority so you must be silenced".

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#318

Post by olliej »

Talanes wrote: post #214
olliej wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The manga carts basically gave power to landlords, the American revolution protected slavery, the Declaration of Independence explicitly stated the slaves were not people. No one should be beholden to the “giants whose shoulders we straddle”. Note that that phrase is actually applied to scientists who developed evidence based theories rather than old “pure thought” silliness. As far as despotic rule - England had an…

> the Declaration of Independence explicitly stated the slaves were not people. That is categorically not true. It said some problematic things about Native Americans for sure, but they could never have gotten away with pro-slavery language in the Declaration. It's a propaganda document that had to unite wide swaths of revolutionary ideologies; abolitionists included. I assume that you are actually thinking of the 3/…

The DoI did not release slaves, which is fairly explicit statement that slaves are people. Of course Deciding that slaves were 3/5th of a person, and slavery was legal is an explicit statement the “all men are created equal” was not something believed by the signatories of the DoI.

That said the “State power” argument in this case has always been the justification for the treason committed by the confederacy. When faced with a legally elected president, making a legal change that they didn’t like, the confederate states mutinied.

They have retroactively tried to call it the “war of northern aggression” (hint, you committed treason, so it’s not). Then they’ve claimed it was about states rights - if it was, then the Supreme Court would have ruled it unconstitutional, they’ve also never mutinied over anything else.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#319

Post by couchand »

mirimir wrote: post #286
knzhou wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There indeed were a few dangerous vaccines, about three generations ago. That's exactly why we have the elaborate clinical trial system today: they stop potentially unsafe vaccines all the time . A large fraction of the COVID vaccines might go this way. Nobody is against banning unsafe vaccines, but some are for banning people from spreading baseless, conspiratorial anti-vax bullshit.

There have been issues more recently with vaccine safety. Or at least, there were enough lawsuits to start frightening off vaccine manufacturers. Since 1986, however, they've been insulated from lawsuits under federal law:[0] > The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, ..., as amended, created the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), a no-fault alternative to the traditional tort system. It p…

A business decision to avoid risk of costly litigation is not at all the same as actual harm. If you have any information on actual harm, please share it. Otherwise, please leave your FUD at the door.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#320

Post by knzhou »

cambalache wrote: post #291
knzhou wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that even if Youtube literally censored everything overnight, we wouldn't end up living in hell, we'd be living in the year 2000.

You cant have it both ways. Either youtube is relevant and important in the public discourse and you agree with them there is a risk that vast portions of the population will be misled by those videos , or Youtube is an incosequential player so it does not matter what publishes. If you agree with the second point you should not care what it is published there, the same reason you dont care about the contents of the "…

But I do have it both ways. Youtube is a large provider, which is why I'm glad it's kicking off bullshit. But it's far from the only provider: without Youtube you still have print, radio, TV, going outside with a megaphone, going door to door with pamphlets, and the entire rest of the internet.
Post reply on HN