YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke • Hacker News Board

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#731

Post by kitd » Mon, May 04, 2020, 10:11 AM UTC

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…

Many may disagree, but I think we need to throw out this concept of "disinformation" entirely. I don't believe in fighting "bad ideas" by suppressing them, I believe in shining a light on them. Let the truth fight for itself.

This argument reminds me of when the WWW first appeared. Everyone thought that at last Truth and Reason would be available to all and "win out" naturally.

And all that happened is that you can now find supporting arguments for any perverse or dangerous theory you are already predisposed towards online. They propagate and multiply because we are primarily emotional creatures, no matter how rational or educated we think we are.

So "shining light" on disinformation only has an effect on people if they are already predisposed to rejecting that disinformation, which makes it redundant.

There's a powerful argument about substantially improving educational equality, which I would wholeheartedly support, but in the intervening generation(s), removing disinformation from platforms that has been shown to be dangerous (ie endangered lives, which David Icke's videos have) is an acceptable compromise IMHO.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#732

Post by DaedalusPsyk_ » Mon, May 04, 2020, 10:12 AM UTC

dntbnmpls wrote: post #679

FranzFerdiNaN wrote: post #593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that you can convert people who hold racist, misogynistic, anti-Semitic or other repulsive thought by just presenting them better facts is of course naive. We have the entirety of human history that shows that the liberal idea of a market place of ideas is ridiculous. It doesn’t work, if only because for example the far right isn’t playing the same game and isn’t interested in fair debate.

> The idea that you can convert people who hold racist, misogynistic, anti-Semitic or other repulsive thought by just presenting them better facts is of course naive. What? We have countless examples of it. What world are you living in? It's free speech, facts, ideas that change individuals and society. > We have the entirety of human history that shows that the liberal idea of a market place of ideas is ridiculous.…

I'm sorry to burst your bubble but the best protection is not free speech and studies have shown cognitive bias enables people to effectively ignore what disrupts their beliefs.

http://ubplj.org/index.php/jpm/article/view/974 In fact we've known this for some time https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fh0082790

And very likely you yourself are also affected, in this case by your very belief in free speech. You hold it so intimately that it has become a core of your own self.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#733

Post by [deleted] » Mon, May 04, 2020, 10:13 AM UTC

joshuamorton wrote: post #466

factsaresacred wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They said bans on air from specific places (especially those that disrupt supply chains) are bad. This is true. The idea that bans on travel are 'bad' is nonsense. There's a global ban on civilian travel precisely because it is effective. > There is no evidence of human-to-human transmission. Sending out a message only to contradict it days later is poor communication and management. > They said that random people…

> The idea that bans on travel are 'bad' is nonsense. There's a global ban on civilian travel precisely because it is effective. There's not though. > Sending out a message only to contradict it days later is poor communication and management. I can hear the goalposts scraping by. > very little evidence of widespread benefit from masks use outside of these clinical settings’ The WHO never said this, I'm not sure what…

[deleted]

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#734

Post by MaxBarraclough » Mon, May 04, 2020, 10:16 AM UTC

PureParadigm wrote: post #725

zimpenfish wrote: post #719

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well thats my point, they werent forced underground. My mistake, I misfollowed your logic. > it was not socially acceptable to have a reasonable conversation around them without being labeled racist Well, that's because Trump is an outspoken racist, the GOP is also pretty racist (but better at keeping it quiet), and Brexit was largely predicated on racism.

Sure, you may think all these people are racist. Does calling them racist change anyone's mind? No, it just makes them and their supporters mad at you and just poisons the well. Instead, debate the policies. Explain why they're wrong in a reasonable conversation. You'll actually have a shot at changing people's minds this way.

> Explain why they're wrong in a reasonable conversation. You'll actually have a shot at changing people's minds this way.

This seems to be expecting the opponent/interlocutor to be open to having their mind changed, while not being open yourself.

Also, when it comes to values (as opposed to questions of fact), you can't really argue the point, you can just understand the differences between the positions. If someone values sovereignty so highly that it outweighs any possible cost of Brexit, for instance, then they're not likely to change their mind after a discussion.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#735

Post by baq » Mon, May 04, 2020, 10:20 AM UTC

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…

this is very naive.

freedom of speech gives adversaries a way of saturating the information channel to capacity with at best noise, at worst actively incorrect but otherwise coherent data (see conspiracy theories). end result is people either believing the misinformation (because truth is impossible to discern) or stopping the use of the channel at all (same cause, different rationale). it's a losing proposition in the age of information. it was a great idea before while technology didn't allow capture of the channel at such a low cost.

freedom of speech is now a tool used against democracy with great success. yes, i'm super pissed about it and no, i don't have a solution. i believe we're witness to a crawling fall of rome scenario which is carefully helped by nation states outside of the west.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#736

Post by Spooky23 » Mon, May 04, 2020, 10:21 AM UTC

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…

The high and mighty freedom argument is tired. Freedom of speech doesn’t mean an inalienable right to broadcast or use someone else’s property in a way that is against their wishes.

A newspaper had no obligation to publish some crazy letter to the editor. Nor does YouTube have an obligation to publish some crazy video.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#737

Post by Spooky23 » Mon, May 04, 2020, 10:26 AM UTC

italicbold wrote: post #697

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> since YouTube is a general platform and that no serious alternatives exist, we should advocate for less censorship. Disagree. Online misinformation can kill people [0] and act as a recruitment tool for Nazis [1]. Less seriously, it can result in people burning down 5G towers. There's plenty to lose by YouTube hosting this stuff, and they're under no obligation to do so in the name of free speech. It strikes me as o…

And then you wake up one day to Brexit and Trump being elected. Forcing content/ideas underground doesnt stop it spreading, you just become totally unaware of the spread, its not even talked about in social settings. But still it silently spreads. Do you want a situation when it becomes vacine time, half your country revolts? Do you just not care about these people? If thats the case why bother supressing it at all.…

Trump and Brexit aren’t silent spreaders, both used targeted video and social media to hit the people most open to their message. MAGA is magical for certain populations — they basically took the people who were loving Ron Paul back in the day and weaponized the message.

It was silent to you, because the broadcast wasn’t aimed at you.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#738

Post by zimpenfish » Mon, May 04, 2020, 10:27 AM UTC

PureParadigm wrote: post #725

zimpenfish wrote: post #719

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well thats my point, they werent forced underground. My mistake, I misfollowed your logic. > it was not socially acceptable to have a reasonable conversation around them without being labeled racist Well, that's because Trump is an outspoken racist, the GOP is also pretty racist (but better at keeping it quiet), and Brexit was largely predicated on racism.

Sure, you may think all these people are racist. Does calling them racist change anyone's mind? No, it just makes them and their supporters mad at you and just poisons the well. Instead, debate the policies. Explain why they're wrong in a reasonable conversation. You'll actually have a shot at changing people's minds this way.

> Instead, debate the policies. Explain why they're wrong in a reasonable conversation.

This only works if the other side is debating in good faith. Both Trump and the Brexit camp have demonstrated over and over that they are not interested in a good faith debate.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#739

Post by zimpenfish » Mon, May 04, 2020, 10:28 AM UTC

italicbold wrote: post #730

zimpenfish wrote: post #719

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well thats my point, they werent forced underground. My mistake, I misfollowed your logic. > it was not socially acceptable to have a reasonable conversation around them without being labeled racist Well, that's because Trump is an outspoken racist, the GOP is also pretty racist (but better at keeping it quiet), and Brexit was largely predicated on racism.

Do you really believe there are 15,188,406 racists in the UK and 62,984,828 racists in the USA? If you truly believe that then I feel sorry for you, because you live in a really sad world. Is that really the experience you have living in or visiting these countries or travelling around them, that 1 in 2 people you meet are racist? I think its a bit lazy and easy to substitue fringe views from within these two camps a…

> Everyone loves to complain that trump supporters and brexiters suffer from a lack of critical thinking

Which is easily demonstrated by their support for platforms and policies that crumble under the merest hint of application of critical thinking.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#740

Post by supermatt » Mon, May 04, 2020, 10:37 AM UTC

ianbooker wrote: post #698

PureParadigm wrote: post #684

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're absolutely right with the advertising aspect. YouTube is not simply a video hosting platform. It is also an advertising platform. YouTube's dominance is not because video is impossible to host but because YouTube takes care of the advertising/revenue aspect for content creators. Any competitor would need to provide a similar service, and that's hard to do at the same level when you're not run by the world's la…

Or like https://watchnebula.com/ be owned by creators in the first place and try to finance by subscriptions without ads. But this obviously will not scale like Youtube..

I had never heared of this.

I followed your link, then struggled to find something as you have to choose from a list of thumbnails. I then clicked to view something and immediately hit a paywall.

How are you supposed to "discover" this content? That is where youtube is so strong. Often on youtube I will be directed to patreon, etc - does this work on the same principle?