411–420 of 596 posts
Looks alive and well to me... https://youtu.be/uk2YZfnsOPg
So just guerilla advertising? So weird, that video is in the article that claims it was banned.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So just guerilla advertising? So weird, that video is in the article that claims it was banned.
I would have been really surprised if they actually removed it. The points made in the video are mostly sensible. They acknowledge the many unknowns. It more or less advocates for the Swedish model of dealing with this vs. most other countries.
> professor of medicine According to this guy's Wikipedia page, he has claimed many times to be a professor of oncology at Imperial College: but he is not, and Imperial College has sought legal options to stop him from making this claim. The page is full of other fairly astonishing stuff, not the least of which is apparent fraud connected with the Lockerbie Bombing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karol_Sikora I get th…
So he is a paid shill. At least he does not promote drinking bleach.
Lets not resolve to flame wars using factually false info which nobody ever said.
These types of censorship patterns are identical to that employed by China in intent . The practical consequences are the same as well. In China information censorship is due to the government trying to promote peace and harmony. Aka, the government thinks it knows what’s best for people and forces it on people. Facebook et al also encounter these same problems, where they see people spreading “misinformation.” It’s…
At the end of the day, Youtube's intent is to make as much money as possible. If Youtube didn't censor a lot of misinformation videos, people would get mad and demand advertisers to stop advertising on Youtube.
Am I confused or the video is currently on YouTube? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uk2YZfnsOPg
https://twitter.com/ProfKarolSikora/status/12635183523471482...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He's using pedophrasty in his argument in desperation by adding unnecessary elements that distract from the underlying debate and illicit emotions you can't really argue against without being the bad guy. Once you see this approach used, it's safe to assume that person's an idiot (at least on the underlying discussion topic). Pedophrasty Definition: Argument involving children to prop up a rationalization and make th…
> as people are defenseless and suspend all skepticism in front of suffering children: nobody has the heart to question the authenticity or source of the reporting. But that's not actually true. It's nearly impossible to express concern for children in any context on the internet without being mocked and dismissed for having invoked a "won't someone think of the children" ad hominem. It's strange how deeply that part…
Once you conceive the concept, you see it all over the place. See here for a more in depth explanation: https://medium.com/incerto/pedophrasty-bigoteering-and-other...
YouTube consistently followed their policy of removing videos which promote misinformation, disinformation, and policy proposals that contradict the World Health Organization's official guidelines during an emergency pandemic. I have my problems with YouTube, but this isn't censorship, and it isn't a conspiracy to silence anyone. It's an effort to be responsible to public health and safety. The hysteria I see here is…
February onwards, WHO did a full 180. But everyone who got censored before then was the victim.
Same thing about effectiveness of wearing masks.
So anyone pointing out the obvious that "China cannot have lesser deaths than Canada" is considered a "misinformation, disinformation and conspiracy theorists" because they "contradict the World Health Organization's official guidelines during an emergency pandemic".
How people don't see the clear danger of such censorship is beyond me. WHO also says China has been transparent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And on the other end of the spectrum we have people being indoctrinated into violent conspiracy groups like QAnon, or being prompted to set fire to cell towers, or bringing measles back from the dead, because of YouTube videos. There's a line to be drawn here - and it's a tricky line, to be sure - but "YouTube should be totally neutral and not pull anything" is not a viable answer.
I'm not too sure if true neutrality is not the best answer after all. I think these bans are detracting from the real problem, which is that it's Youtube's system for promoting content that is causing problems, not the content on Youtube itself. Youtube has made itself too important a platform to be left in charge of deciding what content people should watch. Frankly I would feel much more at ease if we could all dec…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
CloudFlare, the biggest CDN, despite their words and claims routinely censors sites meanwhile defending hosting terrorist site's free speech. https://www.fastcompany.com/90312063/how-cloudflare-straddle... > the company serves at least seven groups on the U.S. State Department’s list of foreign terrorist organizations, including al-Shabab, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), al-Quds Brigades, th…
CloudFlare is under no obligation to follow a policy you find logical. If you dislike their business practices or find them problematic you might contact your local elected officials and request regulation. Otherwise you’ll have to wait and see if the magic of the free market changes anything.
> you might contact your local elected officials and request regulation
Voicing my opinion on a public forum is one way to do that.