Earlier quoted context omitted.
They lied because they didn't want medical professionals to run out of masks
Can you link to the studies that you think existed in March / April 2020 that showed that masks worked?
[deleted]
YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation
381–390 of 933 posts
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation
#382I'll preface this by stating that I hate the idea of censorship and I always have. However, were I to happen across someone motionless on the floor with a needle in their arm, I would give them NARCAN instead of a ride to a rehab center. I'm from the United States. Social media is currently poisoning our country to a degree that I think it may be too late to try and draw out the fight for free speech by using free sp…
Giving up liberty for a bit of security?
A certain Philadelphian would say your deserve neither.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation
#383Earlier quoted context omitted.
The solution is decentralized, verifiable forms of authority. Not unelected, unaccountable corporations that selectively (and with repeated obvious bias) choose what is “true.” Especially not YouTube, of all places, who has about as much authority as McDonalds, as far as I’m concerned. That’s it. No attempt to have a single source of authoritative information is going to work post-Internet. The cat is already out of…
This has to be one of the most frightening proposals I’ve seen. How would this body be formed? What body currently exists that is completely unbiased? There have been numerous examples of Western gov’ts outright lying to the more citizens, often for decades. That would be the official truth, with any dissenting opinions deemed “illegal”. This literally sounds like 1984 and the Ministry of Truth. Edit: replied to subc…
I think you meant to reply to a different comment.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation
#384Earlier quoted context omitted.
It actually does. Something is called scientific consensus if a large group of independent! researchers come the same conclusion. A far more common problem science faces are the people that claim to know the truth.
Scientific consensus isn't a factor in the scientific strength of a theory. But I'm not denying that there is such a thing as a scientific consensus.
That is true, but it increases the probability of a theory being valid. The exception to that are most notable, but I think it is nevertheless the rule.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation
#385Earlier quoted context omitted.
> YouTube is almost certainly going to be banning literal doctors with actual PHDs from expressing scientific opinions which later turn out to be substantiated. To be fair, Youtube shouldn't be the platform where doctors express their scientific opinion or try to win over support.
Why not? It pretty accessible and a nicely done video does more for the education of the general public than some pdf on a server behind a Springer paywall.
Because no video EVER will reach the medical expertise needed to make any informed decision.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation
#386I'll preface this by stating that I hate the idea of censorship and I always have. However, were I to happen across someone motionless on the floor with a needle in their arm, I would give them NARCAN instead of a ride to a rehab center. I'm from the United States. Social media is currently poisoning our country to a degree that I think it may be too late to try and draw out the fight for free speech by using free sp…
If democracy requires free speech to be sacrificed, why do you think keeping democracy is a worthwhile endeavor? Perhaps you should be questioning the validity of universal suffrage. If your mode of government can't withstand fake twitter bots, you should probably just toss it and start over with something else.
US style free speech isn't seen in other democracies, so I don't see why this argument applies.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation
#387I'll preface this by stating that I hate the idea of censorship and I always have. However, were I to happen across someone motionless on the floor with a needle in their arm, I would give them NARCAN instead of a ride to a rehab center. I'm from the United States. Social media is currently poisoning our country to a degree that I think it may be too late to try and draw out the fight for free speech by using free sp…
I hate it as well, and if I could come up with some new way of advancing our species aside from free speech I would. I cannot and cannot see how such a thing would ever be possible. Here's a bit of sunshine: the human species has not changed in thousands of years. We're still the same hairless monkeys we were back when people were thinking up all kinds of cool shit. Knowing this, it follows that 10% or so of the popu…
> it follows that 10% or so of the population are, well, nuts. Another 10% are so are willing to do anything to become famous. It has always been this way.
Not sure that's true, though. Here's a cloud to cover your sunshine: what if the very concept that beliefs have to correspond to observable reality is a relatively new one, or a relatively unpopular one (with a 10% of the population subscribing to it)? What if it's an unchanging constant that people believe whatever works for them in the immediate, observable way? What if it's natural for people to believe in lies, if these lies don't seem to cause obvious, instant hurt to them, and especially if these lies benefits them socially (going along better with their tribe, finding their in-group, raising status)?
I worry that for most of history, we could get away with believing in bullshit. And now we've scaled up and advanced our societies to the point they need accurate beliefs to function. Problem is, holding inaccurate beliefs doesn't usually hurt you in an immediately obvious ways, so our monkey brains don't connect the failures of our institutions with the bullshit individuals spread to each other.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation
#388Now think about all the conspiracy theories that actually turned out to be truth. MK ULTRA, Dark Alliance, Tuskegee Syphilis Study, COINTELPRO, PRISM, you name it. Would these be banned ("fact checked") from YouTube, Facebook or Twitter under these new rules? On the other hand, there is a clear evidence that authoritarian regimes (Russia) are weaponizing social media, using troll farms, puppet accounts and fake news,…
> What is the correct solution here, that I don't know.
I know, ban what is fundamentally rooted in bullshit. Homeopathy, "all and every vaccine is bad", "these essential oils will cure your cancer", "5G causes corona", "earth is flat".
Done, there's no collateral damage, but helluva lot less lying.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation
#389Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd be interested to know what your thoughts are on the UK and German models of "free speech" where no one has an absolute right to say what they want - certain subjects such as Holocaust denial or promotion of terrorism are banned. You could argue that we have been on a slippery slope for a long time but you could equally argue the slippery slope is a fallacy. I think it's important to think about what the actual pu…
The idea of an arbiter of what is and isn't free speech is deeply repulsive to me. So is cough medicine. So is chemotherapy. I can't see every cell of the cancer but collectively, there's enough of it visible to shake me. Do you kill the poison with a lesser poison? Depends on your level of concern, I suppose. Philosophically, I'm in a weird place right now to be honest. If you told me that our country was going to r…
>science deniers
This term itself is bunk. Part of science--science being imperfect and reliant on experimentation--is arriving at contradictory results. It is a natural part of the scientific process and is codified in the scientific method.
What is the lesser evil here? Are some scientist so beyond reproach that any incongruent findings are illegal? What if they're right? What if they're wrong but there was no intent to mislead. What if the authority that anoints untouchable scientists is compromised or otherwise acting in bad faith?
Nothing good is going to come from giving credence to a ridiculous notion like "science denier."
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation
#390Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hate it as well, and if I could come up with some new way of advancing our species aside from free speech I would. I cannot and cannot see how such a thing would ever be possible. Here's a bit of sunshine: the human species has not changed in thousands of years. We're still the same hairless monkeys we were back when people were thinking up all kinds of cool shit. Knowing this, it follows that 10% or so of the popu…
Except for that extra artery that may be evolving in our arm... https://www.sciencefocus.com/news/humans-are-evolving-an-ext... Totally static for the last few millennia.
Don't forget about the "smartphone bone"
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/joa.12466