YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation • Hacker News Board

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#631

Post by cwhiz » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:29 PM UTC

The YouTube suggestion algorithm is the problem! Create a new account, watch any political video, and then click through the suggestions. Keep clicking through the suggestions and in hour you will be on some extremist nonsense.

YouTube is the source of this problem, and their solution is censorship? It's ridiculous. Show people the videos they have subscribed or searched for, and that's it. The majority of people don't search out extremist content, they find it through suggestions and related videos.

Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube (Google) are the ones who have created these problems. They profit from this crap when people mindlessly flick through the suggestions. They profit when tweets, FB posts, or videos generate discussion and clicks. They profit when bots post content that actual humans click on and discuss. They have created these problems to pad their pockets. And now their "solution" to it is mass censorship.

What an outrage. These companies need to be absolutely shattered into tiny little pieces.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#632

Post by shadowgovt » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:31 PM UTC

roenxi wrote: post #192

pzmTWLwfwJ wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this how science works, you have new information and you use it to make a better decision.

Banning everyone who disagrees with the current state of the science is also not how science works; and yet YouTube is going to attempt (and fail) to do just that. YouTube is almost certainly going to be banning literal doctors with actual PHDs from expressing scientific opinions which later turn out to be substantiated. The article says this ban includes material that "explicitly disputes health authorities’ guidanc…

Banning all practitioners of science who disagree with the current state of science is not how science works.

The jury is a little out on the utility of allowing unpedigreed randos to pontificate on the nature of the science with the same amount of volume and podium-authority as qualified, practicing scientists with years of experience. Academia certainly doesn't consider them the same; we don't allow any random undergraduate to walk up to the podium and kick the lecturing professor off the stage so that they can have 5 minutes to explain how etheric currents are actually what makes lightning work.

We aren't, practically speaking, seeing a lot of evidence that the public can tell the difference right now. This is a problem.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#633

Post by Nasrudith » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:32 PM UTC

mistersquid wrote: post #619

owlbynight wrote: post #174

I'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…

> Banning obvious bullshit, albeit akin to censorship, is NARCAN. This is the crucial comparison. YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook do not promulgate free speech. They are driven by algorithms that prioritize certain information over others. Such algorithmic prioritizations are not platforms for free speech and removing harmful content from these algorithmcally-generated feeds is not the same as censoring speech in the…

Wrong - 1st Ammendment was already ruled to cover algorithims in cryptography export cases. You're trying to rationalize what you already feel is the truth.

The definition of harmful content is already a tautology which belies horrifying implications because it puts agency of the reaction soley upon the "speech". It would mean that in Aparthiad contexts an interracial handshake would be responsible for a riot.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#634

Post by ziml77 » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:33 PM UTC

72deluxe wrote: post #419

blub wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, if we could snap our fingers and wish social media out of existence tomorrow nothing really bad would happen, besides some influencers becoming poorer. The opposite of social media today (election manipulation, divided societies, ethnic cleansing) is the state of affairs before social media, which wasn't bad at all. I'm struggling to think of large-scale benefits social media has brought us, because the ind…

It is interesting that people were horrible or selfish or manipulative before the Internet, before the Web, and are horrible or selfish or manipulative AFTER widespread adoption of the Web and these "platforms". It's almost like arguing about the platforms is a side-point to the root cause of the problem - people's personalities and selfishness, and some people's gullibility without investigating "facts" presented to…

Your analysis seems on point to me even from someone who doesn't really use the services. YouTube definitely doesn't promote conversation of any kind. It's a platform for consumption with essentially no standards applied to what's on it (contrasted with TV which has at least some bar). I can't speak on Facebook, but Twitter is also lacking in conversationality. Replies are limited in length and the way they're displayed means that you have to go out of your way to see replies to replies. So, that's why both YouTube and Twitter are closer to "selfish media"

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#635

Post by umvi » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:34 PM UTC

> The video platform said it would now ban any content with claims about COVID-19 vaccines that contradict consensus from local health authorities or the World Health Organization.

Has this hypothetical scenario ever happened historically:

- Current scientific consensus is wrong

- Scientist with dissenting theory is right

- Consensus eventually changes to align with dissenting theory as evidence mounts for it

I'm inclined to think it has happened many times in history, and will happen many times in the future. And if so, doesn't that mean we could get into a situation where step 3 (consensus realigning) doesn't happen because the truth is actively suppressed by every major speech platform?

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#636

Post by Applejinx » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:34 PM UTC

etripe wrote: post #462

Smithalicious wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If social media is poisonous and the powerful are using it to control ideas, the solution isn't to let the billionaire class social media giants be the arbiter of truth, methinks. "misinformation" is indistinguishable from "thinks I think are false" which in turn is hard to distinguish from "things I disagree with".

> "misinformation" is indistinguishable from "thinks I think are false" which in turn is hard to distinguish from "things I disagree with". Only if you believe the post-modern claim that there's no objectively verifiable truth and that all narratives are equally valid. There is a huge difference between "vaccines contain microchips" and "water retains the essence of homeopathic ingredients" on the one hand and "COVID…

If the billionaire controllers of the tech giants (advertising based services!) aren't doing it, they are simply delegating this to other billionaires who are paying the bills. Like it's often said, 'if you're not paying for it you are the product'. Social media consumers are the target, not the ones directing the narrative.

In the absence of the tech giants choosing what's permissible, you get different other billionaires who can define a benefit to pushing a 'you should drink bleach and overthrow the government' narrative, because THEY are not the 'you' referred to, plus it ain't their government.

Acting like that's an organic social narrative is malpractice.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#637

Post by atlgator » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:35 PM UTC

owlbynight wrote: post #174

I'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…

You are suggesting that we curtail 1st Amendment rights in order to save social media platforms. I would argue instead that social media platforms have been facing the abyss for some time and cannot be saved. New censors beget new methods of exploitation and platforms literally adding new continents of users will only add to the noise. Let’s not fall into the trap of throwing away our guaranteed rights for short term convenience. Instead let’s consider that social media is not a source of truth going forward and adjust accordingly.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#638

Post by VBprogrammer » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:35 PM UTC

trident1000 wrote: post #621

Aeolun wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Censorship and other forms of regulating free speech is simply never a good solution. The almost free speech on the other side of the ocean seems to be working pretty well. You get to say anything that isn’t actively harmful to others, but you won’t be able to advertise bleach as a way to get Corona out of your system.

Absurd. Who are the arbiters of truth and what can and cannot be said? There is no such thing as almost free speech in a free society except perhaps for clear cut physical threats. Also big tech is going to end democracy as we know it unless we get serious. They can decide who gets elected into office and we are on a path to replacing elected representatives with kings.

BREAKING NEWS: trident1000 is a child molester; found with 6000 indecent images of children on his PC.

For the record this is intended in jest

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#639

Post by Karunamon » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:36 PM UTC

jackhack wrote: post #528

Aeolun wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Censorship and other forms of regulating free speech is simply never a good solution. The almost free speech on the other side of the ocean seems to be working pretty well. You get to say anything that isn’t actively harmful to others, but you won’t be able to advertise bleach as a way to get Corona out of your system.

Nonsense. Almost free speech is censorship by another name. Working "pretty well?" Sure, unless one tries to talk about things that really matter and strays outside the dotted lines of permissibility. Some topics are verboten. When you say "other side of the ocean," I assume you're talking about Europe. Try to discuss the muslim rape gangs in the UK. Try to discuss the surge in grenade attacks and many-fold increase…

Indeed. There's a Chomsky quote that fits here:

The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum—even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#640

Post by formerly_proven » Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 2:36 PM UTC

cwhiz wrote: post #631

The YouTube suggestion algorithm is the problem! Create a new account, watch any political video, and then click through the suggestions. Keep clicking through the suggestions and in hour you will be on some extremist nonsense. YouTube is the source of this problem, and their solution is censorship? It's ridiculous. Show people the videos they have subscribed or searched for, and that's it. The majority of people don…

I remember the day I learned that Youtube comes preinstalled on iOS devices -- because the Youtube app somehow (despite never being used, let alone being logged into Google) managed to put a push notification on my home screen -- a push notification for a new upload from a fringe alt-right channel with just a few thousand views. Naturally, every single recommended video on that video was alt-right and far right wing with some Neonazis sprinkled in.

Social media drives antisocial behavior and social division intentionally, because these bring huge numbers of clicks and thus ad money.