Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf] • Hacker News Board

Re: Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf]

#491

Post by dragonwriter » Wed, Feb 24, 2021, 1:06 AM UTC

sleepysysadmin wrote: post #39

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #3

I suppose they mean disinfo and not misinfo? seems like a slippery slope when one can't trust their own people to be able to distinguish between facts/non-facts, so much that one needs laws to ban certain types of content and prevent it from being seen. makes me wonder if this will not even cause further conspiracy and drive traffic to alternative (underground e.g. outlawed) information channels pretty hard to draw a…

>I suppose they mean disinfo and not misinfo? misinformation, disinformation, conspiracy theories, and lies PDF says all of the above. Obviously the democrats are the ones who will define what's a lie. Any Americans here think it's appropriate to allow the democrat party to define what's a lie and then have it censored? "Right-wing media outlets, like Newsmax, One America News Network (OANN), and Fox News" It's inter…

> Obviously the democrats are the ones who will define what's a lie.

Obviously not, if this would happen through legislation, absent erasure of the filibuster or the inconceivable result, given the structural biases in the US electoral system, of the Democrats securing a Senate supermajority.

> Any Americans here think it's appropriate to allow the democrat party to define what's a lie and then have it censored?

I haven't seen any proposal for any political party or government apparatus to either determine what is a lie or to have it censored, or to take any other concrete action whatsoever.

I've seen an inquiry into what private parties in a regulated industry are doing, which presumably might feed back into how that industry is regulated in any of a number of ways that don't involve government determination of truth or state-directed censorship.

> It's interesting that the democrat government is pressuring ATT to deplatform their political opponents.

The “democrat government”, whatever that is, is doing no such thing. They are asking for information about AT&T has done and metrics AT&T might have about past events, not directing or suggesting any future course of action.

Re: Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf]

#492

Post by nyczomg » Wed, Feb 24, 2021, 1:06 AM UTC

offby37years wrote: post #193

tarboreus wrote: post #16

Is anyone finding this terrifying? When did democrafts, the party I vote for, become the people calling for tight censorship in every sector? Weren't the last people to make this move (more more ineffectively, thankfully) the Christian right? Is there something we can do to stand up for speech?

If you're convinced fascism has arrived in America, you'll excuse any means necessary to topple the dictator and to prevent a reoccurrence. The issue is in doing so, they've become the tyrannical force they propose to oppose. “Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes…

Not only that, but the people gladly handing over more and more power to the government now that Trump is out will be in for a terrible surprise when they learn that someday someone like Trump might win another election and will assume those additional powers.

Re: Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf]

#493

Post by rayiner » Wed, Feb 24, 2021, 1:15 AM UTC

Retric wrote: post #452

rayiner wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I honestly think your fath in humanity is refreshing. Personally, I think this is just reversion to the mean where simply lying was historically the most common response. Its your faith in humanity that's "refreshing" if you think giving the people with the guns the power to police speech is the proper solution.

Don’t put words in my mouth, I didn’t suggest government regulation of speech. Though I will admit debate rules where each side gets equal time back to back to be somewhat humorous. That’s mostly my love of chaos and the spectacle of such an idea.

Apologies, didn't mean to put words in your mouth, but that's how I interpreted the following:

dnissley: "Do you think the solution should come from the government? It seems implied here but just checking."

Retric: "Do you have any other options?"

Re: Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf]

#494

Post by andrepd » Wed, Feb 24, 2021, 1:30 AM UTC

autokad wrote: post #483

colpabar wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * I would love to see MSNBC airing opposing viewpoints on controversial issues.* ME TOO. Something that drives me nuts about the current political climate is that some people are so sure of their views on seemingly every hot topic. I think this is because of a complete lack of discussion of any opposing viewpoints, which I believe is fundamental to actually understanding an issue. If you refuse to consider why peop…

> Isn't the goal of any sort of political activism to get more people to vote the way you do? yes, but not THINK. The last thing activism wants is for people to think and consider the alternative.

What a cynic way to look at things. Anti-war activists in the 60s didn't want people to think? Pro-democracy protests Warsaw Pact countries, in Hong-Kong? Anti-capitalist activists today, even vegan activists?

Re: Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf]

#495

Post by nyczomg » Wed, Feb 24, 2021, 1:39 AM UTC

FireBeyond wrote: post #444

nyczomg wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"there's video footage of him being hit with one." You should forward that video footage to law enforcement right away, because they don't even have it. I'll even cite CNN, because I assume you believe they are trustworthy. https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/02/politics/brian-sicknick-charg... "Investigators are struggling to build a federal murder case regarding fallen US Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick, vexed by a l…

Oh, comprehension. > evidence that could prove someone caused his death > have yet to identify a moment in which he suffered his fatal injuries Neither of these things say "he did not die as a result of injuries sustained in the riots". > "According to one law enforcement official, medical examiners did not find signs that the officer sustained any blunt force trauma, so investigators believe that early reports that…

You literally commented that there is video of the officer being struck by a fire extinguisher.

“The statement that it had not been determined that blunt force trauma specifically caused Officer Sicknick's death doesn't make the attack BS - there's video footage of him being hit with one.”

Does the word “one” not refer to a fire extinguisher? Did I fail to comprehend your claim?

Assuming the video you refer to does show the fire extinguisher attack, then law enforcement needs your help. Investigators are trying to find out if the officer was attacked and who did it. Please share the video with them instead of arguing with me on the internet!

Re: Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf]

#496

Post by nobody9999 » Wed, Feb 24, 2021, 1:42 AM UTC

dnissley wrote: post #479

nobody9999 wrote: post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Reframing the question at hand around this metaphor: What would an effective vaccine look like for these thought viruses? I'm not at all sure, but I can't imagine any kind of partisan response that would work, since these viruses infect left and right alike, and many people will bend over backwards to argue otherwise. Until we can face that fact honestly, I don't see how we could even begin to have a productive conv…

They're not partisan, no, but as you kind of allude to ("many folks don't do so") a prerequisite for using them properly is a certain ideological flexibility that is... less common these days. If someone is ideologically possessed, they will use these tools to skewer outgroup ideas but not apply them to ingroup ideas. As the letters in this very post demonstrate even our congress people can't apply them to their own…

>And as far as a governing apparatus, I'm not sure these tools really help provide the structure needed to declare any given piece of media misinformation or not.

If my post came across as suggesting that the methods I linked to should be used in some sort of [quasi]-governmental way to determine what is "good" or "bad" information, then I apologize.

My focus was strictly on answering GP's question[0] on an individual basis:

"What would an effective vaccine look like for these thought viruses?"

I was also trying to imply that there are already ways to "separate the wheat from the chaff" that are quite well-known and well thought out.

But they are just tools. And what use someone (doesn't) makes with such tools is up to them.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26244080

Re: Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf]

#497

Post by TrispusAttucks » Wed, Feb 24, 2021, 1:42 AM UTC

tarboreus wrote: post #16

Is anyone finding this terrifying? When did democrafts, the party I vote for, become the people calling for tight censorship in every sector? Weren't the last people to make this move (more more ineffectively, thankfully) the Christian right? Is there something we can do to stand up for speech?

Long-time democrat here. I am terrified of what my party is becoming!

I'm more critical of my own party because I hold them to a higher standard. I'm getting very disillusioned with them at this point. All the behaviors I decried of the right so many years ago are now in full swing on the left side. The difference now is the consolidatation of control and power makes it an even greater threat. I fear a point of no return.

Re: Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf]

#498

Post by nobody9999 » Wed, Feb 24, 2021, 1:43 AM UTC

kelnos wrote: post #490

dnissley wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not partisan, no, but as you kind of allude to ("many folks don't do so") a prerequisite for using them properly is a certain ideological flexibility that is... less common these days. If someone is ideologically possessed, they will use these tools to skewer outgroup ideas but not apply them to ingroup ideas. As the letters in this very post demonstrate even our congress people can't apply them to their own…

> If someone is ideologically possessed, they will use these tools to skewer outgroup ideas but not apply them to ingroup ideas. Not just that, but ideologically-possessed people will flat-out reject a truth-finding methodology that results in conflicts with their worldview. There's no point in giving someone the tools to find the truth if they're so wedded to their "truth" that evidence will not make them change the…

>There's no point in giving someone the tools to find the truth if they're so wedded to their "truth" that evidence will not make them change their minds.

Are you making the argument that because some folks won't use them, such tools/methods are useless?

Re: Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf]

#499

Post by InfiniteBeing » Wed, Feb 24, 2021, 1:45 AM UTC

garg wrote: post #404

simonh wrote: post #371

I’m deeply concerned about disinformation, it’s a major problem. Politics has always had spin, and many issues are complex and it can be easy to state things too emphatically to press your case. Accusations of lying are everyday in politics. But recently flat out knowingly lying with the specific intent of deceiving people has become normalised. It’s a serious threat. This is precisely the wrong way to tackle it thou…

The violent attack on the capitol was the result of fake news media without anyone ever inciting violence. They simply need to repeat over and over that the election was stolen and that caused the violence and people died. Incorrectly yelling Fire in a crowded theater is illegal and no one is inciting violence in that situation either. There are many commonalities between broadcasting fake news for profit and propaga…

Meanwhile the left dominated media was a major enflamer of the violence of BLM and Antifa.

Re: Letters from House members to cable providers [pdf]

#500

Post by s1artibartfast » Wed, Feb 24, 2021, 1:47 AM UTC

shakezula wrote: post #373

s1artibartfast wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree to disagree, vote on it, and sometimes loose. Part of being in a democracy is that sometimes you dont get what you want, even when you are sure you are right. Change can be slow, even for good ideas. If you have faith in humanity and democracy, then you believe good ideas will prevail in the end. There were US abolitionists in 1770 and the civil rights movement ended in 1970.

And when the problems require solutions in decades and not centuries to be agreed on? What then? I used to have a lot more faith in our democracy but I can't help but feel lately like something has fundamentally changed, and the system is just catching up to that. What changed? I have no idea, but something feels _different_ from before.

I think that is a tough question. If the pace of democratic change is too slow, there aren't a lot of options. Essentially strip people of their voting rights and install a undemocratic government.

I hear your concern, but I think that the biggest change is that people have become accustomed to immediate change and more cynical overall. Democracies don't make sense unless you believe that people are good and correct ideas will ultimately prevail.