Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns • Hacker News Board

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#311

Post by zarkov99 » Sat, Jun 06, 2020, 2:14 AM UTC

pen2l wrote: post #2

After a half hour long conversation with my neighbor last week of him trying to convince me that Bill Gates is behind coronavirus, please, for the love of our future, continue banning information that is blatantly put up on a bad faith basis. It's exhausting to see my mom and dad succumb to a new conspiracy every other day. I don't see how else we can curb this other than for the tech companies to start aggressively…

I understand your sentiment but this isn't going to work. You cannot possibly curate the worlds information to the set you approve of as safe for other people. You will only drive this stuff underground and make people justifiably angry and suspicious about your motives. Much better to build up trust by being honest, reasonable and listening to people without patronizing. That still will not work 100% but it will work better than this patronizing nonsense.

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#312

Post by js8 » Sat, Jun 06, 2020, 2:59 AM UTC

_-o-_ wrote: post #261

entropyneur wrote: post #237

I am all for private businesses' right to censor their platforms as they please. But let's consider why they do so. Amazon and others aren't banning "covid dissidents" because they are worried about people's health nor is it because of some evil conspiracy. The reason is simple and obvious: because they've determined it to be the best course of action PR-wise. Or in other words, it's because what the public wants. An…

And how average Joes form opinions on complex subjects? They don't. Opinions are hammered into general public by a limited number of major media platforms or independent influences.

There is this logical error that comes with elitism. People are generally simple, therefore must have been manipulated by a much smarter "center".

But what if opinions on complex subjects are instead formed as an emergent phenomena of interactions of many humans?

It reminds me of Cartesian theatre, the idea that there has to be a central place in the brain where "real decisions are made".

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#313

Post by selimthegrim » Sat, Jun 06, 2020, 3:12 AM UTC

yongjik wrote: post #285

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. I see a lot of posts refuting the garbage from the too post, and it does nothing. It’s like watching a whole community try to nail jello to a telephone pole.

Upvoted for the imagery. :)

I believe Bill Clinton is responsible for the original - "nailing jello to a wall"

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#314

Post by selimthegrim » Sat, Jun 06, 2020, 3:14 AM UTC

claytongulick wrote: post #115

misiti3780 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does he think bill gates is behind COVID? That's a new one I have not seen yet.

Most of what I've seen follows this general thinking (note, I don't agree with it, just what I've seen): 1) Bill Gates was convicted of monopolistic practices while he was running a global company attempting to seize power. 2) Almost immediately after this conviction, he suddenly becomes philanthropic and donates most of his wealth to a non-profit that he's in control of. 3) This non-profit runs social experiments th…

So where does Soros going after Zuckerberg fit into this?

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#315

Post by selimthegrim » Sat, Jun 06, 2020, 3:16 AM UTC

crazygringo wrote: post #297

StuntPope wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say classical liberalism of yore is closer to libertarianism today. The big difference is positive versus negative rights. Libertarians and classical liberals believe in the latter (the right to be left alone, to live your life as you please, to marry who you want, to be gay, to be straight, etc) Liberalism today, is all about positive rights, entitlements. But the objection libertarians have against positive…

> I would say classical liberalism of yore is closer to libertarianism today. Of course it is. But that's not what "liberal" means anymore in everyday speech in America. I'm well aware of Isaiah Berlin's delineation of negative and positive rights, of Robert Nozick's defense of property rights, and so on. I'm extremely well-versed in libertarianism. That doesn't make it any less extreme. Governments have redistribute…

> And here's the thing libertarians ignore: neither Locke nor Nozick ever produced any convincing justification for a natural right to property, because there isn't one. A general idea of property rights is a useful thing, but not an absolutist one.

Hmm, one wonders if this isn't why the Framers switched out property for pursuit of happiness at the last moment.

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#316

Post by selimthegrim » Sat, Jun 06, 2020, 3:19 AM UTC

Alex63 wrote: post #141

whoisjuan wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free flow of information is not the same as misinformation. Lack of understanding is not the same as misinforming. I 100% support restricting distribution of material that is based on conjecture and bullshit info. Especially when that information comes with a for-profit motive. This person can easily put their book for free on their own website if they really feel they have important information to share. Amazon can…

Someone is going to be busy... Chariots of the Gods [1] The GMO Deception [2] How to End the Autism Epidemic [3] [1] https://www.amazon.com/Chariots-Gods-Erich-von-Daniken-ebook... [2] https://www.amazon.com/GMO-Deception-Corporations-Government... [3] https://www.amazon.com/How-Autism-Epidemic-J-B-Handley/dp/16...

Ooh! Oooh!, I've got one (in Hans Landa voice)

[4] https://www.amazon.com/Worlds-Collion-Immanuel-Velikovsky/dp...

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#317

Post by Dylan16807 » Sat, Jun 06, 2020, 3:20 AM UTC

dmix wrote: post #182

devmunchies wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I fear thats seems to be the root of the problem. we're a fear driven economy now. That's why conspiracy theories are rampant, as well as actual conspiracies. I liked the quote from Apocalypto: > Fear. Deep rotting fear. They were infected by it. Did you see? Fear is a sickness. It will crawl into the soul of anyone who engages it. It has tainted your peace already. I did not raise you to see you live with fear. St…

Nothing generates fear and distrust like censorship.

Nah, plenty of other things do too.

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#318

Post by amanaplanacanal » Sat, Jun 06, 2020, 3:46 AM UTC

wuliwong wrote: post #27

lsy wrote: post #10

Declining to sell a book in a store isn’t “censorship”. The author could easily host the book on their own website. If the government forces them to take it down, then it’s censorship.

This is technically incorrect. You might argue that censorship is commonly understood to mean specifically government censorship. But censorship by itself does not have to refer to the actions of the state.

I'm not selling that book either. Am I censoring it too?

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#319

Post by basic612 » Sat, Jun 06, 2020, 4:02 AM UTC

ponker wrote: post #274

basic612 wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if this will be noted on the easy blog or on hacker news. It seems that people are too caught up being outraged to notice. Comments made here three hours ago about the book now being available on Amazon are buried under piles of diatribes. Let’s not let the truth get in the way of a good sanctimonious rant.

Amazon’s ban is a problem even if they reversed it due to publicity. It means that this is going on even when you don’t hear about it.

Does stating that they will not offer for sale amount to a ban?

I wonder if Amazon would have reversed their original decision on more detailed review, without the publicity you speak of. Are we sure that the blog post or this discourse are the causes that effected the book being offered for sale in the end?

I would have read the blog post and HN comments with less skepticism if there was evidence that Amazon had continued to refuse to sell the book after multiple submissions and signs of human / managerial interaction in the process on their part.

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#320

Post by tzs » Sat, Jun 06, 2020, 4:09 AM UTC

searchableguy wrote: post #305

tzs wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Currently, there is some kind of information you and I are both succumbing to coming from "legitimate" sources that you, me, and the authorities trust. The Iraq WMD fiasco was being reported by the New York Times. It's not accuracy that makes a source legitimate. Legitimate sources will publish misinformation. The differences between legitimate and illegitimate sources are that (1) legitimate sources make a conside…

Can you give me a list of few legitimate sources out of mainstream media?

I'm assuming US.

For newspapers Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and Washington Post would be some examples. Really, most on this list [1] are going to be fine.

For radio, NPR.

For TV, the nightly news broadcasts of PBS and the major broadcast networks (ABC, CBS).

I'd be cautious about the cable news networks, like CNN and FOX. Filling a 24/7 schedule with news is hard without getting mind numbingly repetitive, filling time with a lot of fluff, having a lot of opinion shows, or having other random stuff.

There is an interesting chart here [2] that has a plot of many news sources, with the horizontal axis being left/right bias, and the vertical axis being overall source reliability.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Pulitzer_Prize-winnin...

[2] https://www.adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/?...