Spotify censored Joe Rogan episodes • Hacker News Board

Re: Spotify censored Joe Rogan episodes

#41

Post by krapp » Tue, Sep 01, 2020, 3:15 PM UTC

gridlockd wrote: post #39

aaron695 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From your link - "One of Jones’ most notorious conspiracy theories is that the government is using chemicals in order to turn people gay, using a mysterious “gay bomb” devised by the Pentagon." Except BBC also pretty much reported on that in 2005 - "The US military investigated building a "gay bomb"" - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4174519.stm And that's why I want Joe Rogan to interview him. I want to know why Alex Jon…

To be fair, they admit that a potential "gay bomb project" was real. They didn't report that the "gay frog experiment" was real though. Most conspiracy theories have some sort of factual basis. What makes them conspiracy theories is the wild exaggerations, unfounded extrapolations and unproven connections to all other conspiracy theories . I have my own "conspiracy theory", which is that people like Alex Jones are as…

From what I can tell, there was never any "gay bomb project" to begin with. While the proposed cost of the project was estimated at about 7 million dollars, no taxpayer money ever flowed into gay bomb research, except maybe the cost of printing a three page proposal. It was one of hundreds of speculative projects deemed too problematic to be workable, and never funded or implemented - which the linked article actually points out.

Unfortunately, people see an article about "the US government once considered a 'gay bomb' but dismissed it as ridiculous" and read "the US government has a secret Manhattan Project for gay bombs" and conclude "Alex Jones wasn't entirely wrong because, you know, the government is building gay bombs like he said. And if they're doing that, maybe they are putting something in the water. "

The entire line of reasoning is specious.

Re: Spotify censored Joe Rogan episodes

#42

Post by gridlockd » Tue, Sep 01, 2020, 3:38 PM UTC

krapp wrote: post #41

gridlockd wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, they admit that a potential "gay bomb project" was real. They didn't report that the "gay frog experiment" was real though. Most conspiracy theories have some sort of factual basis. What makes them conspiracy theories is the wild exaggerations, unfounded extrapolations and unproven connections to all other conspiracy theories . I have my own "conspiracy theory", which is that people like Alex Jones are as…

From what I can tell, there was never any "gay bomb project" to begin with. While the proposed cost of the project was estimated at about 7 million dollars, no taxpayer money ever flowed into gay bomb research, except maybe the cost of printing a three page proposal. It was one of hundreds of speculative projects deemed too problematic to be workable, and never funded or implemented - which the linked article actuall…

I didn't say the project was undertaken, but it was real enough for someone to come up with the idea, ballpark the cost of it, write up the proposal and have a bunch of presumably high-paid decision-makers read it in order to come to the conclusion that it's just a little bit too ridiculous. That's all on the tax dollar.

Of course, of all the egregious military research that has been undertaken, that one is just a whimsical side note. It could serve as a red herring even without any conspiracy theorist. I'd certainly sleep easier believing that the military is busy researching the gay bomb instead of the doomsday device.

Re: Spotify censored Joe Rogan episodes

#43

Post by krapp » Tue, Sep 01, 2020, 5:18 PM UTC

gridlockd wrote: post #42

krapp wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I can tell, there was never any "gay bomb project" to begin with. While the proposed cost of the project was estimated at about 7 million dollars, no taxpayer money ever flowed into gay bomb research, except maybe the cost of printing a three page proposal. It was one of hundreds of speculative projects deemed too problematic to be workable, and never funded or implemented - which the linked article actuall…

I didn't say the project was undertaken, but it was real enough for someone to come up with the idea, ballpark the cost of it, write up the proposal and have a bunch of presumably high-paid decision-makers read it in order to come to the conclusion that it's just a little bit too ridiculous. That's all on the tax dollar. Of course, of all the egregious military research that has been undertaken, that one is just a wh…

>but it was real enough for someone to come up with the idea, ballpark the cost of it, write up the proposal and have a bunch of presumably high-paid decision-makers read it in order to come to the conclusion that it's just a little bit too ridiculous. That's all on the tax dollar.

A research laboratory speculated about possible areas of nonlethal chemical weapons research, and created a three page proposal, among which was a reference to what would be called the "gay bomb." That's their job.

Here is the proposal[0]. That's how "real" the "gay bomb" was - a single brief paragraph on the second page.

This isn't "egregious military research," it's a step above a doodle scribbled onto a napkin that someone else threw into the wastebasket.

[0]https://web.archive.org/web/20060502201217if_/http://www.sun...

Re: Spotify censored Joe Rogan episodes

#44

Post by bluescrn » Tue, Sep 01, 2020, 11:13 PM UTC

chiefalchemist wrote: post #21

wccrawford wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censor As a verb, it's used the same as Merriam Webster defines it. There is no need for it to be the government, just someone that is suppressing or deleting things that are objectionable. Everyone knows what is meant here, so there's no problem with the clarity of communication.

The point is simple: Censorship laws do not protect against this type of "censorship". So yes, out of context it meets the vanilla definition of the word. Unfortunately, in the current sociopolitical environment where such things are front and center, the word is misleading. Spotify is not Uncle Sam, and vice versa. Context matters, and therefore censor is an extremely poor choice. It hurts more than it helps. In fac…

These days, corporations are arguably more powerful than governments. Censorship by big tech should be taken more seriously. It might be easy to cheer it on while it’s mostly right-wing voices being deplatformed, but it may not always be the case that these companies are on your side.

Re: Spotify censored Joe Rogan episodes

#45

Post by hayd » Wed, Sep 02, 2020, 9:58 PM UTC

jasode wrote: post #8

Fyi... part of Rogan's deal he signed with Spotify requires him to delete his videos from Youtube by the end of the year so Spotify becomes the "exclusive" place for JRE. I didn't know about this until a few weeks ago. Apparently, some folks have already archived (i.e. youtube-dl) all of his old videos before they disappear.[0] It would be interesting to check back next year and see if these Spotify rejected/censored…

I don't think this is the case. It's that new episodes will be exclusive to Spotify and won't be uploaded to YouTube.

edit: No, my mistake, the suggestion is that all but 100 or so videos will be migrated and then deleted from YouTube. I guess I'd misunderstood the earlier statements!