Just a note that the book in question has been re-published: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B089P216NP/
Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns
71–80 of 345 posts
Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns
#72[flagged]
As a somewhat libertarian, I disagree with Amazon's actions, but I also don't believe the government ought to be able to force them to do otherwise.
Why do you pretend this viewpoint doesn't exist? That's the normal viewpoint of a libertarian. In fact one might even call it the canonical viewpoint.
Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns
#73After 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…
Why does he think bill gates is behind COVID? That's a new one I have not seen yet.
I believe the story goes that Bill Gates created COVID-19 to force people to accept microchip implants that will then be used to control their minds.
Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns
#74There's a lot of issues at play here- what constitutes censorship, the monopolistic power of big tech platforms, how to address misinformation. I suspect the root cause is that we live in an extremely segmented information society now, modern life is incredibly complex and self-filtered information bubbles very easy to fall into. Echoing some of the comments, the Streisand effect will only disseminate misinfo and disinfo further, and create a martyr effect that self-defeatingly amplifies the power of the content being suppressed.* But there's really no other good options either. We live in an age where one set of facts will only be countered by a different set of opposing facts, a different list of footnotes and sources, all tailored for that opposite opinion. No one really has time to check all of the links anymore. So much of society simply rests on blind faith on one's own set of experts and gurus. The polarized environment renders your opposite experts into dupes, liars, or agents of shadowy powers, worthy of the worst insults. "Education" doesn't really help fight misconception or conspiracy theories because any inconvenient fact is easily rejected as propaganda by your enemies.
* Though not in all cases. In some cases de-platforming has been very effective https://mashable.com/article/milo-yiannopoulos-deplatforming...
How does this apply to tech specifically? Amidst this climate of post-truth and truthiness, the big tech platforms have become de facto gatekeepers, guardians of public truth. Something they neither are capable of being, nor should they be. In a healthy civilization, the government, businesses, and civil society should all have roles to play in promoting harmony and fostering understanding. But we've somehow let the infection of division and ignorance take root, so here we are.
On the flip side, something I was thinking about regarding the recent Facebook/Twitter controversies and policing or not policing the president's speech: how is it really different from '90s AOL chat rooms or '00s vBulletin message boards having TOS that forbid certain types of inflammatory, hateful, or otherwise objectionable content? Why was everyone fine with those supposedly "anti-free speech" or "unconstitutional" policies in past decades? Was it simply a matter of scale? Those platforms and online communities were smaller so fewer people got mad about them? Because for a long time, people posting on the internet simply accepted that there is no absolute free speech anywhere, even if they hated the mods.
Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns
#75After 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…
How do you know that the book in question was putting up misinformation on a bad faith basis?
You don't, and you won't, because the decision has been made for you.
You honestly think there is no legitimate information to be added to the equation from outside official sources? And that official sources, are, by definition right about everything?
Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns
#76Never thought we'd see wide support for book restriction or censorship again. Are people not reading history or considering the second order effects? Heck, you don't even have to go back that far. Just look how badly "official sources" handled Covid-19. For example, remember what the official word was, even despite being a self-contradiction: masks don't work, but save them for health workers. You may say that's a no…
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…
> That's not what free speech is.
The argument becomes more difficult the more widely used and essential a platform is. Would you make the same argument about being restricted in what you can say over a private chat service? Over the last decades and especially during the pandemic how people assemble and use their right to free speech has massively shifted.
Before you assume that I hold an strong opinion on this: I don't think I do. I don't know where I want the line to be.
Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns
#77Never thought we'd see wide support for book restriction or censorship again. Are people not reading history or considering the second order effects? Heck, you don't even have to go back that far. Just look how badly "official sources" handled Covid-19. For example, remember what the official word was, even despite being a self-contradiction: masks don't work, but save them for health workers. You may say that's a no…
This isn't censorship. Are we going to get mad at a children's book store refusing to carry explicit adult literature? Amazon has put in place publicly know and clearly defined policies for a specific and unique situation. This is not a slippery slope. The second they step out of that boundary there will be severe backlash.
Unless it's for another good reason.
Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
‘who decides what is bullshit’ Is the usual problem with this.
I don't buy the argument that bullshit exists on a perpetually grey gradient. There are things that are clearly bullshit.
I think flat earth falls into that category. However... the problem is there are also things that seem clearly like bullshit that we later find out not to be.
Have you ever been completely convinced about something that turned out to be entirely wrong? Almost certainly, probably more than a few times. It happens to all of us. And sometimes this happens on a societal scale with things like science and civil rights. Ideas not accepted at the time, attempted silence, but fortunately resisted censorship until history was able to bore them out.
Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns
#79Official sources are continuing to mess up, and causing more destruction than this book ever could. The Lancet is about as official as it gets: https://www.thelancet.com/lancet/article/s0140673620313246
I'm generally confused why you are being downvoted for pointing this out.
HN should really get rid of downvotes.
They only play one role: To alter how others perceive a post
I am unfortunately immediately biased against a post that is greyed out. Greyed posts are increasingly just a different political view rather than an objectively wrong statement.
If a post is truly problematic, there is a flag option.
Let the cream rise to the top, but don't tell people how to think.
Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn't censorship. Are we going to get mad at a children's book store refusing to carry explicit adult literature? Amazon has put in place publicly know and clearly defined policies for a specific and unique situation. This is not a slippery slope. The second they step out of that boundary there will be severe backlash.
Unless it's for another good reason.
There is always another good reason.