Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

741–750 of 844 posts

Re: Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

#741

Post by bnjms »

indy wrote: post #81
bb123 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does memoryholing mean?

Some episodes are no longer available, as if Spotify wants everyone to forget that they even exist. Episodes featuring Milo Yiannopoulos, Alex Jones etc. In other words, guests that offend the progressive attitudes of Silicon Valley

Which is funny to me because JRE is the reason we are rid of Milo. The JRE also didn’t do any favors for Candace Owens or Dave Rubin. I don’t see why they would memory hole those episodes but at least they’re on YouTube.

Re: Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

#742

Post by supperburg »

dntrkv wrote: post #447
landonxjames wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I came across a very thorough analysis of the Paul Saladino episode [0] the other day when I was researching him after a friend recommended his book. Seemed like he was cherry picking evidence pretty hard and that the majority of the evidence doesn't agree with his stance at all [0] https://www.biolayne.com/articles/research/paul-saladino-on-...

This is the problem with misinformation nowadays. Everything is "backed by studies." The problem is, the same study can be interpreted to support two opposing views. Hell, I'm sure if this Saladino guy just completely made up a study and presented it as fact, the vast majority of the users will never bother to check if that study even exists, let alone verify the claims. Most listeners are just there to reaffirm thei…

Well Paul saladino doesn’t do that. Try carnivore for 30 days and tell everyone how wrong I am

Re: Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

#743

Post by trenchgun »

josephg wrote: post #564
dalbasal wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's all competition for monopoly. No one "owned" podcasting, like itunes own streaming music and youtube own free-to-air TV. Spotify is trying to be the one that owns it. They bought exclusivity to as many top podcasts as they could in order to start centralizing podcasting on their platform. Eventually enough momentum shifts, and all the other podcasters have to go where users go, spotify. They may or may not succe…

Yeah, I’m a paying spotify customer and I hate this. And I also hate that the spotify client seamlessly mixes podcasts with music in its recommendations. It’s like a PM somewhere at spotify was offered a cash bonus based on how many podcast listens happen, and they decided that making the app trick people into playing podcasts was a profitable idea. It breaks trust, and makes the spotify app feel adversarial. Like I…

Yea same, I fucking hate it that the podcasts are taking the space where playlists and albums should be.

Spotify is going to hell.

Re: Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

#744

Post by ineedasername »

achillesheels wrote: post #636
ineedasername wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From talking and being open minded. If you're listening to a comedian then your mind should not be open to any scientific statements that person makes or medical advice they give.

So civilized experts are infallible? Please. “Mind opening leads to compassion.” -Lao Tzu, Tao te Ching, 16 “The sage deters those who know too much from going too far.” - ibid , 3

Sure experts can make mistakes. Which is why it makes an enormous amount of sense to avoid taking the opinions seriously from people that are not even experts because they are significantly more likely to make mistakes based on incomplete knowledge or poor understanding of it.

Imagine drowning: If we were talking about expert lifeguards vs. some random beach goer and you had to choose which would try & save you, would you choose the expert lifeguard or the random person?

And sure, Lao Tzu may be right about compassion. It's also irrelevant in this discussion.

Re: Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

#745

Post by actually_a_dog »

read_if_gay_ wrote: post #445
nate_meurer wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The claim by the experts was that the vaccines were 95% effective at stopping the spread. No, vaccines are not expected to prevent infection or spread, and almost none do. For example, flu vaccines don't keep you from from getting infected, and the virus still spreads successfully even when vaccination rates are high. What the flu shot does is (hopefully) cause you to have less severe symptoms. Vaccines are designe…

If that is such an universally understood principle then a lot of people are badly misinformed. I can’t count how often I hear “if everybody just took the vaccine the virus would be gone within insert timespan ” even in academic circles.

That's just a matter of conflating "the virus" with "the disease." People do this all the time. Usually it doesn't matter. In this case, it does.

Re: Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

#748

Post by mavhc »

jessaustin wrote: post #537
mavhc wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's 1000 sane hosts who have the same interesting guests though, don't support the crazy people, we've seen where that leads us

Name ten.

People I mostly admire

The Life Scientific

Ted Interview

How I Built This

TWIML

This Week in Virology

Freakonomics

The Changelog

And Lex Fridman and Tim Ferris have their own shows

Re: Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

#749

Post by trompetenaccoun »

krapp wrote: post #739
trompetenaccoun wrote: post #727

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Deplatforming" works, because what you just did is use a nicer sounding euphemism for censorship. Obviously with censorship you can hinder the spread of information, regimes like the CCP do this very successfully. The question is at what cost, and who decides what is misinformation? Does it actually result in a net positive for society over time? The most livable societies I know are all open societies. Once you sta…

>The most livable societies I know are all open societies. If by "open" societies you mean societies in which no form of "censorship" is practiced by any entity, at any level, then no, you do not, because such societies do not exist. Even the United States has limits placed on speech at the Federal level (the level limited by the First Amendment) and elsewhere. Even public squares are regulated. And on top of everyth…

And yet increasing cases of such censorship are exactly what we observe. A recent extreme example was an Oxford professor of epidemiology who had his post removed for 'false information'. They're also outright banning all News in Australia now: https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2021/02/18/exper...

>feel free to "lobby" the mods about it.

Sure, we both know they won't remove you. If I were an elite and actually had the power to have your voice removed from all popular platforms, as well as access to Visa transactions and banking etc. like it happened to Jones, you'd still support it, right?

It's of course known these Silicon Valley corporations aren't really multi-billion dollar businesses, but collectivized people who have personhood and free speech rights. By creating oligopolies and controlling what information we view, they only exercise their rights as citizens the world.

Re: Joe Rogan, confined to Spotify, is losing influence

#750

Post by DoingIsLearning »

cbozeman wrote: post #690
snet0 wrote: post #681

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is naïve. Taking Sandy Hook as the example, do you think Alex Jones' discussion on Rogan increased or decreased its spread? It's very easy to pick up new conspiracies for a conspiracy-minded person. It's very hard to drop them.

What's "naïve" is you or anyone else thinking they have the power to "nudge people into better patterns", which is exactly what the kind of behavior you're promoting attempts to accomplish. You can't, and you never will. Culture evolves slowly, and humans even slower.

> What's "naïve" is you or anyone else thinking they have the power to "nudge people into better patterns" > You can't, and you never will. Culture evolves slowly, and humans even slower.

There is ample evidence since at least World War I, that both 'positive' PSA type information and 'negative' propaganda/counter information/psy ops absolutely have an effect.

Reminder that the Wakefield fraud in 1998, on M.M.R. vaccines and autism, started a negative sentiment towards vaccination and is directly attributed to the measles outbreaks (and deaths) across the developed world (Amplified by Oprah's platform). [1]

Reminder that still today many people will claim carrots give you better vision (they are indeed healthy). This was a counter-info operation from the British, claiming they were providing Air Control with carrots, in order to hide the existing of newly invented RADAR technology against German Bombers. [2]

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3136032/

[2] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/a-wwii-propagand...

Post reply on HN