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

YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

771–780 of 923 posts

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#771

Post by neilwilson »

funny948 wrote: post #768
ryankemper wrote: post #46

I very strongly feel that we should be very careful to avoid adopting a legalistic attitude towards freedom of speech. That is, I am opposed to the argument that private corporations are not bound by the first amendment, and therefore it's okay for them to suppress content. I agree that they're not bound by the first amendment (I don't claim to understand the nuances of the "platform" laws so I won't address that), b…

Our society is based on science. I would prefer to add an amendment to allow to censor extreme views contradicting modern science knowledge. It is, indirect, what happens and to be honest, i do believe that people doing the youtube videos about aliens and flatearth have often enough some agenda. It hurts our society and we need to find a proper solution.

And those in 'science' captured by a groupthink? How do we deal with them?

Don't forget that the 'lipid hypothesis' was everywhere just a few years ago and everybody believed it. Now you have more chance of finding somebody who will admit to be being a member of the Stasi.

Science is, at its base, the rejection of hypotheses by experimental validation. Quite a lot of what is touted as science either hasn't or can't be experimentally validated. The non-falsifiable stuff dressed up as science, when it is really philosophy (or perhaps religion) is just flat earth thinking with better PR and credentials.

This is the reason free speech has to be defended. Remember Cromwell's Plea: "I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken."

Not every nutter turns out to be nuts.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#772

Post by coldtea »

ryankemper wrote: post #46

I very strongly feel that we should be very careful to avoid adopting a legalistic attitude towards freedom of speech. That is, I am opposed to the argument that private corporations are not bound by the first amendment, and therefore it's okay for them to suppress content. I agree that they're not bound by the first amendment (I don't claim to understand the nuances of the "platform" laws so I won't address that), b…

>I very strongly feel that we should be very careful to avoid adopting a legalistic attitude towards freedom of speech. That is, I am opposed to the argument that private corporations are not bound by the first amendment, and therefore it's okay for them to suppress content. I agree that they're not bound by the first amendment (I don't claim to understand the nuances of the "platform" laws so I won't address that), but that's different from saying that we as a society should want our private platforms to engage in such censorship and suppression.

Not to mention the "first amendment" is a US thing.

We need better global laws imposed upon them, because those private corporations operate globally, and have influence (as social media platforms, etc) in all countries, not just the US.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#773

Post by waynenilsen »

funny948 wrote: post #768
ryankemper wrote: post #46

I very strongly feel that we should be very careful to avoid adopting a legalistic attitude towards freedom of speech. That is, I am opposed to the argument that private corporations are not bound by the first amendment, and therefore it's okay for them to suppress content. I agree that they're not bound by the first amendment (I don't claim to understand the nuances of the "platform" laws so I won't address that), b…

Our society is based on science. I would prefer to add an amendment to allow to censor extreme views contradicting modern science knowledge. It is, indirect, what happens and to be honest, i do believe that people doing the youtube videos about aliens and flatearth have often enough some agenda. It hurts our society and we need to find a proper solution.

This is a very dangerous viewpoint in my opinion. There is no true science without free speech. Kepler for example was censored due to his highly controversial views about the sun being at the center of the solar system.

If the science is so shaky as to be blown over by some crackpots then it is no science good at all. Interestingly, some among the flat earthers have independently verified the curvature of the earth. This is a beautiful outcome for these true skeptics and critical thinkers. These are true scientific minds in my opinion.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#774

Post by coldtea »

chrononaut wrote: post #446
ryankemper wrote: post #46

I very strongly feel that we should be very careful to avoid adopting a legalistic attitude towards freedom of speech. That is, I am opposed to the argument that private corporations are not bound by the first amendment, and therefore it's okay for them to suppress content. I agree that they're not bound by the first amendment (I don't claim to understand the nuances of the "platform" laws so I won't address that), b…

> Hacker News Guidelines > What to Submit > Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic. > In Comments > Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion…

>These guidelines seem like a private corporation censoring content. Are platform guidelines like these also an example of censorship?

Obviously they are. Nominally they censor certain content.

That said, not all instances of censorship are equally bad -- e.g. a parent forbidding their kid to swear at strangers, or some small forum like HN is not comparable to a large platform with big global political influence like FB or YouTube.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#775

Post by coldtea »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #594
fragmede wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For one, Facebook's trying to give YouTube a run for their money. There's an entire tab in their mobile app dedicated to small bite-size videos like are watched on YouTube, and Facebook Live is all about connecting small video producers directly to their audiences. Outside of that, there are lesser known sites. Vimeo, Metacafe, Dailymotion, Twitch, Veoh. YouTube has the brand recognition, but simply hosting video onl…

Facebook is unusable without a FB account. A walled garden can't supplant YouTube.

Except if people trivially can make (or already have) FB accounts, and for them it's not an issue whether it's a "walled garden" or not.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#776

Post by 40four »

chrononaut wrote: post #446
ryankemper wrote: post #46

I very strongly feel that we should be very careful to avoid adopting a legalistic attitude towards freedom of speech. That is, I am opposed to the argument that private corporations are not bound by the first amendment, and therefore it's okay for them to suppress content. I agree that they're not bound by the first amendment (I don't claim to understand the nuances of the "platform" laws so I won't address that), b…

> Hacker News Guidelines > What to Submit > Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic. > In Comments > Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion…

I see where you’re trying to go with that, but there is a huge gap between “Here are some suggested guidelines for submissions and comments, please try to follow them.”, and “Under no circumstances can you say anything that contradicts the policies of this particular political organization we agree with, repeated violations will result in de-platforming.”

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#777

Post by mirimir »

cycomanic wrote: post #744
mirimir wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you don't believe that people ought to have the right to sue when injured? Also, calling stuff "FUD" is a classic strategy to escape responsibility. For example, the tobacco industry claimed that lung cancer risk was FUD for decades. Other examples include groundwater pollution, asbestos, and lead paint. Not to mention human overpopulation. Which is arguably the root cause of the COVID-19 pandemic. Along with HIV…

The irony with your comment is that it's the tobacco industry which started (and is still significantly funding) the whole anti science/evidence campaigns. In fact the whole antivax movement is part of a big FUD campaign. So historically these campaigns have almost always come from a certain direction to discredit established scientific evidence. The current antilockdown campaigns come from the same corner/often the…

Huh. I didn't know that, and I'd appreciate references.

I am aware that the ad agency behind the "tobacco doesn't cause cancer" campaign got into the "lead paint is safe" and other pro-industry campaigns, including the climate change contrarians. And the Tea Party. Funded by folks like the Koch brothers.

> Maybe then outlets would be more careful about posting obvious untruths.

That's a very slippery slope. As I've said before, you may be surprised when you become the pariah.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#778

Post by nostrebored »

watwut wrote: post #576
stateofnounion wrote: post #568

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are large swathes of the population that have been infected asymptomatically: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/nyregion/coronavirus-anti... There are similar studies and similar findings in both the US and Europe. tl;dr The virus is much less lethal for the average person than models predicted before we had more data.

CFR is case fatality ration and is literally defined as "people who we know are sick to people who died". It does not mean overall lethality and it never meant that. CFR is not prediction nor model, it is input into the mode. Asymptomatic non tested population is literally not supposed to be counted into CFR.

'asymptomatic non tested population' is an interesting way to refer to people with covid 19 antibodies found via immunoassays. This sizeable population shows that our cfr estimates have enough error to be meaningless.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#779

Post by coldtea »

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #691
PureParadigm wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, as the parent mentions, YouTube can do the same kind of content curation from a legal point of view. The question is whether YouTube is a platform where we should advocate for less censorship/more freedom. I think that since YouTube is a general platform and that no serious alternatives exist, we should advocate for less censorship. YouTube is different from Hacker News because YouTube is more of a general platf…

> since YouTube is a general platform and that no serious alternatives exist, we should advocate for less censorship. Disagree. Online misinformation can kill people [0] and act as a recruitment tool for Nazis [1]. Less seriously, it can result in people burning down 5G towers. There's plenty to lose by YouTube hosting this stuff, and they're under no obligation to do so in the name of free speech. It strikes me as o…

>Disagree. Online misinformation can kill people [0] and act as a recruitment tool for Nazis [1].

Same as online, officially accepted information. Only the latter can be even more dangerous.

As a reminder, the actual Nazis had the official, state sanctioned, platform on their hands, and they also labelled whatever they didn't like "misinformation" (from Jews, communists, etc).

No war was ever started by David Icke and his conspiracy theories. But NYT "official" and "sanctioned" Saddam's WMDs stories were crucial in building support for the Iraq war. Same for many other wars -- it's usually the state, official, sanctioned, news that are more dangerous...

Post reply on HN