YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud • Hacker News Board

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#961

Post by llimos » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 1:17 PM UTC

donkeyd wrote: post #327

Holy shit, this thread is scary. Sure, there are some implications worth discussing based on this news. However, the number of people directly posting doubts on the election results is way more concerning and shows that Youtube might be doing a good thing in this case.

I don't think the vote was rigged.

But rationally I have no way to be 100% certain, because, as a thought experiment, if it really was rigged, what would look different to how it does look?

The fact that "everyone knew" and was expecting the losing side to cry foul means that when they do, everyone says "you see? Told you so." But if it really was, how would we know? What would look different?

The fact that those who are meant to look out for such things (primarily, the media) are not trusted by one side to do so impartially means that if there really was foul play, their reporting would not necessarily be different. So again, how would you know?

To reiterate, I am not saying I think it was rigged. I'm not American, nor have I ever lived there. I'm just saying that _if it was_, things would look pretty much as they do now. _If t wasn't_, things would also look pretty much as they do now. So how can we know?

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#962

Post by vfc1 » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 1:22 PM UTC

So there goes OANN and Newsmax alternative reality business model.

Freedom of speech does NOT mean freedom of misinformation.

These companies (Fox is an example) get sued in court and admit they were lying, and claim freedom of speech as the right to say anything including spreading damaging lies, and get away with it and are not condemned.

I'm all for freedom of speech, but seriously this is getting to Nazi Germany "we lost the war because of the jews" lunacy level.

Freedom of speech does not mean being able to say anything at anytime, independently of the consequences, including lies and be guaranteed to get away with it.

No, some things that people say can get them into legal trouble, and rightfully so. Our freedom ends where another person's freedom begins.

For example, people can get sued and convicted for defamation, for saying something that negatively affected someone else.

The US might not be a democracy in 10 years if this goes on, it has to stop.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#963

Post by sethammons » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 1:32 PM UTC

flowerlad wrote: post #39

20 years ago reputed organizations such as newspapers, radio stations and television informed people the truth. Conspiracy theories were fringe and didn't have a way to spread. Today more than half the population believes in conspiracy theories because they learn the "truth" from disreputable sources on social media. This is dangerous for society. I am glad social media companies are taking action themselves, instead…

On mobile so I can’t find the source. Conspiracy theories spread in a low-trust environment. Maybe instead of trying to block ideas (which can never work), initiatives that work to restore trust should be investigated.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#964

Post by Causality1 » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 1:35 PM UTC

syndacks wrote: post #791

Causality1 wrote: post #381

Disgusting. YouTube has profiteered via ad revenue on these videos for over a month and now that it's dying down they want to be the last ones through the door and say "hey we're against this stuff we're the good guys." They stand for free speech as long as it suits them and they stand against misinformation when it doesn't, the fucking sociopaths.

Nope, not how it works. Free speech is not applicable to private companies.

That's not my point at all. YouTube stands for the principle of free speech when it suits them and then pretends to stand against misinformation when it doesn't.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#965

Post by piokoch » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 1:40 PM UTC

endymi0n wrote: post #630

singlow wrote: post #330

If there is to be toleration in the world, one of the things taught in schools must be the habit of weighing evidence, and the practice of not giving full assent to propositions which there is no reason to believe true. For example, the art of reading the newspapers should be taught. The schoolmaster should select some incident which happened a good many years ago, and roused political passions in its day. He should…

"False balance, also bothsidesism, is a media bias in which journalists present an issue as being more balanced between opposing viewpoints than the evidence supports. Journalists may present evidence and arguments out of proportion to the actual evidence for each side, or may omit information that would establish one side's claims as baseless. False balance has been cited as a major cause of spreading misinformation…

How about Covid-19 Pfizer or Moderna vaccine? Can we discuss that? Or we have to accept that it is great because it is great?

Is it allowed to cite Pfizer that in the III tests phase it applied vaccine or placebo to 43 000 people out of which 170 developed COVID-19 - 162 in placebo group and 8 among those vaccinated.

On that base vaccine producer claim that they achieved 95% effectiveness. Can we doubt that number because of the small number of people who developed disease? Is that fact somehow proves that Covid is not that infectious as people thought? And so on.

Should we believe Swiss regulator who refused to accept vaccine? Or maybe Swiss regulator did that since some Swiss company is working on the vaccine?

Can we ask if taking vaccine makes someone non-spreader of the virus? Can we ask if it was tested on older people, people who take a lot of other medicines (like many older people do)? Is seems that people with allergies (what?) should not take vaccine. Was this even testes?

There are many pros and cons and doubts, the evidences is one thing, the conclusions might be different.

Same with election case. Was there at least one case when we have a prove that election result was manipulated? I think at least one can be found. Why can't this be discussed?

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#966

Post by swiley » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 1:41 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #789

singlow wrote: post #330

If there is to be toleration in the world, one of the things taught in schools must be the habit of weighing evidence, and the practice of not giving full assent to propositions which there is no reason to believe true. For example, the art of reading the newspapers should be taught. The schoolmaster should select some incident which happened a good many years ago, and roused political passions in its day. He should…

He wrote that nearly 100 years ago. With an additional century's experience, I think it's clearer that teaching media literacy just isn't enough. One reason is the bullshit asymmetry principal: "The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it." Another is that liars get a lot more practice in selling their lie than people do in analyzing and refuting a particular lie.…

So we should just give up on democracy because most people are too stupid to understand it.

That makes a lot of sense.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#967

Post by waheoo » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 1:56 PM UTC

endymi0n wrote: post #630

singlow wrote: post #330

If there is to be toleration in the world, one of the things taught in schools must be the habit of weighing evidence, and the practice of not giving full assent to propositions which there is no reason to believe true. For example, the art of reading the newspapers should be taught. The schoolmaster should select some incident which happened a good many years ago, and roused political passions in its day. He should…

"False balance, also bothsidesism, is a media bias in which journalists present an issue as being more balanced between opposing viewpoints than the evidence supports. Journalists may present evidence and arguments out of proportion to the actual evidence for each side, or may omit information that would establish one side's claims as baseless. False balance has been cited as a major cause of spreading misinformation…

That wasn't a suggestion for bothsidesim though?

It was a suggestion to actually read articles from both sides.

Not read one article badly providing 1.25 sides.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#968

Post by arkh » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 2:02 PM UTC

quadrifoliate wrote: post #742

grawprog wrote: post #694

https://www.engadget.com/youtube-election-misinformation-dem... So, i'm kind of curious how it's reasonable a political party can ask for partisan censorship. >YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki received a letter on Tuesday from four Democratic senators expressing “deep concern” over the spread of election misinformation on Google’s video platform. In the letter, senators Robert Menendez of New Jersey, Mazie Hirono of Hawaii…

This is roughly the equivalent of the yelling "fire" in a crowded theater problem. A lot of these videos are saying things that cannot reasonably be classified as anything other than misinformation. For example, they typically refer to things like mail-in voting as "fraud" to begin with. They also make up vague but scary claims about large numbers of illegal immigrants having voted, etc. All of this has a chilling ef…

Mail-in voting really feels crazy from other countries. Just check why it was banned in France : https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/57152/why-isnt-...

"For context, electoral fraud was and is more prevalent in Corsica than in the rest of the country. The article goes on to mention that in Ajaccio (the largest city in Corsica), one list had obtained 33.5% of the physical votes but 90% of the mail-in votes in the first round, and similar figures in the second round."

Doesn't it feel familiar?

> Here also — observers generally agree on this point — mail-in voting is one of the preferred methods for fraud. The idea of removing mail-in voting and replacing it by proxy voting has therefore been generally admitted in the [parliamentary] legal commission.

Also the counting from some distant area with opaque machines and the fact not everyone is authorized to check the count is ripe for abuse.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#969

Post by hnracer » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 2:05 PM UTC

misiti3780 wrote: post #304

misiti3780 wrote: post #90

Is there any article or video out there that outlines a compelling case of how massive election fraud could have even occurred ? I do believe some election fraud happened, how could it not with 150MM voters in this past election. But I have yet to read a single article that could outline any explanation for how democrats stole 8MM votes so Trump lost, but did not change down-ballot votes so that they also lost house…

Can I assume that I am being downvoted because I suggested that "some" fraud occurred?

I hope not since that isn't disputed in the least. There's loads of convictions, over 1000, for small scale election fraud. What's disputed is fraud sufficient to meaningfully change the outcome in a single state.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#970

Post by MeinBlutIstBlau » Thu, Dec 10, 2020, 2:28 PM UTC

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #386

Unpopular opinion: it is much better to have a leader hated by the media and who's every move is scrutinized by the press than to have a leader cowtowed by the press and given a free pass on anything. How do I know? I'm from Russia. Authoritatism begins with tight control of news sources.

I have yet to meet a reddit democrat that knows more about Obama than they do about Trump. That's why I thought Trump should've been in office again. Now we've got a dying old man and a pro cop VP.