Author Topic: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back  (Read 30707 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline cdev

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • !
  • Posts: 7350
  • Country: 00
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #200 on: May 04, 2022, 01:25:02 am »
CDEV, you're completely out of control. I honestly feel bad for you; living in constant fear of, well apparently everything, must be exhausting at best and probably much worse.

Seriously, you need to take care of yourself.

I'm fine and I think I'm being fairly lucid.. Do you understand what I have said, and what I havent said.. (anything unclear)
"What the large print giveth, the small print taketh away."
 

Offline cdev

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • !
  • Posts: 7350
  • Country: 00
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #201 on: May 04, 2022, 01:29:11 am »
The government
--- cut - stuff ---

Is everything alright ?

You seem to be making quite a lot of, posts. Which seem to be worried about the Government and stuff.

Are you okay?
"What the large print giveth, the small print taketh away."
 

Offline MK14

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4987
  • Country: gb
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #202 on: May 04, 2022, 01:29:58 am »
 

Offline eugene

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 497
  • Country: us
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #203 on: May 04, 2022, 02:22:41 am »
CDEV, you're completely out of control. I honestly feel bad for you; living in constant fear of, well apparently everything, must be exhausting at best and probably much worse.

Seriously, you need to take care of yourself.

I'm fine and I think I'm being fairly lucid.. Do you understand what I have said, and what I havent said.. (anything unclear)

I think I understood both what you said and what you didn't say.

Good talk. Good talk.
90% of quoted statistics are fictional
 

Offline Nominal Animal

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7193
  • Country: fi
    • My home page and email address
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #204 on: May 04, 2022, 05:13:24 am »
Fortunately social media and regular media start to see that they have a responsibility for removing false information
That is utterly sick and twisted.

Journalists are not supposed to be the guardians of truth!  They are not the watchdogs of the population, they are the watchdogs of the powers that be!

God dammit I utterly, utterly despise the idea of information providers limiting access to information based on what they believe to be true or factual.  It is not their right, nor their responsibility.

or at least tagging information as not being verified
Now that is perfectly reasonable, and something any respectable journalist always does.  I agree.

or at least tagging information as not being true
Do you not realize that those you demand should limit others' access to information are just as fallible as everyone else?

Think of the situation where 98% of those working at the media you can access easily were Trumpists.  Would you feel okay accepting their definition of truth as your own?

Hell, regardless of what kind of political views those people have, why on Earth would you accept their definition of truth as your own anyway?
Or is it that you are comfortably stuck with your own views that no data can shake, and you're worried about what other people might consider to be the truth, and limit that?

Anyone can set up an "intelligence-gathering outfit" in their Mom's garage like Bellingcat, and construct a circle of actors to provide enough references to make any kind of claim and label it "true" by referring to each other.  That's how most "fact checkers" work.

What I want, is everybody to acknowledge that they never, ever have all the facts.  It is not the purpose nor the right of a news house or social media to limit the exchange of information, especially to some arbitrarily politically defined subset they deem "true".  (Especially since in the last few years, quite a few of the "conspiracy theories" from Trump's election being a result of Russian manipulation, to Hunter Biden's laptop and its damning evidence of the Biden family money-for-power politics, have now been shown to be factual, contrary to what majority of media insisted at the time.  Fact is, no pun intended, that "fact checking" has nothing to do with verifiable facts, and everything to do with selecting which sources one wants to believe.)

Tagging is fine.  Removing or region-restricting illegal content is fine.  (It's up to the local population to decide what they consider illegal, in my opinion.)
But handing anyone the right to deem information as "not for the population to see or discuss" because is is not "true" is unbelievably fascist, authoritarian idea, that I will fight against.  The hate speech laws here in EU are utterly ridiculous already, what with a Finnish former minister and current member of parliament being dragged through the courts for quoting the Bible.  (I'm not actually Christian myself.)
 
The following users thanked this post: rsjsouza, james_s

Offline ve7xen

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1195
  • Country: ca
    • VE7XEN Blog
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #205 on: May 04, 2022, 05:41:49 am »
Journalists are not supposed to be the guardians of truth!  They are not the watchdogs of the population, they are the watchdogs of the powers that be!

YouTube et al are not journalists, nor are (most of) their users. That is the problem. If they were, they would vet their sources, do proper research, and censor unreliable information before publishing it...

They are platforms that host user generated content, and an entirely different thing. It is well within their rights and perfectly reasonable for them to censor the content they choose to host. I do think they have some ethical responsibility to at least make a good-faith effort to stem the spread of scams, misinformation, and hate on their platforms, but ultimately it is up to them. There is certainly no reason Google or anyone else should be obligated to host or publish any content on behalf of their users, especially if they believe it is harmful/misleading, which is in effect what you are saying.

Quote
God dammit I utterly, utterly despise the idea of information providers limiting access to information based on what they believe to be true or factual.  It is not their right, nor their responsibility.

So you despise journalists with integrity? I'm so confused by your position here Journalists *are* 'the guardians of truth', doing that research, determining, in good faith, what is fact, and publishing the result of their efforts so we don't all have to retread the same path is exactly their job and purpose, yet somehow you use this as an argument against censoring lies and misinformation :wtf:. That is what journalism is all about, and while social media / Internet hosting companies are not journalists, they are realizing that they should exercise at least some of the discretion that actual journalists do in what they publish and propagate.

Quote
But handing anyone the right to deem information as "not for the population to see or discuss" because is is not "true" is unbelievably fascist, authoritarian idea, that I will fight against.  The hate speech laws here in EU are utterly ridiculous already, what with a Finnish former minister and current member of parliament being dragged through the courts for quoting the Bible.  (I'm not actually Christian myself.)

That is not even close to what is happening. The platforms have the right to choose what to host for any reason they want. Is it ethical for them to censor content that they believe to be misleading or harmful? I believe it is, on the same grounds as it is ethical and even essential for journalists to do so.

And the Bible is full of hate speech, that's really not a defence, though I know nothing of this case.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2022, 05:43:23 am by ve7xen »
73 de VE7XEN
He/Him
 
The following users thanked this post: MK14

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 17952
  • Country: lv
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #206 on: May 04, 2022, 05:49:26 am »
YouTube et al are not journalists, nor are (most of) their users. That is the problem. If they were, they would vet their sources, do proper research, and censor unreliable information before publishing it...
According this statement largest news outlets have almost no journalists either since they publish loads of unverified garbage or outright lies.
 

Offline Nominal Animal

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7193
  • Country: fi
    • My home page and email address
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #207 on: May 04, 2022, 05:58:09 am »
God dammit I utterly, utterly despise the idea of information providers limiting access to information based on what they believe to be true or factual.  It is not their right, nor their responsibility.

So you despise journalists with integrity? I'm so confused by your position here Journalists *are* 'the guardians of truth', doing that research, determining, in good faith, what is fact, and publishing the result of their efforts so we don't all have to retread the same path is exactly their job and purpose, yet somehow you use this as an argument against censoring lies and misinformation :wtf:. That is what journalism is all about, and while social media / Internet hosting companies are not journalists, they are realizing that they should exercise at least some of the discretion that actual journalists do in what they publish and propagate.
You conflate two completely separate things:
1) What a person in a news organization chooses to write about
2) What an organization forbids discussion about

Don't you see the difference?

Again, the Hunter Biden laptop case is a perfect example.  Hard evidence existed, it was just labeled as "Trump campaign product" and "Russian misinformation", and therefore not to be discussed in media.

No matter of personal :wtf: changes the fact that no media organization is to be trusted to define what is true and what is not, no matter what their political leanings are.

The best journalists will post their findings, separate from their personal opinions –– or at least clearly stating what is their opinion and what is what they found out.  Today, "journalists" try very hard to mix and conflate the two, and deliberately mischaracterise their political leanings exactly because they do not see themselves as servants of the public, but as the gatekeepers and shepherds of the public, determining what information the public should not be exposed to.  This is sick.

Without free information, all you have is manipulation.  Better face it, or accept being manipulated.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2022, 06:00:04 am by Nominal Animal »
 
The following users thanked this post: rsjsouza, wraper, Karel, terminus

Offline Nominal Animal

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7193
  • Country: fi
    • My home page and email address
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #208 on: May 04, 2022, 06:09:29 am »
A key part of the manipulation of "truth" is to choose your sources selectively.  Because there are tens of sources that are generally categorized as "factual" by independent organizations, and they tend to have differing opinions on what is true and what is not, all you need to do is choose your sources.

In Finland –– again, ostensibly the country with the most free newsmedia in the world, according to international observers –– the "journalists" openly admit they don't need to consider sources they don't like.  The head of one of the largest newsrooms even admitted in a tweet that they are not hired to do journalism, but to push their own opinions and views instead.

(That Hunter Biden laptop is a particularly sore point for me, because when I mentioned it in some face-to-face discussion here in Finland, I was labeled a "conspiracy theorist".  Our beloved Finnish newsmedia still hasn't reported on it, probably because they find the topic "distasteful".  That's the level of "world's free-est journos" for you.)

Perhaps things are different where you (whoever you might be, the person reading this post), but I do not think so: the world is surprisingly small in these things.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2022, 07:26:12 am by Nominal Animal »
 
The following users thanked this post: rsjsouza, wraper, Karel, terminus

Online Zero999

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 20358
  • Country: gb
  • 0999
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #209 on: May 04, 2022, 06:35:19 am »
I'm triggered.
You seem to have forgotten the reason why women are given separate spaces from men: to make them feel more comfortable and protect them against predators. Yes it's true, it doesn't stop predators, but it helps. The hospital simply noting the person's genitalia and putting him on a male ward, irrespective of how he identifies, would have solved the problem. If he'd had gender reassignment surgery, then no problem, put him on a female ward.
I don't see how the latter would make anything different. In the end gender and sexual orientation are just superficial. There will always be people that harrass other people and gender has nothing to do with that. IOW: you are seeing a cause and effect relation that doesn't exist / are jumping to the wrong conclusions.
Sex/gender is not superficial. Men are stronger than women and women are more likely to be harmed by them, than the other way round. It is also why there are separate categories in most sports for men and women.

Men are really identifying as female to be allowed into women's prisons, hospitals, changing rooms etc. This isn't the only case of a woman being raped by a man, claiming to be a women. I dare say there are a greater number of men who are prepared to lie to get access to vulnerable women, than there are genuine transgender women, especially criminals destined for prison. It is a problem.

How would you feel if this happened to your wife/girlfriend/mother/sister?

And don't conflate transgenderism with sexual orientation. They are not the same thing. Being attracted to the same sex, doesn't involve any delusion, body dysmorphia, or require any physical treatments i.e. surgery and hormones. Transgenderism is believing ones body doesn't match their brain. It is similar to someone with anorexia nervosa believing they're fat, when they've vert thin. Of course, people with this condition need to be allowed to live their lives in piece, without harassment and not be denied employment.

Quote
Their activism is getting artifically amplified by policies of social networks and media, and that's what makes the whole thing look more and more "normal" to the whole population. But I'm sorry, I do not think in the least that those networks and media do it BECAUSE that's what the population wants to hear. They do it because they have their own agenda, and THEN it progressively gets inside people's minds.
That is what I call a 'Trumpism'. Usefull information gets lost in the noise and reliable sources are being discredited. It seems to work well on you.

Fortunately social media and regular media start to see that they have a responsibility for removing false information or at least tagging information as not being verified / necessarily true.
People who work for social media companies lack the knowledge, skills and experience, to separate misinformation from the truth. A classic example was Facebook's censorship of the British Medical Journal for publishing something they didn't believe/like.
https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o95
 
The following users thanked this post: rsjsouza, Karel, terminus

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 17952
  • Country: lv
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #210 on: May 04, 2022, 07:55:31 am »
God dammit I utterly, utterly despise the idea of information providers limiting access to information based on what they believe to be true or factual.  It is not their right, nor their responsibility.

So you despise journalists with integrity? I'm so confused by your position here Journalists *are* 'the guardians of truth', doing that research, determining, in good faith, what is fact, and publishing the result of their efforts so we don't all have to retread the same path is exactly their job and purpose, yet somehow you use this as an argument against censoring lies and misinformation :wtf:. That is what journalism is all about, and while social media / Internet hosting companies are not journalists, they are realizing that they should exercise at least some of the discretion that actual journalists do in what they publish and propagate.
You conflate two completely separate things:
1) What a person in a news organization chooses to write about
2) What an organization forbids discussion about

Don't you see the difference?

Again, the Hunter Biden laptop case is a perfect example.  Hard evidence existed, it was just labeled as "Trump campaign product" and "Russian misinformation", and therefore not to be discussed in media.

No matter of personal :wtf: changes the fact that no media organization is to be trusted to define what is true and what is not, no matter what their political leanings are.

The best journalists will post their findings, separate from their personal opinions –– or at least clearly stating what is their opinion and what is what they found out.  Today, "journalists" try very hard to mix and conflate the two, and deliberately mischaracterise their political leanings exactly because they do not see themselves as servants of the public, but as the gatekeepers and shepherds of the public, determining what information the public should not be exposed to.  This is sick.

Without free information, all you have is manipulation.  Better face it, or accept being manipulated.
Actually it was published by 220 years old media called New York Post, and then their account was banned/limited on twitter and other social networks. Any links to the article posted by other users were automatically deleted.
I guess because they needed to "fortify" elections as they say https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2022, 07:57:27 am by wraper »
 

Offline Nominal Animal

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7193
  • Country: fi
    • My home page and email address
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #211 on: May 04, 2022, 08:29:59 am »
Actually it was published by 220 years old media called New York Post, and then their account was banned/limited on twitter and other social networks. Any links to the article posted by other users were automatically deleted.
Yes, exactly; and they did have the proof at hand.  The other journalists simply refused to look at or consider it at all, and labeled –– based on various characters' assertions –– it something to be censored and hidden from view.

The point is, if you hand that kind of power to anyone, regardless of their political stance, that power will eventually be misused, to the detriment of all.

Even trusted fact-checkers sometimes get things wrong.  Because of that, telling people to trust some kind of checkmark that labels it factual, is just manipulating them.  Teaching each person to weigh things for themselves, to apply rational thought and logic, and how to critically analyse data –– say, the very basics of critical rationalism –– is what we should do, to empower individuals.

Of course, you do not become powerful by teaching people to be powerful.  You become powerful by making people into followers, into consumers.
 

Offline MK14

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4987
  • Country: gb
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #212 on: May 04, 2022, 10:00:54 am »
(That Hunter Biden laptop is a particularly sore point for me, because when I mentioned it in some face-to-face discussion here in Finland, I was labeled a "conspiracy theorist".  Our beloved Finnish newsmedia still hasn't reported on it, probably because they find the topic "distasteful".  That's the level of "world's free-est journos" for you.)

No, I think they were right in accusing you of believing in, a conspiracy theory ("conspiracy theorist").

On the one hand, at some level, it is true that there is such a claim, (Hunter Biden laptop).
But, as I understand it, it is NOT acknowledged (genuinely/cleanly proved), to be a verified/true piece of evidence.

On the other hand.  A good quality/reliable news article (and somewhat similar things, such as social media), should at least mention its existence.  But carefully explain that it is NOT proved/accepted as being true/genuine, at this moment in time. It could have been planted by other parties (I.e. Trump/Russian sources), and seems to have a number of "holes" in the evidence (serious or somewhat serious doubts).

TL;DR
I suppose, it would really need a jury and/or panel of (independent) experts.  To properly analyse the available evidence, and decide if it seems to be genuine/true, possibly genuine/true (but not PROVED or 100% known to be so), or definitely FALSE (lies, planted by other parties).

Just because it has NOT been proven so far, to have been falsely created by other parties.  Doesn't mean, that it is genuine.  E.g. An electronics component from AliExpress, that passes some basic electronic tests, and looks possibly genuine.  Could still be later, proved to be a fake.  It is just that the simple electrical parameter checks, with a $15 multimeter, and quick glance at it.  Haven't shown any obvious defects, yet.

Reference material (helping me write this post) was taken from here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_Biden_laptop_controversy
 
The following users thanked this post: nctnico

Online Zero999

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 20358
  • Country: gb
  • 0999
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #213 on: May 04, 2022, 10:23:15 am »
(That Hunter Biden laptop is a particularly sore point for me, because when I mentioned it in some face-to-face discussion here in Finland, I was labeled a "conspiracy theorist".  Our beloved Finnish newsmedia still hasn't reported on it, probably because they find the topic "distasteful".  That's the level of "world's free-est journos" for you.)

No, I think they were right in accusing you of believing in, a conspiracy theory ("conspiracy theorist").

On the one hand, at some level, it is true that there is such a claim, (Hunter Biden laptop).
But, as I understand it, it is NOT acknowledged (genuinely/cleanly proved), to be a verified/true piece of evidence.

On the other hand.  A good quality/reliable news article (and somewhat similar things, such as social media), should at least mention its existence.  But carefully explain that it is NOT proved/accepted as being true/genuine, at this moment in time. It could have been planted by other parties (I.e. Trump/Russian sources), and seems to have a number of "holes" in the evidence (serious or somewhat serious doubts).

TL;DR
I suppose, it would really need a jury and/or panel of (independent) experts.  To properly analyse the available evidence, and decide if it seems to be genuine/true, possibly genuine/true (but not PROVED or 100% known to be so), or definitely FALSE (lies, planted by other parties).

Just because it has NOT been proven so far, to have been falsely created by other parties.  Doesn't mean, that it is genuine.  E.g. An electronics component from AliExpress, that passes some basic electronic tests, and looks possibly genuine.  Could still be later, proved to be a fake.  It is just that the simple electrical parameter checks, with a $15 multimeter, and quick glance at it.  Haven't shown any obvious defects, yet.

Reference material (helping me write this post) was taken from here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_Biden_laptop_controversy
As you've acknowledged, there's a possibility the Hunter Biden laptop story might be true, so calling someone as conspiracy theorist for believing it is uncalled for.

Quite often, it's impossible to know what's true and what's a conspiracy theory. Another example was the lab leak theory of SAR-Cov-2, rather than the then accepted wet market narrative. It was originally dismissed as a conspiracy theory by many, but only a year later, many experts started to believe it's true. In reality, it's not proven, but is certainly a possibility.
 
The following users thanked this post: MK14

Offline MK14

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4987
  • Country: gb
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #214 on: May 04, 2022, 10:45:08 am »
As you've acknowledged, there's a possibility the Hunter Biden laptop story might be true, so calling someone as conspiracy theorist for believing it is uncalled for.

Quite often, it's impossible to know what's true and what's a conspiracy theory. Another example was the lab leak theory of SAR-Cov-2, rather than the then accepted wet market narrative. It was originally dismissed as a conspiracy theory by many, but only a year later, many experts started to believe it's true. In reality, it's not proven, but is certainly a possibility.

I agree, that (if we accept that it is NOT proven yet, so might or might not be true), it is debatable/acceptable/arguable/arbitrary as to how reliable the claim, that the 'Hunter Biden laptop story' is true.  Is a persons opinion and/or conspiracy theory and/or political belief/opinion and/or technical analysis of the publicly available evidence, so far.

You're right.  Conspiracy theory, may be (or is) too much of a counter-claim.

Ideally/hopefully, eventually the (known to be reliably) true facts will come out, one way or the other.  As these things, sometimes do.  In the future.
 

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 17952
  • Country: lv
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #215 on: May 04, 2022, 11:48:02 am »
(That Hunter Biden laptop is a particularly sore point for me, because when I mentioned it in some face-to-face discussion here in Finland, I was labeled a "conspiracy theorist".  Our beloved Finnish newsmedia still hasn't reported on it, probably because they find the topic "distasteful".  That's the level of "world's free-est journos" for you.)

No, I think they were right in accusing you of believing in, a conspiracy theory ("conspiracy theorist").

On the one hand, at some level, it is true that there is such a claim, (Hunter Biden laptop).
But, as I understand it, it is NOT acknowledged (genuinely/cleanly proved), to be a verified/true piece of evidence.
Laptop authenticity already admitted by NYT and WAPO which earlier dismissed it as Russian hoax.
 
The following users thanked this post: MK14

Offline MK14

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4987
  • Country: gb
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #216 on: May 04, 2022, 12:10:05 pm »
Laptop authenticity already admitted by NYT and WAPO which earlier dismissed it as Russian hoax.

But, that is NOW, in relatively recent times.  Presumably, when others called Nominal Animal, a "conspiracy theorist", it was well before article(s), such as the following, were publicly available.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10624113/NYT-finally-admits-Hunter-Bidens-laptop-real-year-DailyMail-com-confirmed-authenticity.html

Dated: "PUBLISHED: 20:11, 17 March 2022 | UPDATED: 04:46, 19 March 2022".

So, it is not TOTALLY UNREASONABLE, for the people, Nominal Animal was talking to, to call them a "conspiracy theorist". Or if it was (unreasonable), it was not unreasonable for them to dispute the truthfulness of that story circulating at the time.
 

Online coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10034
  • Country: gb
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #217 on: May 04, 2022, 12:14:23 pm »
So, it is not TOTALLY UNREASONABLE, for the people, Nominal Animal was talking to, to call them a "conspiracy theorist". Or if it was (unreasonable), it was not unreasonable for them to dispute the truthfulness of that story circulating at the time.
It is TOTALLY UNREASONABLE to call someone a conspiracy theorist, based on them not agreeing with the mainstream media. The mainstream media is the main source of conspiracy theories these days.
 
The following users thanked this post: wraper

Offline MK14

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4987
  • Country: gb
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #218 on: May 04, 2022, 12:28:35 pm »
It is TOTALLY UNREASONABLE to call someone a conspiracy theorist, based on them not agreeing with the mainstream media. The mainstream media is the main source of conspiracy theories these days.

On reflection, I too easily went down the road of mentioning 'conspiracy theories'.  I didn't realize, it would cause such an adverse reaction.

Anyway, two things:

(Firstly)  Sorry Nominal Animal, if I've appear wrong/nasty, agreeing with other people (and me), saying/implying that your claims were a conspiracy theory.

I'm trying to have a discussion in this thread, rather than be rude about other posters.

(Secondly)  At the time it was especially newsworthy (before the US Presidential election).  There were clearly two parties involved.  The Biden camp, who especially wanted to trivialize and discredit that story.  Presumably doing so, with all Biden Camp friendly news sources.
Similarly (and opposingly), the Trump Camp, would try to spin it in the other direction, and make out it is a true story (which it seems to be turning out, it may well be).  Through their own Trump friendly news sources, and social media outlets.

There seem to have been a number of somewhat similar stories/incidents, like this one, throughout the last few decades (and longer).  Politics, seems to breed such situations.  E.g.  There have been a number of claims against the Trump Camp, which I won't drift this thread, even further down the political route, by mentioning.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2022, 12:31:41 pm by MK14 »
 

Offline Nominal Animal

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7193
  • Country: fi
    • My home page and email address
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #219 on: May 04, 2022, 01:16:26 pm »
On the one hand, at some level, it is true that there is such a claim, (Hunter Biden laptop).
But, as I understand it, it is NOT acknowledged (genuinely/cleanly proved), to be a verified/true piece of evidence.
Well, what you "acknowledge to be verified/true" is up to you, not up to some "authority" or "fact checker".  It is always up to you, the individual.
And just because you or some authority believes it to be so, they shouldn't be allowed to control others from accessing and discussing it.

Another example right now is Russian internal media here right now.  To understand what Russia does, I'd like to see what they want others to believe.  I cannot, because both rt.com and sputniknews.com are blocked here.  So much for freedom of press, eh?  Sure, it definitely is mostly propaganda; but to understand what they believe and think, you do need to see what they claim and hear what they say.  Otherwise, you're trusting someone elses opinion on what is true and what is not, without any references or way to check for yourself.

I'm just not the type to trust anyones word on anything.  I need to see the reasoning behind the opinion for myself, or the "word" is useless to me.

A good quality/reliable news article (and somewhat similar things, such as social media), should at least mention its existence.  But carefully explain that it is NOT proved/accepted as being true/genuine, at this moment in time.
Or, you know, like New York Post did, describe its sources in the story.  Remember, the counterargument was that "your sources are people we don't like, so we'll assume it is Trump lies or Russian propaganda".

The sources were good enough that independent journalists tracked down the repair person.  The provenance of the laptop is not really in question (except among those whose counterargument is "I don't believe you, because I only listen to people I trust and adopt their opinion uncritically"); what is in question, is whether the information in it matters or not.

I suppose, it would really need a jury and/or panel of (independent) experts.  To properly analyse the available evidence, and decide if it seems to be genuine/true, possibly genuine/true (but not PROVED or 100% known to be so), or definitely FALSE (lies, planted by other parties).
Perhaps; but it is not up to journalists to be that jury or judge, because nothing is ever 100% proven, when humans are involved.

Having the right to decide what to believe and think, is the primary human right, in my opinion.  Don't be so quick to let someone else tell you what you should believe to be true, or what you yourself should think.

Quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_Biden_laptop_controversy
Whenever you use Wikipedia as a source, I recommend also looking at the history of the page, i.e. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hunter_Biden&action=history.  It contains gems like "New York Post is unreliable" as a basis for deletion, even though Media Bias / Fact Check rates New York Post as reliable as MSNBC or CNN.
 
The following users thanked this post: MK14, terminus

Offline madires

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8276
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #220 on: May 04, 2022, 01:22:20 pm »
The things we're discussing in this thread are nothing new. About 2k years ago Romans slandered Vandals to be monsters destroying everything they come across. Today we still use terms like vandalism because of this propaganda. But the truth is, as archaeology found out later, that Vandals were highly educated and not what the old Romans claimed to be. Today's social media is simply a fire accelerant for nonsense and propaganda because of its speed of distribution and the mass of 'information'. No time to reflect about what you just have read - the next message is already waiting.
 
The following users thanked this post: cdev

Offline Nominal Animal

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7193
  • Country: fi
    • My home page and email address
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #221 on: May 04, 2022, 01:42:28 pm »
Sorry Nominal Animal, if I've appear wrong/nasty, agreeing with other people (and me), saying/implying that your claims were a conspiracy theory.
No, don't worry.  My frustration then (and less so now) was that having a discussion on the matter was impossible.  I wanted then to have a discussion along the lines of "Okay; if we assume this article is essentially true, what does it mean?  Also, if we assume this article is false, who and how and why this hoax was perpetrated?"  Both questions are equally interesting in the time frame when corraborative or falsifying facts were being obtained (like the source of the laptop itself).  Instead, I get labeled a conspiracy theorist for even entertaining the first case at all.

Same with the Russian media.  I don't want to know what they say because I think they are truthful, I want to know what they say because that describes what the powers that be there want to say; therefore, they reflect on what those powers want.  It is not about what I want to believe, it is about what various powers want the population (like myself) to believe, and why.  Everyone is trying to present a convincing narrative, and I want to find the holes in them.

No matter how nasty and disgusting language might be used, free speech is the only way for individuals to be free to think.
Rather than shielding people from the hurt and scariness, I want people to grow strong enough to weather the nasty, unfortunate side of the free speech (non-violence-inciting hate speech and such), because the possibilities and the end result is worth it, to me.

The things we're discussing in this thread are nothing new. About 2k years ago Romans slandered Vandals to be monsters destroying everything they come across. Today we still use terms like vandalism because of this propaganda. But the truth is, as archaeology found out later, that Vandals were highly educated and not what the old Romans claimed to be. Today's social media is simply a fire accelerant for nonsense and propaganda because of its speed of distribution and the mass of 'information'. No time to reflect about what you just have read - the next message is already waiting.
So true.  Having public access to some Vandal thinkers might have changed the opinion of the populace.  Food for thought when considering bans and censorship.

I'm worried that the Supreme Court may invalidate my marriage by overcoming Loving vs. Virginia..which is based on Roe vs. Wade..  thats a very real possibility in the US today.
You are, however, aware that if Roe vs. Wade is overturned, it just means that it will be up to each state to decide about it in its own legislation, and not that anything becomes "banned" overnight?  If you're worried, contact your local state legislature representatives, and help them make sure the proper state laws are in place in case Roe vs. Wade gets overturned at the federal level.  If the old racist laws are no longer in place –– and they damn well shouldn't, right? –– nothing changes.  As to the Roe vs. Wade and reproductive rights, the same applies: it just becomes a matter to be decided at the state level, instead of at the federal level.
 
The following users thanked this post: wraper, MK14

Offline cdev

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • !
  • Posts: 7350
  • Country: 00
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #222 on: May 04, 2022, 01:47:06 pm »
I can't because of redistricting..

BUT - Any billionaire can buy Twitter and have a voice that cant be bought. See, isnt the world great!
« Last Edit: May 04, 2022, 01:53:04 pm by cdev »
"What the large print giveth, the small print taketh away."
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28429
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #223 on: May 04, 2022, 03:15:43 pm »
Journalists are not supposed to be the guardians of truth!  They are not the watchdogs of the population, they are the watchdogs of the powers that be!

YouTube et al are not journalists, nor are (most of) their users. That is the problem. If they were, they would vet their sources, do proper research, and censor unreliable information before publishing it...

They are platforms that host user generated content, and an entirely different thing. It is well within their rights and perfectly reasonable for them to censor the content they choose to host. I do think they have some ethical responsibility to at least make a good-faith effort to stem the spread of scams, misinformation, and hate on their platforms, but ultimately it is up to them. There is certainly no reason Google or anyone else should be obligated to host or publish any content on behalf of their users, especially if they believe it is harmful/misleading, which is in effect what you are saying.
Indeed. Most of the junk that goes against what is scientifically accepted as being true (or at least the best possible assumption) can go into the bin. There is too much noise nowadays which is echoed and amplified by people that have no clue at all and really need protection to prevent harming themselves and others.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Online Zero999

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 20358
  • Country: gb
  • 0999
Re: Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back
« Reply #224 on: May 04, 2022, 03:46:44 pm »
Journalists are not supposed to be the guardians of truth!  They are not the watchdogs of the population, they are the watchdogs of the powers that be!

YouTube et al are not journalists, nor are (most of) their users. That is the problem. If they were, they would vet their sources, do proper research, and censor unreliable information before publishing it...

They are platforms that host user generated content, and an entirely different thing. It is well within their rights and perfectly reasonable for them to censor the content they choose to host. I do think they have some ethical responsibility to at least make a good-faith effort to stem the spread of scams, misinformation, and hate on their platforms, but ultimately it is up to them. There is certainly no reason Google or anyone else should be obligated to host or publish any content on behalf of their users, especially if they believe it is harmful/misleading, which is in effect what you are saying.
Indeed. Most of the junk that goes against what is scientifically accepted as being true (or at least the best possible assumption) can go into the bin. There is too much noise nowadays which is echoed and amplified by people that have no clue at all and really need protection to prevent harming themselves and others.
What's scientifically accepted to be true changes. Remember, back in February/March 2020, we were told face masks were ineffective at preventing the spread of COVID-19, then a few months later, the position was reversed? It turns out that there wasn't much real world evidence to support them back then. There were a few lab experiments, involving cages of animals infected, with a cloth cover placed over the cages and computer simulations, but nothing concrete.

Fortunately, a study was done in Bangladesh last year. It shows surgical masks reduce the spread by 11%, yet cloth masks didn't have a statistically significant effect. Great, you'd expect the mainstream media would report this and governments would start recommending people wear proper surgical masks, but no, ineffective cloth masks prevailed.  :palm:
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02457-y

Quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_Biden_laptop_controversy
Whenever you use Wikipedia as a source, I recommend also looking at the history of the page, i.e. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hunter_Biden&action=history.  It contains gems like "New York Post is unreliable" as a basis for deletion, even though Media Bias / Fact Check rates New York Post as reliable as MSNBC or CNN.
I do read Wikipedia, but it does have a strong left-wing bias. If the left-wing Guardian thinks it's slightly biased towards the Democratic Party, then it must be strongly left-wing.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/29/the-five-wikipedia-biases-pro-western-male-dominated
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf