8 ms·

Who decides who the liars, cranks and con artists are?

subhobroto 6y ago
Exactly. It's extremely upsetting to see decisions like the parent's. What's more concerning is the tone is absolute - the intention is "I know exactly what is right and the world shall follow my lead". That guy Gandhi causing all kinds of trouble! Ban his content! That guy MLK causing all kinds of trouble! Ban his content! That guy Edward Jenner with his braindead idea of vaccination proposing we infect ourseves to get better! Ban! Ban! Ban! History has many examples what that thinking leads to.
- krapp 6y ago
  You're equating people claiming vitamin C and turmeric will cure COVID-19 to MLK and Ghandi?
  - subhobroto 6y ago
    I want people claiming vitamin C and turmeric will cure COVID-19 to have a voice. Whether that voice has value is an individual decision you and I get to make, on our own. What data do you have, that proves diferuloylmethane is ineffective in treating COVID-19? Are you 100% sure that diferuloylmethane cannot be an ingredient in a battery of medicine to help recover from COVID-19? This is what I know - SARS-COV2 is novel and not even highly trained, world renowned infectious diseases experts know how it behaves and how to treat it. Not a central authority that removes that choice from both of us leaving us with no choice.
    - msla 6y ago
      > I want people claiming vitamin C and turmeric will cure COVID-19 to have a voice. They're scammers. They're perpetrating a scam. "Giving them a voice" means allowing them to scam others out of money. Why should YouTube be complicit in running a scam?
      - subhobroto 6y ago
        > "Giving them a voice" means allowing them to scam others out of money. Perhaps you left out the videos that warn others of said scam. Don't treat adults like chlidren or, pretty soon, you will have a world full of only children with no adult supervision! Yes, being an adult means having the freedom to drink alcohol and drive a car instead of waiting for a bus or a parent to come pick me up. It also means having the responsibilities of making my own decisions instead of waiting for someone else to do it for me. What's the expectation - that if the decision making authority makes a wrong decision that kills me, I can then blame them and collect damages? That's crazy talk - for one, I will be dead already!
  - vixen99 6y ago
    https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s13054-020-02851-4 https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s13054-0... 'a new clinical trial to investigate vitamin C infusion for the treatment of severe 2019-nCoV infected pneumonia has begun in Wuhan, China'
krapp 6y ago
Yeah, no... I'm not jumping down that rabbithole of thought-terminating cliches. HN is already replete with countless tiresome retreads of the same slippery slope arguments around freedom of speech, censorship, social media policies, whether truth even exists, Voltaire quotes and Orwell references. Feel free to browse if that's what you're looking for, they all devolve into the same unproductive quagmire.
- subhobroto 6y ago
  An echo chamber sure feels good. This is what I know - SARS-COV2 is novel and not even highly trained, world renowned infectious diseases experts know how it behaves and how to treat it. I don't, for a second, believe Youtube has figured that one out. Now whether you have decided to reject all competing hypothesis to something you have already decided to be the truth so you can move on with your life and be productive in areas you find valuable - that's your call but if I see you foisting your opinions on what kind of content I get to see, that's you infringing on my freedom and we have a problem.
- viridian 6y ago
  There's some irony in you refusing to engage with thought terminating cliches when your original post that kicked this sub-thread off was "Yes. But liars, cranks and con artists should be oppressed."
  - krapp 6y ago
    Maybe it is, but almost no one who asks "but who decides x" in these threads is actually interested in debating the matter. They typically already believe no one should be allowed to decide, and they have no intention of actually engaging you in conversation beyond lecturing, berating and snark. Learning when to step away from such fruitless pseudo-debates before wasting hours on the online equivalent of beating one's head against a brick wall is a valuable survival skill here. Sometimes it's best to simply state your opinion and move on.
    - subhobroto 6y ago
throwaway2048 6y ago
It's not like its some impossible to distinguish thing that people that say things like "5G causes coronavirus" are cranks. Nuance in these discussions basically flies out the window entirely, and frankly, its stupid.
tree3 6y ago
YouTube. It's their platform, they make decisions. If you don't like their platform/decisions, go elsewhere.
- viklove 6y ago
  So if they make the wrong decisions and spread misinformation or fail to censor misinformation, can I sue them? Why do they get the power but none of the responsibility? Is it just because they happen to agree with your worldview? And what if they don't -- what if they start banning videos that suggest Taiwan is a country? Would your opinion change?
  - airstrike 6y ago
    > So if they make the wrong decisions and spread misinformation or fail to censor misinformation, can I sue them? IANAL but unless someone is knowingly spreading false information as true (i.e. fraud), the answer is no. They probably don't even carry the burden of having to reasonably vet information first. > Why do they get the power but none of the responsibility? Because it is your privilege to use YouTube, not your right.
    - viklove 6y ago
      Ok, so what you're saying is that if YouTube starts banning videos that suggest Taiwan is a country, you would support their decision.
      - joshuamorton 6y ago
        No, but I also wouldn't call for legal intervention.
        viklove 6y ago
        Not sure why so many people think it's good for Google and Facebook to be able to control the flow of information on the internet.
alvarelle 6y ago
> Who decides who the liars, cranks and con artists are? Yes, WHO decides.

Exactly. It's extremely upsetting to see decisions like the parent's. What's more concerning is the tone is absolute - the intention is "I know exactly what is right and the world shall follow my lead". That guy Gandhi causing all kinds of trouble! Ban his content! That guy MLK causing all kinds of trouble! Ban his content! That guy Edward Jenner with his braindead idea of vaccination proposing we infect ourseves to get better! Ban! Ban! Ban! History has many examples what that thinking leads to.

krapp 6y ago
You're equating people claiming vitamin C and turmeric will cure COVID-19 to MLK and Ghandi?
- subhobroto 6y ago
  I want people claiming vitamin C and turmeric will cure COVID-19 to have a voice. Whether that voice has value is an individual decision you and I get to make, on our own. What data do you have, that proves diferuloylmethane is ineffective in treating COVID-19? Are you 100% sure that diferuloylmethane cannot be an ingredient in a battery of medicine to help recover from COVID-19? This is what I know - SARS-COV2 is novel and not even highly trained, world renowned infectious diseases experts know how it behaves and how to treat it. Not a central authority that removes that choice from both of us leaving us with no choice.
  - msla 6y ago
    > I want people claiming vitamin C and turmeric will cure COVID-19 to have a voice. They're scammers. They're perpetrating a scam. "Giving them a voice" means allowing them to scam others out of money. Why should YouTube be complicit in running a scam?
    - subhobroto 6y ago
      > "Giving them a voice" means allowing them to scam others out of money. Perhaps you left out the videos that warn others of said scam. Don't treat adults like chlidren or, pretty soon, you will have a world full of only children with no adult supervision! Yes, being an adult means having the freedom to drink alcohol and drive a car instead of waiting for a bus or a parent to come pick me up. It also means having the responsibilities of making my own decisions instead of waiting for someone else to do it for me. What's the expectation - that if the decision making authority makes a wrong decision that kills me, I can then blame them and collect damages? That's crazy talk - for one, I will be dead already!
- vixen99 6y ago
  https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s13054-020-02851-4 https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s13054-0... 'a new clinical trial to investigate vitamin C infusion for the treatment of severe 2019-nCoV infected pneumonia has begun in Wuhan, China'

krapp 6y ago

Yeah, no... I'm not jumping down that rabbithole of thought-terminating cliches. HN is already replete with countless tiresome retreads of the same slippery slope arguments around freedom of speech, censorship, social media policies, whether truth even exists, Voltaire quotes and Orwell references. Feel free to browse if that's what you're looking for, they all devolve into the same unproductive quagmire.

subhobroto 6y ago
An echo chamber sure feels good. This is what I know - SARS-COV2 is novel and not even highly trained, world renowned infectious diseases experts know how it behaves and how to treat it. I don't, for a second, believe Youtube has figured that one out. Now whether you have decided to reject all competing hypothesis to something you have already decided to be the truth so you can move on with your life and be productive in areas you find valuable - that's your call but if I see you foisting your opinions on what kind of content I get to see, that's you infringing on my freedom and we have a problem.
viridian 6y ago
There's some irony in you refusing to engage with thought terminating cliches when your original post that kicked this sub-thread off was "Yes. But liars, cranks and con artists should be oppressed."
- krapp 6y ago
  Maybe it is, but almost no one who asks "but who decides x" in these threads is actually interested in debating the matter. They typically already believe no one should be allowed to decide, and they have no intention of actually engaging you in conversation beyond lecturing, berating and snark. Learning when to step away from such fruitless pseudo-debates before wasting hours on the online equivalent of beating one's head against a brick wall is a valuable survival skill here. Sometimes it's best to simply state your opinion and move on.
  - subhobroto 6y ago

throwaway2048 6y ago

It's not like its some impossible to distinguish thing that people that say things like "5G causes coronavirus" are cranks. Nuance in these discussions basically flies out the window entirely, and frankly, its stupid.

tree3 6y ago

YouTube. It's their platform, they make decisions. If you don't like their platform/decisions, go elsewhere.

viklove 6y ago
So if they make the wrong decisions and spread misinformation or fail to censor misinformation, can I sue them? Why do they get the power but none of the responsibility? Is it just because they happen to agree with your worldview? And what if they don't -- what if they start banning videos that suggest Taiwan is a country? Would your opinion change?
- airstrike 6y ago
  > So if they make the wrong decisions and spread misinformation or fail to censor misinformation, can I sue them? IANAL but unless someone is knowingly spreading false information as true (i.e. fraud), the answer is no. They probably don't even carry the burden of having to reasonably vet information first. > Why do they get the power but none of the responsibility? Because it is your privilege to use YouTube, not your right.
  - viklove 6y ago
    Ok, so what you're saying is that if YouTube starts banning videos that suggest Taiwan is a country, you would support their decision.
    - joshuamorton 6y ago
      No, but I also wouldn't call for legal intervention.
      - viklove 6y ago
        Not sure why so many people think it's good for Google and Facebook to be able to control the flow of information on the internet.

alvarelle 6y ago

> Who decides who the liars, cranks and con artists are? Yes, WHO decides.