YouTube, Twitter & Facebook to join forces in an effort to curb fake Covid19 news

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, Wheresmehammer said:

With how the internet works and how it can lead to revolt... yes peoples thoughts really do matter,

So what's your solution? Give some big corporation/government the power to control everyone's thoughts and punish wrongthink, don't you think this is super dangerous?

6 minutes ago, Deus Voltage said:

Riddle me this:

 

- Suppose that we live in a world where facts no longer matter to people who feel as though they're onto something not many people know.

- Suppose that that a large segment of society is comprised of those people.

- Suppose those people also unquestionably believe in their dear leader, that they will never doubt them under any circumstances.

- Suppose that the health of the general populace is impacted to a noticeable degree by the aforementioned segment of non-science believers.

 

Now realize that we don't really have to suppose what I previously mentioned, and that that is the world we live in now. Realize that Facebook/Twitter ect ... created a big miss, and they have to clean it up. Companies whose rights are treated equally to that of an individual in the U.S.

 

This whole mess is largely the result of how easy it is to lobby the U.S. government and how easily the public opinion swings towards that which comforts their hearts and ears. 

I'll just ask you this, do you think that censoring the people you are describing would honestly stop the misinformation? It would only reinforce the conspiracy theories and push them "underground" where they won't be challenged which will even further reinforce the stupidity, if instead of censoring them, you provide them with the correct information, there is at least a chance that they would stop believing in that nonsense.

[Deus Voltage]

1 minute ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

what suffices as dumb? who exactly is dumb? who gets to decide who or who is dumb?

 

Saying covid isn't real is enough for me to put you in that category.

[Letgomyleghoe]

4 minutes ago, DeScruff said:

The conspiracy that Hitler is still live. - Not that he didn't kill himself back in 1945 but the fact that in 2020 hes still somehow alive at the youthful age of 131 years old. - Yes I know someone at my workplace who actually believes that, and no you cannot convince them otherwise.

that's not your job to convince them otherwise, if he wants to believe it let him. if you don't want to believe it dont, it's that simple.

[poochyena]

Just now, Letgomyleghoe said:

what is false information to you, something you don't agree with?

false information is information that is false. idk how to dumb that down any further than that.

 

1 minute ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

if someone brings up the point of "idk if we should be taking this vaccine it has xxxxx in it" or "this vaccine was developed in such a short amount of time I don't think we should be taking it" or "cloth masks pose a health risk to people with asthma" are they wrong?

well, those first two aren't making claims, but that last one is, but i'm not an expert in the field so I can't say if its right or wrong.

 

[PlayStation 2]

3 minutes ago, Deus Voltage said:

 

Completely agree. I genuinely don't know how you can get those people to trust those institutions again. 

You simply can't, at least in the state the news media is in. Especially when the people at said institutions view the people that don't trust them as lesser people.

The simple solution is to cut out the ego from the news media. Sadly, it's ingrained heavily into a lot of people in the business. It's a vicious cycle.

[Deus Voltage]

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

So what's your solution? Give some big corporation/government the power to control everyone's thoughts and punish wrongthink, don't you think this is super dangerous?

I'll just ask you this, do you think that censoring the people you are describing would honestly stop the misinformation? It would only reinforce the conspiracy theories and push them "underground" where they won't be challenged which will even further reinforce the stupidity, if instead of censoring them, you provide them with the correct information, there is at least a chance that they would stop believing in that nonsense.

To be certain, the choice is quite difficult.

 

Having to choose between censoring people in order to ensure the cohesiveness and well-being of society or letting misinformation ran rampant because it's freedom of speech, I think that tells you something. That we're reaching some sort of a limit in terms of our approach. That the problem may need to be dealt with in ways that may be very uncomfortable. Either that or we start thinking of solutions that are out of our technological/legal/philosophical reach right now.

[PlayStation 2]

I do have to say, this thread proves that there's a massive divide in how we view content providers. In a time like the coronavirus, it would generally be a time of understanding everything to actually figure out what the hell's going on, but as distrust has wrecked any proper way to understand it, there's a split between absolutely tooth-and-nail believing what fact-checkers wanna put out and being massively skeptical about everything. I err on the skepticism more than I do the believing everything, but at the same time, all that does is prove that the way that institutions have made people lose trust in them has fucked everyone up.

[Letgomyleghoe]

1 minute ago, Deus Voltage said:

Saying covid isn't real is enough for me to put you in that category.

I don't ever remember saying covid isn't real.

 

1 minute ago, poochyena said:

false information is information that is false. idk how to dumb that down any further than that.

how do you know it's false, how do you 100% know it's false. you can't just go around saying that everything you dont think is right is false, is someone being worried about taking a vaccine false? how do you trust a company that has been previously known to go for cash grabs not to be swayed by someone with money trying to push something, to be frank, social media platforms can mark whatever the fuck they want as false, there's no jurisdiction to decide what's right. 

[Deus Voltage]

Just now, Letgomyleghoe said:

I don't ever remember saying covid isn't real.

 

Sorry I didn't mean you specifically, I meant generally. Much love.

[poochyena]

Just now, Letgomyleghoe said:

how do you know it's false, how do you 100% know it's false.

Because its proven false. Experts in a field can show things are false. You can't point to a cat and saying its a bird. I don't understand how you seem to be implying that everything is just an opinion and nothing can be certain.

2 minutes ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

you can't just go around saying that everything you dont think is right is false

I don't.

2 minutes ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

social media platforms can mark whatever the fuck they want as false

They can, but the more credible social media platforms don't. Twitter, for example, doesn't accuse any information as being false, they point to what the experts say on subjects.

[Wheresmehammer]

19 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

So what's your solution? Give some big corporation/government the power to control everyone's thoughts and punish wrongthink, don't you think this is super dangerous?

I'll just ask you this, do you think that censoring the people you are describing would honestly stop the misinformation? It would only reinforce the conspiracy theories and push them "underground" where they won't be challenged which will even further reinforce the stupidity, if instead of censoring them, you provide them with the correct information, there is at least a chance that they would stop believing in that nonsense.

I think it's perfect for instilling how dumb humans have become.

[Wheresmehammer]

Maybe people will realize that there is no win-win situation, it's fully lose-lose and it's here to teach a lesson.

[PCGuy_5960]

7 minutes ago, Deus Voltage said:

To be certain, the choice is quite difficult.

 

Having to choose between censoring people in order to ensure the cohesiveness and well-being of society or letting misinformation ran rampant because it's freedom of speech, I think that tells you something. That we're reaching some sort of a limit in terms of our approach. That the problem may need to be dealt with in ways that may be very uncomfortable. Either that or we start thinking of solutions that are out of our technological/legal/philosophical reach right now.

My opinion is that misinformation is a preferable alternative to censorship, at least it doesn't last as long. The most important thing is clearing up the misinformation, which can be hard, but it is possible. What twitter is doing is pretty good, doesn't censor the content, but they do provide you with the facts too. Making the media more trustworthy to the public would also help massively.

7 minutes ago, poochyena said:

Because its proven false. Experts in a field can show things are false. You can't point to a cat and saying its a bird. I don't understand how you seem to be implying that everything is just an opinion and nothing can be certain.

That is true for some things, but not all. For example, if you say that covid is a hoax, then yeah, that is wrong and you're an idiot (and all the experts agree). If you question the impact that a nation wide lock down could have on the economy and if it's bad enough that it might not be a good idea, then you aren't right or wrong and different experts may not necessarily agree. (Economists/Doctors in this case)

5 minutes ago, Wheresmehammer said:

I think it's perfect for instilling how dumb humans have become.

Seems pretty authoritarian, but ok. Different opinions, I guess. /shrug

[Letgomyleghoe]

6 minutes ago, poochyena said:

Because its proven false. Experts in a field can show things are false.

the "experts" also thought that our DNA was a Single Helix, they thought that the earth was flat, they thought that emissions were not a problem. they thought radiation therapy, and shock treatment were okay, they thought lobotomies were ethical.

 

9 minutes ago, poochyena said:

They can, but the more credible social media platforms don't. Twitter, for example, doesn't accuse any information as being false, they point to what the experts say on subjects.

and that's completely correct, thats what should be happening, instead of just deleting what was posted, they could have a bot or some way of adding a link near the post that debunks the claim or "fake news." I don't believe that you can just tell someone that something is false, or that something is right, thats why theres scientific theories, because new information is always being found on the subjects that we never knew about or considered. 

[Rocketdog2112]

48 minutes ago, poochyena said:

its silencing fake news, not "opinions"

Actually, it's pushing an agenda...

[DeScruff]

28 minutes ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

that's not your job to convince them otherwise, if he wants to believe it let him. if you don't want to believe it dont, it's that simple.

It is my problem when he is annoying everyone around him and will not take a "stop talking about this subject" seriously. - And the boss refuses to do anything about it.

He believes PLENTY of other things that do get in the way, guy mixes chemicals when cleaning, refuses to not to cause some theory that chemical companies just don't want you making a superior product. - Not that some chemical combinations are actually deadly. - And yes I have looked up some concoctions hes made and found things that are toxic, or will cause chemical burns.
And don't give me a "Just let him do it" cause no hes likely to cause harm towards others by... I dunno mixing ammonia and bleach to give a well known example.

[PCGuy_5960]

1 minute ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

the "experts" also thought that our DNA was a Single Helix, they thought that the earth was flat, they thought that emissions were not a problem. they thought radiation therapy, and shock treatment were okay, they thought lobotomies were ethical.

That is true, science is constantly evolving, so information that is considered true today may be wrong tomorrow. If you told someone in the 1800s that time is relative or that matter has wave like properties, he'd think you are a nutjob. 

[Letgomyleghoe]

8 minutes ago, DeScruff said:

He believes PLENTY of other things that do get in the way, guy mixes chemicals when cleaning, refuses to not to cause some theory that chemical companies just don't want you making a superior product. - Not that some chemical combinations are actually deadly. - And yes I have looked up some concoctions hes made and found things that are toxic, or will cause chemical burns.
And don't give me a "Just let him do it" cause no hes likely to cause harm towards others by... I dunno mixing ammonia and bleach to give a well known example.

if your boss won't fire him report it to your local labor bureau, let the guy make chloroforms in his own home.

 

you've tried to tell him, not much else you can do.

[poochyena]

6 minutes ago, Rocketdog2112 said:

Actually, it's pushing an agenda...

Yes, the agenda to promote facts over fiction.

9 minutes ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

the "experts" also thought that our DNA was a Single Helix, they thought that the earth was flat, they thought that emissions were not a problem.

The overwhelming scientific community do not say any of that.

 

12 minutes ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

and that's completely correct, thats what should be happening

...should be? that IS whats happening.

 

12 minutes ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

I don't believe that you can just tell someone that something is false, or that something is right, thats why theres scientific theories, because new information is always being found on the subjects that we never knew about or considered. 

This is absolutely incredibly faulty logic and just isn't true. Do you think one day it will be "discovered" that a gtx 950 is more powerful than an rtx 3090? So if linus made a video saying that the gtx 950 is a much more powerful GPU than the rtx 3090, you'd be completely ok with that and refuse to say he is factually wrong?

Look, everything isn't just a knee-jerk opinion, many things in life are simply factually right or wrong. "well, it could be wrong" is not a valid retort to a claim backed up by facts. If something can be proven to be true, then thats the truth until it can be proven false.

[Rocketdog2112]

32 minutes ago, poochyena said:

Because its proven false. Experts in a field can show things are false. You can't point to a cat and saying its a bird. I don't understand how you seem to be implying that everything is just an opinion and nothing can be certain.

I don't.

They can, but the more credible social media platforms don't. Twitter, for example, doesn't accuse any information as being false, they point to what the experts say on subjects.

But yet people can self Identify as a different sex (or no sex at all) and that is supported by Experts?

[Letgomyleghoe]

6 minutes ago, poochyena said:

The overwhelming scientific community do not say any of that.

"also thought that" as in past tense.

 

6 minutes ago, poochyena said:

Look, everything isn't just a knee-jerk opinion, many things in life are simply factually right or wrong. "well, it could be wrong" is not a valid retort to a claim backed up by facts. If something can be proven to be true, then thats the truth until it can be proven false.

it is though, science is constantly changing, things that were once thought to be true are now not thought to be true, and it will happen in the future. you can't call it the truth if it can be proven false.

6 minutes ago, poochyena said:

...should be? that IS whats happening.

on twitter, yes, on other social media platforms, no. 

 

feel free to dm me, but i'm not gonna continue discussing in this thread, its stalling out and de-railing.

[Master Disaster]

53 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

So what's your solution? Give some big corporation/government the power to control everyone's thoughts and punish wrongthink, don't you think this is super dangerous?

I'll just ask you this, do you think that censoring the people you are describing would honestly stop the misinformation? It would only reinforce the conspiracy theories and push them "underground" where they won't be challenged which will even further reinforce the stupidity, if instead of censoring them, you provide them with the correct information, there is at least a chance that they would stop believing in that nonsense.

Nobody has said anything about censorship though. They want to create a standard set of rules on how to deal with it that is the same across all platforms.

 

People have the right to believe what they choose, they do not have the right to force those opinions on others.

 

I totally agree that censorship is a VERY bad idea, all that will do is let the preachers exclaim that the censorship is proof of them being correct but thats not the only way to deal with it. Adding clear labelling that the news is disputed or flat out fake along with context and links to facts and materials explaining why will do a lot more good than the current system.

 

Lets also not forget that Facebook only did this voluntarily because they were going to be forced into it anyway. IMO its better to have news outlets and independent organisations involved in the process rather than them trying to self regulate.

[poochyena]

3 minutes ago, Rocketdog2112 said:

But yet people can self Identify as a different sex (or no sex at all) and that is supported by Experts?

yea? You don't have to be an expert to know people self identify as whatever they want.

1 minute ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

"also thought that" as in past tense.

ok

2 minutes ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

it is though, science is constantly changing, things that were once thought to be true are now not thought to be true, and it will happen in the future. you can't call it the truth if it can be proven false.

Hey, my gtx 980 is actually way more powerful than that new rtx 3090. Linus and everyone else are all actually just wrong saying the 3090 is way better. How about I sell you my gtx 980 for $400, its an amazing deal!

[Rocketdog2112]

1 minute ago, poochyena said:

yea? You don't have to be an expert to know people self identify as whatever they want.

But does that make it true just because it's supported by gender experts?

[poochyena]

1 minute ago, Rocketdog2112 said:

But does that make it true just because it's supported by gender experts?

its true because there is no force stopping people from identifying how ever they want.