Should misinformation be banned from the major platforms?

[Daedalus X]

For this topic misinformation is any information that promotes needle hesitancy or anti authoritarian approved information.

Here is an example of misinformation that can't be posted to YouTube, twitter, Facebook or any mainline medium. Is this good public policy?



This is a MUST WATCH.

https://www.therealanthonyfaucimovie.com/viewing/

[oldbadger]

What can we can learn about these boxes via IT?

That could be a project for you? You won't know until you try, I guess.

A BBC Journalist asked a US county mayor about this last evening, and we listened to a brief resume about how they work....in that county republican and democrat observers witness the whole business, all the way through, and that seems to be a very good idea.

I don't understand your response. But my best guess is that you are saying it is good to censor lies but not the truth? Is that correct?

Hang on........ opinions are just, opinions. But if a person is provoking violence in a demonstration, or blackmailing folks via IT, or inciting crimes, or....etc..... then policing is necessary and we are getting more of that here.

The Nuremberg Code had to do with "Permissible Medical Experiments".

The Nuremburg Code had not been written when the Nazis were tried, and convicts executed.
Nuremburg trials and a later Nuremburg Code are different 'things'.
Your dates are mixed up.

Just as an aside, I don't know how many people were murdered in the camps, I am sure there were some. But, most of them died as a result of the successful allied bombing campaigns.

No. We didn't know where these camps were, mostly hidden in away in forest areas, and far from commerce, industry and cities.
One prison camp was bombed, by Mosquito fighter bombers returning from another target, but the camp held British POWs and the attack was intended to smash down prison walls to aid a mass escape....is that where you got the idea that extermination camps got bombed?

You should see pictures and film of these camps when they were overrun by Russian, American and UK forces......dreadful.
After the trials all the convicts were distributed between UK, US and Russian officials for execution.
We sent our head executioner Mr Pierrepoint to carry out UK executions.
There were so many to hang that after hanging all the female convicts singly he had to hang the males in tandem. They ran out of coffins.

[oldbadger]

Firstly, only if you see buying something as the same as producing it, morally. I don't think the people who throw blood on people for wearing fur are right. I don't think there's a moral obligation not to buy a product just because the people who produced it used immoral means. It scans fine when it's fur, but how about people faced with a choice between starvation and buying something really horrid to stay alive? I wouldn't have them starve. That, and I don't even believe people who moderate their forums are doing anything wrong. I just think that if they use that moderation to silence people for disagreeing with them, it makes a horrible world for everyone but bullies. Pollution makes a horrible world too but I think there should be laws that address the problem, rather than demonising people for buying laundry detergent and throwing away the containers.

Yes........ people who throw blood on victims commit a very very serious offence and need to be convicted and punished. Any kind of assault is a disgusting crime.
Yes...... some of my neighbours are opening and cleaning out their chimneys to burn wood if they get cold in a freeze, even though we are not allowed to, now. That's like starvation and in need I would support folks doing what they can to get by.

I even acknowledge that on this forum, Osteng uses moderation to create a utopia. Because he's fair. I have acknowledged this before. You can look at the whole post if you're interested. It shows I'm being non-hypocritical.

That's it...... the bottom line is that like me you do support moderation on private web-sites. It makes sense to police IT now, you just have to be careful who will do the policing.

The problem, as I see it, is that you give absolute power over private property, and some will be fair like Osteng. However, others will not be fair, they will cater to the 51% - the bullies - they will win on the free market, they will push the fair guys out of business, and then you will have only one ideology allowed. Not, to go to a specific bar, a specific forum, but to exist at all. Want a job? Have the correct ideology, or we won't hire you. It's not even that the restaurant owner is necessarily a bully. He's forced to be, because once you get a dominant ideology, those people will only patronise their ideology, while the loser ideology must patronise whatever they can get.

It's sad that fanatics deliberately pick on businesses who have some prejudice or other to try and catch them out. That's just nasty. But when people are picked on and victimised because of some personal difference in them, then that's just extremism....
There are idiots on both sides of that line.

Let's say you have two political bars, one conservative, and one liberal. Each bar is only for those of that ideology. Let's say 70% of people become liberal. The first thing that will happen is the minority bar will start allowing liberals. The previous patrons of the bar will gripe, but where are they going to go? They have to accept this new status quo. Then, because of the majority, you get 80% liberals, some having changed their tune. Now the liberal bar is filled with 50 liberals, while the conservative bar is filled with 20 conservatives and 30 liberals. The 30 liberals have the power and they'll use it: They demand that the conservatives be kicked out of the everyone bar. If not, they will patronise the other bar. Rather than lose most of his customers, the bar owner caves. There's only one right move here: Choosing 30 customers over 20. In this way the free market creates a dominant ideology you have to hold, just to get along in society. Eventually you'll have to profess your loyalty to the correct ideology to get groceries.

Have you ever walked in to a pub in Ireland or Scotland? My wife and I went in to a Scottish village pub about thirty years ago and a nice quietly spoken guy came over to us, introduced himself and then explained that we were definitely in the wrong pub...we needed to go to another.
There are shops, places, pubs etc in Ireland where you would be welcomed.....and there are others.

One time, a man in a restaurant was ranting on about Catholics, and we were sitting at a nearby table. I heard him tell his mates 'Ah yes...We can tell 'em on sight! I caught this guy's eye and asked him 'Can you really tell a Catholic on sight? and then he explained exactly how N.Irish Catholics look different from Protestants.

Yiou don't have to tell Brits about bigotry.

So you also believe that people should be restricted, by the government, in what they can and cannot do with their own private property. Private property rights, but only if no racism. Private property rights are not absolute. They are limited within the scope of, don't be racist. Yet your entire argument against tyrannically enforced protection of ideas is, because it's their forum, they need to be able to moderate their own forum, as they see fit, full stop.

People can do what they like with their property, but if they open it to the public then rules apply here.
Yes.... a shopkeeper can refuse entry to shoppers with dogs, but they cannot refuse entry to medical, care and guide dogs.
We have rules and we have an Equality Act 10' that applies to Great Britain (I'm not sure about Northern Ireland)

It's just that, you don't have a particularly good case that people need to be able to moderate their own forums, that is moral, because property rights are moral, and it is immoral to impose limitations upon it. Not if you believe in anti-discrimination law. If you were in the minority you'd be just as wrong as I am now.

But you have already shown me that you do support moderation on private forums.

[Daedalus X]

Hang on........ opinions are just, opinions. But if a person is provoking violence in a demonstration, or blackmailing folks via IT, or inciting crimes, or....etc..... then policing is necessary and we are getting more of that here.

The police should get involved only after a crime is committed in the real world, but that is just my opinion, I don't want to see the police arresting people for pre crimes as in the movie "Minority Report".

Just as an aside, I don't know how many people were murdered in the camps, I am sure there were some. But, most of them died as a result of the successful allied bombing campaigns.

No. We didn't know where these camps were, mostly hidden in away in forest areas, and far from commerce, industry and cities.
One prison camp was bombed, by Mosquito fighter bombers returning from another target, but the camp held British POWs and the attack was intended to smash down prison walls to aid a mass escape....is that where you got the idea that extermination camps got bombed?

When I said "successful allied bombing", I did not mean the allies were intentionally bombing the camps and hitting them was considered successful bombing. What I meant was that their bombing was destroying the German critical infrastructure, supplies and their ability move goods to the troops as well as the factory workers and the other parts of the population. The residents of the camps were last in line and therefore suffered deprivation of food and medicine.

You should see pictures and film of these camps when they were overrun by Russian, American and UK forces......dreadful.

The piles of dead bodies look like people who died of starvation and diseases. Why would the Germans gas people who are already knocking on deaths door?

[Purple Knight]

I even acknowledge that on this forum, Osteng uses moderation to create a utopia. Because he's fair. I have acknowledged this before. You can look at the whole post if you're interested. It shows I'm being non-hypocritical.

That's it...... the bottom line is that like me you do support moderation on private web-sites. It makes sense to police IT now, you just have to be careful who will do the policing.

I don't support people doing as they like with their private property any more than you do. You think businesses open to the public should have to be fair to minorities. I think they should have to be fair to ideological minorities.

And I feel hideous that I'm enjoying an environment I don't deserve. I deserve the environment of that one forum I left where people made horrible threats against me and told me to kill myself regularly, because I believe they have every right to say that and I don't want to stop them. What I really wish I could do is remove myself from Osteng's protection and have him declare open season on me. In other words, insults are fair game against Purple Knight.

I do feel like I don't deserve this nice environment and being protected from insults. But I also can't find that I'm doing anything wrong by being here, since I don't believe buying or using a thing is the same as producing that thing and I don't even think people moderating their websites are doing anything wrong. Osteng certainly is not, and even those stomping out the minority views, well, the law tells them they have the right to. I just think the law should say otherwise.

There are shops, places, pubs etc in Ireland where you would be welcomed.....and there are others.

I'm sure. In fact it's the prevalence of hardcore religion that has staved off Ireland hitting ideological critical mass, but eventually it will, and every business will be forced to stomp on, exclude, and disparage the minority viewpoint. America hit ideological critical mass some time after the 90's and you now simply can't believe what you like, nevermind say what you like, and still get along unless you happen to be religious. Then, you have a golden ticket where people can't bully you, fire you, exclude you, or silence you for what you believe. What would you say if I just said, I want the First Amendment to apply to everyone, not just the religious? I'm sure you'd find that pretty reasonable.

People can do what they like with their property, but if they open it to the public then rules apply here.
Yes.... a shopkeeper can refuse entry to shoppers with dogs, but they cannot refuse entry to medical, care and guide dogs.
We have rules and we have an Equality Act 10' that applies to Great Britain (I'm not sure about Northern Ireland)

I'd support a version of those laws, or a version of anti-discrimination laws, that protected ideas... if I thought that would work, but sadly I don't. And as you said, America hasn't come a long way with racial discrimination. They either do it under the table and just don't hire people named Jamal - don't even look at that application, and what can you do because they got 200 and only had time to look at three - or they follow the law and just take it out on nonprotected groups, of which there are many. For every nasty thing they can't say against Jamal, they pick on somebody for being fat, which is not protected except in Michigan and D.C.

But you have already shown me that you do support moderation on private forums.

I don't support it, I just acknowledge that there would be more nastiness with tyrannically enforced free speech. You have to protect people who harass and tell others to kill themselves too, and I'll eagerly make that deal with the devil, if that's really the only way to avoid this situation we have now, where it's believe exactly what we say or lose your job and starve. Nevermind being silenced on forums, but that's certainly part of it.

[oldbadger]

The police should get involved only after a crime is committed in the real world, but that is just my opinion, I don't want to see the police arresting people for pre crimes as in the movie "Minority Report".

Criminal Attempts Act (81?)
Going equipped to steal. (68?)
Being found on enclosed premises for an unlawful purpose.(Common law?)

No...... the idea that police would wait for a crime to be completed after it had already been embarked upon is very dodgy.

Example:-
Emergency services, Police. Can I help you?
I have been warned that my ex husband is coming to murder me!
OK, well if anything like that happens please call us.

When I said "successful allied bombing", I did not mean the allies were intentionally bombing the camps and hitting them was considered successful bombing. What I meant was that their bombing was destroying the German critical infrastructure, supplies and their ability move goods to the troops as well as the factory workers and the other parts of the population. The residents of the camps were last in line and therefore suffered deprivation of food and medicine.

The prisoners were being shot, clubbed, gassed, worked and starved to death........millions of them. 11+ million.
You need to learn about the Holocaust.

The piles of dead bodies look like people who died of starvation and diseases. Why would the Germans gas people who are already knocking on deaths door?

Many were just starved to death........ but you should read about the Holocaust.

Forty years ago I had a lodger who denied the Holocaust absolutely. He insisted that he didn't mind Gypsies, Jews, JWs, Masons, Blacks, Gays and that his opinion was based solely upon 'facts'. One day I was at his residence and a there was a news report on his television about a businessman's successful company. My lodger's face screwed up in to a rictus of disgust, hatred or anger and he muttered aloud, 'Ah...yes... and there's another f---------- j-- boy!'

I've always wondered about holocaust deniers ever since.

[oldbadger]

I don't support people doing as they like with their private property any more than you do. You think businesses open to the public should have to be fair to minorities. I think they should have to be fair to ideological minorities.

Hi........... before I continue to answer your points, please know that I am very interested in our conversation and am glad that you are taking part in it. OK?

And I feel hideous that I'm enjoying an environment I don't deserve. I deserve the environment of that one forum I left where people made horrible threats against me and told me to kill myself regularly, because I believe they have every right to say that and I don't want to stop them. What I really wish I could do is remove myself from Osteng's protection and have him declare open season on me. In other words, insults are fair game against Purple Knight.

I do feel like I don't deserve this nice environment and being protected from insults. But I also can't find that I'm doing anything wrong by being here, since I don't believe buying or using a thing is the same as producing that thing and I don't even think people moderating their websites are doing anything wrong. Osteng certainly is not, and even those stomping out the minority views, well, the law tells them they have the right to. I just think the law should say otherwise.

I know about such forums, PK, I do. I know Theist forums where some members can throw dreadful insults, and yet I visit a non-theist forum which is even worse. I also know forums where anybody who writes against a particular ideal is banned. One forum has removed it's all-time member's list because a massively huge % of member's names had 'banned' beside them!

One forum is so bad, so shocking, that I visit it about once a fortnight just to remind myself that folks like that exist in the world.

But just as it should be reasonable for you to walk safely to a convenience store safely at night, so it should be reasonable for media sites to be reasonably controlled.

I'm sure. In fact it's the prevalence of hardcore religion that has staved off Ireland hitting ideological critical mass, but eventually it will, and every business will be forced to stomp on, exclude, and disparage the minority viewpoint. America hit ideological critical mass some time after the 90's and you now simply can't believe what you like, nevermind say what you like, and still get along unless you happen to be religious. Then, you have a golden ticket where people can't bully you, fire you, exclude you, or silence you for what you believe. What would you say if I just said, I want the First Amendment to apply to everyone, not just the religious? I'm sure you'd find that pretty reasonable.

But you can believe what you like, PK, you can. Anybody can. Where I live we have laws that try to help everybody to live in safety and as free from any kind of bullies as possible. Our laws and our police fail, all the time, but they do their best and we need them, just like we need a military to protect us from outside aggressors.
Just now we are sending as much help to Ukraine as we can to help it defend itself from an invading army.....it's all about safety and fairness, I guess.

I'd support a version of those laws, or a version of anti-discrimination laws, that protected ideas... if I thought that would work, but sadly I don't. And as you said, America hasn't come a long way with racial discrimination. They either do it under the table and just don't hire people named Jamal - don't even look at that application, and what can you do because they got 200 and only had time to look at three - or they follow the law and just take it out on nonprotected groups, of which there are many. For every nasty thing they can't say against Jamal, they pick on somebody for being fat, which is not protected except in Michigan and D.C.

They? Who are 'they', PK?
All humans have prejudices of one kind or another. Back in the day this was a survival condition. But we need to rise above these if we live in communities. And we need to police our communities to protect from Loss and Crime.
If I would drive from home to the local city my vehicle would have passed through countless Auto-Number-Recognition cameras and the authorities would be warned if my car was in any way illegal, if criminal activity was linked to my car, etc etc..... And I would have passed through countless private and public camera systems and been recorded. Criminals hate all this, but since it protects me I don't mind it.

I don't support it, I just acknowledge that there would be more nastiness with tyrannically enforced free speech. You have to protect people who harass and tell others to kill themselves too, and I'll eagerly make that deal with the devil, if that's really the only way to avoid this situation we have now, where it's believe exactly what we say or lose your job and starve. Nevermind being silenced on forums, but that's certainly part of it.

If you lived in the UK counselling services in our NHS are free, and I would suggest that you look in to such services, but I don't know if you would have to pay for that where you are.
At this time you seem to dislike many aspects of moderation, policing and enforcement that are there to help everybody, including you.

[Daedalus X]

The police should get involved only after a crime is committed in the real world, but that is just my opinion, I don't want to see the police arresting people for pre crimes as in the movie "Minority Report".

Criminal Attempts Act (81?)
Going equipped to steal. (68?)
Being found on enclosed premises for an unlawful purpose.(Common law?)

No...... the idea that police would wait for a crime to be completed after it had already been embarked upon is very dodgy.

Example:-
Emergency services, Police. Can I help you?
I have been warned that my ex husband is coming to murder me!
OK, well if anything like that happens please call us.

Ex wife: Sorry to bother you, but there is a creepy man that knows where I live and he said something about visiting me when I least expect it, I know you have several guns would you be willing to sell me one?

Ex husband: Sure, I have one I have been meaning to sell, would $200 dollars be good for you.

Ex wife: Great, can you be here at about 8 pm?

Ex husband: I will be there.

Emergency services, Police. Can I help you?
I have been warned that my ex husband is coming to murder me!
OK, we will be there and if he shows up we will arrest him.

The prisoners were being shot, clubbed, gassed, worked and starved to death........millions of them. 11+ million.
You need to learn about the Holocaust.

As I said there were some that were murdered, but it looks to me like most of them died from starvation and typhus. The Germans did not have enough food for their own people, so the residents of the camp ended up suffering for it.

When we "learn" about history, we get the account that the winners would like us to see. And it is human nature to demonize the enemy and hide our own evils.

I have never seen any proof that that Hitler ordered the death of all these camp residents, but if you have any I would like to see it. The closest I have seen is that in some of his pre war speeches he talked about removing the certain people from Europe.

Just for comparison how many Germans died in Eisenhower's camps after the war? I have seen numbers between 3K and 1M. And nobody was bombing his supply lines.


And here is something that you will not see in the evening news reports.

[Purple Knight]

If you lived in the UK counselling services in our NHS are free, and I would suggest that you look in to such services, but I don't know if you would have to pay for that where you are.
At this time you seem to dislike many aspects of moderation, policing and enforcement that are there to help everybody, including you.

So I need counseling because I prefer that people are allowed to insult me, if that also makes it so I can say and think what I like? Seems like you're calling me crazy for pure personal valuation. That's fine. I think you have the right to that opinion, and I think it should be a strong right, so that you can't be discriminated against, silenced, fired, banned from forums or grocery stores, for having that opinion.

[oldbadger]

Ex wife: Sorry to bother you, but there is a creepy man that knows where I live and he said something about visiting me when I least expect it, I know you have several guns would you be willing to sell me one?

Ex husband: Sure, I have one I have been meaning to sell, would $200 dollars be good for you.

Ex wife: Great, can you be here at about 8 pm?

Ex husband: I will be there.

Emergency services, Police. Can I help you?
I have been warned that my ex husband is coming to murder me!
OK, we will be there and if he shows up we will arrest him.

I do love your extension of that piece! Very good! Maybe the last line could have read:-
OK, we will be there and if he shows up we will shoot him.

........... Sorted.......

As I said there were some that were murdered, but it looks to me like most of them died from starvation and typhus. The Germans did not have enough food for their own people, so the residents of the camp ended up suffering for it.

When we "learn" about history, we get the account that the winners would like us to see. And it is human nature to demonize the enemy and hide our own evils.

I have never seen any proof that that Hitler ordered the death of all these camp residents, but if you have any I would like to see it. The closest I have seen is that in some of his pre war speeches he talked about removing the certain people from Europe.

Just for comparison how many Germans died in Eisenhower's camps after the war? I have seen numbers between 3K and 1M. And nobody was bombing his supply lines.

Murder.......... all murder. I mentioned Pierrepoint the English hangman who was handing numerous convicts in pairs each day for many days.
Death of Germans in US and UK POW camps........ Yes, some, but if you're looking for multitudes of dead it might be a good idea to review the Russian camps where many POWs were sent to die in labour camps and mines, etc.

And here is something that you will not see in the evening news reports.

I see you're back on that Neo-Nazi Right Wing Racist fanatic's website again.

Do you know who the speaker is, and do you know where he is?

[oldbadger]

So I need counseling because I prefer that people are allowed to insult me,

No....... you mentioned that you hate yourself.

if that also makes it so I can say and think what I like? Seems like you're calling me crazy for pure personal valuation.

Where did I suggest anything like that?

That's fine. I think you have the right to that opinion, and I think it should be a strong right, so that you can't be discriminated against, silenced, fired, banned from forums or grocery stores, for having that opinion.

That wasn't my opinion.
Your feelings about yourself are what caused me to suggest counselling.

40 years after my wife was treated at an experimental psychiatric clinic by Guy's hospital, and thirty years after her death, my doctor recommended that I take tests for early dementia at the local psychiatric centre. I passed those tests just fine, but was surrounded by psychiatric nurses and at one point I told the centre's Sister that I felt very strange in the place. We talked. She suggested counselling. I had ten counselling sessions with a young counselling trainee........... at the time I didn't think it was any good, but some time later I realised that all the bad memories and horrors..... I wasn't thinking about them any more.

If you feel hate for youreself about stuff it might be a good idea to seek counselling, if you can afford it where you are.