4 ms·

Good

by tedajax 8y ago

Good

lugg 8y ago
This is not good. This is a very shitty situation where nobody is winning.
goostavos 8y ago
Silencing ideas is not the way to correct them...
- lern_too_spel 8y ago
  How well has letting people air these ideas worked? Compare the number of Nazis in Germany (and hate crimes committed by same) vs. Lost Causers in the American South and their hate crimes. It's one thing to hold a belief in a certain threshold for freedom of speech. It's another thing to state without evidence that it has better outcomes.
  - freedomben 8y ago
    There's a really nice place you may consider as an option that tightly controls information. No need to worry about encountering bad ideas in the People's Republic of Korea. There's also China. They have a much safer internet there. Not as safe as DPRK's internet, but still pretty good.
    - lern_too_spel 8y ago
      And yet Germany is nothing like DPRK or PRC. Maybe there exist freedom of speech thresholds in between the extremes of Somalia (where you are free to shout "fire!" in crowded theaters) and DPRK? It amazes me how many Americans religiously believe that their thresholds are the only ones that work and that the only other option is some ridiculous extreme. You can see the same religiosity in weapons freedoms. Somalians have more. North Koreans have less. Yet there are many working thresholds in between, most of which empirically perform better than the US's.
- intrasight 8y ago
  They still have their freedom to speak. And so does Jeff Bezos.
- CyberDildonics 8y ago
  People not wanting to listen to someone is not censorship. An organization not broadcasting you is not censorship. Even good ideas and real science aren't entitled to be broadcast by every organization in every way possible.
- yongjik 8y ago
  Amazon isn't set out to fight and correct anti-vaxxers. (Some people do, and I admire their devotion, but it's not a fight I'd enjoy.) They just want to stem the flow of misinformation. It's not the job of a fireman to make an arsonist see the error of his ways. We just want to put out the fire.
- belltaco 8y ago
  Fake news are not ideas.
_red 8y ago
Here is an insert for you to enjoy! https://imgur.com/a/Q8IvuZJ https://imgur.com/a/Q8IvuZJ
- throwawaymath 8y ago
  Do you mind helping us interpret this? I'm not picking up from this what you probably intend.
  - _red 8y ago
    Now this is just one vaccine, and its not wise to extrapolate wholesale. However, this one clearly states: there have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza from using this product. Note: Its curious I'm being downvoted for actually posted an actual insert, which has real scientific information. You would think all the "science lovers" would applaud that. Ho hum, I guess I should've posted a Merck marketing ad instead.
    - mateo1 8y ago
      don't expect them to enjoy facts. They just want their cult to prevail. They'd love to delete your "anti-vaccination" comment. Facts that go against their desires are evil propaganda and should be deleted too.
    - throwawaymath 8y ago
      Well I'm not downvoting you since 1) I can't, you responded to me; and 2) you're not being offtopic. And you're at least defending your position without memeing even if I disagree with it. That being said, I'm glad you clarified because I figured the implication you were getting at is these are harmful vaccines. Am I correct in saying your grievance is a lack of evidence that they're helpful?
      - AnaniasAnanas 8y ago
        > Am I correct in saying your grievance is a lack of evidence that they're helpful? Part of the second picture that the user has highlighted basically says that said vaccine contains a mercury derivative and that it has not been tested for "carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility". So I would say that this is also part of his issue.

Good

lugg 8y ago

This is not good. This is a very shitty situation where nobody is winning.

goostavos 8y ago

Silencing ideas is not the way to correct them...

lern_too_spel 8y ago
How well has letting people air these ideas worked? Compare the number of Nazis in Germany (and hate crimes committed by same) vs. Lost Causers in the American South and their hate crimes. It's one thing to hold a belief in a certain threshold for freedom of speech. It's another thing to state without evidence that it has better outcomes.
- freedomben 8y ago
  There's a really nice place you may consider as an option that tightly controls information. No need to worry about encountering bad ideas in the People's Republic of Korea. There's also China. They have a much safer internet there. Not as safe as DPRK's internet, but still pretty good.
  - lern_too_spel 8y ago
    And yet Germany is nothing like DPRK or PRC. Maybe there exist freedom of speech thresholds in between the extremes of Somalia (where you are free to shout "fire!" in crowded theaters) and DPRK? It amazes me how many Americans religiously believe that their thresholds are the only ones that work and that the only other option is some ridiculous extreme. You can see the same religiosity in weapons freedoms. Somalians have more. North Koreans have less. Yet there are many working thresholds in between, most of which empirically perform better than the US's.
intrasight 8y ago
They still have their freedom to speak. And so does Jeff Bezos.
CyberDildonics 8y ago
People not wanting to listen to someone is not censorship. An organization not broadcasting you is not censorship. Even good ideas and real science aren't entitled to be broadcast by every organization in every way possible.
yongjik 8y ago
Amazon isn't set out to fight and correct anti-vaxxers. (Some people do, and I admire their devotion, but it's not a fight I'd enjoy.) They just want to stem the flow of misinformation. It's not the job of a fireman to make an arsonist see the error of his ways. We just want to put out the fire.
belltaco 8y ago
Fake news are not ideas.

_red 8y ago

Here is an insert for you to enjoy! https://imgur.com/a/Q8IvuZJ https://imgur.com/a/Q8IvuZJ

throwawaymath 8y ago
Do you mind helping us interpret this? I'm not picking up from this what you probably intend.
- _red 8y ago
  Now this is just one vaccine, and its not wise to extrapolate wholesale. However, this one clearly states: there have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza from using this product. Note: Its curious I'm being downvoted for actually posted an actual insert, which has real scientific information. You would think all the "science lovers" would applaud that. Ho hum, I guess I should've posted a Merck marketing ad instead.
  - mateo1 8y ago
    don't expect them to enjoy facts. They just want their cult to prevail. They'd love to delete your "anti-vaccination" comment. Facts that go against their desires are evil propaganda and should be deleted too.
  - throwawaymath 8y ago
    Well I'm not downvoting you since 1) I can't, you responded to me; and 2) you're not being offtopic. And you're at least defending your position without memeing even if I disagree with it. That being said, I'm glad you clarified because I figured the implication you were getting at is these are harmful vaccines. Am I correct in saying your grievance is a lack of evidence that they're helpful?
    - AnaniasAnanas 8y ago
      > Am I correct in saying your grievance is a lack of evidence that they're helpful? Part of the second picture that the user has highlighted basically says that said vaccine contains a mercury derivative and that it has not been tested for "carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility". So I would say that this is also part of his issue.