5 ms·

What is the problem with believing 5G causes coronavirus? The people who believe it are misinformed, and so what? I understand why it's harmful to spread anti-

What is the problem with believing 5G causes coronavirus? The people who believe it are misinformed, and so what? I understand why it's harmful to spread anti-vax memes, but 99% of "misinformation" is harmless. It's often difficult to separate theory and conspiracy from harmful information, a dubious concept.

jjjensen90 7y ago
Besides being bad on principle, misinformation in times of struggle can lead to irrational behavior, including misguided violence. For example, in this specific case: "5G-coronavirus conspiracy theory spurs rash of telecom tower arson fires" https://fortune.com/2020/04/06/5g-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory-telecom-tower-fires/ https://fortune.com/2020/04/06/5g-coronavirus-conspiracy-the...
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
throwaway5752 7y ago
Nothing is wrong with it. But the belief is complete incorrect and Icke is clearly mentally unwell, and social platforms have a right to defend their communities from people like him. They should not have to indulge lunatics that reduce their brand value or community health. Icke has the right to believe what he wants, and speak/write about it freely. Youtube should be under no obligation to provide a platform for him on their private service, either.
- SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
  > Youtube should be under no obligation to provide a platform for him on their private service, either. And that’s TOTALLY FINE. But the issue surrounding the whole “should these monopolies be the free speech overlords?” Is that if they say this guy can’t be allowed speech, they should have to take responsibility for the speech they do allow. Publisher vs Platform.
  - mullingitover 7y ago
    So your position is that if someone starts spamming Hacker News with hate speech, HN shouldn't be allowed to ban that user and delete their posts without shutting down the entire site? Because if web sites are legally liable for every post that's what's going to happen.
    - SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
      Strawman aside... “Hate speech” is a very loose term. Do you mean actual calls to incite violence? Which are illegal and no one has any problem with their removal? Or do you mean “things I just don’t like”? Because HN already has a strong bubble mechanic to remove wrong-think (in practice right now!) “I disagree with you” or “I’m wildly wrong” isn’t typically against a website’s terms of service. Is this looney guy being wrong about 5G calling for violence? Is his opinion illegal in anyway? Can you see no scenario (past your own nose) that your opinion ever winds up on the “wrong side” of corporate judgment? Furthermore, if you’re just going to kick people off your platform because they’re wrong, you had better not selectively enforce that. Seems like it’s best to just be a PLATFORM. Which is exactly what they all claim to be. Except they do it while enjoying PUBLISHER convenience of removing things they just don’t like but are otherwise within the rules and terms.
      - mullingitover 7y ago
        > “Hate speech” is a very loose term. No. It really isn't. Normal people know it when they see it, and the people who claim not to know it are usually the ones using it, along with the bad faith contrarians. > Seems like it’s best to just be a PLATFORM. Which is exactly what they all claim to be. Most sites refer to themselves as communities, and I have no problem with a community kicking bad actors (which they're free to define on their own terms) out while not being held legally responsible if they fail to do that perfectly.
        SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
        > No. It really isn't. Normal people know it when they see it, Wow. That’s an argument I didn’t expect to see. Do you know we’ve already been over this for pornography? It’s a pretty famous argument that didn’t go the way you might want if you’re using it too. If you can’t tell me what hate speech is, but prove my point saying “people know what it is”... that’s exactly the definition of “loosely defined”. I’m not even saying it shouldn’t be loosely defined, there is nuance per context. >Communities Would you please be so kind as to tell me where that definition is in Section 230? You can refer to yourself however you like. In this context the LEGAL terms are platform and publisher. Well, Sounds like a good plan you have there. That it’s entirely ethical to hide wrong-think. Yes, I hope you never think the wrong things! Surely that could never happen right? Do you think it is coincidence that your opinion largely agrees with Silicon Valley’s “taste makers”?
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
moosey 7y ago
I don't think that contemporary, high emotional arousal misinformation sources are harmless. I contend instead that the feeling of superiority and constant novelty of conspiracy theories lead to a dopamine-addiction loop. Since novelty is one of the primary focal points of the human attention system, we are hijacked and conned by these systems. This is why high-anger television (Fox News) has ads for gold and reverse mortgages. Turn off the ability to fight, make them angry, then when the cognitive defenses are turned off, take them for what they are worth. Misinformation and the hole that leads into it are not harmless, and lead to mental degradation and emotional trauma.
01100011 7y ago
A couple days ago in Long Beach, CA, USA, a train engineer derailed his train in an attempt to stop a medical ship which he believed was part of a government takeover. Conspiracies are all fun and games until a simpleton believes them and does something that hurts others.
- NullPrefix 7y ago
  What does the ship have to do with 5G?
- lonelappde 7y ago
  https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/04/02/825897966/train-engineer-says-he-crashed-in-attempt-to-attack-navy-hospital-ship-in-l-a https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/0... Wow. Is this a "misinformation control" issue or is it more a "monitor mental health of employees in high trust positions" issue?
driverdan 7y ago
This is a common misunderstanding. Check out http://whatstheharm.net/ http://whatstheharm.net/ to better understand how conspiracies and crank ideas harm people.
Nursie 7y ago
> What is the problem with believing 5G causes coronavirus? Some of them have been burning down 5G towers here in the UK. That's a part of it! I mean, that's part of the problem with all the scaremongering pseudoscience bullshit out there - people act on it.

jjjensen90 7y ago

Besides being bad on principle, misinformation in times of struggle can lead to irrational behavior, including misguided violence. For example, in this specific case: "5G-coronavirus conspiracy theory spurs rash of telecom tower arson fires" https://fortune.com/2020/04/06/5g-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory-telecom-tower-fires/ https://fortune.com/2020/04/06/5g-coronavirus-conspiracy-the...

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

throwaway5752 7y ago

Nothing is wrong with it. But the belief is complete incorrect and Icke is clearly mentally unwell, and social platforms have a right to defend their communities from people like him. They should not have to indulge lunatics that reduce their brand value or community health. Icke has the right to believe what he wants, and speak/write about it freely. Youtube should be under no obligation to provide a platform for him on their private service, either.

SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
> Youtube should be under no obligation to provide a platform for him on their private service, either. And that’s TOTALLY FINE. But the issue surrounding the whole “should these monopolies be the free speech overlords?” Is that if they say this guy can’t be allowed speech, they should have to take responsibility for the speech they do allow. Publisher vs Platform.
- mullingitover 7y ago
  So your position is that if someone starts spamming Hacker News with hate speech, HN shouldn't be allowed to ban that user and delete their posts without shutting down the entire site? Because if web sites are legally liable for every post that's what's going to happen.
  - SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
    Strawman aside... “Hate speech” is a very loose term. Do you mean actual calls to incite violence? Which are illegal and no one has any problem with their removal? Or do you mean “things I just don’t like”? Because HN already has a strong bubble mechanic to remove wrong-think (in practice right now!) “I disagree with you” or “I’m wildly wrong” isn’t typically against a website’s terms of service. Is this looney guy being wrong about 5G calling for violence? Is his opinion illegal in anyway? Can you see no scenario (past your own nose) that your opinion ever winds up on the “wrong side” of corporate judgment? Furthermore, if you’re just going to kick people off your platform because they’re wrong, you had better not selectively enforce that. Seems like it’s best to just be a PLATFORM. Which is exactly what they all claim to be. Except they do it while enjoying PUBLISHER convenience of removing things they just don’t like but are otherwise within the rules and terms.
    - mullingitover 7y ago
      > “Hate speech” is a very loose term. No. It really isn't. Normal people know it when they see it, and the people who claim not to know it are usually the ones using it, along with the bad faith contrarians. > Seems like it’s best to just be a PLATFORM. Which is exactly what they all claim to be. Most sites refer to themselves as communities, and I have no problem with a community kicking bad actors (which they're free to define on their own terms) out while not being held legally responsible if they fail to do that perfectly.
      - SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
        > No. It really isn't. Normal people know it when they see it, Wow. That’s an argument I didn’t expect to see. Do you know we’ve already been over this for pornography? It’s a pretty famous argument that didn’t go the way you might want if you’re using it too. If you can’t tell me what hate speech is, but prove my point saying “people know what it is”... that’s exactly the definition of “loosely defined”. I’m not even saying it shouldn’t be loosely defined, there is nuance per context. >Communities Would you please be so kind as to tell me where that definition is in Section 230? You can refer to yourself however you like. In this context the LEGAL terms are platform and publisher. Well, Sounds like a good plan you have there. That it’s entirely ethical to hide wrong-think. Yes, I hope you never think the wrong things! Surely that could never happen right? Do you think it is coincidence that your opinion largely agrees with Silicon Valley’s “taste makers”?

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

moosey 7y ago

I don't think that contemporary, high emotional arousal misinformation sources are harmless. I contend instead that the feeling of superiority and constant novelty of conspiracy theories lead to a dopamine-addiction loop. Since novelty is one of the primary focal points of the human attention system, we are hijacked and conned by these systems. This is why high-anger television (Fox News) has ads for gold and reverse mortgages. Turn off the ability to fight, make them angry, then when the cognitive defenses are turned off, take them for what they are worth. Misinformation and the hole that leads into it are not harmless, and lead to mental degradation and emotional trauma.

01100011 7y ago

A couple days ago in Long Beach, CA, USA, a train engineer derailed his train in an attempt to stop a medical ship which he believed was part of a government takeover. Conspiracies are all fun and games until a simpleton believes them and does something that hurts others.

NullPrefix 7y ago
What does the ship have to do with 5G?
lonelappde 7y ago
https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/04/02/825897966/train-engineer-says-he-crashed-in-attempt-to-attack-navy-hospital-ship-in-l-a https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/0... Wow. Is this a "misinformation control" issue or is it more a "monitor mental health of employees in high trust positions" issue?

driverdan 7y ago

This is a common misunderstanding. Check out http://whatstheharm.net/ http://whatstheharm.net/ to better understand how conspiracies and crank ideas harm people.

Nursie 7y ago

> What is the problem with believing 5G causes coronavirus? Some of them have been burning down 5G towers here in the UK. That's a part of it! I mean, that's part of the problem with all the scaremongering pseudoscience bullshit out there - people act on it.