4 ms·

> When you deal in mass distribution, the dynamics and responsibilities are different than when you're in conversation/process with other domain experts. Why?

> When you deal in mass distribution, the dynamics and responsibilities are different than when you're in conversation/process with other domain experts. Why? Is the implicit assumption here that people are too stupid or irresponsible to handle hearing information & coming to their own conclusion on it? This seems like a distressingly common viewpoint nowadays...

DaiPlusPlus 5y ago
> Is the implicit assumption here that people are too stupid or irresponsible to handle hearing information & coming to their own conclusion on it? At risk of being flippant, have you been on Facebook lately at all in the past 5-6 years?
- squidlogic 5y ago
  So the solution is to censor what information is ok for the plebs to see and what is too ideologically harmful for them? This is a very condescending and authoritarian position that I would hope those of us who care about free discourse would eschew.
  - DaiPlusPlus 5y ago
    > So the solution is to censor what information is ok for the plebs to see and what is too ideologically harmful for them? I'm not saying that.
  - voganmother42 5y ago
    “If there be time to expose through discussion, the falsehoods and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.” "The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude larger than to produce it." Is free discourse about being free from consequences? Is it about equal representation/distribution? I am curious about ideological harm when compared to things like offering legal or medical advice. What does a private company/platform have to do with censorship? Why does a private company/platform need to represent and publish all ideological viewpoints, and what is that company’s responsibility to free discourse?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
wwweston 5y ago
You seem to have chosen "too stupid or irresponsible" when I chose my words to focus on "lacking education and domain expertise." Perhaps you were just helping my case out by demonstrating how easily people sometimes confuse even relatively accessible topics like the difference between stupidity and ignorance?
- natural219 5y ago
  Restricting access to information because you feel that its potential audience is too ignorant seems a little counter-productive to me :/. Wouldn't the idea be to provide them with more information?

DaiPlusPlus 5y ago

> Is the implicit assumption here that people are too stupid or irresponsible to handle hearing information & coming to their own conclusion on it? At risk of being flippant, have you been on Facebook lately at all in the past 5-6 years?

squidlogic 5y ago
So the solution is to censor what information is ok for the plebs to see and what is too ideologically harmful for them? This is a very condescending and authoritarian position that I would hope those of us who care about free discourse would eschew.
- DaiPlusPlus 5y ago
  > So the solution is to censor what information is ok for the plebs to see and what is too ideologically harmful for them? I'm not saying that.
- voganmother42 5y ago
  “If there be time to expose through discussion, the falsehoods and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.” "The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude larger than to produce it." Is free discourse about being free from consequences? Is it about equal representation/distribution? I am curious about ideological harm when compared to things like offering legal or medical advice. What does a private company/platform have to do with censorship? Why does a private company/platform need to represent and publish all ideological viewpoints, and what is that company’s responsibility to free discourse?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

wwweston 5y ago

You seem to have chosen "too stupid or irresponsible" when I chose my words to focus on "lacking education and domain expertise." Perhaps you were just helping my case out by demonstrating how easily people sometimes confuse even relatively accessible topics like the difference between stupidity and ignorance?

natural219 5y ago
Restricting access to information because you feel that its potential audience is too ignorant seems a little counter-productive to me :/. Wouldn't the idea be to provide them with more information?