3 ms·

> Tech companies feeling competent to dictate truth is scary. What's scarier, the fact that tech companies feel competent to dictate truth or the fact that we

by mbesto 5y ago

> Tech companies feeling competent to dictate truth is scary. What's scarier, the fact that tech companies feel competent to dictate truth or the fact that we let them?

Ygg2 5y ago
Let them? First rule of internet is don't trust things on the Internet. Cross reference and double check. Everyone makes mistakes or lies.
- iammisc 5y ago
  How can you cross reference and double check if only one side is presented and the internet is the main means by which one double checks? This is the conundrum I haven't figured out.
  - wizzwizz4 5y ago
    Go to the library. (Hopefully you still have one.)
    - iammisc 5y ago
      No the democrats shut mine down and are taxing us for them anyway
      - wizzwizz4 5y ago
        Can you write to your local representative?
        iammisc 5y ago
        After several calls with my Oregon house representative, she no longer responds to my e-mails or calls. Can't contact her via social media because I've been blocked there. I've thought about going to her office but those are closed down too. Of course, if you just block constituents you can just ... do nothing and in Oregon, you'll be re-elected because there's a big D next to your name. Of course, there's also no non-D candidate running, because it's a one party state. I imagine this is what it must be like to vote in North Korea. Oregon law mandates that one must run under the purview of a political party. Forming a party requires a large set of requirements that means only the democrats can run in many places because there's simply not enough of an opposition to form a cohesive opposition. This prevents independent candidates from running. There is no incentive for my representatives to change the status quo. Eventually, I'm guessing I'll vote with my feet, but I don't understand why I should have to move to an area in which the GOP runs unopposed in order to experience the 'other' side. I mean... it's not like the GOP is perfect and a uni-party GOP jurisdiction would be much better. What I want is actual politics with people competing for my vote, instead of people who assume they'll get it.
  - sp332 5y ago
    "The internet"? It's just YouTube. He's a senator, he has one of the biggest and most un-cancelable platforms in the world.
    - raxxorrax 5y ago
      That doesn't justify selectively banning him at all. We could agree if we ban everyone with a political mandate perhaps. Fair and square. Wouldn't support it intrinsically, but at least we could rid of these weasel excuses for why such measures are allegedly justified.
    - iammisc 5y ago
      What platform is that?
      - sp332 5y ago
        They can call a press conference whenever they want and get national news coverage. They can write down anything they want and hand it to the clerk for inclusion in the Congressional Record. They have email and physical mailing lists. The CAN-SPAM act doesn't cover political calls or texts, either.
  - gunapologist99 5y ago
    > only one side is presented and the internet Wait, only one side is presented ... on the internet? I must be misunderstanding you. Unless you're being snarky, or referring to the Internet 'as controlled by google/youtube', and the fact that they're cancelling everyone that disagrees with them.
- nomel 5y ago
  When the whole hydroxychloroquine scandal was going on, I tried to cross reference and double check. Unfortunately, this meant I had to use DuckDuckGo rather than a Google product, since they were burying anything that spoke of it positively, including some of the original research papers. It's hard to cross reference when one of the lines of the cross has been deleted.
nomel 5y ago
I find it terrifying that there's a large portion of the population that encourages and wants them to do this.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- omgitsabird 5y ago
  These companies are maintaining systems that are analogous to message boards. Why not just view this as moderation? This viewpoint makes it a lot less sinister, in my opinion.
  - flyingcircus3 5y ago
    Therein lies the problem though. There seems to be a growing number of people who use sinisterness as a heuristic for the truth. Instead of Occam's Razor, where the simplest explanation is the most likely explanation, it is the most damning answer that is most likely correct.
- dennis_jeeves 5y ago
  Yep that is the truly terrifying part, when you realize that many ordinary people actively support tyranny ( not tyranny in their eye of course) from corporations/govt etc.

by mbesto 5y ago

> Tech companies feeling competent to dictate truth is scary. What's scarier, the fact that tech companies feel competent to dictate truth or the fact that we let them?

Ygg2 5y ago

Let them? First rule of internet is don't trust things on the Internet. Cross reference and double check. Everyone makes mistakes or lies.

iammisc 5y ago
How can you cross reference and double check if only one side is presented and the internet is the main means by which one double checks? This is the conundrum I haven't figured out.
- wizzwizz4 5y ago
  Go to the library. (Hopefully you still have one.)
  - iammisc 5y ago
    No the democrats shut mine down and are taxing us for them anyway
    - wizzwizz4 5y ago
      Can you write to your local representative?
      - iammisc 5y ago
        After several calls with my Oregon house representative, she no longer responds to my e-mails or calls. Can't contact her via social media because I've been blocked there. I've thought about going to her office but those are closed down too. Of course, if you just block constituents you can just ... do nothing and in Oregon, you'll be re-elected because there's a big D next to your name. Of course, there's also no non-D candidate running, because it's a one party state. I imagine this is what it must be like to vote in North Korea. Oregon law mandates that one must run under the purview of a political party. Forming a party requires a large set of requirements that means only the democrats can run in many places because there's simply not enough of an opposition to form a cohesive opposition. This prevents independent candidates from running. There is no incentive for my representatives to change the status quo. Eventually, I'm guessing I'll vote with my feet, but I don't understand why I should have to move to an area in which the GOP runs unopposed in order to experience the 'other' side. I mean... it's not like the GOP is perfect and a uni-party GOP jurisdiction would be much better. What I want is actual politics with people competing for my vote, instead of people who assume they'll get it.
- sp332 5y ago
  "The internet"? It's just YouTube. He's a senator, he has one of the biggest and most un-cancelable platforms in the world.
  - raxxorrax 5y ago
    That doesn't justify selectively banning him at all. We could agree if we ban everyone with a political mandate perhaps. Fair and square. Wouldn't support it intrinsically, but at least we could rid of these weasel excuses for why such measures are allegedly justified.
  - iammisc 5y ago
    What platform is that?
    - sp332 5y ago
      They can call a press conference whenever they want and get national news coverage. They can write down anything they want and hand it to the clerk for inclusion in the Congressional Record. They have email and physical mailing lists. The CAN-SPAM act doesn't cover political calls or texts, either.
- gunapologist99 5y ago
  > only one side is presented and the internet Wait, only one side is presented ... on the internet? I must be misunderstanding you. Unless you're being snarky, or referring to the Internet 'as controlled by google/youtube', and the fact that they're cancelling everyone that disagrees with them.
nomel 5y ago
When the whole hydroxychloroquine scandal was going on, I tried to cross reference and double check. Unfortunately, this meant I had to use DuckDuckGo rather than a Google product, since they were burying anything that spoke of it positively, including some of the original research papers. It's hard to cross reference when one of the lines of the cross has been deleted.

nomel 5y ago

I find it terrifying that there's a large portion of the population that encourages and wants them to do this.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
omgitsabird 5y ago
These companies are maintaining systems that are analogous to message boards. Why not just view this as moderation? This viewpoint makes it a lot less sinister, in my opinion.
- flyingcircus3 5y ago
  Therein lies the problem though. There seems to be a growing number of people who use sinisterness as a heuristic for the truth. Instead of Occam's Razor, where the simplest explanation is the most likely explanation, it is the most damning answer that is most likely correct.
dennis_jeeves 5y ago
Yep that is the truly terrifying part, when you realize that many ordinary people actively support tyranny ( not tyranny in their eye of course) from corporations/govt etc.