3 ms·

Therefore information to refute BS becomes more valuable. That it's easy to lie is not a sufficient argument for censorship.

• tzs 5y ago
  No one has yet proposed a mechanism other than some form of censorship that actually works to deal with the problem of the amount of BS totally overwhelming the time and ability of the average person to have even a ghost of chance of telling what is BS and what is not, except perhaps by becoming sufficiently authoritarian so take away the rights and powers of people to make decisions that believing the bullshit would affect. But sufficiently authoritarian regimes usually also heavily censor, so you still end up censorship even in that case. I'd love to hear an alternative that is actually known to work for societies that are both large and have near zero costs to produce and widely spread information.
  • HKH2 5y ago
    I haven't yet read or heard a single argument for why Robert Malone is wrong. Not even a weak one. All I've seen so far are appeals to authority.
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]