4 ms·

The issue is - as ever - what 'harmful information' is and who gets to define and police that. The EU is overly confident in it's benevolent paternalism; I hope

The issue is - as ever - what 'harmful information' is and who gets to define and police that. The EU is overly confident in it's benevolent paternalism; I hope that US Gov has greater humility

darthrupert 3y ago
That's moral subjectivism, which is objectively wrong ;) Seriously though, even if there exist risks, the goal is improvement, not perfection. There are people who specialize in things like this, moral philosophers for instance. It's actually possible to know things in this space.
- john_the_writer 3y ago
  Correct. But which one of your friends or relatives would you appoint as the person who gets to determine what you say on any topic? Do masks work? How about the vaccine, did it stop you from getting it? Did it stop you from spreading it? Did the lock down last 2 weeks. Was 2 months long enough. Would people leave their bluetooth on, so the tracking app could work? Were the tracking apps secure? Did the tracking apps that cost Australia 100mil actually work? The experts all said yes and they also all said no. What is hate speech? Is saying Picnic hate speech?
  - darthrupert 3y ago
    Not all of those juxtapositions are equal, but let's not go into that. I think it's a bit defeatist and therefore wrong to say that because some people who claim to be experts are giving lousy advice we should stop using experts. I think the way forward is to teach better and more impartial experts, not stop using experts altogether.
lapcat 3y ago
> I hope that US Gov has greater humility Humility from the US? Surely you jest. On the other hand, the US is highly resistant to government regulation, because our politicans are bought and sold by those who would be regulated.
SenAnder 3y ago
Harmful and hateful, as distinct from false. Even true information gets censored if someone decides it qualifies as either of those terms. Plus all the false positives, as social media gets penalized for accidentally leaving those up, but faces no consequences for over-censoring. In practice they will outsource this to some "best practices" "private" (government approved) censor to avoid liability.

The issue is - as ever - what 'harmful information' is and who gets to define and police that. The EU is overly confident in it's benevolent paternalism; I hope that US Gov has greater humility

darthrupert 3y ago

That's moral subjectivism, which is objectively wrong ;) Seriously though, even if there exist risks, the goal is improvement, not perfection. There are people who specialize in things like this, moral philosophers for instance. It's actually possible to know things in this space.

john_the_writer 3y ago
Correct. But which one of your friends or relatives would you appoint as the person who gets to determine what you say on any topic? Do masks work? How about the vaccine, did it stop you from getting it? Did it stop you from spreading it? Did the lock down last 2 weeks. Was 2 months long enough. Would people leave their bluetooth on, so the tracking app could work? Were the tracking apps secure? Did the tracking apps that cost Australia 100mil actually work? The experts all said yes and they also all said no. What is hate speech? Is saying Picnic hate speech?
- darthrupert 3y ago
  Not all of those juxtapositions are equal, but let's not go into that. I think it's a bit defeatist and therefore wrong to say that because some people who claim to be experts are giving lousy advice we should stop using experts. I think the way forward is to teach better and more impartial experts, not stop using experts altogether.

lapcat 3y ago

> I hope that US Gov has greater humility Humility from the US? Surely you jest. On the other hand, the US is highly resistant to government regulation, because our politicans are bought and sold by those who would be regulated.

SenAnder 3y ago

Harmful and hateful, as distinct from false. Even true information gets censored if someone decides it qualifies as either of those terms. Plus all the false positives, as social media gets penalized for accidentally leaving those up, but faces no consequences for over-censoring. In practice they will outsource this to some "best practices" "private" (government approved) censor to avoid liability.