4 ms·
So if it wasnt Musk and instead someone you align with, youd agree with the policy ?
by aydyn 3y ago
So if it wasnt Musk and instead someone you align with, youd agree with the policy ?
- lisper 3y agoHumans have invented a reliable way of adjudicating truth. It's called the scientific method, a closely related cousin of which is professional journalism. There's a reason that it takes years to develop the expertise to be a scientist or a journalist. It's hard work. But it is the only defense against demagoguery. So yes, I would feel a lot better about it if the decisions were being made by someone -- or, even better, a group of people -- who were committed to a process of adjudicating truth on the basis of evidence rather than ideology. And yes, I tend to agree with such people because I personally try to hew to evidence over ideology. One of the benefits of adjudicating truth on the basis of evidence rather than ideology is that it tends to converge, and so it tends result in people who adhere to this process agreeing with each other. Superficially this looks a lot like agreement based on ideology, but there is one big difference, and that is that dissent is actually welcome -- if you can back it up with evidence. In science, progress is possible. In a system that bases truth on ideology, particularly one whose ideology is rooted in an individual (i.e. a personality cult), it isn't. That's what scares me.
- aydyn 3y ago[flagged]
- lisper 3y ago> is that the professional journalism you speak of No. Obviously not. > It takes zero years to be a modern journalist Yes. That's obviously not what I meant by "professional journalist." Most web "journalists" are professional journalists in the same way the Kent Hovind is a professional scientist. There isn't a sharp distinction, just like there isn't a sharp definition of what pornography is. But most people can nonetheless recognize it when they see it.
- aydyn 3y ago[flagged]
- lisper 3y agohttps://arstechnica.com/ https://arstechnica.com/ https://www.aljazeera.com/ https://www.aljazeera.com/ https://en.wikipedia.org/ https://en.wikipedia.org/ https://www.snopes.com/ https://www.snopes.com/ (at least they used to be, not so sure any more since they changed ownership a few years back) I could go on and on. It's not particularly hard to find.
- test098 3y agohttps://www.propublica.org/ https://www.propublica.org/ https://theintercept.com/ https://theintercept.com/ https://www.readfrontier.org/ https://www.readfrontier.org/ https://www.texastribune.org/ https://www.texastribune.org/ https://thelensnola.org/ https://thelensnola.org/ https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/ https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/
- retrac 3y agoThis degree of power, practical editorial and censorship power, should probably not be held by a single person or corporation.
- aydyn 3y agoAgreed, but I haven't heard good alternatives. Some form of crowdsourcing might be the way to go?