Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

[dada]

I wasn't talking about you, griz. I just looked around, and didn't like what I saw, and pointed out why.

The 'uncensored' social and video-sharing sites are garbage that doesn't belong here, in my opinion. Not that facebook twitter youtube are better, but at least they're making an effort.

[DrEvil]

^^It's amazing that the people who keep making those sites haven't figured it out yet (or rather, many have, and they know perfectly well what will happen and are fine with it): if it's uncensored all the idiots, crazies and Nazis will flock there and the sane people will leave, and you're left with a cesspool. Happens every time, because surprisingly, a significant portion of humanity are morons and/or assholes.

Also, for a bunch of people being censored I sure hear a lot from them.

[liminalOyster]

Screen Shot 2020-12-06 at 7.55.23 PM.png

[stickdog99]

I wasn't talking about you, griz. I just looked around, and didn't like what I saw, and pointed out why.

The 'uncensored' social and video-sharing sites are garbage that doesn't belong here, in my opinion. Not that facebook twitter youtube are better, but at least they're making an effort.

Making an effort to do what? Censor any questioning of corporate and US establishment sanctioned consensus?

[stickdog99]

^^It's amazing that the people who keep making those sites haven't figured it out yet (or rather, many have, and they know perfectly well what will happen and are fine with it): if it's uncensored all the idiots, crazies and Nazis will flock there and the sane people will leave, and you're left with a cesspool. Happens every time, because surprisingly, a significant portion of humanity are morons and/or assholes.

Also, for a bunch of people being censored I sure hear a lot from them.

Great. So why doesn't this same reasoning apply to subreddits or youtube channels or facebook pages?

The whole reason any of these platforms got popular was because they allowed free expression of individualized content. I don't get how effective monopolies taking steps to censor any content that deviates from "conventional wisdom" is a positive development. I am very libertarian when it comes to the expression of ideas. Authoritarian control of the transmission of ideas is profoundly frightening to me.

[Belligerent Savant]

^^It's amazing that the people who keep making those sites haven't figured it out yet (or rather, many have, and they know perfectly well what will happen and are fine with it): if it's uncensored all the idiots, crazies and Nazis will flock there and the sane people will leave, and you're left with a cesspool. Happens every time, because surprisingly, a significant portion of humanity are morons and/or assholes.

Also, for a bunch of people being censored I sure hear a lot from them.

Great. So why doesn't this same reasoning apply to subreddits or youtube channels or facebook pages?

The whole reason any of these platforms got popular was because they allowed free expression of individualized content. I don't get how effective monopolies taking steps to censor any content that deviates from "conventional wisdom" is a positive development. I am very libertarian when it comes to the expression of ideas. Authoritarian control of the transmission of ideas is profoundly frightening to me.

Seconded.

[Belligerent Savant]

I wasn't talking about you, griz. I just looked around, and didn't like what I saw, and pointed out why.

The 'uncensored' social and video-sharing sites are garbage that doesn't belong here, in my opinion. Not that facebook twitter youtube are better, but at least they're making an effort.

Making an effort to do what? Censor any questioning of corporate and US establishment sanctioned consensus?

Quite right. The "effort" is precisely what should be opposed at all times.

[Belligerent Savant]

.

Sobering.

Cost of Lockdowns: A Preliminary Report

– November 18, 2020

In the debate over coronavirus policy, there has been far too little focus on the costs of lockdowns. It’s very common for the proponents of these interventions to write articles and large studies without even mentioning the downsides.

Here is a brief look at the cost of stringencies in the United States, and around the world, including stay-at-home orders, closings of business and schools, restrictions on gatherings, shutting of arts and sports, restrictions on medical services, and interventions in the freedom of movement.

Full chart here, with embedded links:
https://www.aier.org/article/cost-of-us ... ry-report/

[dada]

The things on that list are caused by the structure of society, Rooted in problems that started long before any lockdowns.

When I say "make an effort," I mean an effort to clean up their act.

We just see free speech differently. For me, free speech is not like free market capitalism. A supermarketplace of ideas where anything goes, as long as it sellls, and everything is for sale. I think of free speech as something more intimate, delicate, that is heard only when the noise from everything else around it quiets down in the idea bazaar.

[DrEvil]

^^It's amazing that the people who keep making those sites haven't figured it out yet (or rather, many have, and they know perfectly well what will happen and are fine with it): if it's uncensored all the idiots, crazies and Nazis will flock there and the sane people will leave, and you're left with a cesspool. Happens every time, because surprisingly, a significant portion of humanity are morons and/or assholes.

Also, for a bunch of people being censored I sure hear a lot from them.

Great. So why doesn't this same reasoning apply to subreddits or youtube channels or facebook pages?

The whole reason any of these platforms got popular was because they allowed free expression of individualized content. I don't get how effective monopolies taking steps to censor any content that deviates from "conventional wisdom" is a positive development. I am very libertarian when it comes to the expression of ideas. Authoritarian control of the transmission of ideas is profoundly frightening to me.

It was just an observation: sites that have no content moderation whatsoever beyond strictly illegal content always end up as cesspools. The same reasoning doesn't apply to subreddits, youtube channels or facebook pages because they're all moderated (after realizing they were or are turning into cesspools themselves), just like every comment section on the internet and this forum. Why? Because if they're not the assholes, idiots and Nazis flood them with garbage. Take a look at 8chan if you want to see what a libertarian view on expression looks like in practice.

Also, the fucknuts aren't being censored, they're being told to piss off elsewhere, which they are. I can still hear them moaning about it.

[JackRiddler]

It's a conundrum.

There is no contesting dada's observation that nowadays* completely open platforms turn into cesspools of disinformation and ignorant troll-wankery. conniption has helped illustrate this with his research, helpfully posting samples of some of the worst for us.

Does anyone here contest that censorship by the social media corporations (and their overall tendency to create conformist environments) turns platforms into obedient, repetitive, state-approved propaganda outlets, and makes them ideal for surveillance, control, and at least attempted brainwashing? Also, as far as possible, absence of content.

What model could work?

* Was it different in the old Internet days? A bit, yes. More exclusive set, more inclined to see through bullshit? Could be my nostalgia.

[Joe Hillshoist]

It was different. There were less people and they were less likely to be targeted on facebook by ads that are designed to trigger memes (real memes as in the Dawkins concept, not silly online jokes) concerned with survival, genetic and cultural identity etc etc. in an attempt to manipulate them politically.

[DrEvil]

Does anyone here contest that censorship by the social media corporations (and their overall tendency to create conformist environments) turns platforms into obedient, repetitive, state-approved propaganda outlets, and makes them ideal for surveillance, control, and at least attempted brainwashing? Also, as far as possible, absence of content.

Yes, in the same sense that traditional media - from the bible to newspapers to radio to TV - have always served that function. It's just a new and exciting way to do the same old shit. Meet the new mainstream, same as the old mainstream.

The biggest problem as I see it is that way too many people want it that way. They want mainstream, they want to have the same opinions as everyone else and they don't want anyone to rock the boat and upset their worldview. Deep down they know it's all shit, but it's a comforting kind of shit that lets them carry on with their lives without too much cognitive dissonance.

Not really sure there's any way to fix it, but shutting down Facebook completely might be a good start. For legal reasons I'm not advocating arson here, but if someone were to start burning down Facebook data centers I wouldn't be terribly upset. I might even cheer a little on the inside.

[dada]

"Does anyone here contest that censorship by the social media corporations (and their overall tendency to create conformist environments) turns platforms into obedient, repetitive, state-approved propaganda outlets, and makes them ideal for surveillance, control, and at least attempted brainwashing? Also, as far as possible, absence of content.

What model could work?"

Sounds like Hollywood.

I'm looking at different models, but none of them work. I end up with a combination of a modernized renaissance-style virtual city of the sun, a panopticon without walls with its designers and the prison guards trapped in the middle, maybe a light web above the web like the dark web is below it. And revolutionized, comprehensive search capabilities, with unfolding index trees and 3d ring menus, every user's fully-customizable, personal artificial intelligence works only for them.

Buncha bs, basically. And even if it weren't bs, people would find a way to ruin it anyway. Turn it into a big Borges library of babel.

Why we can't have nice things? I'm left with the sense that the model we have is just fine.

[kelley]

https://www.theonion.com/georgetown-hos ... 1845825737

Georgetown Hospital Staff Saddened By Elderly Patient Repeatedly Insisting He Used To Be America’s Mayor

WASHINGTON—Surveying an enfeebled Rudy Giuliani with a mixture of bewilderment and pity, the Georgetown Hospital staff were reportedly saddened Monday by the elderly patient repeatedly insisting he used to be “America’s mayor.” “A lot of people are pretty far gone by the time they come to us, but these delusions are probably the worst we’ve seen,” said charge nurse Daniella Weber, smiling sympathetically as she retied the 76-year-old’s open hospital gown and nodded along to his story about rebuilding his city better than ever before. “Oh God, you hate to witness this. He keeps saying he’s beloved by millions, and it’s just heartbreaking. We gave him a little medicine to calm him down, but he’s still talking about how he single-handedly cleaned up Times Square. He even asked to get the president on the phone. It’s so sad he’s going to die like this, disoriented and all alone.” At press time, a group of nursing aides was leading Giuliani back to his bed after finding the patient holding a 9/11 memorial service in the morgue.

. . . .

satire is a decent model

a shame it went completely missing in 2016 with hundreds of instances ripe for outright savage mockery

but

there's still time! ahahahahahaha

this one above fires on all cylinders