Youtube/Google is evil, time to fight back - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 04:45:55 pm
content: (Note that it's not just about Naomi, she just happens to be a popular creator affected by unethical stuff on Youtube's part.)Here's a list of what to do:* If you're not already using one, install an adblocker. If you want to, whitelist Youtube to support creators, blocking Google ads everywhere else still makes an impact. (Hiding the ads and "autoclicking" them with AdNauseam instead of blocking them might work better in that it would cost Google the ad views/clicks, but that would also increase their ad view/click count.)* Don't use Google search, use DuckDuckGo.* Don't use Chrome, use Firefox or Chromium.* Don't get Youtube Premium (cancel it if you have it), use an adblocker and give directly to the creators.* Use Make Internet Noise or similar to waste Google's resources as a protest, use in conjunction with an adblocker. It would also make their data collection less useful although it works best if you minimize the data you're giving them in the first place.* Use/support more ethical alternatives to Youtube.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 05:25:55 pm
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on April 23, 2022, 04:45:55 pmI personally already do all of the above, except for using "Make Internet Noise", which I didn't know about.

author: DiTBho
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 05:50:10 pm
content: oh, miss busty starlet complains

author: DiTBho
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 05:52:02 pm
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on April 23, 2022, 04:45:55 pmWhich one?

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 06:40:50 pm
content: Big tech censorship is not new - just ask conservatives and liberals and their channels that discuss anything against the most accepted narrative of the big tech, CV policies, Ukraine war, etc. That is why a lot of people are going to Rumble, Odysee, Locals, Telegraph and other alternatives. These are still small, but hopefully people wake up and move away.

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 06:59:52 pm
content: TheyTube has always had rules against porn.(TL;DW - did I guess wrong what this thread is about?)Also related, look up Nasim Aghdam. At least she quit with style

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 07:14:09 pm
content: I think some time ago they implemented a filter that basically put all content in disadvantage that showed "tits for clickbait" on the thumbnail. Rightly so, it was a way to boost the click of videos that were fail compilations and other junk content like these. I wonder if she was to change the thumbnails, if they would show up in the search results.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 10:28:39 pm
content: Quote from: DiTBho on April 23, 2022, 05:52:02 pmOdysee is by far the standout. They have just introduced a Patreon-like creator support system where 100% goes to the creator, and 90% of superchats go to the creators.There is also Utreon which works very well and also has Patreon-like direct subscriptions to creators.And in that entire video she didn't once mention alternatives?

author: HobGoblyn
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 10:47:11 pm
content: I watch most of my YouTube on the living room TV.Usually using the Sky Q YouTube app, but I could use the TVs own YouTube app.Since paying for YouTube premium, it’s been a whole new world of pleasurable viewing, ad free, even if it was twice the price, the amount of YouTube I watch, I would probably still pay.Sure on my tablet or PC I could use some form of Adblock and not have premium, but I can’t do that when I watch YouTube on the TV, whether I’m using Skys app or the TV app.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 10:53:49 pm
content: Quote from: DiTBho on April 23, 2022, 05:52:02 pmLBRY/Odysee is really the only viable alternative. Thankfully, some of my favourite content creators have or are slowly making the transition over. I understand that it's difficult when monetisation from Youtube is their primary source of income, but to me that suggests poor planning (if the channel is being run as a business). Revenue from Youtube should only ever be considered a hobby or extra cash. It's too volatile to be anything else long-term. They could turn around and change the rules tomorrow which directly impacts your wallet.I still use Youtube, but mostly in the following ways:I watch videos on my laptop which has both the Ghostery and ABP plugins installed -- This means no pre-roll ads, ad banners or video ads during videos.I download the videos and watch them as normal video files "offline".

author: DiTBho
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 10:57:47 pm
content: Hence, alternative[]={ LBRY, Rumble, Odysee, Locals, Telegraph }.I will study them, I have never used them, thanks for the list

author: John B
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2022, 11:58:52 pm
content: I like odysee, but I find the bandwidth to be limited, so I have to download each video to watch them smoothly. Conveniently odysee has a function for that unlike youtube which views downloading videos as against their ad business model.Rumble has very fast servers and is smoother than odysee for browsing/streaming vids, making it a good option for watching podcasts and long form vids.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 12:24:29 am
content: Quote from: John B on April 23, 2022, 11:58:52 pmThat can really be improved if there's a system to allow anyone to set up a "cache node" and get rewarded for it. The "I have more bandwidth than I actually use" problem has to be very common, "it would be nice if I could use it to help the creators I like."

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 12:59:37 am
content: Quote from: HobGoblyn on April 23, 2022, 10:47:11 pmIf your TV can install APK packages, you could get Smart Tube for Android TV. This is a godsend TV app for watching youtube not only ad-free but also can skip intros and do other stuff.My TV is fairly old so what I did i got an Amazon Fire stick and installed Smart Tube on it. The other benefit of the Fire stick it is lightning fast compare to the native TV app. I watch Youtube from the comfort of my reclining chair on a big screen ad-free.

author: MrMobodies
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 02:18:58 am
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on April 23, 2022, 04:45:55 pmDownload Youtube content with Firefox too, (I know some extensions) where you don't see the ads and that'll suffocate them a bit.Looks like they won't be going anytime soon.Sometimes they too useful but hopefully other search engines will catch up.Not only are they afloat in everything and everywhere they seem too powerful.Maybe one day Thunderf00t will come along and bust it if that happens to be over inflated.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 02:42:56 am
content: Quote from: MrMobodies on April 24, 2022, 02:18:58 amDuckDuckGo is a good alternative.

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 02:44:18 am
content: Move to rumble.com

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 03:14:42 am
content: Quote from: DiTBho on April 23, 2022, 10:57:47 pmSorry, I should have said "Telegram" (an alternative to Twitter).Well, each to its own set of expectations... sure the search results presented are not showing her videos, which hints of shadow banning if it wasn't for the fact these are very dependent on the content previously browsed/watched by the logged account (it is unclear from the video). Also, having several videos with more than 1 million views and almost all of her very recent videos reaching more than 100k views, I wouldn't think the platform is exactly boycotting her. Such numbers would be the envy of many of the tech content creators.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 03:59:01 am
content: Quote from: HobGoblyn on April 23, 2022, 10:47:11 pmMe too. I'm happy to pay for what I use, and at least half goes to the creators of the videos I watch.FYI, about 20% of my Youtube income comes from Premium subscribers.

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 03:59:43 am
content: Quote from: John B on April 23, 2022, 11:58:52 pmContent creators refuse to acknowledge this.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 04:02:51 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on April 23, 2022, 10:53:49 pmIt's not poor planning, it's literally less than 5 minutes work and all your content is synced. You never have to look at or touch it again. Same with Utreon, Bitchute, and Rumble. Once creators are aware of this it's a decision most likely based on an ideological viewpoint of some kind.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 04:03:27 am
content: Quote from: Ed.Kloonk on April 24, 2022, 03:59:43 amI constantly mention it.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 04:10:07 am
content: Quote from: DiTBho on April 23, 2022, 10:57:47 pmLocals is a Patreon alternative, not a Youtube-like video platform.The best alternative Youtube platforms are IMO, ranked:1) Odysee2) Utreon3) Rumble4) Bitchute a distant lastBoth Odysee and Utreon have Patreon like features as well as superchats for live shows.There are others like Vimeo and Daily Motion but the traction is practically zero.If you don't like the random buffering issues with Odysee I recommend Utreon, it's really very nice, but hardly anyone knows about it apart from many gun channels that have moved over there. They have only started some publicity in the last month or so after several years with practically zero publicity or effort.Rumble is probably bigger then Odysee, but AFAIk I'm the only electronics creator on there. And I don't use it personally.Bitchute is just horrible, the resolution sucks, they refuse to fix there image etc. I don't recommend it.With the exception of Rumble, I have talked to the owners and developers of these platform and have helped them shape it. Bitchute is the only one that listened but dismissed my advice outright.If creators had joined LBRY and then Odysee when I told them too that would have build large audiences on there by now like I have and have gained a huge amount of LBC that was offered early on per view. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

author: MrMobodies
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 05:08:29 am
content: Quote from: timenutgoblin on April 24, 2022, 04:34:45 amI am slowly migrating across different platforms, trying to use Google less and less, so I do one search in DuckDuckGo, I set that as my default home page, then when I am not satisfied or want to see more I select the text, left click and select "search with google" which has a few exclusions one being from Pinterest and some sites that mas spam the search engine with their links to clickbait and troll the user into things so that's one benefit.There is another search engine I have seen called, Ecosia and I think it is based on Bing.https://www.ecosia.orgI don't see any option to hide the search suggestions so hid them with Adblock:I don't know which does what from my blocklist but it's in there somewhere if you don't like being bombarded with search suggestions:QuoteActually I think I have a few from DuckDuckGo one of them if the suggestions as I can't be bothered switching them off when the cookies sometimes get cleared:Quote

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 07:06:43 am
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on April 24, 2022, 02:42:56 amNo it's a pile of crap that does not return the same quality of results, theres another one that claims to plant trees with the proceeds and uses bing, that can't find what is in front of it.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 07:44:54 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on April 24, 2022, 04:02:51 amI meant from the point of view that if your business model relies on Youtube revenue to survive, then you're doing it wrong (with the exception of the top 0.01% of creators that actually make significant money over time, which is still going to be short-lived, because, that's life).

author: DiTBho
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 11:14:35 am
content: Quote from: evb149 on April 24, 2022, 10:27:42 amYup, precisely. Internet v3.0 will get it.

author: DiTBho
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 11:16:11 am
content: Two years ago I planned to open my YouTube channel. Nothing too serious, I would just like to share some of the crazy Linux projects, probably a niche among niches, so "sponsors" will probably never be a problem because the channel will never get more than a hundred views at best.For many reasons I haven't started the channel yet, but I'm still thinking about it.What would you suggest at this point? Youtube as a first start, something else and Youtube as a second option?Mumble

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 12:26:12 pm
content: Quote from: DiTBho on April 24, 2022, 11:16:11 amFor a new channel, consider gearing the material for Odysee and mirroring a percentage of it to youtube until they inevitably find something to ping you about, then lower the percentage. As our friend Naomi has finally discovered, after plenty of warning, one by one the channels not pulling in the million views per vid are being yeeted. I hope we see your new channel soon.To reiterate/reinforce what Dave said,Quote from: EEVblog on April 24, 2022, 04:10:07 am

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 12:53:26 pm
content: Quote from: DiTBho on April 24, 2022, 11:16:11 amYoutube without a doubt. It's where all the discoverability still is.All the other platforms "come for free" so to speak if you are a Youtuber. Upload to Youtube and your content automatically gets mirrored on the other sites if you set that.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 12:56:42 pm
content: Quote from: Ed.Kloonk on April 24, 2022, 12:26:12 pmThere is zero evidence that happens.

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 01:27:09 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on April 24, 2022, 12:56:42 pm?Why does Odysee exist?Nearly every video I see now, OK, you're the exception, the creators complain about the algo, the shadow banning, the copyright matching, the word mincing, the nutters in the comments section. I watch a few hours of internet vids a week and more and more the channels big and small are regularly grumbling and e-begging more than ever.They came for Jack Vale the other day because after ten years they are sick of him farting on the internet. Why would they do that?All I'm saying, my evidence is the creators I watch who have been affected earlier and for longer are much happier now over on the alts and just flicking a select portion of the content up on youtube for the masses and for the legacy viewers or for those who want to share to legacy viewers.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 02:46:47 pm
content: Patreon are just as bad. They banned Sydney Watson because they disagree with her political views. What's so bad is it wasn't because of anything she said on Patreon, but elsewhere online. If Dave says something they dislike on this forum, they might ban him. It doesn't matter if you agree with Sydney's political views or not and this isn't the place to discuss them. The fact companies are monitoring people's online activity and banning them because they say something they don't like is dangerous.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 06:16:22 pm
content: All of those networks end up the same, for the same reasons.Odysee is currently better, but wait till it grows and some big corporation buys it, and it'll do exactly the same shit. Meanwhile, enjoy.Most of those companies have a political agenda, so it's not just about the money. This is concerning indeed. Probably inevitable though. The only thing that can help avoiding this is to "divide and replicate". Avoid concentration of powers, and you solve the problem.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 06:53:26 pm
content: I've just watched the video posted at the start of the thread. I don't follow her channel, but going by Google's super woke ads, I would have thought they'd love her. She's a Chinese lesbian with fake tits, which should help, rather than hinder her. Google claim to be all for the rights of ethnic minorities, women performing traditionally thought of as men's jobs and LGBTQ rights and she ticks plenty of boxes. She should tell YouTube, they're discriminating against because she's a gay Chinese woman and be sure to use the following words: racist, homophobic and misogynist. Those words trigger woketard managers.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 06:57:12 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on April 24, 2022, 06:16:22 pmThe ideal would be an open source P2P system that cannot be "bought".

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 07:10:27 pm
content: I'm watching some channels on Odysee for a while now and from a user's perspective they have several issues. When the video resolution option is available I have to select 1080 to get an acceptable image quality (480 on YouTube works fine for me). Anything up to 720 looks like crap, expecially motions. Still images, e.g. a schematic, are mostly fine. Videos often stop randomly and I have to reload the page. Luckily the reloaded video starts where it stopped before. The algorithm for video recommendations seems to promote SJW/woke/scam/conspiracy themed videos on some special trigger words in video titles. I had this several times when watching electronics videos and I strongly dislike it.

author: YurkshireLad
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 08:00:09 pm
content: Osysee's search engine is terrible. If I search for Owon, for example, it returns hits for Owen and God knows what else. They hate to admit when they don't have many matches and just show you a list of irrelevant junk.

author: MrMobodies
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 08:08:24 pm
content: I like Odysee but my concern is, I read they allow anything on there such as hate speeches that could give governments like the UK the justification to ban it from their country (if out of their jurisdiction to force them to change) which might lead to it's downfall.https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/14/odysee-video-platform-nazi-content-not-grounds-for-removalQuoteThen there's a safety bill act in the UK that focuses on hate content:https://www.gov.uk/government/news/online-safety-law-to-be-strengthened-to-stamp-out-illegal-contentQuoteWell I hope the two (governments and hate campaigners) don't ruin it for everyone else enjoying the platform.

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 08:08:38 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on April 24, 2022, 06:53:26 pmShe and her viewers objectify whamen and promote harmful stereotypes which lead to discrespecting whamen.Also, think of all the young girls who will believe they also need to get implants just to be accepted in the industry.Besides, all social justice is manufactured by Reptilians. They pick a cause which aligns with their goals and then the media promote the cause and then you end up believing the cause. Starting with a belief (even if one promoted last year) and expecting the media to promote it now is 100% backwards, you might as well go and start giving orders to the Lizards.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 08:40:34 pm
content: Everything Google does is fake and a calculated strategy to deceive the public.This is the era of fake everything. Including Reptilians.Quote from: magic on April 24, 2022, 08:08:38 pm

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 08:54:08 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on April 24, 2022, 02:46:47 pmI've never heard of her and have no idea what her views are, but watching that video I would say she's intelligent, articulate and overall sounds very reasonable. Whether we call it "cancel culture", a "culture war" or something else, this banning people over random things they do or say somewhere is scary, it is quite literally authoritarian oppression no different than what the most reviled tyrants throughout history have done. Every one of those tyrants and their followers believed in their cause, believed they were on the right side of history and believed what they were doing to be noble and just. The irony is that type of personality will steadfastly refuse to see the similarity between what they're doing and what other authoritarian figures of the past have done. The only good thing about it is that these movements have a tendency to eat their own as they get divided by various purity tests and eventually collapse.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 09:00:36 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on April 24, 2022, 08:54:08 pmThe most scary thing about cancel culture is that you get one chance. One bad word and they non-person you, you will lose your income and will be an outcast.Society decided some time ago, that we will not do capital punishment, and even after being convicted for crimes (after prison), you can redeem yourself and re integrate.Not anymore, because whatever you did stays online forever, and you will be a pariah. One word on a bad day.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 09:08:23 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on April 24, 2022, 09:00:36 pmYes and the very same people fall all over themselves to demonize the justice system, to fight against excessive prison sentences, to fight against capital punishment, to give every criminal chance after chance after chance. Yet ironically they are happy to completely destroy a person's life over a single comment made somewhere, even if it was 20+ years ago, and there is no path to redemption. An apology is never enough, in fact it is the opposite, it is an admission of guilt. Never, ever apologize, they will spot the weak moment and pounce like a gazelle on a sick and straggling prey.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 09:25:55 pm
content: Quote from: MrMobodies on April 24, 2022, 08:08:24 pmThat's the Guardian talking complete bollocks as usual. The far-right don't pose a significant threat in the UK. There have only been two deaths in the last 70 years due to far-right extremism: Jo Cox and Makram Ali (Finsbury Park mosque attack), compared to many more due Islamic extremism and the IRA. Radical left-wing groups such as BLM and extreme trans activists pose a similar threat to the far-right, yet no one whines about them. There's loads of hate on Twitter about killing terfs (trans exclusionary feminists) and whites which is tolerated, yet people get kicked off all the time just for saying things like trans women are men.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 10:28:53 pm
content: (I'm sensing that this thread may unfortunately end up getting locked...)But yeah, this is all the "woke" agenda that is currently all the rage in most of the big media/social network platforms. It's exactly the same all over the world (at least, the western world) in practically all of those companies, almost to the letter.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 11:12:58 pm
content: Trying to get back to the original problem, any idea why doesn't Odysee/LBRY have a way to build a "cache node" and get rewarded for providing bandwidth?

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 11:42:46 pm
content: They probably don't have as much money to spend on this yet. Sure, it might be a "chicken and egg" situation, but they are at least ten years behind the market leader and it is already quite impressive what was achieved already.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2022, 11:59:54 pm
content: What about a way to build a "cache node" and prioritize those who have donated to the creator of the content? That would add value to donating money since the donor gets faster downloads. And those who aren't interested in donating money can donate bandwidth instead, still benefiting the creators they want to support.

author: station240
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 02:20:52 am
content: Quote from: Zero999 on April 24, 2022, 02:46:47 pmPateron's problem is who works for/runs their "Global Trust & Safety".If you look up some of their current/recent staff it make sense.1. Sean Bonawitz - Senior Director, Head of Trust & Safety - Formerly had same job(s) at TikTok, Youtube, Google.2. Jacqueline Hart - Former Senior Director, Global Trust & Safety - global online payments fraud, trust and safety, compliance and content moderation areas within risk management. Speaker at such international events as Merchant Risk Council, PaymentsEd, RSA, CNP Expo, and card brand summits.This "Global Trust & Safety" is another BS term, it's all about credit card financial matters, nothing about ethics or having consistent rules.The money laundering things I get, but they (the credit card companies) need to drop the "customer is always right" nonsense.Sometimes the customer is a con artist, or a troll, and send money to someone just so they can trigger a chargeback (result -$40 donation).Or donate to a Patreon creator, download everything, then call the bank and complain just so you get it for free.This Woke nonsense is a symptom not a cause, the real issue is listening to cranks who use their personal credit cards to drain other people's bank accounts.After a while the bank gets annoyed about how much this is costing them, and wrongly hassle Youtube/Patreon/Google, instead of telling a handful of their customers to take a long walk off a short pier.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 03:57:23 am
content: Quote from: station240 on April 25, 2022, 02:20:52 amThat problem is solved by cryptocurrencies, where transactions are irreversible.

author: wilfred
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 04:45:01 am
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on April 25, 2022, 03:57:23 amHow does it solve the problem? You contact the bank or service provider and seek a refund. Another irreversible transaction gets you the refund. What's different?

author: vad
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 04:46:03 am
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on April 23, 2022, 04:45:55 pm1) Thanks, I already have AdBlock, but not for YouTube. AdBlock stopped blocking YouTube ads some time ago.2) Why should I use some shi..y search engine? Google works well for me. Your mileage may vary though.3) I do have YouTube Premium and it is great4) Protest what? I do understand that this half dresses lady is pi..sed off of her falling revenues despite 1.5M subscribers on YouTube. Maybe she can have better luck at other platforms. But why should I protest?5) Content providers who I am interested in are all on YouTube. YouTube Premium is convenient way to watch or listen to that content. Alphabet is definitely more ethical than some shady alternatives like Telegram.

author: wilfred
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 05:08:28 am
content: Quote from: MrMobodies on April 24, 2022, 08:08:24 pmWhat fringe nutters need to be mindful of is they are just fringe nutters. When or if they become mainstream the platforms will be happy for their business. Most people, I think, and me included don't really want to live in a society where others are marginalised or subjected to hateful treatment. Gay people are way more tolerated now than say Alan Turing was. Does anyone care that Big Clive is gay? One of my sisters kids is transgender and I don't want them to live in a world where they are excluded or worse. I have a particularly low regard for people who make others lives miserable for profit. And getting thrown off Patreon or Odysee won't stop the comments but it throttles back the profits. And that's a good thing. It will at least reduce the comment to those who genuinely believe them and weed out those who just say them to profit from them.The platforms know full well it is bad for business to become part of the fringe echo chamber. Same goes for site that feature porn. That is more likely to lead to their downfall.The people who created LBRY/Odysee did it to ultimately profit from it. Don't get in their way or no access for you. Patreon same. Twitter same. And Trumpet was created for the same reason but only with smaller ambitions. When their ambitions grow they'll shed the nitwits and nutcases just the same.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 08:59:20 am
content: Quote from: MrMobodies on April 24, 2022, 08:08:24 pmIf that happens then you have more to worry about than not being able access Odysee.They have TOShttps://odysee.com/$/tosPart of it:Quote

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 09:05:10 am
content: Quote from: james_s on April 24, 2022, 08:54:08 pmPatreon lost a lot of large creators over this "Manifest observable behaviour" thing (google if you want to know more), and it's what spawned Locals and SubscribeStar.Every creator on Patreon lost a significant number of Patrons over this issue of baning creators for what they say off-platform, as many customers left in protest. I lost maybe 10% of my Patrons over it.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 09:14:31 am
content: I don't understand why card merchants like Square or even some of the bigger ones like Visa or Mastercard don't create a platform similar to Patreon to enable donations to be easily deposited in content creator's accounts via their network. It seems to be a bit of a gap in the market.It would be easy for them to develop a product for hobbyists capped at say, $100k per year in donations in exchange for a discounted fee on transactions.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 10:16:52 am
content: Quote from: wilfred on April 25, 2022, 05:08:28 amI didn't know Big Clive is gay and I don't care. I watch Fran's videos and couldn't give a toss about he being trans.The problem is there is extremist LGBT content is allowed, if not even encouraged by social media. Age inappropriate content is being pushed onto children. I'm all for teaching children to be tolerant of minorities, but despise radical trans activists who glorify gender dysphoria. There have been too many cases of vulnerable children and adolescents who have been convinced they're trans by manipulative people and undergone life changing medical treatments as a result. Many trans activists aren't really transgender, but male transvestites, who want to use women's spaces. A women was raped in hospital recently, because a man who identified as female was allowed on a women's ward. What's worse is the police didn't believe her, because the hospital staff have been told to deny there was a man on the ward. I hope the policy is changed and the staff are prosecuted for wasting police time and perverting the course of justice: following orders is no defense!

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 10:26:39 am
content: Quote from: MrMobodies on April 24, 2022, 08:08:24 pmThese days unwanted truth (by some leftist minority) often is labeled a hate speech and shut down by people with extreme opinion which is shared by like <5% of population. Youtube and major social meadia these days became an agenda marketplaces which shovel some fringe minority agenda into your mouth, and shut down those who dare to say something against this.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 10:48:02 am
content: Quote from: wilfred on April 25, 2022, 05:08:28 amModern social media lets you think that fringe nutters are mainstream and people with traditional values are fringe. Saying something that was completely normal like 10-15 years ago is labeled as blasphemy. People who asking for more censorship don't understand what they are promoting, because tomorrow they will be called a fringe minority and shut down for not being progressive enough. Shutting down the opposition pushes the overtone window further and further until perverse becomes mainstream.

author: DiTBho
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 11:00:31 am
content: Quote from: vad on April 25, 2022, 04:46:03 amIndeed. Why should I protest specifically for that Youtuber?Good for her she earned a lot of money until it worked.And That's all.

author: DiTBho
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 11:02:16 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on April 25, 2022, 09:05:10 amThat's what I should protest against! And I will!

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 11:08:58 am
content: Everything boils down to attention. Content related and social media platforms are businesses which want to make money. So they need to get as much attention of their customers as possible. Controversial and extreme content/opinions draw a lot of attention. This creates a classic win-win situation for the two groups. Don't pay attention!

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 12:18:41 pm
content: For those who don't know what's going on here with Naomi, it's called algorithmic demotion. Youtube have publicly admitted they do this for independent news sources, famously promoting only "authoritative sources".And as much as they publically mouth support for LGBT stuff, there has been many complaints from trans content creators about being algorithmly demoted.Several other categories as well. Same thing across all these types of channels hit, you can't find much of your own content even with exact title searches.Some of it is ideologically woke driven, some politcially driven, some advertiser driven, but Naomi is just one in a vast number of channels it happens to.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 12:26:36 pm
content: Quote from: wilfred on April 25, 2022, 04:45:01 amIn most cryptocurrencies, the sending of coins can only be initiated by the one who has access to the source account, basically like cash.Quote from: EEVblog on April 25, 2022, 12:18:41 pmTime to make some independent search that prioritizes those creators?

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 01:12:49 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on April 25, 2022, 12:18:41 pmFrom Schiller's Wilhelm Tell: The best cannot live in peace, if it does not please the bad neighbour.

author: Ranayna
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 02:01:24 pm
content: There is one youtuber I regularly follow that is openly trans. She transitioned a couple of years ago, but i followed that channel many years before that already.Her videos are still regularly suggested to me.But that may be due to the fact the she very regularly releases a video each and every monday, and did so for many, many years, even before she came out as trans. In generally her videos are very critical about anything related to capitalism, she regularly uses foul language, and also complains a lot about being shafted by the algorithm. But i still get her monday video each and every time one is released.I follow another youtuber that was actually "canceled" for a couple of months, due to a scandal involving the suspicion of "underage relationships". That was resolved after a couple of months though, and that channel is slowly gaining traction again. There the algorithm seems to have forgotten, or never even noticed, that this happened. Though his subscriber count took a *massive* hit back in the day. I do not know if he already surpassed the losses yet though, since i don't really care about the subscriber count of channels anymore. Or rather the other way around: i am inherently distrusting of channels with high subscriber countsSo i have no idea how the algorithm works. I wonder if it is somewhat related to the location of the viewer. Considering the perceived "prudishness" of US Americans, that would actually not surprise me.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 02:03:23 pm
content: Quote from: madires on April 25, 2022, 11:08:58 amAttention, you really think? I have x subscribers, who explicitly told Youtube by pressing the button that they are interested in my content.And I have videos that didn't have 1/4th the impressions than my subscriber count. Meaning that they haven't been shown the video, because the mighty Algorithm decided it is not Worthy of their time. At this point, asking to subscribe is completely pointless.If you turn off monetization your channel dies because no ads.If you don't upload in regular intervals, 2-3x a week, your channel dies because no impressions.You upload a few bad videos in a row, have a bad streak, your channel dies, because no impressions.If you say a bad word your channel is killed, banned etc...If you post videos that are less than 8:00 long, you loose advertising money because no midroll ads. You can either pad the video with useless content (which makes people click off) or loose midroll, which means less impressions.

author: YurkshireLad
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 02:31:21 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on April 25, 2022, 02:03:23 pmSadly this is the world we live in where AI rules the roost.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 02:41:56 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on April 25, 2022, 02:03:23 pmElectronics is a niche topic. Too uninteresting to be promoted. The algorithms promote stuff which has potential for much more views (= more ad revenue).

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 04:27:45 pm
content: Quote from: madires on April 25, 2022, 02:41:56 pmMy niche isn't electronics. My conclusions were quite general, after doing some research on how things are on YT.I would say I am slightly successful, because managed to get monetized in the first year, and get 8K subscribers. But also my views are falling maybe 30% every month, because ai.

author: Poe
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 05:34:12 pm
content: Naomi says her business is "Youtube". It isn't.Naomi's business is selling content. Youtube just happens to be her only customer. Like if I made educational sing-a-long videos for kids and just sold them to PornHub.Youtube is not her boss either, it's her business partner. A business partner that doesn't value her content. Like PornHub not valuing my sing-a-long videos. In fact, they'd probably be flagged and practically hidden on the Pornhub search results. Like Youtube's situation, both likely just flag stuff and move on. Too many content creators, not worth the resources.If I was in her business, I'd either find a different partner or improve my value to my existing business partner. Maybe she could pretend to have a mental disorder and act like a victim. That has been a strong trend for the last couple decades on Youtube/Twitter/Tiktok/Reddit/etc and it's just gaining more steam. Or she could look to one of the multitude of outrage merchants who are quite successful on the platform. She could tell us who's lying to us. We love that apparently.

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 05:48:50 pm
content: Yeah, thanks. A bad scene there, when someone just wanted use 'groggle' even for business related search, and you've got that whole mess, to figuratively shove aside,...from the distractions.And 'politics'; first time through (casual search), you get, like 2 relevant 'hits', from news a couple weeks ago. "That's not right? ", I'm thinking, where's any other coverage ?Then, later same search and 3 or 4 different articles do come up, but seems erratic..., Like some other agenda when you're simply looking for 'Campus Speaker chased by mob'...Too much to ask ? Yeah somebody's algorithm stinks.Anyway, a very relevant topic: I even bought the book, Adnoids for Dummies', (sic) so I could operate the cell phone user interface... Couldn't even find basic stuff, like which buttons do what; that book was so chock full of ads, for APPs.Cardiac specialist had 'Google Forms', for starters. I'm thinking; Do I REALLY feel OK with Google, all up in my medical details (boring), now ?

author: YurkshireLad
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 05:58:15 pm
content: QuoteI would cynically argue that content creators are YouTube's products, not business partners. They only exist to create money for YouTube. Content Creators exist at the whim of YouTube's AI, and YT cares not one iota about them as long as they can make more ad revenue for the behemoth.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 06:23:15 pm
content: Quote from: Ed.Kloonk on April 24, 2022, 01:27:09 pmOn youtube the nuts might be in the comments but on odysee they are making the videos.... I look now and then but I don't see anything that appealing other than what I already know about like Dave. I actually pay for youtube so if I did watch dave on odysee he would not make any money. The whole sponsorship thing is a problem to me, I would rather have the model of paying an amount each month to the platform to distribute among the creators I watch, but we have been duped into this everything is free crap so creators have to beg for donations, you want the service? then pay for it!

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 07:00:25 pm
content: Quote from: Poe on April 25, 2022, 05:34:12 pmI'd define YouTube as a video hoster with monetization service. The content you're creating is the product, and maybe you'll earn some money if you're lucky. It's like an online marketplace which takes a huge percentage as commission for providing the platform, a CDN, and payment processing.

author: MrMobodies
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 07:23:21 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on April 24, 2022, 09:25:55 pmSo I can't trust any newspaper. Sometimes I find I have to read the same story from several different sources just to get a picture when I suspect something is missing or it's vague on details but then even when lengthy like that one.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 07:33:00 pm
content: newspapers always have an angle, so I don't read any of them as they all lie.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 09:06:49 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on April 25, 2022, 06:23:15 pmI agree. It's difficult to find good videos on Odysee. I tend to use YouTube to find creators I like and check their Odysee accounts for content they can't put on YouTube because of censorship.Censorship in the west has become progressively worse over the last 25 years. It started with the idea of stopping bad people push dangerous and harmful ideas, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions. We need to allow people to put across bad and dangerous ideas, so they can be rebutted with well-reasoned, evidence-based counterarguments, otherwise we won't learn and develop as a society.Quote from: MrMobodies on April 25, 2022, 07:23:21 pmThey generally don't outright lie, but they do have blatant political leanings. For example, a right wing paper might blame long doctor's waiting lists on immigration and the government's botched handling of the pandemic, yet a left leaning publication will cite lack of government funding and insufficient pay for hard working doctors who migrated to the UK to help the struggling NHS. In reality both are correct: we import useful foreign medical staff, but immigration does put pressure on the NHS, the government have mishandled the pandemic and funding is an issue, although it's more of a case in how it's spent, rather than too little.I prefer to look for different news sources, especially those reporting UK stories from abroad, which I tend to trust more as they're less influenced by the UK government.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 25, 2022, 10:29:24 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on April 25, 2022, 09:06:49 pmI think that comes down to your viewing habits. Television (paid or free-to-air) is exactly the same.Personally, I'm the kind of person who knows what I want to watch and seek out that content/show/episode, whether that be online streaming media or television. I don't mindlessly click through stuff or wait for recommendations to come to me. I usually come across new things to watch through word-of-mouth.

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 03:21:32 am
content: Quote from: Simon on April 25, 2022, 06:23:15 pmIn the very early days I used to download Dave's vids from the server so I could watch in a quality other than standard y/t potato mode. I didn't have the bandwidth to stream in HD and the flash/firefox implementation was cancer.The e-begging is prolly here to stay no matter what platform they spruik on. But I just get tired of the "youtube shafted me" videos.The nutters on Odysee will only decrease in proportion as youtube kicks off (and ticks off) more and more harmless presenters.I suggest that soon it may be that nutters remain on youtube. Those prepper clowns can manage and are motivated to stay one step ahead of the algo and yet they continuously forecast the imminent collapse of society for five years straight (so buy my prepper stuff before it's too late!)It is why I now urge new creators to go back to basics a bit. The best material is of the spare-time nature. That said if gaming the algo is your goal, fill yer boots so long as it's understood that sometimes the machine wins.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 03:34:35 am
content: Quote from: Simon on April 25, 2022, 06:23:15 pmThat has the problem of inadvertently supporting creators you don't want to support, for example flat earthers and clowns staging plane crashes. It's especially problematic if you specifically want to watch the video in order to criticize it, but that's counterproductive if they get paid for the view.

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 03:49:38 am
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on April 26, 2022, 03:34:35 amAnd the aviation channels contorting themselves trying to distance themselves from it.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 05:00:08 am
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on April 26, 2022, 03:34:35 amThey would be getting far more from their zombie followers and if one were to watch something like that then it would be a tiny portion of view time so not much. Ultimately your argument is flawed, they should not be on youtube, or their channel should be entirely demonetized.Free speech and all is all well and good when there is the rebuttal to stupid ideas, but we live in a society of silo's. If I came across some flat earther videa I would not even bother to comment on it as the comments would already be full of their fans who won't be told by some stranger on the internet. So all the videos do is drag more people in and make it look like these people are worth listening to.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 05:04:51 am
content: Quote from: Simon on April 25, 2022, 06:23:15 pmOdysee now have a Patreon like subcription service, as does Utreon. In the case of Odysee, 100% goes to the creator. It's brand new but I expect it will become big.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 05:09:26 am
content: Yes but that is a pain. I would like to sign up and pay once and all creators get a cut like youtube premium.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 05:12:17 am
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on April 26, 2022, 03:34:35 amI used to be of that opinion with Red now called Premium. If you pay for preium then some tiny (like, realy, really tiny) percentage goes to the creator of every video you view.But now I think it's actually fair. If you watched the video, regardless of the intent, then that creator deserves the cut, even if you hate their guts and you are only watching to criticise. The fact is you chose to watch it.You can chose not to participate in such a system of course.As a creator, ideally we want people to subscribe to use and have 100% of that come to us. Currently only Odysee offers this.But in reality I think the premium system really has a place, as it means that any fleeting video you watch that creators gets a cut with no effort on your part.

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 05:13:14 am
content: Quote from: Simon on April 26, 2022, 05:09:26 amHave a look athttps://www.thevertex.io/Quoteoh nearly forgot, edit: regarding your wish to pay once, I believe that is a feature they will be adding soon.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 05:13:47 am
content: Quote from: Simon on April 26, 2022, 05:09:26 amYep, see my previous comment as you typed yours, that's why I use it. I do wish the Premium cut was greater though.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 05:31:45 am
content: Yes, but then I would rather Google pay their taxes too and this is one reason I prefer to just pay for the service. I now have every right to demand that 20% or that or whatever it is goes to tax revenue.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 06:04:48 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on April 26, 2022, 05:12:17 amFunny that they FINALLY renamed that. I worked on a DVR product at a former job that supported YouTube Red and people I worked with were constantly confusing it with RedTube which is not quite the same thing.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 06:08:27 am
content: Quote from: MrMobodies on April 25, 2022, 07:23:21 pmI do the same thing. I end up looking for the same story on the left slanted and right slanted news sources, read both and try to interpolate something resembling reality. It's frustrating that this is necessary, I mean is it really that hard to just present the facts without an agenda?

author: MrMobodies
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 06:29:31 am
content: I remembered 20 years ago someone telling me that the newspapers can't even get the football scores right between them let alone the reporting and that they are corrupt.So I asked "Well what about the Independent?"They replied: "Nope they're corrupt too."Football and sports don't interest me so, don't understand it too well and I don't read the sports section so I woudn't know if the newspapers are or were accurate or not with the scores and reporting.Quote from: EEVblog on April 26, 2022, 05:04:51 amI asked a couple of months ago about other payment methods for Odysee premium such as Paypal than giving them my card details.They replied not "eta" yet but provided a link to one that does it in Bitcoin but I hope they eventually accept paypal.QuoteQuote

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 06:59:28 am
content: Quote from: james_s on April 26, 2022, 06:08:27 amMiddle of the road journos (when they were still around) used to assure me that if you print vanilla news then both sides come at you claiming you're covering something up.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 12:19:18 pm
content: There are not differenent sources..

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 03:20:03 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on April 25, 2022, 07:33:00 pmSo where do you learn about what's happening around the world/country/city?

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 05:59:17 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 26, 2022, 03:20:03 pmIf you stick to newspapers for this, your view of reality is likely pretty twisted, without you even realizing. =)

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 07:34:40 pm
content: What else is there? Facebook?Edit: I am not suggesting newspapers are the only source, but I'd like to know of a more credible source - if there isn't one then in writing off newspapers is a bit silly since whatever source you do use will be no better and probably worse.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2022, 11:59:05 pm
content: Are newspapers still a thing? I get most of my news online, I browse a variety of news sites and try to interpolate the true story from what I find. I don't spend a lot of time on news though, most of it is depressing stuff I can't control anyway.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 27, 2022, 02:02:32 am
content: Quote from: james_s on April 26, 2022, 11:59:05 pmFran has started a new newspaper segment:

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2022, 04:28:11 am
content: Quote from: james_s on April 26, 2022, 11:59:05 pmThe free ones get thrown onto my front yard. They are good lighting the BBQ and keeping a stash in readiness for any more TP zombie apocalypse.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2022, 08:43:12 am
content: QuoteI imagine so, but nowadays by 'newspaper' one tends to include the online simulacrum of same.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2022, 05:11:05 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on April 26, 2022, 11:59:05 pmYes of course they are. But if you only use their online counterparts, that's still the same content.Problem is that the major ones, almost worldwide, have stopped being independent and almost all belong to large groups/billionaires with definite political agendas and tight links with governments. That's not good.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2022, 05:29:02 pm
content: The underlying problem is generally corporations are taking over government and that is ending the unpredictability (like democracy) Of course all corporations want this, its been their goal since the 1930s to end the unpredictability of voting.Otherwise, people could just vote whatever they wanted to happen. That would sometimes destroythe investmentsof corporations when the people didn't agree with them. So there has been this huge change, that not many people know has happened. Its global and permanent. And Nobody is about to announce this, ever. why would they?

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2022, 05:37:31 pm
content: Simulacrum,Its a word invented by Baudrillard, and a pretty descriptive/good one.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2022, 05:42:49 pm
content: QuoteVery unlikely, unfortunately. Or perhaps luckily, given what some people want!The problem is you can't vote for a single thing. Well, you can, but doing so drags along several pages full of other manifesto commitments, many of which you might prefer to vote against in preference to the thing you want to vote for.There is also the small problem of not being able to vote for something that isn't on offer. If, for instance, neither of the main parties in the UK say they will ban excessive profits from motorway service stations then no-one will be able to vote for that regardless of who they align behind.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2022, 05:46:49 pm
content: Some of my friends who work in the infotainment industry tried to impress on me years ago what it was and that it wasn't "news". I should have listened to them earlier. I would have saved myself a lot of frustration.Quote from: james_s on April 26, 2022, 11:59:05 pm

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2022, 06:25:15 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on April 27, 2022, 05:11:05 pmI typically read the online text versions of the local TV news stations, I used to read some of the local newspapers online years ago but I think they all went behind paywalls at which point I stopped. The same problem of belonging to large groups with agendas is true to both though.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 27, 2022, 06:51:10 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 26, 2022, 07:34:40 pmwhat's facebook?

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2022, 07:55:53 pm
content: They are infotainment..Fecesbook is infotainment.. Its a lot like excrement..Monopoly privilegesQuote from: Simon on April 27, 2022, 06:51:10 pmI like the phrasing of the WEF and the corporate contyrolled WHO and its sham COVIX organization, as well as the various gfovernments being controlled by corporations .. and aglobal coups d' etat.. a global hijackas it were.. as trying to perpetrate a big trick... The UN invited in the corporations.. due to the withdrawals of state funding..

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 27, 2022, 11:14:01 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on April 27, 2022, 05:11:05 pmA whole bunch of independent news channels have sprung up on Youtube, but they usually have a bent to them of some sort. But simply follow several of them if you want balanced coverage.Doesn't help though that Youtube have publically admitted that these are not "authoritative sources" and so they algorithmically demote them.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2022, 11:18:41 pm
content: Do they publish what (they claim are) "authoritative sources" ? Ive been looking for something on that for years..in a sense its much like slavery, from the perspective of the slavers.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 27, 2022, 11:50:49 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on April 27, 2022, 11:18:41 pmOff hand I'm not sure, but it's a very public policy.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2022, 12:42:37 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on April 27, 2022, 11:50:49 pmYT automatically flags videos that it detects as dealing with a current political/medical/... you name it/ topic, and gives what it thinks is the official source of information for this. Usually, a government agency of some kind.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2022, 07:43:10 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on April 28, 2022, 12:42:37 amAuthorities. Maybe big corporations, governments, etc. ? YouTube is generally more interesting (to me) than Twitter.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 29, 2022, 02:14:01 am
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on April 28, 2022, 12:42:37 amIn the case of political stories, "authoritatvie sources" like the mainstream media. Independent news sources get absolutely crushed in algorithm. You can't even find their stuff with exact title searches, just like the issue with Naomi.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2022, 02:51:07 am
content: If Even if you type her name, you can't find "Naomi Wu" thats bad.. that's just evil.. Anybody would feel snubbed.. Hopefully thats not the case (afraid to look, but I could see that happening)Its not, a search by name finds her.. good..

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2022, 02:55:15 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on April 27, 2022, 11:50:49 pmI'd like to know if you find asny written policy.. For example, there is a meta description tag..an xml format for source verification.. by fsct checker sites - wish I could use it to provide source info.. and have it picked up consistently..

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2022, 02:55:24 am
content: Perhaps someone should write a browser extension that blacklists (filters out) mainstream media junk, flat earth junk channels, etc. from Youtube search results with the user being able to select what to blacklist.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2022, 10:40:34 am
content: QuoteWho fact checks the fact checkers?Seriously. At the last election there were 'fact checking' websites run by one side or the other to a) confirm whatever that party wanted to push, and b) diss the other side's claims.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2022, 10:50:29 am
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 29, 2022, 10:40:34 amFact checkers are invariably just journalists, who lack the technical competence in the subject they're supposed to be verifying. Even experts aren't 100% certain of the facts, which has often been the case over the pandemic. Official bodies often get it wrong, or only accept facts which support their policies/agenda. I'm very skeptical when only one narrative is accepted to be true, by the mainstream media.

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2022, 11:03:20 am
content: Quote from: Zero999 on April 29, 2022, 10:50:29 amOnce you make peace with fact that the modern fact checker doesn't tend to hold facts as the top priority in their quest, well..

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2022, 11:11:27 am
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 29, 2022, 10:40:34 amAs I hear, people who do fact checking have burnout problems faster than the average JS programmer.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2022, 04:20:05 pm
content: QuoteProper ones, no doubt. What I'm pointing out is that there were/are essentially fake fact checkers who look like the real thing (unless you know something they are pushing is wrong). How do you know the checkers you are looking at are pukka fact checkers?Traditionally, you could rely on mainstream newspapers and TV because if they were pulling a fast one (that was bad enough) they would be called out by the oversight organisation. Sure, there would be bias but outright fibbing would have to be corrected. The likes of YouTube channels... well, not so much. The web... lol.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2022, 05:27:45 pm
content: That was then. Now, this journalistic ethic has left several major media corporations and what remains are activists - these are one part of the body of authoritative sources and anything posted that contradicted them was censored by the tech overlords. Fact checkers also rely on them, carefully selecting the bias du jour when making their judgment calls. A journalist named Tim Pool noticed that quite early and created a media company so it could act as an authoritative source and have a leg to stand against some of the excess of these guys.Another authoritative source is the government: with the deep divide currently present in politics, their value is close to nil.So, IMHO the only reliable authoritative source is indeed research done by oneself... Just like many here already suggested.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2022, 05:43:58 pm
content: They dont get fact checked except by themselves.Thats the whole point of their agenda.They were set up to do that, they didnt become authoritative.It became too formulaic and they were set up for a purpose.. to take over what "was" (no room for questioning here) "the "facts".. kind of like how slavery was set up, and how the wto was set up to become the "rules of the global economy" take it or leave it or get out.Quote from: tszaboo on April 29, 2022, 11:11:27 am

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2022, 05:51:29 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on April 29, 2022, 10:50:29 amA dedicated effort to buy up newspapers in the 1980s and 1990s made jobs for journalists very very scarce, in the US. This was quite intentional and coincided with an attempt to take over the world of trade, with the WTO Services Agreement, which was bound to result in the demise of a great many jobs.. . which they claimed would be offset by higher profits.. But for whom?

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2022, 05:55:03 pm
content: Quote from: jonovid on April 29, 2022, 03:19:16 amBut if you write that down and try to share it some people now will call you a terrorist, why?What changed??

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2022, 06:06:01 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 27, 2022, 05:42:49 pmThey dont want to ever ban "excessive profits" for anything.. On "principle". Because to them, no profits are ever excessive, since people enter into contract of their free voilition. Thyey can enter into the deal, or do without, whatever, forever.Do without food, or without water, under some circumstances slavery is still legal. If you steal anything.Can you see why? Read up on Churchill's Bengal famine. On Principle, no profits are ever "excessive". They simply are profits. Large ones. Sometimes people sell themselves into slavery, to eat. Sound userious? Sure, but... What does this tell you about the future they are planning for us all? I realized when I was pretty young how extreme a future some of our people felt was their entitlement. Why do people fail to understand why some people are buying up all the farmland and housing they can?

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2022, 08:35:48 pm
content: Quote from: rsjsouzaWhich means what?Howdo you research stuff yourself? All you can do, unless you are omnipresent, is read/watch/listen someone elses research. We're going round in circles here, not actually zeroing in on anything.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2022, 09:17:52 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 29, 2022, 08:35:48 pmUnless you are a field journalist that is eyewitness of a specific event,researchmeans you look for information from various sources in an attempt to have a balanced view from many sides. This is obviously only reasonable if you have enough interest vested in a specific subject, as this requires a lot of time and effort. Most people do only cursory reading of headlines and/or use a single source with the newfangled fad of "fact checkers", blue marks, etc.Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 29, 2022, 08:35:48 pmMy post expanded yours with the fact that you can't trust the ethics of corporate journalism more than the independent guy anymore. At any rate, you can't possibly think that anyone here at EEV will have a magical solution for a century-old problem nor point you to a single source of absolutely unbiased source, do you?The only point that one can "zero in" is this: get your information from different sources and read past the headlines - now with the internet it is easier than before, but it expanded exponentially.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2022, 11:11:09 pm
content: QuoteOf course not, but that seems to be the solution being proposed here. Hence my comments.

author: station240
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 07:55:03 am
content: Quote from: james_s on April 27, 2022, 06:25:15 pmIt's worse than that though, News Limited owned newspapers have been caught out distorting news stories for financial reasons.See how accurate the story is, depends on how much you spend on advertising with them!small ad=accurate story, no add=distorted information, large ad=full page news story that is basically a poorly disguised ad.A non profit running an event just wanted to have it listed on the paper's events page, nothing fancy just a brief mention.Newspaper agreed to promote it for free, and send out reporter who took down the details, they double checked the notes she took were accurate.When published all the details were wrong, times, entry cost, actual event details etc, it was just pointless changes that helped no one.Newspapers have a limited amount of space, so actual useful information has been replaced with mass appeal crap in the hope of selling more papers, doesn't work anymore.Anyway these are the same problems we have with google/youtube, they want zero risk content that will attract advertisers and hence get higher prices for ads.it's going to fail, for the same reasons newspapers and TV are failing, people abandoned TV and moved to youtube as they got sick of dumbed down content and tons of ads, getting to choose what sort of content you watch/get recommended is vital to keeping people watching.Naomi Wu is having problems because Youtube have decided for whatever reason her presence is a financial risk to them, be it offending advertising agencies, the Chinese government, or just moron housewives who freakout when their husband is so interested in this woman with big tits (when he's just watching the 3D printer review).

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 09:29:58 am
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on April 30, 2022, 04:07:30 amAs Dave pointed out on the comments section of this video, there is very little to be done other than providing feedback on this portion of the search results page. I personally don't see a problem with the "algorithm" as she mentioned: it is returning an unfiltered result based on what people actually search*. What one does with that information is what matters.In a society that is more accepting of the trans community, such piece of information, despite distorted, could be the spark of a broader conversation about the word or even be used as PR currency in a partnership.On the other hand, if this information alone is enough to steer a potential partner from getting involved, wouldn't it be killing a partnership that shouldn't have happened in the first place anyways? Of course the first impression is the one that tends to last, but I don't believe that everyone serious in wanting to make money will overlook the body of work and achievements.*Sure, this is a "chicken and egg" situation: the more proeminent a search result is, the more people will click on it, making it even more popular. Both the good and the bad comes with the popularity.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 10:02:37 am
content: QuoteThat's true (the space bit, at least) for paper-based ones, but online there is not really any limit. The Daily Mail, for instance, not only has bazillions of articles on its front page but each is probably several days worth of concatenated (and sometimes barely related) wibble.I tend to do the same as james_s suggests and sample from diverse sites but, often, stories are exclusive to a particular site (at least for a day or so) so there is no alternative view to compare. Sometimes a major story you'd expect to be plastered everywhere is barely mentioned, if at all, on a more, ah, 'acceptable' site.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 11:10:51 am
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on April 30, 2022, 09:29:58 amExactly! The algorithm does what it is designed for. You could blame the people responsible for that algorithm to be insensible or indifferent. But the real problem is the humankind. We're so dumb and ignorant that it really hurts.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 11:54:21 am
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on April 30, 2022, 09:29:58 amIt's now gone. I did report it a few hours ago, so maybe that did the trick?

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 05:09:04 pm
content: Its significant that later in life, opportunities to be nice to trans people or more accepting (of everybody) are seen by some as missed opportunities that will never come one's way again. Sadly.The world has lots of room for improvement. Its interesting how an investigation of the roots and roles of slavery has brought me in the last few weeks to more understanding of the history of the world. Particularly the Middile East.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 05:27:57 pm
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on April 29, 2022, 02:55:24 amBack in the day, it was all about the science. Back in the day. I was around the founding of many of these entities.. and really still dont understand how we got to where we are today as well as I would like. I know it has much to do with the creation of highly mobile capital. Money going everywhere.. This is what spawned Rodrik's Trilemma..What happened during the various transitions? I think much is to be learned from trying to understand the roots of them. For example, this was one of them.https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/comparative-studies-in-society-and-history/article/reforming-everywhere-and-all-at-once-transitioning-to-free-labor-across-the-british-empire-18371838/E2BBDC44298E2C11B71A1737DB36B4A6

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 08:54:22 pm
content: Quote from: madires on April 30, 2022, 11:10:51 amThe people responsible for the algorithm have no way of knowing a priori what people will search for and what suggestions will be provided and how they will offend somebody. For that reason, Google has been busy removing politically incorrect search results and suggestions more or less manually for over a decade.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 09:00:40 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on April 30, 2022, 05:09:04 pmThe really sad thing about slavery is its still widespread today, yet few people give a damn about those still being oppressed in this way.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 09:03:59 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on April 30, 2022, 09:00:40 pmWell, it's like pollution. We displace it kinda far away so that it's not directly visible, and we feel good.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 09:25:40 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on April 30, 2022, 09:03:59 pmThat is a very good way to put this. Because thats what awareness of the most common abuses often devolves into. Watching Mondo Africa the other day and its massacres of Omani Arabs in Zimbabwe, which I had been warned about by VS Naipaul's fiction book, A Bend in the River" still it made me think and want to know more..Getting sick while poor?Slavery by race is now illegal Slavery in the United States is legal if somebody is duly convicted of a crime. Make America Great Again, means make America Profitable Again, to some people. Paying people to work back them was fairly progressive. It seems that some people feel thats all thats necessary now. Well, slavery is still common. And the existence of decent jobs is all thats standing against it.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 09:35:04 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on April 30, 2022, 09:25:40 pmWhat are you talking about? Are other forms of slavery legal in the US?

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 09:44:12 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on April 30, 2022, 09:35:04 pmLets not talk about it any more.. It makes me sad.. Nobody is entitled to anything. We still have a lot of work to do to bring ourselves up to where we ought to be.There is a pervasive sense of entitlement radiated by the wealthy, who seem to feel entitled to huge windfalls right around now. Which bugs me.. They are arguably right the way things are going now. The concept of a "living wage" is alien to some people because they are claiming entitlement to windfalls due to vast increases in migration under free trade. Making wages fall a lot. Wages are determined by supply and demand.Ive known about this since I was a kid.. And that knowledge transformed me..

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 09:49:53 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on April 30, 2022, 09:35:04 pmI think he's referring to the US prison industrial complex, that uses prisoners in close to slavery conditions to produce a huge range of consumer products. Most countries only allow prisoners to produce things for the state, like military uniforms. There is a reason why certain groups really like private prisons, and having the world's large percentage of people incarcerated in the US.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 09:58:16 pm
content: Yup.. I am weird in a certain way, I just notice certain things a lot more.. Certain kinds of behaviors.. I am just praying that I'm wrong.Lets leave it there for now. Pray.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 11:07:31 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on April 30, 2022, 11:54:21 amIt was actioned internally at Google. It seems Fran has viewers with influence.Would be nice to know how easy it is for things like Naomi's issue to get fixed at Youtube. Sometimes you hear of things getting fixed, other times you hear about huge names not being able to get things fixed, people you would think would have direct influence.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 11:08:51 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on April 30, 2022, 09:49:53 pmI think having prisoners perform useful work is a good idea, it isn't slavery, it's punishment for committing crimes. Personally I think any proceeds should go toward reimbursing crime victims rather than profit for private prisons though.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 11:10:38 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on April 30, 2022, 11:08:51 pmPlease do not derail this thread with slavery talk.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2022, 11:19:12 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on April 30, 2022, 11:08:51 pmI agree that making prisoners work to help pay for the prison is a good idea. That's not what seems to happen, though. The poor old tax payers pay to run the prison, and someone else profits from the work the prisoners do.

author: MrMobodies
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2022, 03:42:13 am
content: Just found this:https://www.androidpolice.com/youtube-is-now-hiding-the-like-count/QuoteLooks like they are trying balance it out a bit, if they are going to hide the negative feedback counter why not do it to the other. Maybe they should have thought about this during their experiment early last year before their final decision.

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2022, 05:11:19 am
content: Wonder what's the motivation for thatConcerns about people liking videos with many likes already out of peer pressure?Some video promoted by YT didn't receive enough likes for their liking and they think it doesn't look good for them?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 01, 2022, 08:16:29 am
content: Quote from: MrMobodies on May 01, 2022, 03:42:13 amThey didn't think it through, they were pressured to do it by the the corporate media and other big accounts, and the whitehouse who were getting ratioed to hell.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2022, 08:48:07 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on April 30, 2022, 11:54:21 amI didn't think the word transvestite is a slur. I suppose a good number of people don't know the difference between transgender and transvestite/cross-dresser, or whatever the accepted term is for a man dressed as a women. This isn't helped by the fact that it appears that some people who claim to be trans are just cross-dressers.Yes, Google will just base its results on what people search and will display troll results, if trolled.

author: HobGoblyn
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 01, 2022, 10:21:31 am
content: Quote from: MrMobodies on May 01, 2022, 03:42:13 amTrouble is, almost every business on the planet goes out of their way to hide bad reviews, a while back Private Eye (uk magazine) had an article about trustpilot, saying how bad reviews of certain companies it’s parent company owns, seem to have disappeared.As for things like Facebook, I loath Facebook, I’m on it to keep in touch with about 20 people where I grew up. Unfortunately this has the pain of getting all Facebooks ads.One got my attention, a washing machine manufacturer claiming quote“ Xyz products are all Made in England to some of the most stringent design and manufacturing standards in the world.” They also made a huge point about how their washing machines had hot fill as well as cold fill.Someone asked “ what percentage is made in Britain, they replied 87% is made in their own factory”I asked them how they arrive at 87%, is it by number of pieces, weight or size etc, pointing out that the most likely thing to go wrong are the electronics, and could they confirm what percentage of the electronics are made in the UK.I also questioned their claim that having a separate hot fill in addition to cold fill would save the average UK householder with a combi boiler any money, again politely pointing out that for many householders it can take up to a minute before hot water reaches the tap, so in many cases the boiler would be kicking in to heat water after the machine had filled up, hence wasting money not saving it.My post was removed and I have been banned from their site

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2022, 11:19:11 am
content: Quote from: HobGoblyn on May 01, 2022, 10:21:31 amYou're meant to enjoy ads and to consume, not to ask reasonable questions.On the bright side, you've learned that they are hypocrites and suppressing free speech.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2022, 12:16:11 pm
content: The Day After The Google Video:

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2022, 01:52:13 pm
content: Although its not the main function of YouTube, there is absolutely no reason that you cant set up your own YouTube vote counter, except their trademarked name.If you call it something else.You should try doing that. Offer a means for people to vote on web content, and get people to use it. Slice and dice and sort in different ways.Give these web sites competition. They have become hugge monopolies that are stealing all thats interesting on the web and selling it to the biggest corporations to track people.Ive set up my own search engine, so that I can avoid using Google. Its only accessible to me. Every day I spider a large number of sites. I save my index of their their content to a database. I use a search engine that pre-existed Google. I remember using it back then. (I also pre-exist Google and can prove it.) I refuse to use anything like their "YouTube App". I just use http GET and POST.Quote from: HobGoblyn on May 01, 2022, 10:21:31 am

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2022, 05:40:58 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 01, 2022, 08:16:29 amThey said they hid dislike conuters to discourage downvote brigading of videos.SJWs have always been the main victims of downvote brigading.Google is full of SJWs.Connect the dots, Dave. Google cares about it more (or at least as much as) the media and surely more than the White House.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2022, 06:06:44 pm
content: Quote from: madires on May 01, 2022, 12:16:11 pmSaw that. Fran raises very valid points, but this is nothing new really. This has been a problem ever since 'search engines' have existed.When the Internet started becoming popular, web sites collecting personal information started to appear - that was even before Google did it. Those web sites were dedicated to providing information on as many people as possible, without their consent, of course. Those were meant to become giant directories.This has just gotten worse, but the idea has been around for a long time now. Causes major privacy issues.One additional point Fran makes is the fact that Google helps sustaining some "questions" about people or facts by providing "frequenly asked questions" about the name or topic you're searching. It's one of the most idiotic (well, not for Google, of course) feature one could think of. It's about as bad as constantly pushing results of surveys about what people would vote right before an election.Is there a way of changing that? I'm unfortunately not sure, as there are way too many interests at stake here.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2022, 09:36:37 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on May 01, 2022, 01:52:13 pmAlready done for dislikes, it would just be a small tweak to track likes as well.https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/return-youtube-dislikes/

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 02, 2022, 01:42:27 am
content: Quote from: magic on May 01, 2022, 05:40:58 pmThat's the public excuse, and you believed it,But yes, a few SJW's were also some of the complainers, which is why it was made the focus of the public excuse.

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 02, 2022, 05:31:06 am
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on May 01, 2022, 06:06:44 pm99% of Google traffic is people searching for information rather than political opinion and the suggestions are fairly useful. If anything, I'm bothered by the screen estate they take when they are notWhen I type "bipolar transistor", the suggestions are "how BJT works" or "what are BJT applications".When I type the name of a local shopping mall, the suggestions are "what brands have their stores there" or "what are the opening hours".For the remaining 1%, Google is very well aware of their influence and of course always working to "improve". Hence the removal of "Clinton email scandal" and similar problematic queries. I'm sure that "is public personality X a woman" fits this category, as long as the public personality is big enough for anyone to care, because lack of serious customer support and emergency-driven moderation is another hallmark of Google. The idea that they don't care about their influence is asinine, they are highly obsessed with using it to further their private interests, not only in politics but even more so in technology. It's just that they are cheap bastards too so there is only so much they can do with the drones they are willing to hire and the task is immense.Quote from: EEVblog on May 02, 2022, 01:42:27 amSo who were the main complainers and why would they give rat's ass in the first place?Reminder that the votes still exist, they just aren't shown to the proles.Reminder that the algorithms are already "improved" to ignore "wrong" votes and guide the proles to "authoritative" sources.Also, reminder that Google CFO admitted to having cried after Clinton's wife's election loss

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 02, 2022, 06:29:01 am
content: Quote from: magic on May 02, 2022, 05:31:06 amYes, and they lied, it's not to protect creators, because creators still get bombarded with the dislike count every day.

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 02, 2022, 07:12:18 am
content: For the record, protecting creators' fragile egos by hiding the information from them wasn't really the official goal. The stated goal was to protect creators' fragile egos by discouraging downvote bombing in the first place, by reducing its effectiveness. And they have AB tests to "prove" that it works, or at any rate appeared to work before everyone knew what's going on, because I'm sure that if you want to troll/downrank/annoy a specific creator, you can still do it and all the trolls know it well.https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/update-to-youtube/<tinfoil hat on>Whether they really believe the above or not, what I'm saying is that the downvote raids bother YT as much as they bother their big customers, because they too often affect sorts of content that YT is as much happy to promote as the legacy media, be it for political or financial reasons. They are all one nest of snakes and I doubt that much external coercion was necessary to produce this change.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 02, 2022, 08:34:24 am
content: Quote from: magic on May 02, 2022, 07:12:18 amThey very specifically said in the video and demonstrated it with screen shots that they were hiding away the dislike count so that creators would have to go to specifically extra effort to find it. They lied, that isn't the case as I demonstrated in my video.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 02, 2022, 10:40:34 am
content: Now, how do we convince Google to get rid of that horrible c-slur for those of us having a traditional biological gender identity?By c-slur, I of course mean "cis".Words cannot express the depth of my hurt and sadness whenever I see that slur thrown around like it was nothing.Why is it thatmyemotions do not matter?

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 02, 2022, 12:49:59 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on May 02, 2022, 10:40:34 amI agree. I have to restrain myself from retaliating with another c-word.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 12:17:41 am
content: It is because the infinitesimal minority of "non-c" people that gives two hoots to categorize others this way is extremely loud, coercitive and obnoxious.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 01:22:47 am
content: Some of them are pretty loud activists indeed, but that's a very, very small minority. Those people alone wouldn't have the power to be coercitive in any way. So, while they are certainly involved, that's not were the power and interests behind it lie.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 01:45:18 am
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on May 03, 2022, 01:22:47 amLong term studies of the effectiveness of movements says you only need about 3% of people pushing an agenda, and the rest of the population may cave. People see a substantial group, and think it represents a broadly held view. However, they may be looking at hundreds, while the country has a population of 10s of millions.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 02:56:03 am
content: Do you mean like how a certain global hegemon promoted a divide and conquer ethos in the last century.. except now? Because thats what I find particularly irksome.. I see that as happening. Unnecessarily dividing people.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 07:07:59 am
content: Quote from: coppice on May 03, 2022, 01:45:18 amAnother problem is, it's impossible to tell how many are really people are really trans and how many are cross-dressers. The two get conflated these days and many of the latter become convinced they're really trans.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 07:55:43 am
content: No, the true problem is that we are assigning huge importance in the perceived emotive content of words, and as a result, require global control of such "bad words", making free speech impossible and unattainable.If we allow individual words to become weapons, we force ourselves to live in a warzone, a minefield. Language is the best tool we have to interact with each other, and it is frail and error-prone enough already; any attempt to weaponize it further horrifies me.I so wish Fran had taken a different approach in her video. Instead of pointing out "transvestite" is a slur, I wish she had pointed out that "transvestite" and "transgender" are completely different things, and that people confusing the two shows how people really do not understand the underlying things at all; things that are very close to the core of many people, and thus rather important. And, then, that many consider "transvestite" a slur –– could be because so many people misuse the terms –– and prefer the term "cross-dresser" instead. (Perhaps point out that cross-dressing has a rather long history, and isn't necessarily coupled with sexuality at all.) And then described her own experience to whatever degree she finds necessary; but most importantly, showing that it is a natural part of her and her history, not something to be ashamed about or scared of having others know.Why do I wish that? Because you cannot achieve lasting change by telling people they are evil if they use 'slurs'. You need to first show there is nothing dark or wrong in the terms themselves, and then explain what they actually mean. Instead of priming them as mines, you need to defuse them.As an example, consider the following. Many human societies have tales of evil beings living in water, and dragging unwary children to their death. These are often used by parents as an easy way to keep their children from going into the water without adult supervision. However, such tales also mean a lot of children don't want to learn to swim, because of the fear. The end result is that using such tales with the intent of protecting children, can actually result in more child deaths due drowning. Using such tales –– or saying that a specific word is a slur and anyone using it should be excluded from polite society –– causes more harm than good.It iseasy, and therefore very enticing as a tool to make one feel safer, but in the end, it does more harm than good, overall.If human languages are forced to become a primed minefield, then I do sincirely believe that letting those minefields blow up on their primers' faces as early as possible is the least harmful outcome of the entire mess.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 08:26:20 am
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on May 03, 2022, 07:55:43 amWhat I was alluding to was that the confusion between transgender and cross-dressing is an important one, with real world implications.What happens if Fran does something illegal, as a result of money troubles? Which prison does she go do? She's biologically male, so perhaps a male prison? The problem is she would be more vulnerable to being bullied and sexually assaulted, so perhaps a female prison is more appropriate. That's fine, but then what about male sex offender who claims he's trans, dresses as a women and sexually assaults women in female toilets? If the law is applied equally, then he would be sent to a female prison, where he can have a rape fest.The obvious solution to the above is to individually assess prisoners, taking into account psychological reports and what treatment/surgery he or she has had. The problem is this doesn't happen. There have been instances of men who claim to be women, in female prisons assaulting female prisoners.The points you raise above, are part of the problem. If certain words are too offensive, then it's not possible to debate the matter rationally.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 08:46:07 am
content: Quote from: Zero999 on May 03, 2022, 08:26:20 amAlready happened in UK.https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10406351/I-sexually-assaulted-transgender-rapist-womens-jail.html

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 08:52:00 am
content: Quote from: Zero999 on May 03, 2022, 08:26:20 amTrue, and I do agree. I just think that defusing that via a positive explanation would have been a much better approach. As it is, primarily pointing out "transvestite" is considered a slur, and secondarily pointing out the two are completely different things, might help Fran herself, but overall, it is pushing the way us humans communicate with each other in a harmful direction.Quote from: Zero999 on May 03, 2022, 08:26:20 amYes!I've mentioned before, that some of my own faults are such that I just do not perceive the kind of things that others do. For example, I have absolutely no "gaydar". Several times, I've been asked whether someone I interacted with was male or female, and I realized I didn't notice. Yes, it does mean I do some real silly goofs every now and then, but in face-to-face discussion it hasn't been a problem: I am easy to read, and try hard to honestly admit my errors; me stammering an apology with my face firetruck red when my gaffes are pointed out to me, seems to almost always defuse the situation through friendly laughter. Online, itisa problem.To me, everyone I meet and interact is an individual first. Their gender and opinions are just attributes that matter much less to me than their interaction with me and others. By requiring more complex patterns of social interaction – like remembering what words to use with which individual, without any internally consistent logic – I will be excluded from interactions. I already see online how groups are becoming more insular, deliberately avoiding communicating with outside the group to keep themselves safe and reduce the cognitive load of social interactions. This reduces interactions, and is definitely not good.The next time you try to report a bug or suggest a patch to some software project, note who and how you are responded to. It is no longer like to a peer (like it used to be when the web was new), but more like to a possible IED.It is safer to mark, ignore and avoid, than to interact.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 09:57:24 am
content: Quote from: Zero999 on April 25, 2022, 10:16:52 amI feel the need to point out that this is absolutely untrue.Quote from: Zero999 on April 25, 2022, 10:16:52 amIf by that you mean “depictions of LGBT people doing the same things cis/hetero people do, like having families and buying groceries”, then yes.Quote from: Zero999 on April 25, 2022, 10:16:52 amNo, what they’re saying is to be accepting of those who suspect they may have gender dysphoria.Quote from: Zero999 on April 25, 2022, 10:16:52 amI’ve never heard of even one such case. What there have been is cases where children who were either intersex or whose privates had been damaged were then, upon doctor’s advice, raised as the opposite sex, with disastrous results.But nobody is pushing gender reassignment on people who didn’t want it. This is precisely why gender reassignment requires extensive, long-term psychological evaluation first. It’s also why using hormone blockers to delay puberty is incredibly smart: you can delay the development of gender-specific physiology until the individual is absolutely certain of what they are.Quote from: Zero999 on April 25, 2022, 10:16:52 amComplete nonsense.Quote from: Zero999 on April 25, 2022, 10:16:52 amThere’s a better word for that man: sexual predator. But being a predator has little to do with trans issues, and a whole lot to do with predation issues.It’s also entirely possible, if rare, for both to be the true simultaneously — a pre-op trans woman can still be a sexual predator.But let’s not lose sight of the fact that the number of cases of predatory men pretending to be trans women in order to gain access to victims is vanishingly small. In contrast, the number of trans women murdered every single year is shocking. And that’s in addition to all the other abuses and indignities they have to endure on a daily basis.It’s absolutely abhorrent to throw all trans women under the bus to prevent a nearly nonexistent threat. Not to mention that it’s categorically impossible to protect women from predators at all times. If the predators can’t gain access one way, they’ll just find some other way to find victims, unfortunately.Quote from: Zero999 on April 25, 2022, 10:16:52 amHow would you propose to even do this? It’s the same problem as the anti-trans bathroom bills in some US states: how do you enforce it? Genitalia inspections for everyone? Or just the ones who don’t look feminine enough? (We already have had cases of tomboyish cisgender women having the cops called on them for trying to use the ladies’ room.)The correct thing to do is to act on predatorybehavior, rather than impose draconian rules that single-out an already vulnerable population, all to protect against a threat that is 99.999% imaginary.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 10:35:37 am
content: Quote from: tooki on May 03, 2022, 09:57:24 amI fully agree. And to do that, we need to examine humans as individuals, not as representatives of any groups; and instead of setting arbitrary rules about specific words getting people in trouble, we need to look at what they are saying.I believe Fran's intentions were and are positive. It's just that like with the stories scaring kids away from water, the easy and immediately effective way (pointing out "bad word" as the actionable thing) can in the long term cause more harm than good.The fact that that kind of details pop up on Google shows that that kind of misunderstanding is common. I claim we cannot fix those misunderstandings by forcing any kind of language; I claim only truly free and honest speech can do that. Humans are just drawn to the easy short-term solutions, because the long term ones require more effort from themselves; it is so much easier to just demand that everyone else do the work instead.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 10:45:19 am
content: Quote from: tooki on May 03, 2022, 09:57:24 amYou seem to have forgotten the reason why women are given separate spaces from men: to make them feel more comfortable and protect them against predators. Yes it's true, it doesn't stop predators, but it helps. The hospital simply noting the person's genitalia and putting him on a male ward, irrespective of how he identifies, would have solved the problem. If he'd had gender reassignment surgery, then no problem, put him on a female ward.The problem is throwing women under the bus, in order to protect the tiny proportion of transwomen. Men simply declaring they're women, in order to gain access to women's spaces is increasingly becoming a problem. What's to stop any pervert wearing a dress and going into a women's changing room? When I used to go to nightclubs, the security would eject anyone who did such a thing. Nowadays it they'd sue for discrimination.There are numerous videos of misogynistic "transwomen" on Tiktok calling women all sorts of nasty words, because they've been called out for going into women's spaces. I don't mind men dressing as women, wanting to be referred to as she and her. If they want to have surgery, to remove they're genitalia, that's fine too, but if a chick with a dick, were to go into a changing room when my mum, a girlfriend, or sister, were in there, whilst I was waiting outside. I'd go in there, drag him out by the balls. Fuck the consequences. Women should be protected from that, fuck the rights of men who act like that!I used to think puberty blockers were a good idea, but have completely reversed my view. There isn't sufficient medical evidence to support them and their long term effects are unknown. There's an increasing number of detransitioners who have been sold into the transitioning by bad actors on social media. There isn't enough protection against this. A women is currently suing the National Health Service, for wrongly giving her surgery and medication, when counseling would have probably convinced her she's a women and no trans. A big problem is they're accused of transphobia for telling their stories.I'm fine with children being made aware of gender dysphoria, in an age appropriate manner, but there are too many cases of teachers indoctrinating young children in radical gender theory. A big problem is children are encouraged to question their sex, because they don't fit stereotypical male or female traits. My sister was a tomboy, when she was younger and now many girls who are like that are led to believe they're nonbinary, or worse trans. I was never into football and developed a love for flowers, at one point, which some might no see as an indication of being trans, yet no, I'm a straight man.Many of your views mirror mine, a couple of years ago. I suggest you do some real research and get back to me.Quote from: wraper on May 03, 2022, 08:46:07 amThat doesn't surprise me. A similar incident occurred in hospital, which I referred to inanother post. It's easy to find the article, so I won't post a link.Quote from: Nominal Animal on May 03, 2022, 10:35:37 amThat is the only way to deal with this. It would also help to deal with the problem I mentioned above, of predatory men in womenface.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 10:57:20 am
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on May 03, 2022, 01:22:47 amThe small fringe minority was able to grow in numbers to a significant point through the megaphone of the internet - it really snowballed.IIRC, this cultural change started to take shape publicly through gamergate, where the tactics of shaming others based on the use of their words was tested in a broader arena and, since it was present in a large community (gamers) and with a young generation (more open to new ideas), it was able to grow roots in this part of the society. Companies catering to the younger generation started to pay attention and started to self-censor themselves, while this was mostly ignored by the rest of the industry and media (despite still being active in Twitter). However, once the scholars with the proper background in Critical Theory were able to connect the shaming tactics with their "proper" theoretical foundation, the media companies started to pay attention (by inviting them to speak at their bobblehead segments) and, being in an audience crisis themselves, did not want to lose the chance to cater to the young audiences. Once it hits *that* powerful megaphone, no containment is possible.Never let a good crisis go to waste.(I might have forgotten a detail or two, but all this happened in the past eight or nine years only).

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 04:27:28 pm
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on May 03, 2022, 10:57:20 amLoud people don't get gather support. They cower the meek into submission. We seem to live in times where things have been so easy for so many that most people are meek enough to submit.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 04:55:57 pm
content: See "The Problem of Social Cost" by Coase,https://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/file/coase-problem.pdfThats the underlying explanation for a great many things..Its a very big and important change in things . Profit is much more important now. It was always important but now everything reevolves around it, legally.There used to be moral scruples that sometimes contradicted the corporate logic. Many people dont know there has been this sea change.. and a lot of effort seems to go into hiding this change. Why? A few people have said words to me about this change and the hiding of the Trilemma as some call it.Dani Rodrik (Articulate Harvard economist) is credited for it but it was around, as it was well known to economists and others in the 1990s long before his paper..

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 05:09:23 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on May 03, 2022, 09:57:24 amYou said a lot of nonsense, without supporting any of it, but let's take this as an example. Most people have great sympathy with the plight of anyone who doesn't fit in, whatever the reason might be. This shouldn't be suprising. None of us fit in 100%. I've spent my life like a fish out of water. Even most of those who make snide remarks about outsiders will support their right to be themselves. I've met few people who are genuinely hostile to the issues of someone who doesn't fit in sexually, unless the reason they don't fit in is predatory. 40 years ago I knew several trans-sexuals, when society was much less accommodating of anyone out of the ordinary. Their dearest wish was to just fit in and be accepted living the way they felt comfortable. They didn't stand up and scream that everyone else had to adapt to them, because they were trying to hard to keep a low profile and fit in. If their physique made it easy fort them to pass themselves off as the opposite gender they had a reasonably smooth path. If they were, say, a huge burly male trying to pass as a women life could be hard. That's true for anyone who stands out. Life for anyone who is exceptionally something - tall, short, fat, thin, etc - has issues. One trans-sexual was hired where I worked in the 1970s. Both the women and men there had issues with this person using their toilets, and the individual sympathised with their views. The company built a separate toilet for them, so nobody had a reason to feel uncomfortable about the issue. Later, that toilet was replaced with an oversized one that could accommodate disabled people as well, and became an anyone's toilet. I suspect they only expanded that toilet for the disabled under external pressure, but they accommodated the trans-sexual themselves. Businesses and communities generally seemed ready to spend significant resources to help.Now we have a situation where people are claiming that anyone who says they are something needs to be fully accepted as that something. Their honesty is accepted without question, which is weird, since we know humans lie a lot. Not just to others, but to themselves too. They don't need to make any real commitment to their new role. They don't need to do anything more than dress up. They can even be a man wearing a beard dressed as a woman, and we are expected to take them seriously as someone who was born a woman. Activists try to push the jaggedly shaped peg of a complex person into a round hole, because their view of humans is quite shallow, and any dishonest actor has a field day in a situation like that. So, we see an increasing number of cases of girls and women abused and raped in women's spaces by dishonest actors, and by people who are probably just too complex to fit into a pure male or female mould.So, you are right. Predation is the problem. Why do you support an environment where predators can have a great time? Why is letting people dressing as women, but acting male, into women's spaces in hospitals, prisons, and schools a good idea?

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 05:15:53 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on May 03, 2022, 01:45:18 amSocial media greatly amplifies this effect I think. It allows people to exist almost entirely within curated echo chambers of like minded people. That becomes their whole world as any dissenting views are expelled and soon they perceive that as the views of the population as a whole.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 05:41:01 pm
content: Duck Duck Go is actually using Google for its searches.I think a lot has to do with keeping Google profitable. They have to be kept profitable. Just like health insurance companies have to be kept profitable or politicians might find themselves responsible for a disfunctional healthcare system.Quote from: evb149 on April 24, 2022, 10:27:42 amThese big companies are trying to commercialize (by stealing) other peoples work and sell advrtising to see it. People naturally behave in certain ways because we are social beings, big corporations are tring to steal the value from normal peoples efforts to participate in online communities and prevent poor people from somehow becoming rich. Without formal credentials.. The jopbs are supposed to go to the rich people, all around the world.. not the poor people. This is one of the worst things some companies do. They are consciously trying to lower he value of labor.. Of course they do it because they want to pay lesss, and all big companies do.

author: YurkshireLad
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 05:43:08 pm
content: I thought DuckDuckGo uses Bing? Or did they switch?

author: eugene
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 05:53:45 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on May 03, 2022, 05:09:23 pmYou might be right, but I'd need evidence before I repeat the claim, and I doubt that evidence exists. True or not, I strongly doubt that anyone has kept accurate records allowing a before and after comparison.Bottom line: just don't make the claim unless you can back it up.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 05:58:56 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on May 03, 2022, 05:41:01 pmhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DuckDuckGo#Search_results:Quote

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 06:03:14 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on May 03, 2022, 01:45:18 amYeah. Well, all those sociology studies are a gold mine... ahem. But I doubt there's even 3% of those people in the population anyway.No, those people are not "loud" (but, certainly not "powerful") enough by themselves to have their way without external help. That's just bullshit IMHO.Their activism is getting artifically amplified by policies of social networks and media, and that's what makes the whole thing look more and more "normal" to the whole population. But I'm sorry, I do not think in the least that those networks and media do it BECAUSE that's what the population wants to hear. They do it because they have their own agenda, and THEN it progressively gets inside people's minds.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 06:28:27 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 27, 2022, 05:42:49 pmAs long as you are a stakeholder. Lobbying is out of control, at least I think so.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 07:06:48 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on May 03, 2022, 06:03:14 pmWhile activists corrupt research, things like that 3% figure cut both ways for them. If its as low as 3% it encourages the flock to push hard. If its as low as 3% is badly hurts their credibility with everyone else. So, which way are you going to corrupt the outcome of your research?

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 09:52:00 pm
content: Corporations dont make good overseeers of many things, because they invariably prioritize money above all else. Not always, but fairly often sometimes this results in real disasters.. Like in the 90s with AIDS drugs which ended up in the deaths of 30 million african children from HIV,after a cure had been found.. They should have just given those drugs to doctors to distribute to sick people.. Eventually they did but only after years of bad decisions.. and greed.And they still havent forgiven anybody for what was done, and now they are determined to not let the "historic opportunity be "wasted".. They want to make a killing off of COVID.. Some really do, they still do and its horrible.. How could anybody be so ignorant of common sense?During epidemics of that kind its really a crime to profiteer of of sick people in he way the drug companies do. If you want to know the story see the award winning 2013 filmFire in the Bloodby Dylan Mohan Grey..Or read the book Genocide By Denial, which is a very well written truly gripping book by an African doctor who was really on the front lines of the HIV epidemic.. Is pretty interesting.. and the book is free, although its hard to find..In the case of several tech companies they really owe their success to the high quality free software which underlies their product.. more than anythingt else.. They should nbe more open about that..

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 10:20:10 pm
content: These companies are trying to influence the world to fit their desires. Its not a good situation because its very coercive. Things could be a great deal better if people joined together to actually promote optimal outcomes. Which right now its not, in fact its the opposite, IMHO its in many ways the worst possible outcomes. Ive lost track of how many folks I grew up who have died of what should be cure-able cancers.. People here often don't go to the doctor when they should because of fear of the cost...Here they are spending $10,000 or more per year on health insurance and they don't even use it..

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 10:24:10 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on May 03, 2022, 10:45:19 amI don't see how the latter would make anything different. In the end gender and sexual orientation are just superficial. There will always be people that harrass other people and gender has nothing to do with that. IOW: you are seeing a cause and effect relation that doesn't exist / are jumping to the wrong conclusions.Let me tell you that women have said things to me that would earn me a slap in the face if I'd said those things to a woman. I felt flattered though (I do look good).Quote from: SiliconWizard on May 03, 2022, 06:03:14 pmThat is what I call a 'Trumpism'. Usefull information gets lost in the noise and reliable sources are being discredited. It seems to work well on you.Fortunately social media and regular media start to see that they have a responsibility for removing false information or at least tagging information as not being verified / necessarily true.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 10:52:51 pm
content: The government has its own private in house Google.. (network search boxen) As do many other entities.They also have their own malls, and other stores. etc. This is a well known fact. Its used by government employees..This should not be the case.. Its out of control..wrong.. filled with fake news? I dont think we know..but this kind of creation of an unaccountable parallel Internet is scary..; and wrong, IMHO.Nomenklatura was the word in Russia for it.. .. or the annointed ones.. the named members of the elite.. its always creepy.. when its done.. They accused others, dissidents of insanity but it was (and remains) Russia's government that was attempting to become a law onto itself and in retrospect was going insane..I have a healthy mistrust of and distaste for government by and of corporations..which I feel are amoral. They dont own the world. They made it up, their ownership.. we never voted for that.Their agreements set up immopral unconscionable unaccountable government of them, of for and by them. alone.Google doesnt care about any of us or anything besides themselves, as far as I can tell.. They dont care about the things they claim matter to them, thats just a cover up of what they are doing which has been exposed as a sham.. I'm a bit afraid, I do admit it that with certain oither shams exposed the country and the corporate gobbledegook could implode..

author: eugene
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2022, 11:21:48 pm
content: CDEV, you're completely out of control. I honestly feel bad for you; living in constant fear of, well apparently everything, must be exhausting at best and probably much worse.Seriously, you need to take care of yourself.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 12:34:33 am
content: Quote from: cdev on May 03, 2022, 10:52:51 pmIs everything alright ?You seem to be making quite a lot of, posts. Which seem to be worried about the Government and stuff.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 01:25:02 am
content: Quote from: eugene on May 03, 2022, 11:21:48 pmI'm fine and I think I'm being fairly lucid.. Do you understand what I have said, and what I havent said.. (anything unclear)

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 01:29:11 am
content: Quote from: MK14 on May 04, 2022, 12:34:33 amAre you okay?

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 01:29:58 am
content: Quote from: cdev on May 04, 2022, 01:29:11 amI hope so.

author: eugene
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 02:22:41 am
content: Quote from: cdev on May 04, 2022, 01:25:02 amI think I understood both what you said and what you didn't say.Good talk. Good talk.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 05:13:24 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 03, 2022, 10:24:10 pmThat is utterly sick and twisted.Journalists are not supposed to be the guardians of truth! They are not the watchdogs of the population, they are the watchdogs of the powers that be!God dammit I utterly, utterly despise the idea of information providers limiting access to information based on what theybelieveto be true or factual. It is not their right, nor their responsibility.Quote from: nctnico on May 03, 2022, 10:24:10 pmNow that is perfectly reasonable, and something any respectable journalist always does. I agree.Quote from: nctnico on May 03, 2022, 10:24:10 pmDo you not realize that those you demand should limit others' access to information are just as fallible as everyone else?Think of the situation where 98% of those working at the media you can access easily were Trumpists. Would you feel okay acceptingtheirdefinition of truth as your own?Hell, regardless of what kind of political views those people have, why on Earth would you accept their definition of truth as your own anyway?Or is it that you are comfortably stuck with your own views that no data can shake, and you're worried about whatother peoplemight consider to be the truth, and limit that?Anyone can set up an "intelligence-gathering outfit" in their Mom's garage like Bellingcat, and construct a circle of actors to provide enough references to make any kind of claim and label it "true" by referring to each other. That's how most "fact checkers" work.What I want, is everybody to acknowledge that they never, ever have all the facts. It is not the purpose nor the right of a news house or social media to limit the exchange of information, especially to some arbitrarily politically defined subset they deem "true". (Especially since in the last few years, quite a few of the "conspiracy theories" from Trump's election being a result of Russian manipulation, to Hunter Biden's laptop and its damning evidence of the Biden family money-for-power politics, have now been shown to be factual, contrary to what majority of media insisted at the time. Fact is, no pun intended, that "fact checking" has nothing to do with verifiable facts, and everything to do with selecting which sources one wants to believe.)Tagging is fine. Removing or region-restricting illegal content is fine. (It's up to the local population to decide what they consider illegal, in my opinion.)But handing anyone the right to deem information as "not for the population to see or discuss" because is is not "true" is unbelievably fascist, authoritarian idea, that I will fight against. The hate speech laws here in EU are utterly ridiculous already, what with a Finnish former minister and current member of parliament being dragged through the courts for quoting the Bible. (I'm not actually Christian myself.)

author: ve7xen
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 05:41:49 am
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on May 04, 2022, 05:13:24 amYouTube et al are not journalists, nor are (most of) their users. That is the problem. If they were, they would vet their sources, do proper research, and censor unreliable information before publishing it...They are platforms that host user generated content, and an entirely different thing. It is well within their rights and perfectly reasonable for them to censor the content they choose to host. I do think they have some ethical responsibility to at least make a good-faith effort to stem the spread of scams, misinformation, and hate on their platforms, but ultimately it is up to them. There is certainly no reason Google or anyone else should beobligatedto host or publishanycontent on behalf of their users, especially if they believe it is harmful/misleading, which is in effect what you are saying.QuoteSo you despise journalists with integrity? I'm so confused by your position here Journalists *are* 'the guardians of truth', doing that research, determining, in good faith, what is fact, and publishing the result of their efforts so we don't all have to retread the same path is exactly their job and purpose, yet somehow you use this as an argument against censoring lies and misinformation. That is what journalism is all about, and while social media / Internet hosting companies arenotjournalists, they are realizing that they should exercise at least some of the discretion that actual journalists do in what they publish and propagate.QuoteThat is not even close to what is happening. The platforms have the right to choose what to host for any reason they want. Is it ethical for them to censor content that they believe to be misleading or harmful? I believe it is, on the same grounds as it is ethical and even essential for journalists to do so.And the Bible is full of hate speech, that's really not a defence, though I know nothing of this case.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 05:49:26 am
content: Quote from: ve7xen on May 04, 2022, 05:41:49 amAccording this statement largest news outlets have almost no journalists either since they publish loads of unverified garbage or outright lies.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 05:58:09 am
content: Quote from: ve7xen on May 04, 2022, 05:41:49 amYou conflate two completely separate things:1) What a person in a news organization chooses to write about2) What an organization forbids discussion aboutDon't you see the difference?Again, the Hunter Biden laptop case is a perfect example. Hard evidence existed, it was just labeled as "Trump campaign product" and "Russian misinformation", and therefore not to be discussed in media.No matter of personalchanges the fact thatnomedia organization is to be trusted to define what is true and what is not, no matter what their political leanings are.The best journalists will post their findings, separate from their personal opinions –– or at least clearly stating what is their opinion and what is what they found out. Today, "journalists" try very hard to mix and conflate the two, and deliberately mischaracterise their political leanings exactly because they do not see themselves as servants of the public, but as the gatekeepers and shepherds of the public, determining what information the public should not be exposed to. This is sick.Without free information, all you have is manipulation. Better face it, or accept being manipulated.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 06:09:29 am
content: A key part of the manipulation of "truth" is to choose your sources selectively. Because there are tens of sources that are generally categorized as "factual" by independent organizations, and they tend to have differing opinions on what is true and what is not, all you need to do is choose your sources.In Finland –– again, ostensibly the country with the most free newsmedia in the world, according to international observers –– the "journalists" openly admit they don't need to consider sources they don't like. The head of one of the largest newsrooms even admitted in a tweet that they are not hired to do journalism, but to push their own opinions and views instead.(That Hunter Biden laptop is a particularly sore point for me, because when I mentioned it in some face-to-face discussion here in Finland, I was labeled a "conspiracy theorist". Our beloved Finnish newsmedia still hasn't reported on it, probably because they find the topic "distasteful". That's the level of "world's free-est journos" for you.)Perhaps things are different where you (whoever you might be, the person reading this post), but I do not think so: the world is surprisingly small in these things.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 06:35:19 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 03, 2022, 10:24:10 pmSex/gender is not superficial. Men are stronger than women and women are more likely to be harmed by them, than the other way round. It is also why there are separate categories in most sports for men and women.Men are really identifying as female to be allowed into women's prisons, hospitals, changing rooms etc. This isn't the only case of a woman being raped by a man, claiming to be a women. I dare say there are a greater number of men who are prepared to lie to get access to vulnerable women, than there are genuine transgender women, especially criminals destined for prison. It is a problem.How would you feel if this happened to your wife/girlfriend/mother/sister?And don't conflate transgenderism with sexual orientation. They are not the same thing. Being attracted to the same sex, doesn't involve any delusion, body dysmorphia, or require any physical treatments i.e. surgery and hormones. Transgenderism is believing ones body doesn't match their brain. It is similar to someone with anorexia nervosa believing they're fat, when they've vert thin. Of course, people with this condition need to be allowed to live their lives in piece, without harassment and not be denied employment.QuotePeople who work for social media companies lack the knowledge, skills and experience, to separate misinformation from the truth. A classic example was Facebook's censorship of the British Medical Journal for publishing something they didn't believe/like.https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o95

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 07:55:31 am
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on May 04, 2022, 05:58:09 amActually it was published by 220 years old media called New York Post, and then their account was banned/limited on twitter and other social networks. Any links to the article posted by other users were automatically deleted.I guess because they needed to "fortify" elections as they sayhttps://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 08:29:59 am
content: Quote from: wraper on May 04, 2022, 07:55:31 amYes, exactly; and they did have the proof at hand. The other journalists simply refused to look at or consider it at all, and labeled –– based on various characters' assertions –– it something to be censored and hidden from view.The point is, if you hand that kind of power toanyone, regardless of their political stance, that power will eventually be misused, to the detriment of all.Even trusted fact-checkers sometimes get things wrong. Because of that, telling people to trust some kind of checkmark that labels it factual, is just manipulating them. Teaching each person to weigh things for themselves, to apply rational thought and logic, and how to critically analyse data –– say, the very basics ofcritical rationalism–– is what we should do, to empower individuals.Of course, you do not become powerful by teaching people to be powerful. You become powerful by making people into followers, into consumers.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 10:00:54 am
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on May 04, 2022, 06:09:29 amNo, I think they were right in accusing you of believing in, a conspiracy theory ("conspiracy theorist").On the one hand, at some level, it istruethat there is such aclaim, (Hunter Biden laptop).But, as I understand it, it is NOT acknowledged (genuinely/cleanly proved), to be a verified/true piece of evidence.On the other hand. A good quality/reliable news article (and somewhat similar things, such as social media), should at least mention its existence. But carefully explain that it is NOT proved/accepted as being true/genuine, at this moment in time. It could have been planted by other parties (I.e. Trump/Russian sources), and seems to have a number of "holes" in the evidence (serious or somewhat serious doubts).TL;DRI suppose, it would really need a jury and/or panel of (independent) experts. To properly analyse the available evidence, and decide if it seems to be genuine/true, possibly genuine/true (but not PROVED or 100% known to be so), or definitely FALSE (lies, planted by other parties).Just because it has NOT been proven so far, to have been falsely created by other parties. Doesn't mean, that it is genuine. E.g. An electronics component from AliExpress, that passes some basic electronic tests, and looks possibly genuine. Could still be later, proved to be a fake. It is just that the simple electrical parameter checks, with a $15 multimeter, and quick glance at it. Haven't shown any obvious defects, yet.Reference material (helping me write this post) was taken from here:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_Biden_laptop_controversy

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 10:23:15 am
content: Quote from: MK14 on May 04, 2022, 10:00:54 amAs you've acknowledged, there's a possibility the Hunter Biden laptop story might be true, so calling someone as conspiracy theorist for believing it is uncalled for.Quite often, it's impossible to know what's true and what's a conspiracy theory. Another example was the lab leak theory of SAR-Cov-2, rather than the then accepted wet market narrative. It was originally dismissed as a conspiracy theory by many, but only a year later, many experts started to believe it's true. In reality, it's not proven, but is certainly a possibility.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 10:45:08 am
content: Quote from: Zero999 on May 04, 2022, 10:23:15 amI agree, that (if we accept that it is NOT proven yet, so might or might not be true), it is debatable/acceptable/arguable/arbitrary as to howreliablethe claim, that the 'Hunter Biden laptop story' is true. Is a persons opinion and/or conspiracy theory and/or political belief/opinion and/or technical analysis of the publicly available evidence, so far.You're right. Conspiracy theory, may be (or is) too much of a counter-claim.Ideally/hopefully, eventually the (known to be reliably) true facts will come out, one way or the other. As these things, sometimes do. In the future.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 11:48:02 am
content: Quote from: MK14 on May 04, 2022, 10:00:54 amLaptop authenticity already admitted by NYT and WAPO which earlier dismissed it as Russian hoax.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 12:10:05 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on May 04, 2022, 11:48:02 amBut, that is NOW, in relatively recent times. Presumably, when others calledNominal Animal, a "conspiracy theorist", it was well before article(s), such as the following, were publicly available.https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10624113/NYT-finally-admits-Hunter-Bidens-laptop-real-year-DailyMail-com-confirmed-authenticity.htmlDated: "PUBLISHED: 20:11, 17 March 2022 | UPDATED: 04:46, 19 March 2022".So, it is not TOTALLY UNREASONABLE, for the people,Nominal Animalwas talking to, to call them a "conspiracy theorist". Or if it was (unreasonable), it was not unreasonable for them to dispute the truthfulness of that story circulating at the time.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 12:14:23 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on May 04, 2022, 12:10:05 pmIt is TOTALLY UNREASONABLE to call someone a conspiracy theorist, based on them not agreeing with the mainstream media. The mainstream media is the main source of conspiracy theories these days.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 12:28:35 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on May 04, 2022, 12:14:23 pmOn reflection, I too easily went down the road of mentioning 'conspiracy theories'. I didn't realize, it would cause such an adverse reaction.Anyway, two things:(Firstly) SorryNominal Animal, if I've appear wrong/nasty, agreeing with other people (and me), saying/implying that your claims were a conspiracy theory.I'm trying to have a discussion in this thread, rather than be rude about other posters.(Secondly) At the time it was especially newsworthy (before the US Presidential election). There were clearly two parties involved. The Biden camp, who especially wanted to trivialize and discredit that story. Presumably doing so, with all Biden Camp friendly news sources.Similarly (and opposingly), the Trump Camp, would try to spin it in the other direction, and make out it is a true story (which it seems to be turning out, it may well be). Through their own Trump friendly news sources, and social media outlets.There seem to have been a number of somewhat similar stories/incidents, like this one, throughout the last few decades (and longer). Politics, seems to breed such situations. E.g. There have been a number of claims against the Trump Camp, which I won't drift this thread, even further down the political route, by mentioning.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 01:16:26 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on May 04, 2022, 10:00:54 amWell, what you "acknowledge to be verified/true" is up to you, not up to some "authority" or "fact checker". It isalwaysup to you, the individual.And just because you or some authoritybelievesit to be so, they shouldn't be allowed to control others from accessing and discussing it.Another example right now is Russian internal media here right now. To understand what Russia does, I'd like to see what they want others to believe. I cannot, because both rt.com and sputniknews.com are blocked here. So much for freedom of press, eh? Sure, it definitely is mostly propaganda; but to understand what they believe and think, you do need to see what they claim and hear what they say. Otherwise, you're trusting someone elses opinion on what is true and what is not, without any references or way to check for yourself.I'm just not the type to trust anyones word on anything. I need to see the reasoning behind the opinion for myself, or the "word" is useless to me.Quote from: MK14 on May 04, 2022, 10:00:54 amOr, you know, like New York Post did, describe its sources in the story. Remember, the counterargument was that "your sources are people we don't like, so we'll assume it is Trump lies or Russian propaganda".The sources were good enough that independent journalists tracked down the repair person. The provenance of the laptop is not really in question (except among those whose counterargument is "I don't believe you, because I only listen to people I trust and adopt their opinion uncritically"); what is in question, is whether the information in it matters or not.Quote from: MK14 on May 04, 2022, 10:00:54 amPerhaps; but it is not up to journalists to be that jury or judge, becausenothingis ever 100% proven, when humans are involved.Having therightto decide what to believe and think, is the primary human right, in my opinion. Don't be so quick to let someone else tell you what you should believe to be true, or what you yourself should think.QuoteWhenever you use Wikipedia as a source, I recommend also looking at the history of the page, i.e.https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hunter_Biden&action=history. It contains gems like "New York Post is unreliable" as a basis for deletion, even though Media Bias / Fact Check ratesNew York Postas reliable asMSNBCorCNN.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 01:22:20 pm
content: The things we're discussing in this thread are nothing new. About 2k years ago Romans slandered Vandals to be monsters destroying everything they come across. Today we still use terms like vandalism because of this propaganda. But the truth is, as archaeology found out later, that Vandals were highly educated and not what the old Romans claimed to be. Today's social media is simply a fire accelerant for nonsense and propaganda because of its speed of distribution and the mass of 'information'. No time to reflect about what you just have read - the next message is already waiting.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 01:42:28 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on May 04, 2022, 12:28:35 pmNo, don't worry. My frustration then (and less so now) was that having a discussion on the matter was impossible. I wanted then to have a discussion along the lines of "Okay; if we assume this article is essentially true, what does it mean? Also, if we assume this article is false, who and how and why this hoax was perpetrated?" Both questions are equally interesting in the time frame when corraborative or falsifying facts were being obtained (like the source of the laptop itself). Instead, I get labeled a conspiracy theorist for even entertaining the first case at all.Same with the Russian media. I don't want to know what they say because I think they are truthful, I want to know what they say because that describes what the powers that be there want to say; therefore, they reflect on what those powers want. It is not about what I want to believe, it is about what various powers want the population (like myself) to believe,and why. Everyone is trying to present a convincing narrative, and I want to find the holes in them.No matter how nasty and disgusting language might be used, free speech is the only way for individuals to be free to think.Rather than shielding people from the hurt and scariness, I want people to grow strong enough to weather the nasty, unfortunate side of the free speech (non-violence-inciting hate speech and such), because the possibilities and the end result is worth it, to me.Quote from: madires on May 04, 2022, 01:22:20 pmSo true. Having public access to some Vandal thinkers might have changed the opinion of the populace. Food for thought when considering bans and censorship.Quote from: cdev on May 04, 2022, 01:30:28 pmYou are, however, aware that if Roe vs. Wade is overturned, it just means that it will be up to each state to decide about it in its own legislation, and not that anything becomes "banned" overnight? If you're worried, contact your local state legislature representatives, and help them make sure the proper state laws are in place in case Roe vs. Wade gets overturned at the federal level. If the old racist laws are no longer in place –– and they damn well shouldn't, right? –– nothing changes. As to the Roe vs. Wade and reproductive rights, the same applies: it just becomes a matter to be decided at the state level, instead of at the federal level.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 01:47:06 pm
content: I can't because of redistricting..BUT - Any billionaire can buy Twitter and have a voice that cant be bought. See, isnt the world great!

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 03:15:43 pm
content: Quote from: ve7xen on May 04, 2022, 05:41:49 amIndeed. Most of the junk that goes against what is scientifically accepted as being true (or at least the best possible assumption) can go into the bin. There is too much noise nowadays which is echoed and amplified by people that have no clue at all and really need protection to prevent harming themselves and others.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 03:46:44 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 04, 2022, 03:15:43 pmWhat's scientifically accepted to be true changes. Remember, back in February/March 2020, we were told face masks were ineffective at preventing the spread of COVID-19, then a few months later, the position was reversed? It turns out that there wasn't much real world evidence to support them back then. There were a few lab experiments, involving cages of animals infected, with a cloth cover placed over the cages and computer simulations, but nothing concrete.Fortunately, a study was done in Bangladesh last year. It shows surgical masks reduce the spread by 11%, yet cloth masks didn't have a statistically significant effect. Great, you'd expect the mainstream media would report this and governments would start recommending people wear proper surgical masks, but no, ineffective cloth masks prevailed.https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02457-yQuote from: Nominal Animal on May 04, 2022, 01:16:26 pmI do read Wikipedia, but it does have a strong left-wing bias. If the left-wing Guardian thinks it's slightly biased towards the Democratic Party, then it must be strongly left-wing.https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/29/the-five-wikipedia-biases-pro-western-male-dominated

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 03:53:43 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on May 04, 2022, 03:46:44 pmI think it would be more accurate to say wikipedia has a strong stupid bias. If you look at pure technical pages, without any real political angle, they are gradually edited into meaninglessness, by people who clearly have no clue about the topic.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 04:28:35 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on May 04, 2022, 03:46:44 pmThat is how science works and why I wrote 'the best possible assumption'.QuoteThat depends per country where some countries choose not to change their position on the type of masks to avoid a new tsunami of fake news on social media that (in the big picture) has a detrimental effect on the society. IMHO the real problem is that people are insecure and want answers to their worries and many don't care that they get the wrong answer as long as they get an answer. This opens a whole can of worms; like how religions are being used as crowd control.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 04:47:21 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 04, 2022, 04:28:35 pmSo valid and important information should be banned because somebody assumed something, be it good or ill willed?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 04:58:57 pm
content: No, you are twisting my words around. What I'm saying is that it is best to wait for the scientific community (as a whole) to take a position on a subject instead of jumping to conclusions based on messages / videos circulating on social media. Science is truth by broad concensus; not what a single person thinks is true. The problem however is reaching concensus takes time while the public doesn't want to wait that long. 'Experts' take advantage of that by showing up on TV and other media to spout their opinions but in the end it is just meaningless drivel.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 05:04:44 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on May 04, 2022, 03:46:44 pmOne of the interesting things that changed was years of sober minded research by a number of bodies around the world concluded that large scale lockdowns would never be the right approach to take in any plausible pandemic. When a real disease popped up those with power immediately went in the opposite direction, based on nothing new being uncovered.As for masks, there have been a number of studies about them over the years, drawing conclusions between ineffective, and mildly effective, depending on the transmission characteristics of the disease being studied. Did you hear anything nuanced like that being said by anyone with power in early 2020? It was either do not wear a mask or you an evil granny killer if you don't wear a mask, oscillating between those positions as time went by.I was amused by a group of parents in the US being interviewed about their small children using N95 masks. They all felt they were absolutely essential. When questioned about the effect on their child's breathing, they responded that the masks fit their child's face so poorly they were breathing around the sides, and the mask didn't impede their breathing at all. Perhaps these were parents who had studied drama rather than a STEM subject.

author: ve7xen
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 05:04:53 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on May 04, 2022, 05:58:09 amNo, you are the one conflating several concepts here. Whether you belive it is right or wrong ethically, YouTube et. al. are not obligated to publish anything, and it is absurd to suggest that they are.Journalists are individuals, and can choose to write about whatever they went, though society should hold them to high standards of integrity that includes verifying sources and doing actual original research so that we don't have to. This used to be relatively 'easy', because widely distributing information required large networks and expensive equipment, the cost of which stood as a gatekeeper. Irresponsible 'journalists', when identified, shouldn't be published, and should be relegated to standing on their soapbox and handing out pamphlets on the street, and that is how journalism has ostensibly worked for 100s of years.The internet has made it difficult to discern who is a journalist in the true sense and who is peddling unfounded outrage, conspiracy, and hate. YouTube et. al. are realizing they have some of the ethical responsibility of old-school news organizations to keep those crazies on the street with their pamphlets, and not give them front page headlines. This is, for whatever it's worth, still much more liberal and free than a few newspapers having a monopoly on reporting.QuoteReally, this is the best example you have? A random laptop of unknown origin from a random repair shop claimed to contain supposedly incriminating files about the POTUS right in the middle of an election campaign? That is suspicious as all hell and journalists and others should hesitate to trust anything it contains. Years later and only recently has any of this been verified, and it's still highly dubious. This is exactly the kind of garbage that ethical journalists would avoid publishing during an election.QuoteTruth exists, it's not defined. Whether you trust media organizations and journalists to report exclusively on the truth or not is up to you, but that is their role in society, and we should hold them to it, not allow media to devolve into a political pissing match where the truth is hidden and nobody is going to help you find it.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 05:05:20 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 04, 2022, 04:58:57 pmWTF "scientific community" actually means? Who makes an actual decision? Certainly not scientists who more often than not have different opinions about anything other than trivial topics. And how do you effing quantify the opinion of scientific community to begin with?

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 05:13:32 pm
content: Quote from: ve7xen on May 04, 2022, 05:04:53 pmReally? And what about Trump Russiagate which turned out to be a total hoax with no real evidence? None of those "ethical journalists" hesitated to publish a total trash for years, which hindered Trump presidency and reelection. Laptop on other hand turned out to be completely real. And the result of this "responsible journalism" is a corrupt to the bones president with Dementia.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 05:14:41 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on May 04, 2022, 06:35:19 amI sincerely hope to never have the opportunity, but I think if I were headed to prison I would very seriously contemplate claiming to be transgender in order to be placed in a women's facility. Not because I want access to vulnerable women but because it seems likely to be a considerably safer environment away from the masses of violent incarcerated males.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 05:20:03 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on May 04, 2022, 05:14:41 pmMe too. lolQuote from: nctnico on May 04, 2022, 04:28:35 pmHow do you think science works? If you don't know, it involves people discussing different possible theories and the evidence to support them.That can't happen on social media given the current levels of censorship. As I said before, even theBritish Medical Journalwas censored by Facebook. Freedom of speech is essential for science to evolve. Without it, we go back to the Middle Ages, when only theories accepted by the authorities prevail. You must've heard of Galileo.QuoteGiven that all countries I'm aware of recommend/mandate cloth, rather than surgical masks, most of the worlds' governments are equally incompetent then.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 05:43:28 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on May 04, 2022, 05:20:03 pmAny scientist expecting a meaningfull exchange on Facebook is an idiot. There are lots of much better ways like publishing papers in a scientific journal or presenting a new theory at a conference. Radical ideas require extraordinary proof and undergo a lot of scrutiny. Albert Einstein's relativity theories wheren't accepted from day one.QuoteThen you are aware of very few countries. In Germany FFP2 was mandated and in the Netherlands surgical masks where strongly recommended while cloth masks where discouraged.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 05:47:51 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 04, 2022, 05:43:28 pmThey are outliers. The UK, US and Canada still push cloth masks. Germany and I believe Denmark are exceptional in the way their governments update their policies with the latest scientific theories. Another good example of this is recommending aspiration, when doctors and nurses inject the vaccine, in order to reduce the risk of it entering the bloodstream, where it might increase the risks of triggering adverse events.Quote from: nctnico on May 04, 2022, 05:43:28 pmPlenty of doctors and scientists use Facebook to communicate with each other and ordinary people alike. This is vitally important to keep people interested and updated with the latest scientific thinking. Unfortunately this isn't possible, as the idiots who work there think they know better than the likes of the BMJ.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 05:48:47 pm
content: Only an idiot would go on Facebook for medical advice. Facebook is not your doctor! So it is good if Facebook doesn't allow to dispense medical advice. Most governments have websites for medical advice which content is supervised / written by doctors; those are the places to go looking for medical advice.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 06:00:49 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 04, 2022, 05:48:47 pmI would say the same to anyone who gets their medical advice from TV news, or some government run website.QuoteYou're missing the point: Facebook only allow medical content which suits their agenda. I agree, if they want to do their bit to prevent the sharing of medical misinformation, the best thing they could do is just prohibit anyone from posting any medical content, but that's not the case.QuoteUnfortunately they're often full of misinformation. It took the UK's NHS website a couple of years to update their website with the latest list of COVID-19 symptoms.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 06:16:14 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 04, 2022, 05:48:47 pmNo, the right place to go for medical advice is, guess what? A doctor. Shocking huh?

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 06:25:28 pm
content: My local grocery store is filled with posters asking for GoFund me funds for people I grew up with who put off healthcare and ended up with "incurable" cancers.. Then insurance companies get to basically do nothing because its too late. Going to the doctor may cost you $250-$500 but thats probably because you have some health issue. That needs curative care. You can get free care if its only preventative.. in the US, this was for corporations. So that patients would not talk about work related chemicals. Or they get charged for the visit. Isnt that slick?Better to spend the money than end up with some serious disease and have it be too late to do anything about it.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 06:27:12 pm
content: If you feel you need an authority to tell you what is true and what is false, be my guest. You will never, ever make me accept such an authority: I will make my own mind.If you insist that only information vetted by some arbitrary censor is allowed to be disseminated, I will oppose you. It's that simple; free speech is that important. In my own home country, it has already been lost to an alarming degree.Now, unlike the people who are willing to burn cities because they think a mass-produced object – a book – was mishandled or because they think a court might perhaps make a decision they dislike at some point in the future, I will oppose you with my words and concepts only. I might apply a bit of civil disobedience, but not if it harms or risks harm to you or anyone else.I am not an enemy, only an opponent. There is a significant difference. If we ever meet face to face, I'll be friendly and happy to meet you.Am I the only one who has noted the lack of nuance in position in the things discussed in this thread? That somehow, only two possibilities seem to exist? That you either accept the Hunter Biden laptop proves Joe Biden is a crook, or you accept that it is a hoax? Nothing exists in between."Either you are with us, or you are an enemy to be utterly destroyed before you destroy us."There is no more search for the truth via journalism, only a demand that only factually verified non-offensive things should be allowed to be communicated.That the population should "trust media organizations and journalists to report exclusively on the truth  that is their role in society, and we should hold them to it", instead of considering journalism as a tool in discovering what is true and what is not; that it is for the journalists to report, and the readers to evaluate.Well, I've made my position clear. It also seems clear that either I am in a tiny minority, or cannot express myself in a way that convinces anyone, so.At least Dave let me voice it out here, so that's a big plus.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 06:32:32 pm
content: An opponent?Does that mean you have opposed everything? That cant be true, its impossible to oppose everything.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 06:57:52 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on May 04, 2022, 06:27:12 pmThat is what you are making of it. The reality is that the story is simply too thin for any paper to write it on. That should be a very clear sign! If there really was a story, the Republicans would have ran a marathon with it and go for an impeachment. And there is plenty of nuance in this thread but you are simply not seeing it.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 07:35:19 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on May 04, 2022, 01:16:26 pmNot exactly, yes and no, if you like.On the one hand, yes, an individual is responsible, especially if they end up taking action(s) as a result.But on the other. A particular individual, may well want to spend most of their time doing other things. Work, Hobbies, Entertainment, TV/Movies, Dealing with Family, meals, hygiene and many other things.Giving themselves, little time to keep up with the current days news. They may even want to sleep or take toilet breaks, sometimes!A particular individual, may well be highly intelligent, and extremely skilled/knowledgeable in some areas. Perhaps they are a top Doctor. But that wouldn't make them an expert on many other subject areas. For example, could the top Doctor, take 100% control of a troubled airline flight, with one engine burnt out, the other engine, over-heated, smoldering and showing various alert alarms. 45 injured passengers, of 419 (including crew), because of the on-board fire, smoke and other reasons.Could the top Doctor, drive a formula 1 racing car, to win against several former world champion drivers ?Maybe the top Doctor could write the firmware, design the PCB, for a complicated electronics project ?If not, it would be tricky for them to analyse some news items, themselves. Which is why, quality/reliable/trustworthy/truthful news sources, are especially important, for busy people and/or people who are NOT all that interested in the news, anyway.TL;DRSome have limited time and interest in the news. But they want a quick, minute or two, of the days headlines/summary of what has occurred.Quote from: Nominal Animal on May 04, 2022, 01:16:26 pmIt is, but properly analyzing it (as I stated, earlier in this post), may exceed the skills, knowledge base and time resources, of the individual, who just wants to see the news, or a quick summary of it.Quote from: Nominal Animal on May 04, 2022, 01:16:26 pmWikipedia tends to be (sometimes), merelyreasonableas a source (but in many cases, very useful and accurate), rather than outstanding, highly accurate, and other measures of high end quality sources. In some cases, it can be plain wrong, or even edited by people with strong biases, and the wrong reasons, for updated/changing the article(s). Which leads nicely on to my next section:Quote from: Nominal Animal on May 04, 2022, 01:42:28 pmNewspapers/TV-channels, and similar news sources. Should be basically truthful and accurate. When, on a very regular basis, they are churning out complete lies. Basically it is part of a huge disinformation and war propaganda machine, for the other side (enemy).So I can well understand it being banned, in much/all of the West.You are right, in saying that some (probably rare) individuals. Can digest the information, and generate useful information, by reverse engineering the lying process or something. But, the channel(s)/newspapers/etc, from a practical point of view. Need to either be banned completely or allowed.So, in the current circumstances (i.e. war(s) have started up), it makes lots of sense to clamp down on such arguably bad information sources.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 07:52:18 pm
content: I think most people are clever enough to know if it's from RT, it's Russian propaganda, just as most people know the BBC push western propaganda.Quote from: nctnico on May 04, 2022, 06:57:52 pmThe problem is, most news outlets, educational facilities and social media companies, in the US have a pro-Democrat bias. This is reflected on Wikipedia, which as I said before, even the left-wing Guardian paper considers to be pro-Democrat. It's fairly obvious they did their very best to ensure Trump was not re-elected. The Republicans do make a big deal out of it. Watch Fox News and conservative YouTubers and you'll find they talk about it a lot. We don't hear about it much in Europe because Trump is anti-EU, so our mainstream media also dislike him.Note that I have no interest in the matter and consider both the current and previous US presidents to be as bad as each other, in different ways.

author: eugene
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 08:31:56 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on May 04, 2022, 07:52:18 pmI really wish that were true. Unfortunately, the current condition in the US (at least the US, probably elsewhere too) is a deep divide between two groups that simply cannot comprehend the what the other is seeing. I know that I'm guilty myself. My own political views seem so obviously true that I'm sure every sane intelligent person agrees with me. Those that don't must be either stupid or deliberately crooked, right?Given two presidents, A and B, very close to half of the population believes that A is truthfull with only good intentions while B is a filthy and corrupt. Meanwhile, the other half believe that A lies about everything for purely personal gain but B wears a white hat with the best of intentions for the country. It would seem that we can't count on the individual to see the truth without a lot of help.It's a dumbfounding situation, but I can't think of any way to make it work other than to allow everyone to speak their piece, then provide close analysis and scrutiny of what was said by multiple 'experts'. Of course in practice, this hardly works because people listen to the experts that support whatever they already believe... Maybe more experts to fact check the first experts? Well, yeah, that's what free speech is supposed to be, but it doesn't seem to be freeing us from the circle that goes nowhere.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 08:34:26 pm
content: Quote from: eugene on May 04, 2022, 08:31:56 pmI think that's the whole point. People shoud maybe read Machiavelli.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 08:50:58 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on May 04, 2022, 12:14:23 pmMedia can get VERY complicated these days. Several decades ago, things were much simpler. No internet, a range of newspapers, and only a handful of TV channels. These days, with the explosion of the internet, with a mindbogglingly huge range of websites, hundreds or even thousands of TV channels to choose from, mobile phone communications, etc.In addition to all of the above, we can get almost live pictures, from peoples mobile phones. Showing actual (almost) live events happen in front of them, posted onto social media, and other internet places. E.g. At the start of the Russian/Ukrainian war, mobile phone footage of Russian missiles, heading towards and blowing up parts of a Ukrainian airport, were widely circulated.So in modern times. It is somewhat or more, different, to e.g. World War 2. Which was limited to some film footage (usually Black and White), Radio (very little or no TV) and newspapers.With youtube, just about anyone, with a mobile phone, and internet connection. Can rapidly post videos, of almost anything. Including significantly political/war/current news events. Which has a tendency to move the news media/TV out of the hands of government control. With some exceptions, like the Great Internet Firewall of China.EDIT: typos.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 08:59:15 pm
content: And yet, despite this somewhat unreasonable number of sources of information we have now, what I find amazing is that it's every bit as easy to manipulate the public opinion these days than it ever was, if not easier. =)

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 09:28:09 pm
content: Quote from: eugene on May 04, 2022, 08:31:56 pmWhilst you''re right of course. What you said wasn't applicable to the part of my post you quoted. I repeat: any idiot can see the British Broadcasting Cooperation, pushes a British i.e. western perspective on things, whilst Russia Today, does exactly the opposite.Regarding the US presidents: Some people in the UK hate Trump because our mainstream media do, for others it's some of the bollocks he spoke on social media, but a good number of people here love him for being pro-Brexit and anti-immigration. A lot of people here like Biden because he's calm, compared to Trump and the BBC love him, whilst other hate him because they deem him to be incompetent and ineffectual.Quote from: MK14 on May 04, 2022, 08:50:58 pmI think it's more difficult to manipulate everyone into thinking the same nowadays. There are good number of sources of information, on the Internet. which contradict the narrative put out by the BBC. During WW2 newspapers as well as the BBC pumped out nothing but anti-German propaganda. Nowadays it's possible to access alternative viewpoints on the Russian-Ukraine war.

author: eugene
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 09:44:11 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on May 04, 2022, 09:28:09 pmPoint taken.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 09:49:26 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on May 04, 2022, 08:59:15 pmI don't think it ever was difficult. It is just that more parties are screaming for attention nowadays. Organised religion has been the defacto standard to control the massed for eons until book printing was invented.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 09:51:38 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on May 04, 2022, 09:28:09 pmWar is a special case, where honesty is defenestrated by all. However, until the late 80s the media largely distorted, rather than lied, because there was an assumption that there would be backlash to outright lies. Then they found that when they did tell unambiguous lies they could usually get away with a minor retraction at the bottom of page 27, or on the 3AM news update. That's when the news media really began to steep itself in fiction.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 10:02:38 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on May 04, 2022, 09:50:45 pmThat was true during the run up to Brexit, but it doesn't seem to be the case i the UK now. We have the Labour party, who openly promote immigration and the Conservative party who claim to be tough on immigration, yet in reality are just as keen. Both parties have similar policies on the National Health Service and they both supported the anti-COVID measures. Labour are very woke. The Conservatives are less so.I wouldn't vote for either main parties. I side with the right on some aspects: anti-woke/immigration, yet the left on others: invest more in educating the poor, diverting council tax from richer to poorer areas, although I don't support any tax increases over all, just collect it more effectively and spend more efficiently.Quote from: coppice on May 04, 2022, 09:51:38 pmThat's true to a degree. Back then newspapers were more of a thing and had some influence. They ere also good at counteracting the BBC to some extent. Now the Internet serves that purpose, with a far greater diversity of views present.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 10:10:55 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on May 04, 2022, 09:28:09 pmIn the past, I think some countries, would 'bomb' (airdrop) propaganda leaflets, into (usually enemy) countries. To attempt to help with the war effort. Something like that, perhaps with a more modern technical/digital/internet twist to it, could be repeated these days. Perhaps to attempt to tell the Russian people, what is really going on, as regards the horrible Russian/Ukraine conflict.Maybe by using powerful external directional radio transmissions, from western free-speech sources, into Russian territories. Possibly by infuriating the Russian Internet infrastructure, is practicable/possible.Perhaps, put a modern twist into it. By creating millions of USB pens, full of the necessary news articles, from the west. PDFs/HTML and so forth. Then dropping or distributing, or otherwise making them available to Russians. Maybe hand boxes of them to 'friendly' Russians, who are happy to spread out such information, to their population. Ideally without getting caught, and being given a 15 year prison sentence, worse.The various alternative news sources, are useful. Especially for getting a broader, less partly-scripted, views of what is going on, and other peoples opinions. The official news sources, although I appreciate their basic integrity, truthfulness and lack of unsure political interference in their operations. Political correctness, seems to have invaded too much. To the point that it can actually affect, the quality and usefulness of the stories, being pushed out.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 10:16:29 pm
content: Google originated in an NSF-funded project, not a corporation.. One generally open to college students, education which is increasingly only available to the fairly wealthy. The Clinton Administration made student loan debt undischargeable in bankruptcy..https://www.nsf.gov/discoveries/disc_summ.jsp?cntn_id=100660There really are no alternative news sources of any note in the US of today, any more, because of various tactics, such asinformation gerrymandering.. monly two right wing parties and six cororations in the media.. which own countless smaller companies..and control the news..This is consistant with would be Empires.. The US has been plagued with lots of propaganda on the net since around 2013. They use our tax money for it, even though most Americans hate the idea. We have no choice in the matter. The opublic outlet VOA is not what I mean, thats better than average. What bugs me is their paying news media not usually bloggers to parrot official memes.. etc. Stop spending our money to spin the facts..leave whatever happens alone..EU may do this too..They should be prohibited from trying to spin the news at all. Since they are government employees.. Certainly its evil to promote a corporate hegemony oriented state. Or company.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 10:52:00 pm
content: What Google is doing, with their six Declarations to knowledge (They are asserting that its theirs, stealing it all) is much like the the Spanish Conquests "Requirimento" Seehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Requirement_of_1513(also called the Requirimento) IT was read to native villages before attacking and looting them.That should be studied because it framed the entire conquest of the Amercas for the European kings and queens..Google even created A Declaration that parrots it. Every act of indigenous resistance was framed by Columbus and his heirs in the government of Spain as "revolt" thereby legitimating brutal retaliation.Burning entire villages in the dead of the night and hanging women in public view..Text of Spain's formal "Requirimento" authorizing themselves to steal the New World:On behalf of the King, Don Fernando, and of Doña Juana I, his daughter, Queen of Castille and León, subduers of the barbarous nations, we their servants notify and make known to you, as best we can, that the Lord our God, Living and Eternal, created the Heaven and the Earth, and one man and one woman, of whom you and we, all the men of the world at the time, were and are descendants, and all those who came after and before us. But, on account of the multitude which has sprung from this man and woman in the five thousand or even more years since the world was created, it was necessary that some men should go one way and some another, and that they should be divided into many kingdoms and provinces, for in one alone they could not be sustained.Of all these nations God our Lord gave charge to one man, called St. Peter, that he should be Lord and Superior of all the men in the world, that all should obey him, and that he should be the head of the whole Human Race, wherever men should live, and under whatever law, sect, or belief they should be; and he gave him the world for his kingdom and jurisdiction.And he commanded him to place his seat in Rome, as the spot most fitting to rule the world from; but also he permitted him to have his seat in any other part of the world, and to judge and govern all Christians, Moors, Jews, Gentiles, and all other Sects. This man was called Pope, as if to say, Admirable Great Father and Governor of men. The men who lived in that time obeyed that St. Peter, and took him for Lord, King, and Superior of the universe; so also they have regarded the others who after him have been elected to the pontificate, and so has it been continued even till now, and will continue till the end of the world.One of these Pontiffs, who succeeded that St. Peter as Lord of the world, in the dignity and seat which I have before mentioned, made donation of these isles and Tierra-firme to the aforesaid King and Queen and to their successors, our lords, with all that there are in these territories, as is contained in certain writings which passed upon the subject as aforesaid, which you can see if you wish.So their Highnesses are kings and lords of these islands and land of Tierra-firme by virtue of this donation: and some islands, and indeed almost all those to whom this has been notified, have received and served their Highnesses, as lords and kings, in the way that subjects ought to do, with good will, without any resistance, immediately, without delay, when they were informed of the aforesaid facts. And also they received and obeyed the priests whom their Highnesses sent to preach to them and to teach them our Holy Faith; and all these, of their own free will, without any reward or condition, have become Christians, and are so, and their Highnesses have joyfully and benignantly received them, and also have commanded them to be treated as their subjects and vassals; and you too are held and obliged to do the same. Wherefore, as best we can, we ask and require you that you consider what we have said to you, and that you take the time that shall be necessary to understand and deliberate upon it, and that you acknowledge the Church as the Ruler and Superior of the whole world, and the high priest called Pope, and in his name the King and Queen Doña Juana our lords, in his place, as superiors and lords and kings of these islands and this Tierra-firme by virtue of the said donation, and that you consent and give place that these religious fathers should declare and preach to you the aforesaid.If you do so, you will do well, and that which you are obliged to do to their Highnesses, and we in their name shall receive you in all love and charity, and shall leave you, your wives, and your children, and your lands, free without servitude, that you may do with them and with yourselves freely that which you like and think best, and they shall not compel you to turn Christians, unless you yourselves, when informed of the truth, should wish to be converted to our Holy Catholic Faith, as almost all the inhabitants of the rest of the islands have done. And, besides this, their Highnesses will award you many privileges and exemptions and will grant you many benefits.But, if you do not do this, and maliciously make delay in it, I certify to you that, with the help of God, we shall powerfully enter into your country, and shall make war against you in all ways and manners that we can, and shall subject you to the yoke and obedience of the Church and of their Highnesses; we shall take you and your wives and your children, and shall make slaves of them, and as such shall sell and dispose of them as their Highnesses may command; and we shall take away your goods, and shall do you all the mischief and damage that we can, as to vassals who do not obey, and refuse to receive their lord, and resist and contradict him; and we protest that the deaths and losses which shall accrue from this are your fault, and not that of their Highnesses, or ours, nor of these cavaliers who come with us. And that we have said this to you and made this Requisition, we request the notary here present to give us his testimony in writing, and we ask the rest who are present that they should be witnesses of this Requisition.

author: eugene
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2022, 11:54:17 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on May 04, 2022, 09:28:09 pmIn retrospect, I think you might have missed my point. At least in the US, a significant portion of the population (maybe almost everyone) doesn't look at two news sources (RT and BBC for example) and recognize that both are pushing propaganda. They see one as pushing propaganda for entirely self serving purposes and the other as heroically providing the truth for the good of all. This breeds an out of control rivalry that results in absolute closed mindedness. A total stalemate.Certainly there have been plenty of examples of politicians acting more in the interest of themselves and those that support them, but even with my own biases I understand that most politicians have goals they generally believe to be for the public good. I might or might not agree with them. I might have some seriously concerns about their mental health. But I don't believe that they're knowingly trying to achieve personal gains at the expense of the public. Hopefully you understand things in the same way.Unfortunately, the real problem I see is that a significant majority of Americans don't understand things this way. There's evidence in the way I increasingly notice politicians and journalists use the phrase "the other side" when they are really thinking "the enemy." An adversarial stance is understood and expected, maybe even healthy. But what I see in practice is not healthy. It's a very unhealthy belief that the enemy's primary objective is complete annihilation of everything one believes to be right and good. So they need to be destroyed before they destroy us.The problem that I'm pointing at is evidenced by news media, but only because the news media is composed of citizens. It's the citizens that scare the hell out of me, whether they're reporting the news, or hanging around bars drinking Budweiser, or hanging around Internet forums pretending to be above it all. So we can try to decide to what degree social media should be throttled, but social media is just a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself.Anyone trying to convince the "other side" to wake up and smell the coffee is aiming at the wrong target. The problem is not that we disagree, or even that "the other side" often pushes their goals in ways that seem deceitful. It seems to me that the problem is thatalmosteveryone has completely forgotten that generally speaking we all want to get rid of bad things and bring in good things. The problem is not that we disagree about what's good and bad, the problem is that "we" honestly and truly believe that the enemy is deliberately and conciously trying to harm us. It seems obvious to me that this can't really be true. That's the target. We need to get everyone to understand that we're not at war (not talking about Ukraine and Russia) and that the other side isn't our enemy. They may see different things as good and bad, but they are not deliberately trying to make bad things happen. (I do see members of the US congress deliberately trying to make bad things happen to "the other side", but I see that as a symptom of the problem, which is in dire need of treatment, but it is not the problem itself.)

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2022, 01:30:30 am
content: Which 90%? (joke)

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 05, 2022, 07:52:37 am
content: I for one welcome our new misinformation overloards.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2022, 08:02:58 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 05, 2022, 07:52:37 amMinistery of Truth.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2022, 08:38:18 am
content: Quote from: eugene on May 04, 2022, 11:54:17 pmNo I didn't miss your point. That's certainly the case in the US. The problem is confirmation bias: people seek out political content which reinforces their views, rather than challenges them. This isn't helped by Internet algorithms, such as YouTube recommendations which push similar content to what you've seen and liked..

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2022, 02:38:35 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on May 04, 2022, 10:52:00 pmThat post, including the ----cut------ bits, cuts made because it seemed to be a very long post. Makes just about no sense to me, whatsoever. It reminds me of two things. Firstly, it is as if you copied some ancient books texts, from project Gothenburg.Secondly, you are sounding like someone who might want to seek out help. Because you seem very certain, that some kind of conspiracy theory, is actually occurring within the US. Or something on those lines, as I'm finding it difficult to follow, your posts, in general.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2022, 04:25:30 pm
content: QuoteOf course some kind of conspiracy theory is actually occurring within the US! You need to narrow down to whether some specific thing is suchOr... are you suggesting QAnon is actually straight-up, honest to God real?

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2022, 05:53:25 pm
content: Quote from: eugene on May 04, 2022, 08:31:56 pmThat drives me nuts. South Park summed it up nicely, it's a choice between a turd sandwich and a giant douche. I get so frustrated watching both sides behave the same way and both of them are pointing out these awful things the other side is doing while being totally blind to the fact that their side is behaving exactly the same way. But it's different when they do it because... reasons...

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2022, 05:55:59 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on May 05, 2022, 08:02:58 amIt is absolutely coming.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disinformation_Governance_Board

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2022, 06:08:24 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on May 05, 2022, 04:25:30 pmI don't even really know what QAnon is, wasn't it just kind of a joke? I've never actually met anyone claiming to be associated with the group/movement/whatever.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2022, 06:28:55 pm
content: Wouldn't be anon if you knew they were associated with itBut the question is not "did it exist" or "wasn't it just some fun" but "did people believe in it". Ask Marjorie Taylor Greene, who apparently used to know a lot about it.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2022, 09:03:36 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on May 05, 2022, 05:55:59 pmIts such an honest name. They find spreading disinformation so useful, they want to manage the entire BS industry, Its even headed by a famed spreader of BS.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2022, 09:12:11 pm
content: Just to get back to Youtube/Google (and, in this case, Microsoft), they are pushing to get rid of passwords:https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/05/microsoft-apple-google-fido/QuoteSounds pretty reasonable on the face of it, but actually what this will do is make it easier to track you. No longer will you be able to have completely unrelated logins on various fora or other sites; with this every site you log into will know it's not just you but the real you.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2022, 09:23:56 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on May 05, 2022, 05:55:59 pmYeah, I heard about this.The real issue is that free speech is equal to freedom of thought, they don't exist one without another.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2022, 10:15:05 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on May 05, 2022, 09:23:56 pmNobody is taking either away. The goal is to prevent misinformation to spread like wildfire. IOW: people need to actively look for information instead of being bombarded with it. Hopefully it will help to prevent stupidity like anti-vaxers and unhealthy diets (like 'carb free') from becoming popular.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2022, 10:27:29 pm
content: Tracking you is their business model. Anonymous speech is being ended.Were entering a new age of the mass surveillance . With the uruguay Round they initiated a plan the end democracy as most understand it. Look up Dani Rodik's Trilemma. Democracy conflicts directly with it.Quote from: dunkemhigh on May 05, 2022, 09:12:11 pmI just avoid these sites completely funck them.Break up these huge companies so they pay taxes. I boycott the GAFA companies.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2022, 10:33:44 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 05, 2022, 10:15:05 pmSo, you think they are going to crack down on all the garbage the US government has been spouting recently, that oscillates from month to month? I doubt it. I would be amazed if they did anything other than treat Orwell's works as operations manuals. Remember the US government has been doing things like labelling people who question how well we understand never before widely deployed technologies like mRNA pseudo-vaccines in the same way they label the people who question long term very well understood classes of true sterilising vaccines.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 05, 2022, 11:34:04 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on May 05, 2022, 10:33:44 pmmRNA vaccines are not new, the technology was first developed as far back as the 1960s and has been studied over the next several decades, it has been used in animal vaccinations for years according to my vet and the Covid pandemic was motivation to further develop the technology. Calling it a "pseudo-vaccine" is silly, and based on what? That it isn't 100% effective? If you redefine the word "vaccine" to mean something that is 100% effective then no true vaccine exists. Yes any vaccine or other medication has risks, the long term risks take a long time to learn, but diseases also have risks and those risks also take a long time to learn. I really don't understand the controversy around the Covid vaccines, especially since the handful of people I've known that refuse to get it don't seem bothered by taking other medications, particularly some medications that are not approved and/or are known to have potentially serious side effects. I don't think opposition to the Covid vaccine is rational or scientific in any way, it is political, and rooted in the fact that people don't like being told what to do, myself included. If they had told that group that they were not allowed to get vaccinated they'd be lined up at the door with pitchforks and torches demanding a shot. The only reason there is pushback against the idiots that refuse to get it is that vaccines (of any sort) only work when a large enough segment of the population gets vaccinated to achieve herd immunity. My mom was around when the Polio vaccine was developed and remembers lining up in a big line as a nurse walked down the line and gave each person a jab. People trusted science back then and there was no pushback that she can recall, everyone just got it and countless lives were saved or improved by it.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 12:32:44 am
content: Quote from: james_s on May 05, 2022, 11:34:04 pmRobert Malone did the first work towards an mRNA vaccine in 1987. So, I don't know what your 1960s reference might be. I call it a pseudo-vaccine because just a couple of years ago an mRNA vaccine was described as a gene therapy, and not a vaccine. Then the naming suddenly shifted when it was commercially convenient.I was around when polio vaccines were launched, and had early inoculation with one of them. So early the first dose was injected, and by the second dose they had realised you can squirt it on a sugar cube. They were used with somewhat limited testing, but for a disease with truly awful consequences. I was at school with people who were debilitated for life by polio before those inoculations arrived. You can't compare the cost benefit tradeoff for treating polio with a disease like COVID.

author: ve7xen
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 01:52:45 am
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on May 04, 2022, 06:27:12 pmI guess you are responding to me here?QuoteThat is not what I am insisting. I am insisting that YouTube and similar have the right to choose not to host/publish whatever they want for whatever reason they want, and arguing that they don't have this right is absurd. It's a free hosting service provided by a private company. For the most part that's not what's actually happening though. They are taking even weaker action and just making it harder to find by not recommending it or including it in search results; the content is usually still available directly.Free speechisthat important, and I'm not arguing that it isn't. However, I do think those with the ears of the people, so to speak, have an ethical responsibility not to abuse that influence, and part of that is not saying things that are misleading or outright incorrect. In my view, that role falls to YouTube and so on in our current environment, so I have no problem with them choosing to become more ethical and strict on what they propagate, much like journalists are meant to. If folks want to spread their misleading and incorrect drivel, they can host it themselves and still reach their followers far easier than in decades past. This is not at all at odds with free speech; free speech is about freedom from persecution, not the 'freedom' to have someone else host and spread your speech for you.QuoteI don't care about the Hunter Biden laptop and haven't really seen too many people commenting on that issue thankfully, because it is at best a diversion from the topic at hand. The source wasextremelydubious, and I don't think it was compatible with journalistic ethics to publish about it (or at least about it's totally unverified contents) when it first came out because of how very suspicious the circumstances and timing of its surfacing were, and the fact that publishing it could easily influence the election which cannot be taken back with a retraction. Mouthing off about things like this when none of it has been verified is exactly what is eroding trust and integrity in journalism. Advocating for truth in reporting is directly at odds with this kind of mouth-running. Now some of it's been validated, at least they have something to ethically publish on, and the journalists you deride have done so in several prominent articles on what everyone can agree are top-tier sources of real journalism.QuoteWhy are you misquoting me to change the meaning of my statements? I did not say or suggest that the population 'should' trust journalists blindly, and in fact my statement was basically the opposite of how you have snipped my quote here. What I am saying is that journalists and journalism exist to report to us on their research into the truth so that we don't have to do that research ourselves. That is the one and only reason journalism exists: to provide a vetted secondary source of information on the events in the world so that we don't all have to do many duplicates of that same primary research. I am not saying this grants them the automatic and absolute trust of the people; it does not, and that is what I mean when I say we should 'hold them to it'; but that their job is to find and report on the truth and only the truth, and it is up to us as society to make sure they are doing it properly and ethically.As it relates to the online platforms, I think the closest pre-Internet analogy that kind of works is with journalists / publishers, and the ethical considerations seem somewhat similar in my view. They are obviously not exactly the same thing, but there are a lot of parallels, and I think we are seeing the public start to call for similar standards of truth and ethics to be applied to the Internet publishers as we may previously have expected of book publishers. And similarly, there will always be counter-culture publishers and Internet platforms, and there's mostly nothing wrong with that.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 02:43:01 am
content: Quote from: ve7xen on May 06, 2022, 01:52:45 amThat should all be pretty obvious to most people, cant believe it needs restating. Where it gets interesting is that these platforms want it both ways: "we choose who/what appears" while simultaneously "we are not responsible for what appears as it was someone else". Quickly gets political!

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 06:35:34 am
content: Quote from: ve7xen on May 06, 2022, 01:52:45 amBut Youtube gets legal protection as aPlatform, but wants the benefits of being aPublishertoo. This is the big legal delemma.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 06:39:15 am
content: Quote from: Someone on May 06, 2022, 02:43:01 amThey can choose what not to publish. But then they become apublisher, not a platform. Which means they no longer should have legal protections platforms have and should be responsible for the content they publish and can be sued for what they publish. However they want editorial right of a publisher but responsibility of a platform.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 06:59:10 am
content: Quote from: james_s on May 05, 2022, 11:34:04 pmThere are perfectly rational reasons to be concerned about the COVID-19 vaccines. The risk of severe disease increases with age, yet the risk of vaccine side effects increases with decreasing age. There is evidence to suggest that at some point, the risk of certain vaccine complications, such as myocarditis, in some demographics, exceed that of catching the virus. Refer to the study in Nature Medicine for more information.https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.23.21268276v1.full.pdfHere's a graph showing excess myocarditis in different population groups post-vaccine vs infection. The events post vaccination of Pfizer and Moderna, exceed those after infection in men under 40.https://www.eevblog.com/forum/dodgy-technology/mostly-dodgy-sars-cov-2-rapid-tests/?action=dlattach;attach=1386011;imageNow there are other bad things which COVID can do, so I'm not saying men under 40 shouldn't get the shot, just that it isn't always as clear cut as you've been led to believe. The study was also done when more pathogenic variants were in circulation. The rates of myocarditis, along with other complications, post Omicron are probably lower, but there isn't solid data, so it's speculation.There's no data to support getting the vaccine, if you've already had the infection. The risk of hospitalisation, after subsequent infections, for those who've been vaccinated and infected before is the same as those who've only had the natural infection. If you've already had COVID and recovered, then getting the shot makes no difference to your risk of severe illness, if you get it again, so it makes no sense to risk the vaccine side effects.https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm#F1_downThe vaccine doesn't prevent transmission, so implying the pandemic would've been over by now, if idiots got vaccinated is incorrect. It's people who use that kind of rhetoric are part of the problem. Insulting those who disagree with you is only going to make them feel more marginalised and won't help.Herd immunity isn't happening and never will because the virus mutates and sterilising immunity doesn't last for long. Fortunately immunity from severe disease and death are long lived, which is why it's no longer a problem. The fact that Omicron is less pathogenic also helps, but increased immunity is a huge factor.The double blind, placebo controlled trial for the vaccine was for two doses only, not a third, or fourth. It was also only in adults over 18. There isn't sold data to support how it's currently being used.No, the government's vaccine policy doesn't follow the science and needs to be called out. I accepted it at the start and got the first two doses, but refused the third. I completely understand why some people won't get vaccinated.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 08:26:02 am
content: Guns, Drugs, and Skin Bleaching: YouTube Kids Still Poses Risks to Children:https://www.techtransparencyproject.org/articles/guns-drugs-and-skin-bleaching-youtube-kids-still-poses-risks-children

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 11:17:28 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 05, 2022, 10:15:05 pmIt always starts like that. Just this just that. Just the nutters. Just the communists. Just the talk which offends people. Just the talk that offends anyone. Just my neighbor. Just the russians. Just the ones who believed that the Earth is not the center of the universe, but the Vatican and everyone else clearly believes that's the truth, and there are more of us so their view must be false. Just the ones that have opposing political views than mine.We are just going to censor those people, but only those people. Monthly community updates will follow on what is censored!

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 02:14:22 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on May 06, 2022, 11:17:28 amIndeed. Once power is seized, it is never given back willingly.It baffles me how many times over in the history of the world we need to go through the same steps that lead to hell while entire segments of society loudly applaud this in the name of "safety", "reason", "progress", <put_your_favourite_noun_here>

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 02:19:33 pm
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on May 06, 2022, 02:14:22 pm1984, here we come!Quotehttps://www.theguardian.com/childrens-books-site/2016/may/29/1984-george-orwell-reviewQuote

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 05:17:27 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on May 06, 2022, 11:17:28 amNo, you are not getting the point at all here. The aim is to make misinformation not resonate around so much. IOW: Stop the lies from spreading. If you tell a lie enough times, the masses will accept it as the truth (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_lie). Social media has become a very potent weapon to destabilise countries by attacking people's health and thus putting a strain on the society. Look at the anti-vaxers for example that are gaining enough followers to erode herd immunity away against serious deceases like Polio and Measles that where deemed eradicated. This is not an idle or theoretical threat; it is already happening for real and seems to be orchestrated by countries:https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/mar/02/australias-anti-vaccine-groups-switch-focus-to-putin-praise-and-ukraine-conspiraciesAccording to this study:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7849510/social media, and the spreading of misinformation played a big role in the world wide hoarding of toilet paper. As if you are going to die without toilet paperAnd it happens closer to home as well... Every now and then my wife comes to me in a panic state about something that (to me) is obviously a hoax but since she heard it from several friends / family members through social media she thinks it is true.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 05:33:49 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 06, 2022, 05:17:27 pmYou're also missing the point: in who do we trust to be the arbitrator of the truth?We cannot trust any government because they're all open to corruption and often clueless themselves. How about medical bodies such as the World Health Organisation? No, they're also open to corruption by big pharma. What about educational institutions such as big name universities? Again no, as they accept funding from private companies and are controlled by governments. What about journalists? Again no, they're just as corrupt and worse still incompetent.To summarise: I agree, misinformation is a problem, but believe what is being proposed isn't the solution and will make things worse, rather than better. I would rather people be free to spread misinformation on the Internet, where it can be rebuked accordingly, rather than censorship.Quote from: madires on May 06, 2022, 08:26:02 amI've noticed many things go over young children's heads, so not all of that's as bad as it seems,One thing to note is what's unsuitable for children is a matter of opinion and often depends on one's place on the political spectrum. The right are generally more concerned about topics of a sexual nature, critical race theory and gender ideology, whilst the left are more worried about guns, violence and white supremacy. My personally view is all of the aforementioned are bad, although it does worry me that some bad actors are indoctrinating children with political propaganda.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 05:44:48 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on May 06, 2022, 05:33:49 pmThere is no point to miss: the ones spreading the information should be aware of their moral obligation. And if there is lack of implementing such a moral, then they should be nudget into the right direction by the government. In the end it all comes down to good journalism.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 05:47:06 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 06, 2022, 05:44:48 pmOf all the spreaders of misinformation we face, governments are the worst. The second worst are journalists. You want to make them arbiters of truth?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 06:03:59 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on May 06, 2022, 05:47:06 pmI already answered that question if you read the part you quoted carefully enough. Unless ofcourse you have a better idea (which I doubt is the case). You can be very hung up on 'freedom of speech' but if you fail to see that it is being actively used against you to undermine your wealth, health and values, then you are throwing the baby away with the bath water.And for not trusting the government: you voted for those people! So either suck it up or become active in politics and work to make the changes you want.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 06:12:18 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 06, 2022, 06:03:59 pmYou really try hard to miss the point. NO government can ever be trusted. Give me government like power for a while, and I'd probably soon turn into the kind of person I'd loathe. Any reasonable system of government is structured to minimise its power. Not let it sweep through society throwing its weight around.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 06:33:33 pm
content: There are big reasons why both governments and corporations are so reliably unreliable. They have so much to hide. Every day I read about new atrocities.They cant hide the truth.Quote from: coppice on May 06, 2022, 05:47:06 pm

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 06:37:02 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 06, 2022, 06:03:59 pmAnd upon what information do people use, to inform them of who to vote for? Newspapers, TV, the Internet. If they're all manipulated by the government, then democracy can't exist, since the government will always put out information to keep the current regime in power.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 06:40:58 pm
content: In some (scary) parts of the world, everybody who is free, the non slaves, carry potentially lethal weapons most of the time, and life is cheap. death from them is fairly common.. should we prefer that?Quote from: coppice on May 06, 2022, 06:12:18 pmBut, as you pointed out, they almost always do.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 06:44:28 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on May 06, 2022, 06:37:02 pmWell, at least some bullshit is predictable. All thieves want to legitimate their plunder. But since Jan 1, 1995 certain rules tie countries hands. Its so that global capital remains mobile. See the Trilemma. It has certain effects, making the already powerful more so and the powerless even more powerless. The era of democracy was a brief anomaly caused by the Industrial revolution and its labor scarcity, and WWII a rare exception that ended at 11.59 PM on December 31, 1994, because its inconsistent with the protection of certain internationally traded assets. The era that most of us grew up during really was an economic anomaly in history.

author: eugene
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 06, 2022, 10:14:08 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on May 06, 2022, 05:33:49 pmIt would seem the only logical action for any of us is to build a private survival shelter and fill it with weapons and nonperishable food. That way we can protect ourselves from the entire rest of the world, absolutely none of which can be trusted.That isn't at all appealing to me and I'm not even going to look down that road, never mind travel down it. You have to trust someone, at least conditionally.QuoteI agree that any kind of throttling of information is a slippery slope. Ideologically, we want to believe that misinformation will be identified publicly. Then everyone will know what is true and what is false. Not just that, but everyone will see where the information comes from, so everyone will learn who we should trust in the future and who we shouldn't.Unfortunately, this becomes not just a way to battle misinformation, but a tool to spread it. If someone is spreading a 'truth' that is in competition with mine, then I can promote my own by publicly calling them a liar, saying that they're spreading misinformation, maybe part of a big conspiracy. Some other people will retort that I'm the liar and that I'm spreading misinformation, etc. Ultimately it will become difficult (or impossible) for most people to separate information from disinformation. The ideology of free speech will have been shown to fail.That's where we are today. Even blatant lies are given a pass in this morass of 'information.'. Not just subtle forms of misinformation and manipulation, but lies that are easily shown to be false, and obviously known to be false by the person speaking the lie. As a weapon, misinformation might cause some self-inflicted injury, but it can do much more injury to the enemy, so it's a weapon that is heavily exploited. (We all believe that it's used more heavily by the other side than by our side, but I'm not sure that it matters if there's an imbalance or not. It's just not a productive point of discussion. We need to focus on individuals, not 'sides.')Having said that, I'm still not ready to trade the ideology of totally free speech for a different one.

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2022, 09:46:44 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on May 05, 2022, 08:02:58 amA subtle difference: it's Truth Incorporated, so they aren't bound by any of that "constitution" rubbishAmerican liberals love pointing out that the Bill of Rights prohibits the government from taking certain actions, but not private corporations. Freedom, man!The argument that some common sense should be applied when corporations attempt to usurp powers typically held by governments completely flies over their head.

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2022, 04:30:50 am
content: Check out my personal experience, recently:To set this up, I have to 'deflect' some parts, to protect privacy (of others), so let's just say, a close equivalent:. Say, I'm 16, under legal control, by parent 'Mary'...or perhaps I'm 42, under ' Freddy', a manager at job.Now, I've mentioned to this 'Mary' a couple items, relating to former President (Trump), and the US country. Analysis stuff I heard watching cable channel '321', whatever, but it was compelling LOGIC relating toa common situation. Next thing I know; I get labeled by this 'boss', Freddy, he saying: "You're just another Hannity /Fox News puppet...".Now, clearly, I was repeating material from elsewhere, but NO, not according to 'Freddy', as he issues the phrase 'Fox News, Fox News', notwithstanding my denials (repeated), saying "Nope, I heard that political analysis on channel 321, I don't watch Fox all that much, and Hannity I found slightly annoying, at worst."Then I probably responded with, "That's a fake Albatross, you are hanging around my neck", an old old expression referring to 'smears', dirty rumors. But have to be careful: that 'Mary' parent, or 'Freddy' department manager has power...real tangible power and I don't want to, or cannot, afford to make 'trouble', pressing my points politely, (even while the other party is, actually, getting into personal ABUSE, territory!).Next,... that person, starts in with the censor stuff:Saying things like "...We need to STIFLE that news channel,..perhaps ban FOX News /Hannity speach, for sure...".My gawd;. My mention of channel 321 analysis has triggered a 'ban Fox' mantra, (very grossly incorrect), plus coupled with an abusive 'smear' that I might not wish to challenge!So,... calls to ban 'Fox News', or create new 'crimes' of speech(Remember, it's channel 321, NOT Fox channel that I was quoting). That's so far off-base from common sense, (if you can follow my convoluted logic, here, LOL), that I just gotta say:No #@$#34$#@ Way...(insert your own cuss words).

author: John B
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 20, 2022, 10:10:44 pm
content: Odysee must have done some sever upgrades as their bandwidth has improved immensely

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 21, 2022, 01:38:31 am
content: Quote from: John B on May 20, 2022, 10:10:44 pmOf course media streaming needs lots of bandwidth. However, smooth streaming depends more on effectively dispersing that bandwidth around the world, so a good percentage of people can be served locally.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 21, 2022, 03:48:11 am
content: Quote from: John B on May 20, 2022, 10:10:44 pmYes, they just publicied this saying it's their biggest update yet, and the lag and buffering should be completely eliminated. Seems that way to me