Re:YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly co...
by mirimir on Thursday April 23, 2020 @08:13PM
(#22963183)
> The problem is they give one body the ultimate authority on what is truth. Science, epidemiology & politics is more complex than that.
That's an excellent point.
> Google should instead have a list of allowed sources (e.g. WHO, CDC, NHS, etc) and explicitly disallowed sources (states owned media organizations, politicians and intelligence agencies).
Well, isn't the BBC at least government affiliated? And yes, I'm aware that it's supposedly entirely independent.
And about intelligence agencies, the NSA has contributed hugely to computer security. It's true that they're arguably the world's greatest hackers, but that actually increases their credibility. Except for the backdoors that they hide ;)
Re:YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly co...
by canjobear on Thursday April 23, 2020 @10:21PM
(#22963975)
> explicitly disallowed sources (states owned media organizations, politicians and intelligence agencies).
If the intelligence agencies are any good then they do not release information under their own name.
For example some in the Chinese government think coronavirus was released by the US Army while some in the US intelligence community think coronavirus leaked from a Chinese government lab in Wuhan. Another example, some US government officials think chloroquine is a COVID cure, while others disagree or remain undecided.
Google should instead have a list of allowed sources (e.g. WHO, CDC, NHS, etc) and explicitly disallowed sources (states owned media organizations, politicians and intelligence agencies).