News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread electio... by wpietri on Wednesday December 09, 2020 @11:48PM (#25369851)
I don't think YouTube has to be the arbiter of truth. Or of what people are allowed to talk about. But I think they definitely should be the arbiter of what they're comfortable supporting on their platform. As you're proving right now, they are far from the only platform.
Re:YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread electio... by sillysaurusx on Thursday December 10, 2020 @09:50AM (#25374217)
Should twitter remove posts like this? https://twitter.com/Timcast/status/1337043496230932483

"Four people who received Pfizer's vaccine developed Bell's palsy, a form of temporary facial paralysis"

The trouble is, this one's a bit different than a slippery slope argument. We'll have to decide whether we want to allow fringe news at all.

If YouTube announced tomorrow that they would ban opposition to the new vaccine, would that feel as comfortable?

Re:YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread electio... by wpietri on Thursday December 10, 2020 @10:43AM (#25374858)
I think it's a reasonable choice for a platform to label, deamplify, or even ban content that is both clearly false and clearly dangerous. Do you think that tweet is both false and dangerous?
Re:YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread electio... by sillysaurusx on Thursday December 10, 2020 @12:44PM (#25376248)
I think it's probably false. I don't think information is dangerous, no.

Do you think people should be able to make up their own minds? Unfortunately, all of those actions you mention run contrary to that premise.

Re:YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread electio... by wpietri on Thursday December 10, 2020 @07:06PM (#25380571)
I think that's a pretty bad way to frame it.

E.g., look at medical licensing. One could oppose it, on the grounds that people should be able to make up their own minds as to whether somebody is competent to perform surgery on them. Saying that a person can't call themselves a medical doctor is just denying them freedom of speech! Who is the government to come between private parties! Etc, etc.

But in practice that would lead to incredible harm for little gain. I think individual freedom is an important value, but not the only one, and that real-world concerns require balancing values.