Covid-19, Part XIII

[Bob Sheed]

We have people spreading lies right now that are literally killing people, that are leading to insurrections to overthrow this US government. That has to be stopped.

That is far more important than whether or not someone can post about a lab leak theory. Banning over that really just hurts people’s feelings, makes them mad, but it really doesn’t affect anything.

Yes, this quote is taken out of context from its original meaning, but it still applies here:

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Take freedom of speech for example. People are free to say whatever, and free to face the consequences of those words. Let someone yell "fire" in a movie theatre. Then let them get arrested for doing so. Your accepted solution seems to be to outlaw yelling "fire" in movie theatres entirely, in case someone might yell "fire" when there isn't a fire.

I find your reasoning here to be decidedly short-sighted. (And history supports my concern here, over and over again) But I would fight with everything I have for your right to express it freely.

Think of everything we "know" to be true now, that everyone thought was false 50 years ago. Silencing everything we think is wrong by 2021's yardstick, is going down a very dark path.

[BernieCarbo]

What is being abused right now it their ability to lie, and spread lies using these social media algorithms to millions with just a click of a mouse. It is a main cause of vaccine hestitency, a main cause of the January 6th insurrection, and so much more.

These lies are leading to deaths, to a dismantling of our democracy. They absolutely need to be stopped.

And as long as social media sticks to guildlines that it follows, guidelines that are based on the scientific community for instance, then there really is little chance for abuse.

The same thing has been happening for centuries, but only the technology has changed. We are no more special than they were 200 years ago. It’s a very dangerous path to go down where we start limiting what can be published. Go live in a country for a while where that right is restricted, and get back to me.

There are at least two people on this site alone who said that YouTube should be shut down using the same reasoning that you’re using.

[Bob Sheed]

No, absolutely not. That reasoning will be abused over and over.

And, historically, it has been abused. Time and time again.

I don't think 757690 is thinking too many moves ahead on this one.

[BernieCarbo]

And, historically, it has been abused. Time and time again.

I don't think 757690 is thinking too many moves ahead on this one.

I know, everybody likes to think they’re special. There were people back in the 1770s that would’ve blocked the printing of pamphlets using the same rationale- imagine how things would be different now if that had been the case.

Like it or not, we have the right to lie with very narrow exceptions.

[757690]

Yes, this quote is taken out of context from its original meaning, but it still applies here:

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Take freedom of speech for example. People are free to say whatever, and free to face the consequences of those words. Let someone yell "fire" in a movie theatre. Then let them get arrested for doing so. Your accepted solution seems to be to outlaw yelling "fire" in movie theatres entirely, in case someone might yell "fire" when there isn't a fire.

I find your reasoning here to be decidedly short-sighted. (And history supports my concern here, over and over again) But I would fight with everything I have for your right to express it freely.

Think of everything we "know" to be true now, that everyone thought was false 50 years ago. Silencing everything we think is wrong by 2021's yardstick, is going down a very dark path.

I mean, you bring up yelling “Fire” in crowded movie theater and then get it all wrong. The reason why we arrest people for doing that is to prevent that from happening more often. The reason why we arrest people for stealing is to prevent that happening more often. People don’t have the right to yell “fire” in a crowded movie theater any more than they have the right to steal your car.

We don’t have 100% liberty to whatever we want, and that’s a good thing. We need rules, we need protections against actions that harm us, that harm society. The devil is in deciding what those rules are, what restrictions are needed, but we absolutely needs some restrictions, otherwise it’s Lord of the Flies.

[757690]

The same thing has been happening for centuries, but only the technology has changed. We are no more special than they were 200 years ago. It’s a very dangerous path to go down where we start limiting what can be published. Go live in a country for a while where that right is restricted, and get back to me.

There are at least two people on this site alone who said that YouTube should be shut down using the same reasoning that you’re using.

The technology has changed and that is essential to this discussion. That can’t be ignored.

No one is saying that people can’t lie. Facebook and Twitter and other social media sites are saying that you can’t lie and use our technology to do it. This would be the same as someone who owned a printing press denying someone the right to use it because they were printing lies. The owner of the printing press absolutely has that right, and it absolutely is good that they have that right.

We aren’t talking about the government getting involved at all. This is just about the moral obligation that some companies have about how their technology is used.

[BernieCarbo]

I mean, you bring up yelling “Fire” in crowded movie theater and then get it all wrong. The reason why we arrest people for doing that is to prevent that from happening more often. The reason why we arrest people for stealing is to prevent that happening more often. People don’t have the right to yell “fire” in a crowded movie theater any more than they have the right to steal your car.

We don’t have 100% liberty to whatever we want, and that’s a good thing. We need rules, we need protections against actions that harm us, that harm society. The devil is in deciding what those rules are, what restrictions are needed, but we absolutely needs some restrictions, otherwise it’s Lord of the Flies.

Wow, I thought Joe McCarthy died a long time ago.

Your ideas are actually very disgusting. It will give license to someone to declare many things as the equivalent to yelling fire in a crowded theater. It’s way too subjective.

[BernieCarbo]

The technology has changed and that is essential to this discussion. That can’t be ignored.

No one is saying that people can’t lie. Facebook and Twitter and other social media sites are saying that you can’t lie and use our technology to do it. This would be the same as someone who owned a printing press denying someone the right to use it because they were printing lies. The owner of the printing press absolutely has that right, and it absolutely is good that they have that right.

We aren’t talking about the government getting involved at all. This is just about the moral obligation that some companies have about how their technology is used.

If companies want to voluntarily restrict themselves, that’s fine. They already do that and always have.

Your reasoning is the same thing that people used to try to limit playboy when it first came out. Moral obligation? Really?

[757690]

Wow, I thought Joe McCarthy died a long time ago.

Your ideas are actually very disgusting. It will give license to someone to declare many things as the equivalent to yelling fire in a crowded theater. It’s way too subjective.

Lol. I am literally trying to protect this society from the likes of Joseph McCarthy.

And again, for the umpteenth time,

THE SLIPPERY SLOPE ARGUEMENT IS A LOGICAL FALLACY.

[757690]

If companies want to voluntarily restrict themselves, that’s fine. They already do that and always have.

Your reasoning is the same thing that people used to try to limit playboy when it first came out. Moral obligation? Really?

No it isn’t. Not at all. I am saying that Playboy gets to determine what is in its magazine.

[BernieCarbo]

Lol. I am literally trying to protect this society from the likes of Joseph McCarthy.

And again, for the umpteenth time,

THE SLIPPERY SLOPE ARGUEMENT IS A LOGICAL FALLACY.

Above you said “ it needs to be stopped“. Stopped by who? Who decides what needs to be stopped? Facebook can stop anything they want. How do you enforce it?

[757690]

Above you said “ it needs to be stopped“. Stopped by who? Who decides what needs to be stopped? Facebook can stop anything they want. How do you enforce it?

First, no one is talking about “enforcing” anything.

Second, do you not agree that the spreading of these lies about the vaccine need to be stopped? Do you think they should be allowed to be spread on social media? They are resulting in deaths, and keeping this society from controlling a deadly virus. I don’t think it’s controversial to say that they need to be stopped.

[BernieCarbo]

First, no one is talking about “enforcing” anything.

Second, do you not agree that the spreading of these lies about the vaccine need to be stopped? Do you think they should be allowed to be spread on social media? They are resulting in deaths, and keeping this society from controlling a deadly virus. I don’t think it’s controversial to say that they need to be stopped.

No, they don’t need to be stopped. That is a dangerous road to go down. Rather, an effort to educate people so they can recognize stupid ideas is far more effective.

I mean, alcohol results in thousands of deaths, assaults, rapes, loss of jobs and careers, bankruptcies, Child abuse, etc., but every effort to stop it has been a dismal failure. Education is always much better.

[Boston Red]

For anyone with a WSJ subscription, this is the most wholesome story of the pandemic: https://www.wsj.com/articles/peppa-p...sh-11626627266

[757690]

No, they don’t need to be stopped. That is a dangerous road to go down. Rather, an effort to educate people so they can recognize stupid ideas is far more effective.

I mean, alcohol results in thousands of deaths, assaults, rapes, loss of jobs and careers, bankruptcies, Child abuse, etc., but every effort to stop it has been a dismal failure. Education is always much better.

We control the sale of alcohol and ban the sale of many other drugs. We ban the sale of many drugs without a prescription. We ban all sorts of stuff, quite successfully. We stop things all the time, quite successfully. It is delicate to know what to stop and what not to stop, but we are rational, intelligent beings. We make rational disticintions all the time.

If you believe it is essential to educate people, then you should understand the importance of stopping the spread of lies. How can we educate anyone, when they are being fed known lies that harm them? Eliminating the lies should go hand and hand with education.