Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_iy9npad wrote

Reply to comment by Zerksys in Google and YouTube are investing to fight misinformation by Wagamaga

The entirety of the origin is speculation at this point.

Main takeaway from my comment should be that it was labeled misinformation and you would get banned for sharing it but now, it’s an established, probable theory as published by the Wall Street Journal

Same stuff happened with the Hunter Biden laptop.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/another-potential-covid-19-lab-leak-clue-china-11644615472

1

Zerksys t1_iy9rhvz wrote

So the lab leak theory is not confirmed as fact, there's just a bit more evidence for it that brings slightly more credibility to it as a hypothesis? That's a long way from being confirmed as fact.

Same thing with the Hunter laptop stuff. Random computer repair person gets dropped a laptop with an unknown chain of custody by someone claiming to be Hunter Biden at a time when it would have been the most damaging to Joe Biden's campaign for president. The laptop then falls under the custody of not the police but Rudy Giuliani of all people. Never mind that the forensic evidence for the laptop is muddled at best.

This is why information surrounding controversial subjects from the conservative side gets marked as misinformation. Just like your previous post, you take speculation and misconstrue it as fact. So yes, it is still misinformation to say that the lab leak theory is a proven fact and it is still misinformation to say that the Hunter Biden laptop proves wrongdoing by Biden.

I'm not saying that in then future, more information will not surface about these subjects that turn them into facts, but at present, it's all speculation and should be treated as such.

1

[deleted] t1_iy9sq5t wrote

[removed]

2

Zerksys t1_iy9y6uu wrote

I believe the big difference between you and I is that I don't see misinformation filtering as a bad thing because the internet is not centrally controlled. The market for web apps on the internet is pure and unregulated capitalism which is how it should stay.

No one is forcing you to use Google or YouTube. People use them because they are good tools and they, more often than not, deliver accurate information. In the event that Google falls under the influence of a hypothetical deep state, it would become apparent very quickly by using another search engine. You would get completely different results. Over time, the inaccuracy of the information would cause a sizable amount of people to swap over to other tools. That's what's great about capitalism. It gives you options. The internet is democracy.

Another hard pill for free speech absolutists to swallow is that most people are just incapable of "doing their own research" at a level that is required to understand complex topics. I direct your attention to this site.

https://www.wyliecomm.com/2021/08/whats-the-latest-u-s-literacy-rate/

About half of the US has a literacy rating that qualifies as below the reading capabilities of an eight grader. Only 12 percent of the country has a literacy rate that is proficient enough to identify sources as unreliable. The theory that people should be able to do their own research is great, but this actually just goes to prove my point. Doing your own research is impossible for the average person when there is so much misinformation out there.

The scariest thing for me is not information being centrally controlled. There's far too many tools that allow us to get the information we want. Information suppression would also have to come with large social changes that change the fabric of western society. The scariest thing for me is that foreign governments can use misinformation to control a population and cause chaos among its citizens. That's what's scariest to me.

2

[deleted] t1_iyaaw14 wrote

You can pretend all players in the tech industry are equal but that’s false.

Google and Apple could literally kill Twitter by simply delisting it from their App Store if Elon doesn’t run it or ban “misinformation” as they see fit.

1

Zerksys t1_iybgcij wrote

They're not equal but making bad decisions will cause them to lose market share. Making a disastrous decision like intentionally giving misinformation to people is enough to lose you your core customer base.

1

turnip_burrito t1_iya09ls wrote

Lmao, you think people are able to do their own research and come to sensible conclusions. We're human, not purely rational beings with unlimited time to research. We like passing along entertaining stories and have a billion internal biases we don't check unless we have the time. Almost nobody has the time. Who then will be able to reliably "do their own research"?

You need education (from real experts with credentials) and time to do actual research and come to an informed opinion.

1

[deleted] t1_iyaaip6 wrote

But experts are free to publish any findings or opinion pieces they want in my scenario.

And it’s irrelevant if they choose to research. They have the freedom to do so or the freedom to choose ignorance.

In your scenario we would have people at the tippy top choose the experts that are allowed to publish their opinions which would obviously conform to the few individuals bias.

We saw this at Twitter when legitimate sources were getting banned, even major news organizations during 2020 if they didn’t conform to the narratives

1