Thought Police corporate internet giants

A place to sit back, relax, get to know each other, and talk about whatever you want to discuss or share with the group.
Forum rules
Please be sure to check the Rules & Guidelines

Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby zetreque on March 16th, 2018, 2:33 am 

THOUGHT POLICE: YouTube to start “correcting” controversial videos with “facts” from discredited Wikipedia pages run by disinfo trolls
https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-03-14-thought-police-youtube-to-start-correcting-controversial-videos-with-facts-from-discredited-wikipedia-pages-run-by-disinfo-trolls.html

Whatever your political belief and whatever your belief on any controversial topic, is it right for large corporations that continually grow their domination over the internet be allowed to censor users' content?

At what point does a private (or even publicly held) company grow large enough where it becomes a public platform and should lose it's right to control it's content?

Do you think they will leave the user's content in tact while supplying the "companion unit of information" or is this article going too extreme?

As much as I hate seeing such wacko false information out there spreading around or opinions I don't agree with, I am also concerned about the other side of the story on censorship.

PS: One of the channels I subscribe to that is run by a credited chemist that makes badass stuff actually had his video censored a couple months ago and had to battle against youtube to get it reinstalled. He had nothing to do with conspiracy theories or any of this. This is really happening and not only is money buying elections now through strategic media but it's buying the ability to censor the internet in frightening ways... This isn't even mentioning net neutrality.
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 3594
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby zetreque on March 16th, 2018, 3:01 am 

Here is the side saying this is a good thing. It would seem like a good thing if you ONLY looked at this side of it and ignored people like the above video I linked which is just one of several reputable people I have heard and witnessed being affected by this.

http://fortune.com/2018/03/14/youtube-conspiracy-theory-wikipedia/


The main link for this thread links to one solution against censorship.
peer 2 peer network streaming.
https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-03-07- ... aring.html
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 3594
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby BadgerJelly on March 16th, 2018, 3:33 am 

This is precisely the kind of thing I am entrenched with at the moment on this forum.

I don't know what we should or shouldn't censor, of if we should censor anything ... I think we're ready and able to openly talk about censoring things from children, but when it comes to people who can act in the world with self-authority over their actions the boundaries become muddied.

My mother used to comment about people who are banned from owning animals are still allowed to bring up children. Such a conflict of moral behaviors and law enforcement is quite a confusing matter.

My head says private companies should have the freedom to dictate what information they want peddled in their personal domain, but my head also tells me that if such items are being used to present educational material then certain standards should be upheld ... of course this leads to us doing no more than pushing the problem down the line and burying it behind conflated terminology, because what constitutes "educational material"?

It is happening across university campuses too, as it always has. The difference now is that it appears the weight of mass media has made protests easier to organize. I remember seeing Peter Hitchens having to speak outside in the public park because the university couldn't afford the legal costs of possible disruption. If it is getting to the point where the place that are meant to represent freedom of speech and rational discourse are forced to cancel talks and discussions (no matter how offensive the topic may be) then where can these things be discussed? Where can the difficulties of society and social discourse be exposed?

Over all I just think we're going to have to ride out this crazy influx of information and sit tight.

I guess as individuals we can try and instill skepticism, but not a passive kind of skepticism, a kind of skepticism that is actively questioning our own position, other positions, and ready and willing to dig underneath for a better number of perspectives. It seems to me in defense of any singular position lies fault.

On the plus side if people are censored and lose money then they may well start to do better research before posting ... as pointed out though the difficulty lies with WHO is the authority over what is constituted as the "correct" information to be presenting online for public consumption?
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5284
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby zetreque on March 16th, 2018, 3:45 am 

Now that I am actually looking into the stuff I have been hearing about I find it EXTREMELY alarming! The extreme right and left have gotten out of control on this planet. When looking into this the lines are becoming blurred for the left and right also. It just seems next to crazy and people that are trying to put forth real scientific reasoning on why the world is becoming crazy, they are getting censored. When it comes down to it, what's happening is money and ignorance are currently ruling.

This week I have been researching dental mercury. The fact that they are censoring that mercury is not poisonous is insane! Right now what is happening is the mainstream is telling people that mercury is poisonous unless of course it's in the fillings in your mouth. Put aside for the moment whether or not you agree with that, what is happening is these giants are censoring people having this dialog. People are becoming so brainwashed and even science has gotten out of hand IMO and it's hard to know what to believe. I have not liked what I have seen in my academic career when it comes to graduate research. Quite disappointed at times. Not to say there isn't incredible research out there.

Over this past month in my own research pursuits, there are times when I am so frustrated by the information out there. There is soooo much garbage while at the same time there is really good stuff hidden but the frightening thing is the level of censorship that is taking place now. By censoring conspiracy theories they are basically creating conspiracy theories. I really just am not sure that humanity is going to survive at this level of ignorance, lack of awareness, greed and power to change the face of the planet causing massive extinctions. I try to remain optimistic but it gets harder all the time.

PS: I posted several days ago on here what I see happening with google as well.
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 3594
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby zetreque on March 16th, 2018, 3:58 am 

This kind of censorship is eliminating checks and balances on society. It's also fueling conspiracy theorists and uneducated people into lashing out against science and reality.
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 3594
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby BadgerJelly on March 16th, 2018, 7:50 am 

Is this thread a conspircay theory?
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5284
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby Mossling on March 17th, 2018, 10:36 pm 

I'm sorry to say it but it seems that it is in the nature of the 'beast' (the internet) to behave in these ways - to be manipulated and warped and abuse peoples' trust in more serious and disturbing ways than other media can and does.

The Cambridge Analytica Files: ‘I created Steve Bannon’s psychological warfare tool’: meet the data war whistleblower
The Guardian, 17 March 2018.
Mueller’s investigation traces the first stages of the Russian operation to disrupt the 2016 US election back to 2014, when the Russian state made what appears to be its first concerted efforts to harness the power of America’s social media platforms, including Facebook. And it was in late summer of the same year that Cambridge Analytica presented the Russian oil company with an outline of its datasets, capabilities and methodology. The presentation had little to do with “consumers”. Instead, documents show it focused on election disruption techniques. The first slide illustrates how a “rumour campaign” spread fear in the 2007 Nigerian election – in which the company worked – by spreading the idea that the “election would be rigged”. The final slide, branded with Lukoil’s logo and that of SCL Group and SCL Elections, headlines its “deliverables”: “psychographic messaging”.

[...]

Millions of people’s personal information was stolen and used to target them in ways they wouldn’t have seen, and couldn’t have known about, by a mercenary outfit, Cambridge Analytica, who, Wylie says, “would work for anyone”. Who would pitch to Russian oil companies. Would they subvert elections abroad on behalf of foreign governments?

It occurs to me to ask Wylie this one night.

“Yes.”

Nato or non-Nato?

“Either. I mean they’re mercenaries. They’ll work for pretty much anyone who pays.”


It’s an incredible revelation. It also encapsulates all of the problems of outsourcing – at a global scale, with added cyberweapons. And in the middle of it all are the public – our intimate family connections, our “likes”, our crumbs of personal data, all sucked into a swirling black hole that’s expanding and growing and is now owned by a politically motivated billionaire.


It has occurred to me that the dream of the internet as a force for global social evolution is now over. And interestingly it seems that people will instead return to the days of yore - when they would actually meet up face to face, and discuss things during the privacy of a hike through the countryside or on a golf course - perhaps even leaving their most likely 'compromised' smartphones and smartwatches elsewhere. Haha, whoever could have expected such a thing back in 1995?

It seems that the internet is just going to end up like a highstreet - and not a very upmarket one at that - probably more like a red light district with amazon warehouses, newsagents, and crummy cinemas crammed in - jostling to make passers-by stop for a moment or two.

For me personally, the internet has definitely lost its shine. This forum is great, but there is little else beyond more efficient shopping and video content that I can trust on it.
User avatar
Mossling
Active Member
 
Posts: 1282
Joined: 02 Jul 2009


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby someguy1 on March 17th, 2018, 11:45 pm 

zetreque » March 16th, 2018, 12:33 am wrote:lief and whatever your belief on any controversial topic, is it right for large corporations that continually grow their domination over the internet be allowed to censor users' content?


I appreciate your saying that. There's been a huge Youtube purge recently of "alt-right" and conservative voices. I know you lean to the liberal side and I am glad to see a liberal for free speech. Many aren't these days.

Regarding free speech, I'm sure this will get to the Supreme court at some point. A private company can do what they want. But a private company that is effectively a public resource has additional constraints. Utilities for example. The electric company can't deny you service based on your politics.

I wonder if social media will eventually come to be regarded that way. A public resource even if privately owned; and therefore subject to strict limitations on how it can behave.

Myself I'm for free speech. Not a lot of us left these days. It's an important fight. Once you lose free expression your society is toast.
someguy1
Member
 
Posts: 665
Joined: 08 Nov 2013


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby BadgerJelly on March 18th, 2018, 1:44 am 

I prefer the internet to news broadcasts or newspapers.

They are done for, and it is the challenge to their market tha has forced such an explosion. Also, the media was already biased and occassinoally dishonest to push this or that agenda. At least on the internet you can, if you have the time, find a cross section of diverse and differing opinions with different approaches - the question is more about whether or not people are willing to pu the time in and look.

It appears that podcasts, and such, over an hour long are actually popular.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5284
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby Braininvat on March 18th, 2018, 11:26 am 

someguy1 » March 17th, 2018, 8:45 pm wrote:
zetreque » March 16th, 2018, 12:33 am wrote:lief and whatever your belief on any controversial topic, is it right for large corporations that continually grow their domination over the internet be allowed to censor users' content?


I appreciate your saying that. There's been a huge Youtube purge recently of "alt-right" and conservative voices. I know you lean to the liberal side and I am glad to see a liberal for free speech. Many aren't these days.

Regarding free speech, I'm sure this will get to the Supreme court at some point. A private company can do what they want. But a private company that is effectively a public resource has additional constraints. Utilities for example. The electric company can't deny you service based on your politics.

I wonder if social media will eventually come to be regarded that way. A public resource even if privately owned; and therefore subject to strict limitations on how it can behave.

Myself I'm for free speech. Not a lot of us left these days. It's an important fight. Once you lose free expression your society is toast.


I agree with the utility analogy. I think a fair number still are for free speech, but live in electronic cloisters where they don't experience enough of it to remember the rules of discourse that it requires. Free speech also means free and unfettered inquiry. If your speech isn't informed by that, then it may be free and yet sadly narrow.


Zet, you could start a thread on mercury and what you are finding regarding its toxicity. That post made me curious.
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6495
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby Braininvat on March 18th, 2018, 1:43 pm 

BadgerJelly » March 17th, 2018, 10:44 pm wrote:I prefer the internet to news broadcasts or newspapers.

They are done for, and it is the challenge to their market tha has forced such an explosion. Also, the media was already biased and occassinoally dishonest to push this or that agenda. At least on the internet you can, if you have the time, find a cross section of diverse and differing opinions with different approaches - the question is more about whether or not people are willing to pu the time in and look.

It appears that podcasts, and such, over an hour long are actually popular.


The Net is good for getting a range of opinions, but keep in mind that professional journalists who toil on the investigation and reporting side (not to be confused with the columnists and editorial writers) do bring skills to the information floating out there that we may not have. It takes training and years of experience to find a coherent and accurate narrative of what's happening. We still need newspapers, in some form - it's the words that matter, not necessarily the ink and dead tree paste. The freedom of the press comes with the responsibility to keep an oath of fealty to the facts and uncovering the important ones.

One of the good innovations I've seen in TV journalism lately is the practice of reporting an issue and having a couple of informed people weigh in, each representative of a different place on the political spectrum. PBS, for example, is doing this a lot now, and will sit a conservative and a liberal source side by side and discuss the facts, as they are known, and get each perspective. This has caused PBS to get higher ratings on trustworthy in the past few years. It's still not as good as print, but it's not bad.
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6495
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby Event Horizon on March 18th, 2018, 4:45 pm 

I think you will find there is a movement campaigning for "Net Neutrality". The security services already have enough metadata to know your thoughts and habits stored away as it is. Governments want control everything, they want control of the internet too.
User avatar
Event Horizon
Member
 
Posts: 282
Joined: 05 Mar 2018
Location: England somewhere.


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby someguy1 on March 18th, 2018, 6:02 pm 

Braininvat » March 18th, 2018, 11:43 am wrote:PBS, for example, is doing this a lot now, and will sit a conservative and a liberal source side by side and discuss the facts ...


LOL. PBS features a wide spectrum of opinion ranging from slightly left-of-center statism to slightly right-of-center statism.
someguy1
Member
 
Posts: 665
Joined: 08 Nov 2013


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby BadgerJelly on March 18th, 2018, 9:14 pm 

Biv -

I believe they serve a purpose insofar as being a doorway to more indepth analysis. The TV and newpapers cannot really provide us with anything other than a stream of soundbites.

For big world stories they do serve a purpose to inform people about major events. When it comes to provided detailed information they fall short due to lack of space/time and/or company bias. The BBC are biased, but over all they do a reasonable job in most areas.

Journalists are people too. I've heard a few comments by people in politics talk about the number of journalists they find "honest". The list given by most was really short.

There is certainly the worry of people claiming to spread news without having any understanding of how to research. In that respect being trained in journalism is certainly something we should praise and encourage for anyone wishing to provide news.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5284
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby Braininvat on March 19th, 2018, 10:05 am 

someguy1 » March 18th, 2018, 3:02 pm wrote:
Braininvat » March 18th, 2018, 11:43 am wrote:PBS, for example, is doing this a lot now, and will sit a conservative and a liberal source side by side and discuss the facts ...


LOL. PBS features a wide spectrum of opinion ranging from slightly left-of-center statism to slightly right-of-center statism.


I've never found LOL a persuasive rhetorical point. PBS has talked with David Koch conservatives - not exactly "slightly right of center." I'm talking about the news segment, not the Brooks and Shields tete a tete. PBS is primarily news, so it would be a bit off track if they devoted the hour to gleaning opinions from all extremes of the spectrum.

Right now there's a trend in politics towards impugning the honesty of journalists, which may be part of the whole "fake news" campaign of the Right to undermine trust in what are, unfortunately for the Right, verified facts. People used to apologize, or even resign, when caught in a lie. Now some of them just cry fake news and pretend that tossing an epithet can alter reality.

The best newspapers are the ones independently owned, with no corporate affiliations or shadowy plutocrats pulling strings to keep stories out of print. Look for those, if you do want to go the print route.

I don't have time to debate this week, so I will leave it there. You can disagree, and don't take my silence this week as dismissive. Just don't want to recycle old arguments.
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6495
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby BadgerJelly on April 3rd, 2018, 11:09 pm 

A black man goes undercover in the alt-right | Theo E.J. Wilson

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqUaEJLfrLo

Nothing new, but its a nice vid :)
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5284
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby SciameriKen on April 4th, 2018, 10:12 am 

BadgerJelly » Wed Apr 04, 2018 3:09 am wrote:A black man goes undercover in the alt-right | Theo E.J. Wilson

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqUaEJLfrLo

Nothing new, but its a nice vid :)



Great video - thanks for posting! I am not sure I understood the solution he presented though -- was he suggesting trying to get people together in live settings to discuss issues?
User avatar
SciameriKen
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1388
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby Mossling on April 4th, 2018, 10:26 pm 

I liked most of his sentiment in the video, but I don't get how he can talk about divisive echo-chambers as bad and say that we should drop our ethnicity in order to be primarily human - in harmony with the seeking-out of and celebration of the diversity that our biological nature enjoys, and then talk about "my people in the black community".

He identifies with race in a socially significant way whilst apparently masquerading as a transcendentalist of sorts. In that respect he appears to have as much of a subversive racially-driven agenda as any other racially-motivated person does. In this respect, his doing a TED talk apparently fuels the flames, rather than helps to bring people together.

How could hip-hop have emerged without white people's musical instruments and record decks? How could certain white people have had the free time to invest in scientific achievements so much if they hadn't had black slaves to do their dayjobs for them? Replace the words black and white in these sentences with the word human and there are just innovative and corrupt humans doing their thing - the same story as there has been in every human society, no matter the level of racial homogeneity, since the dawn of history.

The internet seems to play on these racial divisions - these innate tendencies to 'invest in one's own selfish DNA' to the point that, as he says - whole alternate universes spring up, and yet as much as there is an instinct to 'care for our own', there is also an instinct to ensure that we are not breeding with our own too intimately, and to increase the survival potential of our DNA by shopping around in the gene pool for a key benefit that may fit our particular chosen strategy - a benefit that may be possessed by a human with different colour skin.

And yet the internet, as he says, is about 'out there', not what is below the level of the skin, and so it is likely that shallow racial views and identities will never be overcome on the internet.
User avatar
Mossling
Active Member
 
Posts: 1282
Joined: 02 Jul 2009


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby Mossling on April 6th, 2018, 10:13 pm 

Researchers develop device that can 'hear' your internal voice
The Guardian, Fri 6 Apr 2018.
The AlterEgo device managed an average of 92% transcription accuracy in a 10-person trial with about 15 minutes of customising to each person. That’s several percentage points below the 95%-plus accuracy rate that Google’s voice transcription service is capable of using a traditional microphone, but Kapur says the system will improve in accuracy over time. The human threshold for voice word accuracy is thought to be around 95%.


Are your phone camera and microphone spying on you?
The Guardian, Fri 6 Apr 2018.
Here is what the former FBI director James Comey said when he was asked back in September 2016 if he covered his laptop’s webcam with tape.

“Heck yeah, heck yeah. Also, I get mocked for a lot of things, and I am much mocked for that, but I hope people lock their cars … lock your doors at night. I have an alarm system, if you have an alarm system you should use it, I use mine.”

If he does, we all should.


Lol, game over for technological 'solutions'?
User avatar
Mossling
Active Member
 
Posts: 1282
Joined: 02 Jul 2009


Re: Thought Police corporate internet giants

Postby Dave_C on April 10th, 2018, 8:09 pm 

There's been a lot of news regarding echo chambers. My personal feeling is it's largely true but to be fair, I'll throw this reference out. They seem to have a study showing perhaps as little as 8% are in these echo chambers.

To do this we conducted a nationally representative online survey of 2,000 British adults. This is part of the larger Quello Search Project that examines the formation of political opinions and the digital media habits of adults in seven different countries. ...

Our analysis suggests that people are rarely caught in echo chambers. Only about 8% of the online adults in the UK are at risk of being trapped in an echo chamber.

Individuals actively check additional sources, change their minds based on information they find using search engines and seek out differing views. All of these are ways individuals can avoid that echo chamber effect.

http://theconversation.com/the-myth-of- ... mber-92544

I'll get back to that... Switching gears: Scientific American had a good article about Facebook's new fact check system.

... Facebook soon rolled out new tools to combat the spread of fake news. As a spokesman puts it, “We cannot become arbiters of truth ourselves.”

Instead, the new tools take four approaches, which Facebook intends to study and enhance over time.

First: If you tap the V button at the top right of a post and then choose “Report this post,” you’ll see a new option called “It’s a fake news story.” ...

Second: If enough people flag a story as fake, it will be sent to a fact-checking organization like Snopes.com or PolitiFact. And if the outfit determines that yes, the story is bogus, it will appear on Facebook with a red banner that says, “Disputed by Third-Party Fact Checkers.” That banner will include a link to the fact checkers’ article explaining why the story is false. (If you try to share it, you’ll see a similar message.) ...

Third: Facebook will employ software to help identify fake stories. For example, Facebook has learned that when lots of people read a certain article but then don’t share it, it’s often because the story is phony.

Fourth: Facebook is trying to shut down the financial incentive for fakers.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... fake-news/

Overall, I'm in favor of even the very large internet sites like YouTube and Facebook attempting to monitor and address 'fake news' stories. I do see evidence of 'echo chambers'. It seems to me we all really need to TRY and find various different sources for news (as the first article above suggests), especially if it's political.

I also think echo chambers might be largely self inflicted. We tend to look for and read those stories that we agree with. If we don't agree with them, it's a buzzkill so the solution is simple. No buzzkill if we stop reading stories we disagree with.

The better solution seems to be to fact check those large internet sites like Facebook & YouTube. And facts are only part of the problem. Alternative facts seem to be spread by all sides to some degree or other. We should welcome the chance to weed out the BS. That doesn't mean either political side is going to suddenly lose their factual supporting information since most of that is opinionated anyway. But at least getting the facts correct to begin with is a good first step towards forming a knowledgeable majority.
User avatar
Dave_C
Member
 
Posts: 305
Joined: 08 Jun 2014
Location: Allentown



Return to Lounge Area

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests