Shake747

I’d love a world like that too, and I think most people would. There’s just too many different cultures and opposing views that we won’t be able to have just a single truth though. Like the Palestine vs Israel stuff for example.

It’d be very dangerous if there was a small governing body of people that gets to decide what’s truth and what isn’t. Maybe if we could figure that out openly, with the public, and have it decentralized and no singular group could control a narrative, maybe we’d inch closer to that ideal

Fair enough, but censorship won’t fix the underlying issue that people aren’t taking the time to think about what they’re reading/watching. It might make it worse once it becomes information “they don’t want you to see”

All the media outlets say stupid shit like that lol. Extreme emotions is what drives viewership for all of them.

All I’m saying is I’d rather have it out in the open (so you can see the stupidity, just like you did with Fox) - rather than censored.

How would you know Fox corp is full of bad actors without seeing actions like that? Now you know not to trust them, and the people it’s connected to.

Fascists restrict speech, more than anyone else.

That restricted speech, coupled with propaganda is what is dangerous. The fact that there’s propaganda, and then a completely opposing view also existing, is a good thing. It means free speech is working and we all need to be diligent about what we take in. “Don’t believe everything you read!”

I don’t want to outsource the cognitive load of who and what I should be trusting, while watching what I say, because that’s exactly how you end up in a fascist state

I’d argue it’s always been 10:1, we just have access to all of it at the click of a button, and it’s all now recorded - remember how many old wives tales used to get shared around back then?

“Bubblegum stays in your stomach for YEARS!” “Shaving makes your hair come back thicker” “Don’t crack your knuckles, it’ll give you arthritis!”

And now we have the ability to cast these claims against their opposers, where as before it would’ve been much more difficult to uncover.

But to your point about believing people with skin in the game, I’d say that’s a great idea - if we can keep it decentralized and as open to the public as possible, all at the same time. Pharmaceutical companies have a lot of exemptions from this kind of thing though, we’d need a method for them as well

Where and how do you draw the line between opinion and misinformation? And who is the arbiter of truth?

Most issues that are controversial are social/political issues. Like Palestine vs Israel - other than “people are dying on both side” what can we say that wouldn’t be a subjective view?

Many things that are subjective, can be spun to be viewed objectively as well. The media is good at appearing like this.

Sometimes even scientific issues arise in the form of skewed/incomplete data pushed by corporations to give their product the go ahead or to make a point, rather than objectively study. See the sugar or tobacco industries as an example. Even “the food pyramid” that was pushed on us all as kids was a lie from skewed studies.

This is sort of the consequence of free speech, one that we currently don’t have a solution for. Personally, I’d rather see “misinformation” than have anything censored. This at least gives you the power to infer what you want, and decide who the good and bad actors are

Did you read that link you posted? Lmao

If you get past the first paragraph, suddenly there’s really no praising and they talk about how bad health care is in Cuba and how many try to defect as they are forced into horrible conditions.

From that article:

“He said, “We were placed in slums with a high level of violence, under constant monitoring by the Bolivarian brigades [political police], who are supposed to offer protection but also report any suspicious activities and assure that we carry out our `revolutionary’ duty, indoctrinating our patients to vote for Chávez. If we refuse to do so we are sent back to Cuba.””

That’s a fair criticism, we do need to find a better way

I was thinking more so about the ~7,000 - 8,000 doctors since 2006 that defected from Cuba as soon as they were able to.

Are you referring to the loosely defined “kulaks” (wealthy peasants) that were exiled/killed when the Soviet Union was created?

I wonder if this meme still applies to those who have fled communist countries?

Its kind of ironic that Lemmy was created to take away centralized power, but the same people want to create a communistic society which will…centralize the power?

Yeah but I’d rather not have the mods remove anything - it’s the ol’ “how do we fact check the fact checkers” conundrum.

One instance of an object or subject, can be viewed completely differently relative to your position in space and time. The observations of how something is functioning can be completely different from one observer to another, yet they can both be correct at the same time.

So how exactly do you tell the truths from the untruths without proving intentional manipulation in the first place?

If energy becomes cheap, they lose money. If the stock market doesn’t see their profits rise every quarter, they will trade for less.

These major corps think of societal impact only in the monetary/cash flow sense and lobby heavily to support their position.

We’d need to adjust some rules, and educate more people on nuclear power

OpenAi’s majority share holder is Microsoft, and they’ve already given OpenAI billions

“Handmaid’s tail etc”?

How do you give one example of 25% of the chart and say “because of this one weird thing, basically everything equals the middle circle”

Yeah, but the HR people rely on paycheques from corporate. And corporate often has enough resources to make legal battles difficult at best.

Even if their interests are aligned with you, they probably won’t have a job at the end

Well yeah, as much as I dislike apple, the majority of Google’s income comes from advertising - and to be the best at it, they need to have more personal data than everyone else, which = lots of tracking.

How do we open source hardware and make it competitive? If we figure that out, maybe we can break free of yet another 2 party system we’re creating lol

It doesn’t really matter, he’s just a putz

Lol no, this is just how it goes on Lemmy in political channels. If you don’t want negative karma here, don’t say anything that objects to “left leaning views” (how far left can vary)

It’s good to not solely exist in agreeable echo chambers, so here I am

Might be a nice change of pace, he’s been fucking me for a while now.

With the white supremacy shit, I was referring to Chris Barber and Tamara Lich - the two most prominent leaders of that whole thing.

I didn’t have the information about Pat King prior, so again thank you for that - I stand partially corrected.

The message that shouldn’t be destroyed is basically “hold your government accountable, and do not let them overstep”. Too many of these politicians get away with everything, and it feels like infighting is all we’re left with. At the very least I think this is something we can agree on.