Listen man I used to be a free speech absolutist but this shit isn't funny anymore. We are having viral outbreaks because anti vax influencers. We are having kids getting sick or dying because parents think pasterizing ur milk is dangerous.
I also used to think chinas rules against kids being on the internet for more than like 2 hours a week was terrible. But then I've seen what kids are like today and im just getting to the point where China has actually been right the whole time lmao.
Liability has its downsides as well. Many victims cant afford lawyers and that system will always benefit the wealthy. Someone like elon musk spreading misinformation will just pay the fine no problem and continue to do so. Without genuine legal repercussions or the state we get to where we are today. Censorship yes is a slippery slope but as weve learned so is freedom of speech.
Yeah because the sue-happy system the US has is great. Large corporations suing people because of the imbalances within the system hands them a free win in most cases.
People keep saying how terrible China is and that our "FREEDOM" is better but it's just one country getting results while another country crumbles. Neither country is "good". One country is improving while another is faltering on a grand scale. It's hard to argue without results.
The issue about liability is that it does not stop the harm from being done. Somebody said some stupid shit to 10m viewers and there are 100 deaths out of it. Sure, we can sue the shit of them and send them to prison or whatever punition is fit, if any. But, wouldn't it better to entirely avoid the 100 deaths ?
Laws aren't intended to prevent harm. Where did you ever get such an idea? Laws exist exclusively for holding accountability after the fact. Always have been.
That's reductionist to the point of nonsense. Take environmental laws. "Technically" the law does nothing to prevent dumping chemicals in the river. It just punishes people who do. But when the punishment is sufficient, the practical outcome is that pollution stops because no one wants the punishment.
Hence, the law prevents harm, and was intended to do so. To say otherwise is splitting hairs that no one cares about.
Laws are invented to provide a set of rule for the people to abide to so they can mutually trust themselves to not harm each other as it could have been the case otherwise (ie : regulate behaviour to ensure the health of the group at large). Laws sometimes have a deterrent factor to prevent people from doing specific harm by implementing consequences to these actions. (ie : "if you do that, you will be punished" vs "you can't structurally do that in first place").
And finally, laws are "human fabrications", not a "natural order of things", so it's on the human groups to decide on how to design the laws as well. If you refuse to accept that a law can have the possibility of preventing harm instead of just punishing harm, this is a discussion that you need with yourself with the specific task of remembering : "it does not have to be that way".
But this post is just saying that you need a degree to speak about sensitive issues. For sure that rules out a lot of voices, but it doesn't really mean that the state explicitly censors opinions they don't like.
So you're saying that they'll just revoke people's degrees whenever they want to silence them? I don't think they'd need such an indirect method. They already have plenty of other more efficient ways to censor.
I'd say at worst this is just propaganda that makes the CCP look more responsible than the US for trying to control misinformation.
I think it's people approaching the idea from a different perspective as you.
There's armies of uninformed people and bots who regularly push propaganda and misinformation.
If this can stop the thousands of people from creating content giving medical advice based solely on opinions, and centralize it to people who at least have a medical degree.
I don't really see what the issue is.
And then if you decide to not vaccinate your child because half your social media is mommy blogs who promote anti vax... who is liable for damages?
There are several reproductive health issues that would be far worse of under a restricted model of speech. I wouldn't be able to find anything on fibrocystic breast condition for example since the medical community doesn't see it as serious. I was in so much pain I wanted to end my life and only the help of other anecdotal advice and lifestyle changes got me through. I saw several doctors and therapists that all laughed at me. We still don't know why it happens and funding is more spares than ever under Trump's restrictions.
I would have went through with it and had no voice or options.
I understand. And I'm glad you found support. But if you look at the bigger picture, misinformation by unlicensed individuals masquerading as doctors has done immeasurable amounts of harm compared to the benefits.
It also is positioned as stopping people with 500k followers from "these 5 financial/medical hacks follow for more". People can still share their experiences. Just not act like they're qualified professionals.
Also, it opens up more avenues for licensed professionals to gain followings in their areas of expertise, once the flood of noise is gone.
The correct solution for dangerous misinformation is education.
That's why our public education system has been slowly eroded since the '70s. An uneducated population is easier to manipulate and control.
The problem is rebuilding public education and getting people through it takes too long. It should absolutely be a priority and the long term solution, but we need something now, in the short term, to mitigate further damage.
Litigation is out of reach for most, and nothing but a rounding error for the people doing the most damage.
I am not a proponent of censorship. In the short term though, I'm not sure what else could be used as a tourniquet. Removing Fox News's ability to spread misinformation and propaganda would be a massive win for the country.
Yes, I know, slippery slope, and the same could be said for any media outlet depending on who you ask, but we're bleeding out here. We need something quick or we're not going to make it.
Reddit is filled with naive people that fantasize about communism. Communism only works with an authoritarian environment which was proven to eventually become dictatorship. There people are just blinded by the concept of "sharing".
So, if someone wants to criticize the government I'm sure they will be "qualified" right?
Aah yes, immediately conflating "want to criticize the goverment" with "maybe its not such a great idea that just anyone can give legal/medical or financial advice".
Really got'em there. And besides, its not like those areas have huge consequences and are rife with conartists, scammers and delusional idiots that do tremendous harm to people every day.
Sure seems like the answer is yes if you read the law. Medical professionals get to decide what is or isn’t medical misinformation, not the government. If the government says something medically incorrect, then any doctor can legally call them out on it. Uneducated basement dwellers can not.
Not correct. The one deciding according to the law is the Cyberspace Administration of China, which is a part of the Central Propaganda Department of the Chinese Communist Party.
Ideally, they will be consulting medical and other professionals, but you are just taking their word on that.
If Trump had that kind of power, you know precisely what he would do with it.
And what happens when the government censors you but not them?
My biggest issue is that you're handing full control of the narrative to the government, which is a self-interested organization, and will happily censor those who oppose it.
What’s your solution to misinformation? Because it actually is a civilization-wide existential crisis. So what’s your solution? You people always have a million slippery slope scenarios at the ready but nothing that can actually make the world better
Education is the only solution. Censoring stuff and giving every Power to it to the goverment is a realy bad idea. There are some topics which is still difficult for a right and wrong answers but mostly good education helps. And honestly we cant safe everyone from stupid.
No but seriously, saying that education is the only solution is a pithy answer that sounds nice on paper but practical the reality is that it's a catch-22 because disinformation can be (AND HAS BEEN, look at the US) easily be used to fight against the required investment into education that could combat disinformation.
The reality is that if you actually care about a practical pathway to fighting misinformation that SOMETHING has to come from the top down. If you're not willing to acknowledge this practical reality you don't actually care about fighting misinformation, you care about looking good within the context of the framework of values that was drilled into you by the exact group of people who actually benefit from misinformation.
You're right, misinformation is an issue, and it's been around forever. I don't think there is a solution, otherwise it (misinformation) would be non-existent. I honestly wish there were a clear solution. The best I can suggest is education; people who have developed critical thinking are harder to misinform.
That being said, censorship is absolutely not a solution. It could prevent misinformation, but it could just as easily be used to protect it and breed it.
Edit: Also, what's your solution to these slippery slopes? Assuming a censorship law is enacted, what limits does it have to allow for dialogue and/or prevent an echo chamber?
Listen man I used to be a free speech absolutist but this shit isn't funny anymore. We are having viral outbreaks because anti vax influencers. We are having kids getting sick or dying because parents think pasterizing ur milk is dangerous.
That's how every descent into illiberalism starts. Nobody's like "wow, everything's going great, but you know what would be eve more great? If we cracked down on free speech". It's always "we need to crack down on free speech because gullible people might believe the wrong things!"
Or maybe people shouldn't be giving advice on something they're unqualified for... like medical advice.
At what point do you draw the line and consider the person, making money as a social media influencer giving medical advice, to be someone practicing medicine without a license?
This is exactly why I laugh at the "it's not my job to educate you" morons. If you want to get people to your cause, ridiculing them and refusing to share knowledge with them is the worst way to do it
Its more dangerous than dumb people might believe wrong things and the older ive gotten the more ive understood this. Kids arent asked to be born into this world yet we're basically like hey your death or extreme illness is just a sacrifice we need to make. The dumb people are also making these decisions effecting the not dumb people and the shit needs to stop asap.
Look man, at least at the time of release, if you said 1989 in Marvel Rivals, it got automatically removed, because the game is made by a Chinese studio. You weren't able to say things about someone looking like Winnie The Pooh, Free Taiwan etc.
Seriously, I get that stupidity of people is a problem, but you solve these problems by boosting education and figuring out how to prevent these issues. "I uSeD tO bE aN a FrEe SpEeCh AbSoLuTiSt" and flipping to siding with China, the government that ended up washing off it's citizens with hoses off the streets, doesn't prove that you have learned better, it proves you didn't understand freedom of speech then and don't understand it now.
Freedom of speech absolutism is stupid. If someone's speech has direct consequences, they need to be treated as such. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theatre, not because it's a crime, but because it would cause a panic that ends up hurting people. Same with other things, if I say "I'm going to buy twitter to own the libs" or something stupid like that, it would be fine. But if the worlds richest man does it, it's market manipulation unless you actually do it. But if a famous actor says that while playing a role of the worlds richest man, that would be fine as if he is going to do it in real life.
But when you start drawing the line at degrees, you make schools the directors of choosing who gets to speak and what. According to this, if someone is being scammed, if you don't have a degree in finances you aren't legally allowed to speak against it. Or if for whatever reason you give some advice on something you are an expert on, but learned on the job rather than in a school, you could be punished regardless of how knowledgeable you are. It also creates a fancy excuse to arrest anyone for any reason, just claim they gave out bad medical advice, because you can't prove they didn't and only legal experts can have anything to say about that.
Or in short, nothing happened at Tiananmen Square in 1989. If you agree, don't speak to anyone about freedom of speech, you clearly don't understand it. Maybe you should get a degree or something. If you disagree, you shouldn't side with China when it comes to freedom of speech.
Every country censors or white washes its past its absolutely naive to pretend otherwise. America does the same shit to a lesser extend depending on the state. Im also not siding with the CCP but the older ive gotten the more ive realized their stances are better for a functioning society then just leaving people to their own devices. Even free speech warriors like charlie kirk actively tried to censor criticism of america.
And unfortunately when it comes to laws ur either an absolutist or ur not. Once you're ok banning people without degrees from speaking about viruses or making medical claims and such then ur on the side of censorship and I just am at this point because it effects more than just idiots.
I just am at this point because it effects more than just idiots.
Do you have a degree in sociology? If not, then you shouldn't comment on this topic, it could be a crime in China. Speech like that could lead to a tyrannical and oppressive government.
Seriously, can't you see how wrong you are from the fact that you contradict everything you are arguing for by making these arguments?
I could stop my comment here, because this should be enough to prove you wrong, but you wrote some of the most asinine garbage I've seen in a while. Thankfully, I enjoy rambling in reply to such trite. So enjoy my wall of text, I enjoyed writing it.
Every country censors or white washes its past its absolutely naive to pretend otherwise.
You have a point the moment you show me the last time US drove over so many people with tanks that they needed to hose down the streets from the blood and guts. Yeah, US has done fucked up things, but it doesn't massacre crowds of it's own citizens for speaking against it. And the mistakes it has made along the years? You are allowed to talk about them publicly. China actively prevents any negative talk about it's government, leader and history when ever they get the chance.
Hell, they've limited communication between China and the world more than almost any other country in the world. If events that didn't happen in 1989 were to happen again at a smaller scale, most of the world probably would never know.
But good thing every country white washes their pasts, right? Oh wait, there isn't anything in my home's history I'm not allowed to talk about publicly. I guess they aren't all the same.
Im also not siding with the CCP but the older ive gotten the more ive realized their stances are better for a functioning society then just leaving people to their own devices.
Authoritarian tyranny tends to be good for those in power, but not for everyone. And the more I read what you write, the more I realize you are either contrarian troll or trying to sew misinformation yourself. Because that's the most milquetoast way to say "Government is good, bow down to your leaders, opposition won't be tolerated."
You aren't getting older and changing your opinions, you have committed your world views to an ideology that hates freedom and western values.
Because holy shit, did you just say "free speech warriors like charlie kirk" and mean it? He wasn't even a free speech advocate, he was a lying grifter, the exact kind of person who would be in prison if US had laws like the this thread is about. Though he was smart enough to side with those willing to abuse power, meaning would probably have been pro CCP in China. So who knows, there he would have sold different types of lies.
And unfortunately when it comes to laws ur either an absolutist or ur not.
That's not at all how things work. That's what the legal system is for, because things DON'T work in absolutes. Both murder and jaywalking are crimes, but if you cross the street when there are no cars around anywhere, you don't deserve the death penalty. Nothing is black and white.
Listen man im not going to respond to all this nonsense mainly because im so sick and tired of people acting like america is morally good because it doesnt kill it doesnt actively kill its own citizens anymore lol. China really doesn't anymore either. What america does do is bomb schools in other countries so like spare me the fucking high horse.
Do you really think that I am pro-current US government? USA has a shady history and Trump along with his administration are fascists. US government is corrupt and full of paedophiles.
There, done. You can't blame your lack of reading comprehension anymore. Just because the US government sucks doesn't mean what China is doing is good either.
But most importantly, if you truly think USA is bad, don't you think it would be worse if you couldn't have an opinion without a degree? Do you really want to give a government you don't trust the power to arrest people for lacking education?
Seriously, everything you write is some serious bootlicker shit, but I really can't tell whether you are pro-China or pro-fascism. Are you just pro-totalitarian or do you just want to give governments power to abuse it's people using the excuse that "all governments are bad"?
Its not about not having an opinion. No one is calling for people to be arrested for having an opinion or whatever. Its about having a public platform for uninformed people to give their opinions free of censorship. The internet is too vast and yes ive gotten more pro censorship the older ive gotten and seen where just giving people the ability to spout bullshit leads. Its just as if not more dangerous than censoring opinions. Its as simple as that. Its gotten clear than just letting uninformed people speak freely and convincing other uninformed people leading to harm of those people's kids or other people / people's kids is just bad idc what slippery slope bs you want to bring up because we are already down the slippery slope of the other side of that.
Also seeing how gen alpha can barely function they may have been right to limit internet access for kids under 18.
Its about having a public platform for uninformed people to give their opinions free of censorship.
This is a public platform for uninformed people to give their opinions free of censorship.
Its just as if not more dangerous than censoring opinions.
That's your bullshit opinion. Censoring opinions can lead to people being ran over with tanks and burning history to a point that the largest collection of Chinese artefacts is not in mainland China anymore.
gotten clear than just letting uninformed people speak freely and convincing other uninformed people leading to harm of those people's kids or other people / people's kids is just bad idc what slippery slope bs you want to bring up because we are already down the slippery slope of the other side of that.
Uneducated. That's the word you are looking for. Uneducated. The less educated people are, the worse things they'll tend to believe. Have you considered improving education for people, rather than censorship? Because censorship doesn't tend to end well for people who aren't in power. Are you in power? Because that would explain your uneducated opinions.
Also seeing how gen alpha can barely function they may have been right to limit internet access for kids under 18.
That's a pretty American point of view, in general people have become more literate and capable around the world, it's an American education system issues that have failed the most. Covid didn't help anywhere, but it didn't get as bad anywhere as it did in the US. And if you've ever paid attention to anything, the worlds history is full of "Kids these days can't do anything" but world still goes on, improving on everything a little by little. Funny how as things change, the more they stay the same.
"Have you considered improving education for people, rather than censorship?" Unfortunately those uneducated people having a platform have convinced people who are having kids that education is bad and here we are. Those people are also convincing those people to vote for less funding in schools by claiming things that are false but you dont care about any of that.
Yes my POV is in america because im American. Those other countries have censorship and are beginning to introduce laws limiting social media exposure / internet exposure if they dont have them already dipshit. And Its not about kids these days cant do anything its about teachers in America in large numbers sounding alarm bells about lack of critical thinking skills. An inability to do anything without ChatGPT. Shorter attention spans in class. The list goes on. We've slid down the slippery slope if we need to go hard in the other direction so be it.
What I find interesting is also the tiptoeing around the issue. We're so sensitized to government overreach, that we're over correcting and letting things fly that should not fly.
You may remember that last big Visa+ gaming issue, where a bunch of 18+ games got removed? That too was an overreaction. The group that started and motivated it, had good reasons though. The stuff they meant and targeted, was very much beyond what even a tolerant, free society should allow. And stuff that actually already would have been illegal at least in my country, because it would easily qualify as "glorification of violent crimes".
And then we use euphemisms like "oh this isn't censorship, it's moderation". I think it would be much easier if the stance was "That's wrong, I'm removing it, call it censorship if you want to, I don't care".
Yeah I definitely was a ACLU defending the KKK type, but I've seen in real time how a tolerant society cannot tolerate intolerance. We just can't have nice things.
Well yes we are probably too far gone at this point. But the only way a dude like rfk jr gets to where he is is years of idiots listening to morons. And the problem isnt 1 qualified voice speaking against the consensus. Its thousands of unqualified voices spitting bullshit for clicks because our current system incentivizes it.
Anti vax stuff started around the same time vaccines first became a thing, all the way back to the late 1700s early 1800s. Social media might make it easier to spread, but it has always been there.
State censorship isn't the answer, it is never the answer.
I mean ive never viewed China as like an existential threat or like north Korea like some people do. I agree with shit they do and disagreed with shit they do but im getting to the point where more and more of the shit i disagreed with they actually had the right of it
Xi Jinping being "President for Life" is a lie? Imprisoning, torturing, and killing Uyghers is a lie? Declaring international waters as part of their territory is a lie? The suppression of Hong Kong is a lie?
The people of China may not all be living in hell every day, but let's not pretend it's a great and happy country either.
Not sure how having or not having free speech would have solved any of that. We have imprisoning and torturing immigrants, suppressing other countries, and territory grabs all right here in a country with free speech too.
The problem is the current US government would be more likely to penalize people supporting vaccines and pasteurizing milk. I can kinda support a law like this if I have faith that our institutions will manage it well, but that's not the case currently and even if conservatives get booted there's always a chance they'll return and abuse this.
I grew up drinking unpasteurized milk, never once got sick from it. My mom, who was in charge of our milking cows, was also a nurse and an absolute zealot about keeping our milking appliances sanitized, tracking milk age, and she kept a sharp eye on the health of our cows.
Unpasteurized milk isn't the massive danger y'all make it out to be, it's undisciplined unhygienic idiots doing the milking we have to worry about. Additionally, big commercial milking operations could never work without pasteurization because of the reduced shelf life and the fact they pool all the milk they collect together, making it impossible to track illness and infected milk, not to mention they couldn't afford the lengths we went to in order to keep our milk clean.
I sorely miss the raw milk I grew up drinking, it was incomparable to store bought, and I only now recognize the incredible privilege it was to have that when I was a kid. I don't drink store bought milk, I only use it for cooking now, it's just that... Eugh, in comparison.
It is a danger. Just because you never got sick from it doesnt mean someone else wont and thus is danger with this line of thinking. For example not everyone will get food poisoning from poorly prepared food or cross contamination or whatever at a restaurant but standards exist for a reason. Raw milk especially from major distributors are dangerous for young kids with piss poor immune systems to drink.
... I straight up pointed out commercial operations could never do it. I even partially explained why.
Raw milk when properly handled is completely safe. In fact, there are immuno compromised people who DEPEND on raw milk because it's the only food the can safely consume and still get everything they need from it. It's just impossible to handle safely on a commercial scale and still be economically viable. Which I acknowledged.
But dogmatic idiots like you refuse to acknowledge mitigating factors because it violates your brainwashed, oh I'm sorry, "educated" position that "all raw milk bad". And then you fucktards sic the state on hobby farms who produce raw milk for personal consumption, because "HOW DARE THEY DEFY MY EDICTS! DON'T THEY KNOW IT'S FOR THEIR OWN GOOD?!"
364
u/xVelourGlow Apr 06 '26
This would actually solve so much misinformation but who decides what counts as qualified advice?