[HN Gopher] Royal Society cautions against censorship of scienti...
___________________________________________________________________
Royal Society cautions against censorship of scientific
misinformation online
Author : steelstraw
Score : 37 points
Date : 2022-01-30 21:47 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (royalsociety.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (royalsociety.org)
| throwaway22032 wrote:
| The issue that plagues us is a lack of trust in long-standing
| societal authorities.
|
| We can't follow the entire scientific proof chain for every piece
| of information we encounter, because we don't have time.
|
| So we rely on authority to some extent, whether that be peer
| review, government, independent bodies, etc.
|
| We need to be able to trust that these bodies are telling us the
| truth and aren't seeking to mislead us. Because when we start to
| doubt them, we then inevitably elect alternative bodies, simply
| due to limited thinking capacity/time - as explained above it's
| impossible to do otherwise, no-one derives from first principles
| every opinion they hold.
|
| The best way, _overall_, to convince someone to do something, is
| by clearly explaining to them the positives and negatives and
| letting them come to their own conclusion.
|
| It doesn't always work, and there are specific situations (e.g.
| someone is holding a gun to your face) in which the cost/benefit
| analysis is very different - in such a situation, the short term
| is all that exists, the long term effect of misplaced trust is
| irrelevant - you simply have to neutralize them.
|
| But in general, I'm absolutely sure that education over coercion
| is the correct approach for society.
|
| Because if you force them, sure, you've got a short term win, at
| the long term cost of trust. What is the long term cost of lost
| trust?
| shadowgovt wrote:
| What do you do while education lags where it needs to be?
| Because enough education to understand, say, climate change
| takes about a decade.
|
| (... And that's assuming it can be provided without being shut
| down as "indoctrination").
| ozfive wrote:
| Can we get an idea of the bias of this mathematician concerning
| vaccinations? Specifically the Covid-19 vaccines. If question of
| authority should be respected then indeed transparency swings
| both ways. It's been proven that the scientific community has
| been compromised by individuals who may not have the best
| interests of society which is evident with Nurses and some
| doctors taking up the position against vaccination. Be vigilant
| in finding out what the background and intentions are of people
| making claims such as these. There is a healthy dose of
| scepticism and then there are the paranoids that spend a huge
| amount of their time and resources to circumvent positive movings
| of our global society. Those individuals have infiltrated
| positions of power and authority themselves to the detriment of
| society.
|
| When hundreds of millions of people have received a vaccination
| with minimal outcomes of death there is no longer an excuse to
| argue against it. The benefit has outweighed the cost long ago.
| Any disinformation now is a danger to society and ignorance that
| is easily swayed by any opinion.
| maskil wrote:
| "excuse to argue against it" is a very slippery slope.
|
| There should be no excuses required to exercise free speech and
| free inquiry.
|
| All you've attempted to do here is impugn the motives of those
| holding a position contrary to your own without addressing
| their arguments.
| limecat wrote:
| You're taking an experimental prophylactic against a disease
| with a 99.9% survival rate. Probably higher if you're under 50.
| And we still don't really know how safe it is, because the
| 'gold standard' data (double blind testing) is absent, save for
| 2 months' of Pfizer data. Your benefit has apparently
| outweighed your cost. Fine. Mine hasn't. I like to read any and
| all opinions, regardless of 'bias'. We all have biases, whether
| we realise or not. I'm intelligent enough to figure them out. I
| don't need 'we' getting 'an idea' of 'the bias'. I'll probably
| get flagged/banned/cancelled for my opinion, but such is life.
| whatshisface wrote:
| Even if you're wrong, I think it's interesting that the only
| lever they think they have to change your mind is "force
| you." The idea of having a serious dialogue is so far from
| their minds (maybe because of decades of training in PR
| disaster scenarios - chemical spills, manufacturing
| accidents, drugs that kill - where the establishment is
| unambiguously in the wrong?) that even when they're right,
| they act like they're wrong.
|
| If the CEO of CNN wanted to convince their toddler to go to
| the bathroom, they'd start by compiling dossiers to discredit
| anyone with large bladders.
|
| ('They', in this, refers to the media/corporate PR/press
| release system that is used to determine public opinion.)
| tempnow987 wrote:
| Yep, this is the real indicator.
|
| What I'm a bit confused about is why they put so much focus
| on lecturing folks, demanding things, and so little focus
| on things that would help.
|
| I wore a mask before anyone except folks in Chinatown where
| I am. I was told not to believe "misinformation" way back
| then. This was when they were telling us masks did nothing,
| only wear if you are symptomatic etc.
| shadowgovt wrote:
| > I'm intelligent enough to figure them out.
|
| That's the epistemological problem with misinformation.
|
| How does one _know_ one is intelligent enough if one is
| trying to evaluate from misinformation? Shouldn 't the
| premise "garbage in, garbage out" apply?
| choward wrote:
| > Can we get an idea of the bias of this mathematician
| concerning vaccinations? Specifically the Covid-19 vaccines.
|
| > Be vigilant in finding out what the background and intentions
| are of people making claims such as these.
|
| I swear every time anyone says anything interpreted as "anti
| vax" the very first thing people do is an ad hominem character
| attacks. Do you say this about the people pushing mandates
| hard?
|
| > When hundreds of millions of people have received a
| vaccination with minimal outcomes of death there is no longer
| an excuse to argue against it
|
| That's just like your opinion. Even if that's the case people
| should still be free to choose. There are plenty of people who
| trust the data and are vaccinated and are against mandates.
| This will come of as rude but a don't care: people like you are
| a far bigger danger to society than people who don't believe in
| vaccine mandates.
| zosima wrote:
| A healthy society must have a diversity of opinion, and that
| includes being allowed to be against vaccination and expressing
| that viewpoint.
|
| The overton window is getting ridiculously narrow right now and
| it's definitely not for the benefit of society, truth nor
| probably even for the general health.
|
| The evidence for the benefits of vaccines can speak for itself,
| so there is really no point in maligning anyone.
|
| But there is definitely a lot of valid debate on who should be
| vaccinated and how much, and minimizing the overton window will
| stifle that debate.
| [deleted]
| prox wrote:
| I agree, and I like to add there is a difference between
| censorship of information and stopping propaganda. Some groups
| make a claim (say against vaccination) which is fine by itself,
| but when people run with it, amplify it to influence others,
| then it goes into propaganda territory.
|
| Healthy debates need a good context and a platform that allows
| for that. I don't know of many platforms except here in HN and
| perhaps the debates I had in IRC channels.
| enchiridion wrote:
| There is no difference. Just label anything you want to
| censor as propaganda.
| prox wrote:
| That is a unsubstantive statement in my view. Who is
| labeling here, why and what context?
| enchiridion wrote:
| In any context. If someone thinks or knows something is
| propaganda they should exercise their free speech to
| point that out.
|
| Not even propaganda should be censored.
|
| Then again propaganda often implies it's coming from a
| government. In that case the people and their
| representatives should have the power to prevent or
| retract statements if needed.
| tempnow987 wrote:
| I'm very curious about the folks pushing vaccines
|
| 6,000 scientists signed the John Snow Memorandum which states
|
| "there is no evidence for lasting protective immunity to SARS-
| CoV-2 following natural infection."
|
| https://www.johnsnowmemo.com/john-snow-memo.html
|
| The CDC director is a signer here.
|
| This is so obviously likely totally false it's mind boggling.
|
| We've been told by experts that
|
| a) masks don't work - despite the fact that they've
| historically worked against other airborne pathogens.
|
| b) that a cloth mask is fine.
|
| ...
|
| and the list goes on.
|
| I ignored this and believed in the "misinformation" of N95 with
| a vent which dramatically increases comfort and wearability.
|
| Now we are are told that natural immunity from our immune
| system, which has handled MANY MANY influenzas and diseases of
| the past, doesn't work against COVID, despite evidence from
| things like SARS and MERS that the immune system remains pretty
| darn amazing with longer lasting protection.
|
| You can't actually get hard data on this claim, despite
| insanely high case rates that should make analysis trivial.
|
| So again a likely lie by the vaccine pushers, that if you've
| been infected with covid you are are not at reduced risk of re-
| infection.
|
| I'll give it three months and watch them eat crow again.
|
| Honestly, there is no excuse for this crap from those who
| insist on lecturing us about "dangers to society". We need
| honesty, integrity and facts, not lecturing, hectoring and
| lies.
| toolz wrote:
| So many "misinformation censorship" proponents seem to have
| quickly forgotten just how much literally everyone in public
| health has spread misinformation this pandemic. It's unavoidable
| being wrong and often the cost of making claims without
| unimpeachable evidence is higher than the cost of being wrong.
| Name me a public health official who regularly made
| recommendations this pandemic and I'll show you misinformation.
|
| The real issue here, in my opinion, is attributing malice so
| quickly and with extreme prejudice. Tensions are high and it
| seems to have become commonplace to assign ill-intent to the
| other tribe way too easily. In my opinion the answer to all of
| these problems is compassion and statistical thinking. Most
| people mean well and often times the only way you can get people
| to go to extremes is to negatively reinforce them into deeply
| entrenched tribal thinking.
|
| It will always be a safer assumption to assume somebody means
| well even when they are wrong. Humans did not become the dominant
| species on this planet without cooperation and pro-social
| behaviors.
| tempnow987 wrote:
| The anti mask, anti N95 masks with exhalation valve stuff has
| been the worst here I think.
|
| If you would let folks wear N95 with exhalation valves (highly
| comfortable) it just makes it easier for folks to protect
| themselves (and indirectly others).
|
| And for those who don't care, let's distinguish slightly
| between making sure those who want to protect themselves as
| much as possible can, and the need to force people down a path
| which for the < 29 year olds really doesn't not have hi
| mortality rates, and for whom vaccination does not eliminate
| the disease the way it might something like smallpox etc.
|
| My own view is the battle is largely lost already by the health
| authorities. Locally we have an indoor mask mandate including
| offices with all staff fully vaxed, and the natural desire to
| comply with this has gotten lower and lower if you are pretty
| spread out in large cubicals etc.
| toolz wrote:
| This is a bit of a tangent, but I don't understand
| generalized masking. At best they flatten the curve, which I
| think at this point I believe flattening the curve is
| dangerous. We have pretty well defined risk demographics and
| if we could have covid seasons come and go quickly I think it
| gives the high risk demographics the best chance of applying
| multi-layered defenses against a shorter season of risk.
|
| There is of course the "overcrowded hospital" issue, but I
| have a hard time coming to terms with that being a real
| problem - if it were a real problem why has hospital capacity
| been in decline this entire pandemic? Is it an unsolvable
| problem or is it just not a real problem outside of
| fantastically clickable headlines? I lean heavily towards the
| latter but I could be convinced otherwise.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-01-30 23:00 UTC)