Trump permanently suspended from Twitter

[Dion]

nm

[curves2000]

I am very uneasy about this whole thing with Trump and the social media companies. I totally understand how he got free rein to spew his stuff on platforms for years and creating division.

I am also very very aware of the fake news situation we are all under in this day in age, it's scary out there.

I am also very concerned with who and why some of these companies are censoring certain topics, people, political people and other bit's of information. No matter who you are or what side of the coin you fall on, we need to ask questions and get some answers. These tech companies need to start being accountable regarding their activities to the world. There is an awful lot of power that they have, a lot of unchecked power that we don't allow virtually anybody else or any other companies.

A very very recent example I have is with a Covid 19 critical care alliance team that has been putting some very good information and research into Covid 19 treatments and potential therapies. They can be found at https://covid19criticalcare.com/

Long story short, they are respected, mainstream ICU and critical care physicians with vast level's of research reports that have been published in respected medical journals. They have been talking about some extremely important benefits of a medicine called Ivermectin. In their experience and in a lot of studies around the world, this medicine has shown significant benefits for Covid patients.

The irony is that this medicine is FDA Approved, WHO list of world wide essential medication and won the Nobel prize for medicine in 2015.

They have been complaining in various interviews, forms and on social media about the level of censorship they have been experiencing with regards to their research. I am no expert in social media ethics or anything but these people aren't Podiatrist's selling snake oil and herbal teas as cure to Covid.

It's my understanding they recently presented to the National Institute of Health and other agencies regarding their research. They feel very confident that it will be made a standard of care for Covid 19 very very soon. They also have recent experience with something similar, being the some of the group of Dr's who were convinced that this was a steroid responsive disease. At the time everybody, including Trump was screaming "Ventilators!!!" There research and bedside experience showed that steroids are effective in this disease.

I've made this post longer than I wanted but I do think questions, standards, policies, procedures and others will need to be made with regards to social media going forward.

These marketing and data harvesting money making machines don't have our best interest at heart. They don't have significant regulations of any kind. They allow whatever, whenever on their platforms. They take zero responsibility for anything, no matter what. They are also the cause of significant levels of friction in society. Trump or no Trump, their platforms are littered with garbage of all levels.

The issue also now is, how emboldened have them become?? They have just silenced the American President, rightfully or wrongfully. That level of power and the balls to do it is an interesting level of power. What is their limit? Who may be next? What is allowed and what isn't?

If people didn't know who the Twitter founder was and who the Facebook founder was, saw them in a soup line at a homeless shelter, and was than told they silenced the American President, it would cause an controllable laugh. It really is nut's to think what we have just experienced this past week.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by curves2000

I am very uneasy about this whole thing with Trump and the social media companies. I totally understand how he got free rein to spew his stuff on platforms for years and creating division.

I am also very very aware of the fake news situation we are all under in this day in age, it's scary out there.

I am also very concerned with who and why some of these companies are censoring certain topics, people, political people and other bit's of information. No matter who you are or what side of the coin you fall on, we need to ask questions and get some answers. These tech companies need to start being accountable regarding their activities to the world. There is an awful lot of power that they have, a lot of unchecked power that we don't allow virtually anybody else or any other companies.

A very very recent example I have is with a Covid 19 critical care alliance team that has been putting some very good information and research into Covid 19 treatments and potential therapies. They can be found at https://covid19criticalcare.com/

Long story short, they are respected, mainstream ICU and critical care physicians with vast level's of research reports that have been published in respected medical journals. They have been talking about some extremely important benefits of a medicine called Ivermectin. In their experience and in a lot of studies around the world, this medicine has shown significant benefits for Covid patients.

The irony is that this medicine is FDA Approved, WHO list of world wide essential medication and won the Nobel prize for medicine in 2015.

They have been complaining in various interviews, forms and on social media about the level of censorship they have been experiencing with regards to their research. I am no expert in social media ethics or anything but these people aren't Podiatrist's selling snake oil and herbal teas as cure to Covid.

It's my understanding they recently presented to the National Institute of Health and other agencies regarding their research. They feel very confident that it will be made a standard of care for Covid 19 very very soon. They also have recent experience with something similar, being the some of the group of Dr's who were convinced that this was a steroid responsive disease. At the time everybody, including Trump was screaming "Ventilators!!!" There research and bedside experience showed that steroids are effective in this disease.

I've made this post longer than I wanted but I do think questions, standards, policies, procedures and others will need to be made with regards to social media going forward.

These marketing and data harvesting money making machines don't have our best interest at heart. They don't have significant regulations of any kind. They allow whatever, whenever on their platforms. They take zero responsibility for anything, no matter what. They are also the cause of significant levels of friction in society. Trump or no Trump, their platforms are littered with garbage of all levels.

The issue also now is, how emboldened have them become?? They have just silenced the American President, rightfully or wrongfully. That level of power and the balls to do it is an interesting level of power. What is their limit? Who may be next? What is allowed and what isn't?

If people didn't know who the Twitter founder was and who the Facebook founder was, saw them in a soup line at a homeless shelter, and was than told they silenced the American President, it would cause an controllable laugh. It really is nut's to think what we have just experienced this past week.

This post is bait.. well done. 100 % all Mark's hit.

[curves2000]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

This post is bait.. well done. 100 % all Mark's hit.

I don't know if I am baiting anyone? People can choose to respond or not. Who's Mark? Zuckerberg?

I just put my very long $.02 into the conversation and people can discuss. People have been discussing Social media, Trump and censorship and more for a long long time.

The last day or two a massive conversation has been had globally over WhatsApp's new privacy policy and how they work with their Facebook counterpart. Literally millions of people are asking, "wtf, how much power do they want and need?" Nothing to do with Trump or anything else.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by curves2000

I don't know if I am baiting anyone? People can choose to respond or not. Who's Mark? Zuckerberg?

I just put my very long $.02 into the conversation and people can discuss. People have been discussing Social media, Trump and censorship and more for a long long time.

The last day or two a massive conversation has been had globally over WhatsApp's new privacy policy and how they work with their Facebook counterpart. Literally millions of people are asking, "wtf, how much power do they want and need?" Nothing to do with Trump or anything else.

Okay, so they've BEEN allowing him to spew false claims of a fraudulent election with their warnings about false information. So, even though they are 100% aware that he's lying and spreading falsehoods, they allow it under the umbrella of free speech.

But, free speech has limits, and it always has had limits under specific situations. I'll just quote a previous post of mine.

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Sure, except that the basic definition of the restriction to 1st amendment protections can be found with a 2 second search and the most basic resources ever: Encyclopedia Britannica.

It's clear to me that the bolded applies and Twitter is 100% acting constitutionally as the law and amendment has been interpreted.

And to be clear, this isn't about them having power to censor people and decide what is worthy, this is about the health of a nation and doing their civic duty to quell a rebellion/coup. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.


To your other points, should there be some limits on the power of these companies? Sure, but to what end and how do you enforce it? Seems like a bit of a quagmire to me. I guess the only thing I would want is a restriction on selling data to 3rd parties for anything other than business marketing purposes. Nothing political at all.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by curves2000

A very very recent example I have is with a Covid 19 critical care alliance team that has been putting some very good information and research into Covid 19 treatments and potential therapies. They can be found at https://covid19criticalcare.com/

Long story short, they are respected, mainstream ICU and critical care physicians with vast level's of research reports that have been published in respected medical journals. They have been talking about some extremely important benefits of a medicine called Ivermectin. In their experience and in a lot of studies around the world, this medicine has shown significant benefits for Covid patients.

The irony is that this medicine is FDA Approved, WHO list of world wide essential medication and won the Nobel prize for medicine in 2015.

They have been complaining in various interviews, forms and on social media about the level of censorship they have been experiencing with regards to their research. I am no expert in social media ethics or anything but these people aren't Podiatrist's selling snake oil and herbal teas as cure to Covid.

It's my understanding they recently presented to the National Institute of Health and other agencies regarding their research. They feel very confident that it will be made a standard of care for Covid 19 very very soon. They also have recent experience with something similar, being the some of the group of Dr's who were convinced that this was a steroid responsive disease. At the time everybody, including Trump was screaming "Ventilators!!!" There research and bedside experience showed that steroids are effective in this disease.

Yeah, a cursory search explains what the issue is here: insufficient RCT data to back up claims of efficacy that show a statistical significance when IVM is administered in this way. Results in a petri dish are not the same as results in humans, and the study sizes don’t support the conclusions.

You won’t find large peer-reviewed RCTs (or large RCTs period, nevermind peer review) of IVM anywhere. I’ve found a small, limited study of IVM where the sample size is only 112 people, and out of that, 4 in the control group died. That’s a footnote, not significance. Further, the study is a pre-print, and no peer-review has ever been conducted.

But I’ll tell you where I found a ton of chatter about Ivermectin being this amazing intervention for COVID-19... /r/conspiracy.

This #### is the next hydroxychloroquine. If large scale, double blinded RCTs conducted by an impartial group (ie: not the people you linked to, due to high bias) produced good results and passed peer review, then I would happily change my mind on this.

By the way, the NIH doesn’t support using IVM for treatment of COVID-19, only in a clinical trial setting: https://www.covid19treatmentguidelin...py/ivermectin/

Apparently when a drug is FDA approved, but you want to prescribe it in a new way that would require “administration of doses up to 100-fold higher than those approved for use in humans”, they kinda want to see your homework first before just approving it.

[Boreal]

Originally Posted by curves2000

I don't know if I am baiting anyone? People can choose to respond or not. Who's Mark? Zuckerberg?

I just put my very long $.02 into the conversation and people can discuss. People have been discussing Social media, Trump and censorship and more for a long long time.

The last day or two a massive conversation has been had globally over WhatsApp's new privacy policy and how they work with their Facebook counterpart. Literally millions of people are asking, "wtf, how much power do they want and need?" Nothing to do with Trump or anything else.

This stuff just infuriates me.

I’ve had the ivermectin info sent to me weeks ago.

What are the odds that this group of medical professionals are the most credible, reliable and knowledgeable source of this drug?

I am going to say pretty low.

Vetting what is being spewed in the ether about this drug takes a few quick questions.

What are the unintended side effects or consequences of taking this drug?
Who and a what state of a Covid infection should take it?

Without these kind of overriding questions the whole topic is vulnerable to toxic oversimplifications.

It’s being proliferated with the insidious trope of...

“I’m not telling you I think this is true, this is just what I heard.”

This enables the BS notion that we can all go back to normal and if we get Covid, let’s just pop an ivermectin pill to eliminate the side effects.

Does this mean it doesn’t have application in people who are dying of Covid? No.

Try investigating the statement

“ivermectin neurological side effects”

I’m nowhere near the person to properly evaluate ivermectin either, but I try to think critically about topics like this.

Try critical thinking before posting nonsense like ivermectin is some secret insider information that Twitter is censoring that could “save the world”.

There is also a clear answer for social media garbage.

Accountability. Trump was finally held accountable.

Attach accounts to a persons identity. Make everything more like LinkedIn.

If they want or need anonymity, then establish criteria for that in the business model. If people don’t like it, don’t use the service. The consequences of not making people accountable for what they say publicly are self evident.

There is a difference between misinformation and disinformation.

Yeah, people make mistakes and need the space to learn from them.

But... when the same mistakes are repeatedly made learning isn’t happening.
It becomes much like the statement...

“never assume malice when stupidity will suffice.”

(To be clear I am not saying you are stupid either.)

Eventually stupidity is just reckless and indistinguishable from malice.

Ivermectin is just another COVID example of the HL Mencken quote:

“For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple and wrong.”

[Mull]

Wrong thread

[Wastedyouth]

Correct me if I am wrong, but don't the rights, as they pertain to free speech, protect you from infringement on your rights by governments. Not privately owned, publicly used social media platforms?

[Mull]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

Correct me if I am wrong, but don't the rights, as they pertain to free speech, protect you from infringement on your rights by governments, and not privately owned, publicly used social media platforms?

I guess it would depend on whom you ask, a lawyer, or a senate republican.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by curves2000

I am very uneasy about this whole thing with Trump and the social media companies....

...It really is nut's to think what we have just experienced this past week.

You're conflating very different things here. The reason social media is taking action against certain interests is because they pose a threat to our country. We are talking about a group that just openly encouraged sedition and an insurrection, one broadcast around the world. Not only have these people done grave damage to our democracy, they have done grave damage to the reputation of our country around the globe. These people staged an event where five people died and state secrets walked out the door. They need to be silenced for the peace and stability of our nation. Big difference from the other issue you raised.

Also, lets make no qualms here. These are private platforms that have acceptable use policies. If you fail to meet those policies you lose access to the platform, not unlike CP. These people have had their warnings and timeouts. They are being blocked for the good of the larger community. Maybe after some time, and after these people show they are productive citizens within the community, they will be allowed access back to the platform. But until that time comes, they should lose access to the platform and be subject to scrutiny.

One last thing I will add, there are groups out there who have been deplatformed for the protection of our society. Stormfront and the Aryan Nations come to mind as obvious targets. Alex Jones and InfoWars is another. Those that spread disinformation and hate information should be deplatformed. Limit the reach of their rhetoric and make society better off for it. If they were on the corner on a soap box you would pass them by thinking they were mentally deranged. But a slick website can fool a lot of people into thinking the information has some gravitas and is reputable. People shouldn't judge a book by its cover, but they unfortunately do. The content is what leads to deplatforming. Let's not lose sight of that.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

Correct me if I am wrong, but don't the rights, as they pertain to free speech, protect you from infringement on your rights by governments. Not privately owned, publicly used social media platforms?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

The government is restricted from infringing on an individual's 1st amendment rights. Citizens can take whatever action they like. Since corporations are people (stupid, I know) they have the freedom to make the same decisions as a private citizen and can limit the freedom of expression of those who work for them, or use their services. What happens in the private sector is different from the public sector. Public sector employees must comply with the law AND uphold the constitution. Public sector employees only need worry about complying with the law, and then only to the extent to which they can bend it or not be caught breaking it.

[Mull]

Originally Posted by New Era

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Does this mean there is an loop hole with executive orders given its not congress?

[nfotiu]

So, is that the end of Parler? I don't see MS or Google hosting them. Who is left that is capable of hosting a large social media network? Alibaba? That would be rather humorous.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

So, is that the end of Parler? I don't see MS or Google hosting them. Who is left that is capable of hosting a large social media network? Alibaba? That would be rather humorous.

Putin will provide one.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Mull

Does this mean there is an loop hole with executive orders given its not congress?

Executive orders are not laws, so no loop hole. Executive orders are directives for the operation of government and how certain bodies of government will execute their duties. They rely on existing law and inform instruments of government how to use the already codified law in the execution of their duties.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by curves2000

I don't know if I am baiting anyone? People can choose to respond or not. Who's Mark? Zuckerberg?

I just put my very long $.02 into the conversation and people can discuss. People have been discussing Social media, Trump and censorship and more for a long long time.

The last day or two a massive conversation has been had globally over WhatsApp's new privacy policy and how they work with their Facebook counterpart. Literally millions of people are asking, "wtf, how much power do they want and need?" Nothing to do with Trump or anything else.

But you used easily disproved fake news to make your point. It's quite ironic in a way.

Both sides many sides.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by Regorium

But you used easily disproved fake news to make your point. It's quite ironic in a way.

Both sides many sides.

I'd like to know why curves2000 attributed "selling snake oil and herbal teas as cure to Covid" to podiatrists. Did I miss something in the news, or have ankle/foot specialists been particularly involved in peddling sham cures?

[Macman]

Twitter stock drops.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1348668495358267403

[Ozy_Flame]

It will go right back up. It's tech lol