Koronavirusas (COVID-19)

[spekas]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9613797/

https://twitter.com/kevinnbass/statu...90577700147200

[digital]

Nenutolkim nuo temos.

[mantasm]

Interneto platformos - autokratinės karalystės kuriose vietininkai (moderatoriai) patys sprendžia kas gyvens o kas mirs (bus išbanintas).

Teisiškai - ne. Nes tada tokioms platformoms galiotų panašus reguliavimas kaip spaudai dėl turinio jose.

Be to geras klausimas ką daryti su itin didelėmis platformomis kurios praktiškai tampa viešąja erdve. Ir kai jų diktatoriukai gali reguliuoti gerokai platesnius visuomeninius procesus.

[MedinisStrazdas]

Interneto platformos - redaguojama spauda ar vieša erdvė pasisakymams? Forumiukai, snukiaknygės ir t.t. labiau bando būt antru variantu. Bet tada nelabai suderinama su cenzūra kol nėra aiškių BK pažeidimų.

Interneto platformos - autokratinės karalystės kuriose vietininkai (moderatoriai) patys sprendžia kas gyvens o kas mirs (bus išbanintas).

[mantasm]

Tik tiek? Galvojau, kad kalbama apie valstybės vykdomą cenzūrą.

Kodėl pandemijos metu privatus forumas negali atsikratyti kenkėjų?

Interneto platformos - redaguojama spauda ar vieša erdvė pasisakymams? Forumiukai, snukiaknygės ir t.t. labiau bando būt antru variantu. Bet tada nelabai suderinama su cenzūra kol nėra aiškių BK pažeidimų.

[Kitas Džiugas]

Keletą antivakserių šiame forume išbanino

Tik tiek? Galvojau, kad kalbama apie valstybės vykdomą cenzūrą.

Kodėl pandemijos metu privatus forumas negali atsikratyti kenkėjų?

[MedinisStrazdas]

O kokia Lietuvoje buvo cenzūra?

Keletą antivakserių šiame forume išbanino

[Kitas Džiugas]

Kad cenzūra buvo mirtina čia forume daug kas nežinojo, daug kas pasisakė už cenzūrą.

O kokia Lietuvoje buvo cenzūra?

[MedinisStrazdas]

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from its consequences.

Speech with consequences is not free.

Kad cenzūra buvo mirtina čia forume daug kas nežinojo, daug kas pasisakė už cenzūrą.

Cenzūra nebuvo mirtina.

Mintis yra, kad jie tikrai nepalaiko šaukimo fire teatre. Jie palaiko diskusiją ir teisingo atsakymo išsiaiškinimą, o ne kitos nuomonės cenzūrą.

2 skirtingi dalykai, o sankauskas jam įprastu būdu bando prilyginti abu.

Tai kodėl pagal juos teisingo atsakymo išaiškinimas yra melagingos informacijos citavimas?

[DeSadas]

Covid Censorship Proved to Be Deadly

Government and social-media companies colluded to stifle dissenters who turned out to be right.

By Bret Swanson
July 7, 2023 5:38 pm ET

https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-c...ealth-697c32c4


''Twitter blacklisted Stanford physician and economist Jay Bhattacharya for showing Covid almost exclusively threatened the elderly, severely reducing the visibility of his tweets. When Stanford health policy scholar Scott Atlas began advising the White House, YouTube erased his most prominent video opposing lockdowns. Twitter banned Robert Malone, a pioneer of mRNA vaccine technology, for calling attention to the vaccines’ dangers. YouTube demonetized evolutionary biologist Bret Weinstein, who suggested the virus might be engineered and predicted vaccine-evading variants. And those are only a few examples.

Social-media platforms were powerful tools for full-spectrum censorship, but they didn’t act alone. Medical schools, medical boards, science journals and legacy media sang from the same hymnal.

Legions of doctors stayed quiet after witnessing the demonization of their peers who challenged the Covid orthodoxy. A little censorship leads people to watch what they say. Millions of patients and citizens were deprived of important insights as a result.

Health authorities and TV doctors insisted young people were vulnerable, demanded toddlers wear masks, closed schools, beaches and parks, and were loath to contemplate crucial cost-benefit analysis. The economy? Mental health? Never heard of them.

These “experts” denied the protective effects of recovered immunity, a phenomenon we’ve known about since the Plague of Athens in 430 B.C. They effectively prohibited generic drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration, such as azithromycin and ivermectin, which low-income nations around the world were deploying successfully. They failed to appreciate the evolutionary dynamics of mass vaccination during a pandemic.
''

Dieve vel prasideda su savo tuo ivermectinu ir azitromicinu... ekspertai mat susirinko.

[Gator]

Nes jie taip pasakė. Negi abejosi

Mintis yra, kad jie tikrai nepalaiko šaukimo fire teatre. Jie palaiko diskusiją ir teisingo atsakymo išsiaiškinimą, o ne kitos nuomonės cenzūrą.

2 skirtingi dalykai, o sankauskas jam įprastu būdu bando prilyginti abu.

[rmss]

who?

who

(World health organization, forumiukas neleidžia didžiosiomis raidėmis posto įkalt :/)

[sankauskas]

who turned out to be right.

Who?

[MikasRidikas]

who turned out to be right.

Nes jie taip pasakė. Negi abejosi

[Gator]

Šitie tekstai turi mums pasakyti, kad kalbos laisvės absoliutistai mãno, kad "Shouting fire in a crowded theater" yra OK. Ir galbūt jie teisūs.

Kad ne apie melagingą gaisro skelbimą rašo, o rašo:

Government and social-media companies colluded to stifle dissenters who turned out to be right.

[Gator]

O ką čia šitie tekstai turėtų mums pasakyti, ko nežinojome iki šiol?

Kad cenzūra buvo mirtina čia forume daug kas nežinojo, daug kas pasisakė už cenzūrą.

[Taj Mahal]

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from its consequences.

[sankauskas]

O ką čia šitie tekstai turėtų mums pasakyti, ko nežinojome iki šiol?

Šitie tekstai turi mums pasakyti, kad kalbos laisvės absoliutistai mãno, kad "Shouting fire in a crowded theater" yra OK. Ir galbūt jie teisūs.

[MikasRidikas]

Covid Censorship Proved to Be Deadly

Government and social-media companies colluded to stifle dissenters who turned out to be right.

By Bret Swanson
July 7, 2023 5:38 pm ET

https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-c...ealth-697c32c4


''Twitter blacklisted Stanford physician and economist Jay Bhattacharya for showing Covid almost exclusively threatened the elderly, severely reducing the visibility of his tweets. When Stanford health policy scholar Scott Atlas began advising the White House, YouTube erased his most prominent video opposing lockdowns. Twitter banned Robert Malone, a pioneer of mRNA vaccine technology, for calling attention to the vaccines’ dangers. YouTube demonetized evolutionary biologist Bret Weinstein, who suggested the virus might be engineered and predicted vaccine-evading variants. And those are only a few examples.

Social-media platforms were powerful tools for full-spectrum censorship, but they didn’t act alone. Medical schools, medical boards, science journals and legacy media sang from the same hymnal.

Legions of doctors stayed quiet after witnessing the demonization of their peers who challenged the Covid orthodoxy. A little censorship leads people to watch what they say. Millions of patients and citizens were deprived of important insights as a result.

Health authorities and TV doctors insisted young people were vulnerable, demanded toddlers wear masks, closed schools, beaches and parks, and were loath to contemplate crucial cost-benefit analysis. The economy? Mental health? Never heard of them.

These “experts” denied the protective effects of recovered immunity, a phenomenon we’ve known about since the Plague of Athens in 430 B.C. They effectively prohibited generic drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration, such as azithromycin and ivermectin, which low-income nations around the world were deploying successfully. They failed to appreciate the evolutionary dynamics of mass vaccination during a pandemic.
''

O ką čia šitie tekstai turėtų mums pasakyti, ko nežinojome iki šiol?

[spekas]

Covid Censorship Proved to Be Deadly

Government and social-media companies colluded to stifle dissenters who turned out to be right.

By Bret Swanson
July 7, 2023 5:38 pm ET

https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-c...ealth-697c32c4


''Twitter blacklisted Stanford physician and economist Jay Bhattacharya for showing Covid almost exclusively threatened the elderly, severely reducing the visibility of his tweets. When Stanford health policy scholar Scott Atlas began advising the White House, YouTube erased his most prominent video opposing lockdowns. Twitter banned Robert Malone, a pioneer of mRNA vaccine technology, for calling attention to the vaccines’ dangers. YouTube demonetized evolutionary biologist Bret Weinstein, who suggested the virus might be engineered and predicted vaccine-evading variants. And those are only a few examples.

Social-media platforms were powerful tools for full-spectrum censorship, but they didn’t act alone. Medical schools, medical boards, science journals and legacy media sang from the same hymnal.

Legions of doctors stayed quiet after witnessing the demonization of their peers who challenged the Covid orthodoxy. A little censorship leads people to watch what they say. Millions of patients and citizens were deprived of important insights as a result.

Health authorities and TV doctors insisted young people were vulnerable, demanded toddlers wear masks, closed schools, beaches and parks, and were loath to contemplate crucial cost-benefit analysis. The economy? Mental health? Never heard of them.

These “experts” denied the protective effects of recovered immunity, a phenomenon we’ve known about since the Plague of Athens in 430 B.C. They effectively prohibited generic drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration, such as azithromycin and ivermectin, which low-income nations around the world were deploying successfully. They failed to appreciate the evolutionary dynamics of mass vaccination during a pandemic.
''