2 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

It's relatively easy to disprove false information.  I agree that many only read/watch (sometimes not even that) what they want to hear ... we have evidence of that very event with a particular conservative News Station that reported something their viewers didn't want to hear so the viewers shifted over to some other News Station that told them what they wanted to hear.

I think (theory) the real issue stems from something more primal in our DNA.  We are pattern recognition and response creatures and that is indeed how we learn to eat, walk, and survive.  That same pattern recognition system is also the source of racism, bias, conviction, and more. 

Another issue is that the problem is compounded by the black box algorithms on many social media sites that will feed you more of what they think you're interested in, and they're very, very good at it. YouTube, for example, is an easy one to try this with by watching a few videos on any topic and then watching as the up next recommendations change to match. It doesn't take very long before most of what you're watching is on that same topic, which can then easily lead to some believing what they're watching must be true (try watching a few flat earth theory videos for fun...). Add in some slickly made videos intended to mislead, and you have a recipe for disaster.

14 hours ago, dave2013 said:

Well, Youtube is owned by Google and has been engaged in biased censoring for some time now. 

Just recently, Google and Apple removed the Parler app from their stores.  Yes, one can get the app elsewhere, but this and other actions are just another form of intimidation and control being exercised by these powerful companies.

Google, Facebook, Apple, Twitter, etc., may not technically be monopolies, but for all intents and purposes they hold the power of one.

I'm not OK with allowing a few mega-corporations to have this level of control over speech.  This type of power is dangerous.

Dave

Apple and Google’s decision to kick out Parler gives a new youth to the old idea of forbidding a company to sell services and the hardware/networks (including OS) which transport them. Breaking them up will become a democratic necessity if they use their de facto monopoly to shape up the public debate with their own views. 

7 hours ago, goates said:

by watching a few videos on any topic and then watching as the up next recommendations change to match

I know. I watched one video of a nice lady wearing high heels....    and life got so much better!  (don't tell my wife.. )

16 hours ago, W2DR said:

Thank you for correcting my typo. My apologies to you and the forum for this oversight. I promise to try harder in the future.

 

😁 Actually I think it's an American expression isn't it? Please don't correct my typo's or you'll be at it all day.

12 hours ago, W2DR said:

True. But the majority of people only read what they want to hear. Dealing with concepts and ideas that are either hard to grasp or differ significantly from a particular viewpoint is not, in my experience, something that the average person is comfortable with.

 

I'm not average then. 😁

On 1/10/2021 at 10:19 AM, Dominique_K said:

Apple and Google’s decision to kick out Parler...

Noy only that, but parler.com is now down.. not that I had many followers, nor parleys on it, but some of the youtubers I watch had accounts there too... 

1 hour ago, HighBypass said:

Noy only that, but parler.com is now down.. not that I had many followers, nor parleys on it, but some of the youtubers I watch had accounts there too... 

Whatever one can think of the political side of the issue, technically the bans on the Potus and Parler look very much coordinated between the GAFAT and thus the work of a cartel. And more than circumstantially I’d say as they share a lot of common interests which have nothing to do with the recent tragic political events in DC. Half of dozen of people decide between themselves what you or I can read or subscribe to. 

Historically, new industries often tend to degenerate into monopolies or oligopolistic cartels (rail, telephone for instance in the past) and governments have set up strong legal frameworks against that. Time to activate them on Apple, Facebook and Google for a start, I suppose.  

On the subject of Mars, I've seen the movie and it looks a deader planet than the one we're already on. Why bother?

2 hours ago, Ron Attwood said:

Why bother?

 

Understanding the origins and ubiquity of life. Which is a fundamental question of mankind.

Understanding Martian evolution. 

 

Quote

 

While life arose and evolved on Earth, Mars experienced serious climate change. Planetary geologists can study rocks, sediments and soils for clues to uncover the history of the surface. Scientists are interested in the history of water on Mars to understand how life could have survived. Volcanoes, craters from meteoroid impacts, signs of atmospheric or photochemical effects and geophysical processes all carry aspects of Mars’ history.

Samples of the atmosphere could reveal crucial details on its formation and evolution, and also why Mars has less atmosphere than Earth.

Mars can also help us to learn more about our home. Understanding martian geophysical processes promises to uncover details of the evolution and history of Earth and other planets in our Solar System.

 

 

Will encourage the development of new technology.

Will encourage space tourism. 

Facilitate off-world mining.

Advance science.

Provide a human presence other than on Earth so that when a big asteroid heads our way, or a cataclysmic CME, or unmitigated climate change or any one of a number of existential threats, our species survives. 

 

Quote

 

Establishing a permanent colony of humans on Mars is not an option. It's a necessity.

At least, that's what some of the most innovative, intelligent minds of our age  are saying.

 

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/5-undeniable-reasons-why-humans-should-go-to-mars-2015-4

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/techtank/2020/08/18/five-reasons-to-explore-mars/

https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Human_and_Robotic_Exploration/Exploration/Why_go_to_Mars

https://earthsky.org/space/robert-zubrin-on-why-we-should-go-to-mars#:~:text=Robert Zubrin of the Mars,%2C the challenge%2C the future.

 

 

You could have just said 'Because'/

18 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

planetary independence

What is that? From whom?

Aah.

Here is a list of elements essential for human life:

oxygen
carbon
hydrogen
nitrogen
sulfur
calcium
phosphorus
potassium
chlorine
sodium
magnesium
iron

If any one of these is not present on Mars, a colony there will always be dependent on Earth in order to survive.

Edited January 11, 20215 yr by dmwalker

5 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

There are consequences and "Freedom" doesn't mean one can say and do whatever they want,

.. and yet some of the people I followed on Parler commentated on the gaming industry rather than the White House... 

1 hour ago, dmwalker said:

Here is a list of elements essential for human life:

oxygen
carbon
hydrogen
nitrogen
sulfur
calcium
phosphorus
potassium
chlorine
sodium
magnesium
iron

If any one of these is not present on Mars, a colony there will always be dependent on Earth in order 

 

 All of those elements are present on Mars. Some in lesser amounts than here on the Earth but they are all there.

Edited January 11, 20215 yr by martin-w