Technology

12 readers

1 users here now

This magazine is dedicated to discussions on the latest developments, trends, and innovations in the world of technology. Whether you are a tech enthusiast, a developer, or simply curious about the latest gadgets and software, this is the place for you. Here you can share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage in discussions on topics such as artificial intelligence, robotics, cloud computing, cybersecurity, and more. From the impact of technology on society to the ethical considerations of new technologies, this category covers a wide range of topics related to technology. Join the conversation and let's explore the ever-evolving world of technology together!

founded 1 year ago

Judge rules White House pressured social networks to “suppress free speech” (arstechnica.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

172 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A federal judge yesterday ordered the Biden administration to halt a wide range of communications with social media companies, siding with Missouri and Louisiana in a lawsuit that alleges Biden and his administration violated the First Amendment by colluding with social networks "to suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Was it antiscience to say covid originated in a lab in China?

Yes. It would be accurate to say that it is possible that the Covid originated in a lab in China, but the evidence is mixed and it is certainly not provided.

Was it antiscience to say 2 weeks to flatten the curve was BS?

No idea, because I don't know who you claimed to say it, when they said it or in which county

Was it antiscience to say cloth masks were ineffective?

Yes - because it's much too simplistic. Depending on the design of the mask, the material and how it was warn cloth masks certainly had an effect on reducing infection - in particular infected mask wearers are less likely to infect others

Was it antiscience to question the long term efficacy of a drug that was not studied for the long term?

No - and questions about long-term efficacy were front and centre of studies into how long (for example) vaccines shots lasted. The point was that even short - term efficacy was pretty useful.

Was it antiscience to question the long term side effects of a drug that was not studied for the long term?

No. It's absolutely scientific to ask questions about it. It is is anti-science tio make stuff up about probable long-term effects when the mechanism of the drug are pretty well understood.

At one point or another every one of those questions was considered antiscience and is now begrudgingly accepted by the experts.

Some of them are "anti-science", some aren't. I'm not quite sure what point you are trying to make, other than "Experts bad"