95
top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] djsoren19 16 points 5 days ago

honestly, incredibly based.

People with platforms shouldn't be allowed to spread blatant misinformation. That shit is incredibly harmful to uneducated people.

[-] jimmy90@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

we need more mechanisms to correct bullshit coming from all forms of media

[-] dizzy@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

On the health front, the number of people calling themselves Dr. Whatever on YouTube and social media talking about all kinds of health conditions is huge. They talk about anything from dermatology to diets to cancer prevention but when you actually look into what type of doctor they are, it always ends up being Doctor of Chiropractic a.k.a. Doctor of pseudoscientific semi-religious bullshit that isn’t even recognised in my country, but for some reason is in the US, yet they go about masquerading as real medical doctors!

Drives me nuts!

[-] Meron35@lemmy.world 12 points 5 days ago

No, China is not ahead of the western world on this, nor is this an unprecedented policy.

Most developed countries already have robust regulation preventing people from giving undue professional advice, especially in health or finance.

These are the same regulations preventing from you claiming to be a qualified lawyer, doctor, accountant, etc without the appropriate qualifications.

Many developed countries such as the UK, Australia, and Canada have already started arresting finfluencers after victims have sued them for making fraudulent claims.

FCA leads international crackdown on illegal finfluencers | FCA - https://www.fca.org.uk/news/press-releases/fca-leads-international-crackdown-illegal-finfluencers

The equation of a university degree as a valid qualification for China is mostly an artefact of the lack of adequate professional bodies and accreditation.

But if course, the devil is in the details and implementation.

[-] Mechaguana@programming.dev 9 points 5 days ago

Im conflicted on this one.

It feels like a good solution for online stuff, but the biggest problematic influencers talk about politics, will they require a political science degree to comment on it?

Will this apply to journalists reporting on governmental situations?

Couldn't this be used to prevent on site people affected by tragedies reporting without a degree?

Will home remedies be banned basically since it's medical advice?

Very curious on how it will be implemented.

[-] AlexLost@lemmy.world 9 points 5 days ago

I am okay with that. Stay in your lanes

[-] daguma118@lemmy.zip 5 points 5 days ago

Completely agree

[-] brendansimms@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago
[-] AmazingAwesomator@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

a degree in mathematics should not validate my correctness about health.

[-] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 12 points 5 days ago

It says relevant university degree so I don't think that would be the case

[-] Eldritch@piefed.world 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

So what's your thoughts on lysenkoism then? He had education in relevant fields. He was wrong and ultimately unscientific as fuck. But that didn't matter. Because Stalin liked what he said over his teacher Vavilov. Vavilov was later vindicated. After he was run out of his university.

I'd like to tell you that was the worst of it. That was not the worst of it. He was sent to a Bolshevik gulag where he spent the rest of his life. Like millions of other victims of the Soviets. I'd like to tell you he still lived to a ripe old age. He did not he suffered and died early from the abuse and neglect the gulags were designed for. As millions of other victims of the Bolsheviks did. I'd like to tell you that that was finally the worst of it. It was not. Many millions more died because of famine due to Lysenko's crackpot ideas.

His only crime was being correct and disagreeing with authority. Does that sound like something anyone should be rushing to emulate again, or still.

[-] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 6 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Idk sounds bad, don't know anything about it really. I don't see how limiting online speculation/teaching of academic topics to academics is equivalent to that. What does it have to do with my comment? I was just correcting AmazingAwsomator on details.

[-] OldChicoAle@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago

What are you talking about? No one is saying having a university degree makes you qualified for anything. Sounds like they're just weeding out the fakes.

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 days ago

It's definitely appropriate to ban genocidal and fraudulent speech. In our case it is permitted to protect our establishment. A defense for such speech is that instead of the speaker being an antihuman hateful liar in service of higher demons accumulation of power, they could simply be cognitively impaired, despite any impassioned ability to rationalize hateful lies.

[-] Eldritch@piefed.world 5 points 6 days ago

If it needs to be banned, we've already failed as a society. Society should reject intolerance and value intelligence/knowledge. Giving anyone the ability to control speech. Gives the worst sort of person the absolute need to wield that ability.

[-] Katana314@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

This already assumes a generationally informed and educated populace, which is the end goal and wouldn’t really need any “systems” to improve information sources. Everyone participating would naturally reject falsehoods.

The difficulty is working out what system should exist in a world of massive morons.

[-] Eldritch@piefed.world 1 points 5 days ago

I may be biased as an anarchist, but what about anarchism? Why would a flat, answerable government based largely on consent and mutual aid be a bad thing? Isn't the current problem unanswerable people with too much power already. Why would we want to give them more power. That's definitionally madness to me. If my ideals are any good, I think I should be able to convince them of that without force.

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 days ago

Our problem is that the establishment supports evil speech and suppresses truth. Yes, we've failed as a society. The establishment has always had the power to control speech. It's not because we gave them that power.

[-] Eldritch@piefed.world 1 points 6 days ago

Then if the establishment supports evil speech and is simultaneously also the only one capable of enforcing this. Why would you want to give them that power? Any establishment given that sort of power. Would instantly use it to suppress speech that is inconvenient to them.

Complex problems generally don't have simple solutions. And anyone offering you a simple solution to a complex problem likely thinks you're a fool.

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 days ago

Why would you want to give them that power?

Democracy is supposed to be allowed to exterminate evil. A theoretical outcome of democracy is less fascism with laws that prevent fascist power, with political campaigns promissing to erradicate demonic supremacist foreign control over the nation. It is genuinely that simple: Proposed laws to exterminate evil influence over establishment.

[-] Eldritch@piefed.world 1 points 5 days ago

Just because something is technically a democracy doesn't mean it has value. Any democracy that is not direct, accountable, or consenting. Isn't much of a democracy. And democracy exterminates nothing. Any democracy that does, isn't much of a democracy. Advocating for authoritarianism absolutely makes things less democratic though.

We didn't get here overnight, and there is nothing we can do that would get us out of this position anytime soon. Especially not reducing democracy. It's going to take a lot of hard work and cultural change. Teaching people to value understanding and knowledge. Only education can eradicate ignorance, but never completely.

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 days ago

democracy exterminates nothing. Any democracy that does, isn’t much of a democracy.

Permitting genocidal and economic fraud speech/lies, means that money is not just speech. Money is terrorism, fascism, fraud. Those with the most money determine establishment through media control, and permitted electability. Exterminating genocide advocacy (replacement theory is genocide of immigrants before their kids can be allowed to vote for universal healthcare), and exterminating trickle down oligarchist fascism lies, is the only option for democracy. People are fundamentally too stupid to vote, when evil speech determines their suicide, and it is the opposite of authoritarianism, when fake democracy establishment only permits authoritarian perspectives.

this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2025
95 points (100.0% liked)

Global News

5140 readers
215 users here now

What is global news?

Something that happened or was uncovered recently anywhere in the world. It doesn't have to have global implications. Just has to be informative in some way.


Post guidelines

Title formatPost title should mirror the news source title.
URL formatPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefixOpinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.
Country prefixCountry prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) where title is not clear enough from which country the news is coming from.


Rules

This community is moderated in accordance with the principles outlined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which emphasizes the right to freedom of opinion and expression. In addition to this foundational principle, we have some additional rules to ensure a respectful and constructive environment for all users.

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. No social media postsAvoid all social media posts. Try searching for a source that has a written article or transcription on the subject.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

Icon generated via LLM model | Banner attribution


If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS