Yes of course.

But by what method or algorithm does this DECENTRALIZED SOCIAL MEDIA system protect us from propagandists and censors?

What is a method in THAT?

Distributed tagging and voting? The grace of our benevolent moderators? Something else?

I mean, combatting propaganda and censorship is the #1 issue here.

How do we protect ourselves from propagandists and censors? Large, small, popular and individual.

Sure

It’s one example of a common disease. So I figured it bore discussion. Now put it back in your pants and zip up.

The best weird ideas are framed as hard science fiction.

Here are 3 good ones

Fine Structure by qntm ( https://qntm.org/structure . Free)

Friendship is Optimal by Iceman ( https://www.fimfiction.net/story/62074/friendship-is-optimal . Free)

Axiomatic by Greg Egan (it’s a collection of short stories. Nonfree. Google it)

I said that the word of an authority that I respect would do it.

And by “do it” I meant (in reply to [email protected]) that it would justify anger at the accused.

That’s pretty far from truth. It’s putting my trust in an authority.

But to address your point.

To treat fiction and reality as equally real. And treat our responses to either as having equal substance. Seems deranged to me.

What’s a tortoise?

(Disregard that pm, wrong community)

The word of an authority that I respect would do it.

You mean like utterly totally zip? Surely not. Surely one is at least a little something. Like a fart in a wind, or a fart in a colander, or something farty like that.

Don’t take hearsay so seriously.

Don’t take the rabble’s judgment of great artists so seriously either

Hearsay constitutes weak evidence.

I’m not familiar. But ya, same idea.

I’d attribute it to that willingness to believe, but I’d take it a step further. An eagerness to believe. An eagerness to enjoy the high of a good anger. Outweighing any loyalty to reality.

Nope. Purely in the abstract. It happens a lot on social media. The Gaiman thing is just one example.

Nope

The statement is more of a ritual appliance. I think the intent is key.

Well it depends on the definition of censor.

If you define censor as, “to suppress or delete as objectionable” (Webster) then it fits just fine.

Engineers are, as a rule… well, you’ve seen what they’re like. You gotta loosen them up with drugs first if you want a decent conversation.

In that first technique you hold your attention on a thing as perfectly as you can for a time.

That thing can be a visualization or it can be any of a hundred other things.

My favorite is the feeling of breath in the tip of my nose. It’s a popular one. No visualization required there.

We have 2 techniques. The Buddhists call them samatha and vipassana. They go by other names, in other traditions, too.
We start with samatha, because it’s easy. Just takes diligent effort.
In samatha you hold your attention upon a thing (called your “object”) as perfectly as you can for a time.
You can use pretty much anything as your object. But some work better than others and some work differently for different people.
So experimentation is called for there.
Popular objects are mantras (a repeated word), visualizations, sights (like a candle flame), sounds (the wind in the trees), the feeling of breath in the tip of your nose. Lots of room for experimentation there. I like that last one especially.
Here’s a nice overview : http://fleen.org/fluffy_cloud (he calls the techniques “shrink” and “grow”). A couple nice books on the subject are “Journey of Awakening” by Ram Dass and “Meditation, the First and Last Freedom”, by Osho.
Ultimately you will need to do your own research, perform your own experiments and become your own expert.