Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#261

Post by 9HZZRfNlpR » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 3:49 AM UTC

TomMckenny wrote: post #147

downerending wrote: post #24

It's worth noting that there is a lot of discussion in serious circles (including here on HN) about the balance between too much and not enough with respect to quarantine, lockdown, etc., both in terms of where we are now and what we should do in the near future. I see little reason to doubt that all involved are trying to minimize general death and misery, even if they may disagree radically about how to do that. It…

>that all involved are trying to minimize general death and misery Unless the anti-quarantine events are organized by a hostile power. And this seems likely since they are insanely harmfully, arose suddenly and with widespread and great organization and have a lot of precedent. [1][2][3] And especially since it's already been explicitly shown for at least some of the domains connected to the protests.[4] [1] https://…

BLM was also sabotaged by Russia (from Mueller report), would you ban black lives matter gatherings and protests because of that too?

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#262

Post by NullPrefix » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 3:51 AM UTC

elicash wrote: post #153

Press2forEN wrote: post #98

For those of you cheering this move, imagine it applied to the causes you care about and decide if you still think its a good idea.

Never understood this argument. Let's take a cause I disagree with. I'm pro-equality, but still think Christian Mingle shouldn't be forced to match up same-sex couples. Because I disagree with their values, of course, I'd never use their website. OF COURSE conservative Christians should be allowed to have a website that aligns with their values. Not only don't I think this website should be outlawed -- I also don't t…

>I'm pro-equality

Stopped reading right there as that is a big enough indicator that you're sitting on a high horse.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#263

Post by nopriorarrests » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 3:51 AM UTC

FpUser wrote: post #223

nopriorarrests wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it double speak? Yes, I think that healthy 29 y.o. male with wife, kid and mortgage should have the ability to make a decision between going to work or losing his home. To make this decision for him looks unethical to me. And why exactly poor? It might be solidly middle class person. EDIT: I'm pushing forties, can sustain myself for 1.5 years without working maintaining the same lifestyle, and I would go to wo…

"I'm damn tired working from home." Interesting. I work from home 20 years already and have no desire to sit in a cubicle or waste my time in downtown traffic. I have my own company and products but also develop products for other companies on order and my first ever requirement is that unless there is some super duper meeting I only work at my own premises. Do not feel lonely either as I have enough friends with who…

OK, it's not just work from home, it's the whole lockdown hysteria. I barely left my home for last 5 weeks. No live music, no bars, no meetings with friends, no long walks. I don't know about covid, but my mental well being and my productivity are clearly taking a hit. I'm especially annoyed by the fact that weekends are not, in fact, weekends. It is two days of solitary confinement without work.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#264

Post by lkrubner » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 3:51 AM UTC

duchenne wrote: post #155

I guess it is easy to dismiss the message from ordinary people, since they do not express themselves as well as the professional speakers we are used to listen to. If instead of saying "I want a haircut.", they would say like Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." would they be taken more seriously? In the movie versio…

"Praising the strategy of these countries should be authorized."

I've heard variations on this argument made 3 of the last 5 days by the President Of the United States. In what sense is this not authorized? The most powerful person in the world is promoting variations on this idea. Also, turn on Fox News and they have been making this argument almost continuously for the last 72 hours. No one is censoring them. Indeed, if you watch that channel, you might think this argument is the mainstream view.

There is nothing wrong with the argument itself, which is why it is getting so much air time. Still, the actual gatherings that are being organized are a different issue. Until there is more transparency about who is funding the anti-quarantine movement, a certain caution would be wise, otherwise we are potentially stumbling into another fiasco like the 2016 election.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#265

Post by bsder » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 3:51 AM UTC

downerending wrote: post #24

It's worth noting that there is a lot of discussion in serious circles (including here on HN) about the balance between too much and not enough with respect to quarantine, lockdown, etc., both in terms of where we are now and what we should do in the near future. I see little reason to doubt that all involved are trying to minimize general death and misery, even if they may disagree radically about how to do that. It…

> It's worth noting that there is a lot of discussion in serious circles (including here on HN) about the balance between too much and not enough with respect to quarantine, lockdown, etc., both in terms of where we are now and what we should do in the near future.

The problem is that the "followers" in the "Reopen All The Things(tm)" camp is ASSUMING that you get immunity once you get Covid-19.

We do not have information about this. We also do not have information about how long immunity lasts if you do get some. We also do not have data as to whether a person who has an asymptomatic case of Covid-19 can later get a case which puts him into the hospital.

Herd immunity has significant limitations if immunity burns out every 6 months.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#266

Post by ShorsHammer » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 3:52 AM UTC

phakding wrote: post #88

chrisco255 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not astroturfing. I saw the protest in Austin this weekend. 22 million people have been laid off in the last 4 weeks. I've seen the footage of tens of thousands lining up at food banks across the country. This is just getting started.

I don't see the link here. Yes there are 22 million laid off. But given a choice between being alive and being jobless, I think people would choose being jobless. The people protesting are not the same people lining up at food banks. I have seen wapo video of Michigan protest. People there were angry because they want to get their hair done or buy paint and fertilizer. They want others to go to work to they can stay…

> But given a choice between being alive and being jobless

Is that actually the choice being made here?

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#267

Post by AnthonyMouse » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 3:54 AM UTC

Barrin92 wrote: post #192

duchenne wrote: post #155

I guess it is easy to dismiss the message from ordinary people, since they do not express themselves as well as the professional speakers we are used to listen to. If instead of saying "I want a haircut.", they would say like Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." would they be taken more seriously? In the movie versio…

>Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." would they be taken more seriously? Just to point out that quote is a textbook example of historical revisionism. Benjamin Franklin wrote this to the Penn family who governed the state of the same name on behalf of the general assembly. The Penn family wanted to make a one time p…

I think I have heard at least four different versions of the alleged history of the Franklin quote over the years (one of which being that it is apocryphal and he never actually said it), all from people willing to tie themselves into a knot to avoid the words having their ordinary plain meaning.

It's a rhetorical device, not a history book. A lot of other people have said the same thing over the years, but if you attribute it to them instead, the words are still the same and so is the meaning intended to be conveyed by the people using the quote now.

On top of that, the quote still can't be used for what you're using it for, because giving up the power to tax (note also that at the time the taxes had to be apportioned) is not at all the same thing as usurping the power to infringe rights held by the people.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#268

Post by feydaykyn » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 3:54 AM UTC

FpUser wrote: post #210

kyawzazaw wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should add the fact that a lot of people in Sweden live alone.

"people in Sweden live alone" you stating this as the cause of why Sweden is doing Ok-ish while not introducing drastic measures. All without any shred of proof.

You just have to search : • Sweden: number of households by type 2019 | Statista https://www.statista.com/statistics/526013/sweden-number-of-...

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#269

Post by stanfordkid » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 4:02 AM UTC

As we do serological testing, it is being revealed that the death rate was even lower than previously imagined -- potentially by a factor of 50x [1].

[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01095-0

Most places (outside of super dense metros) actually don't need quarantine at all. Maybe for people working in eldercare.

With these new statistics the risk of death for those <65 is about the same as the normal risk of random death through other circumstances over the course of 2 months.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#270

Post by fyfy18 » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 4:07 AM UTC

duchenne wrote: post #155

I guess it is easy to dismiss the message from ordinary people, since they do not express themselves as well as the professional speakers we are used to listen to. If instead of saying "I want a haircut.", they would say like Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." would they be taken more seriously? In the movie versio…

> Now, the government should inform people with data, and let them take a decision.

The problem with this argument is that there isnt that much data around, and what is available is only understandable to a subset of the population as it's in scientific papers. If you let everyone decide, what would happen is most people would listen to their authority figures which would be their governor, mayor, pastor or news anchor. The problem is those people will each have their own agenda and aren't going to give an unbiased recommendation, and those people don't necessarily have the knowledge themselves to understand the data.

What you are saying is similar to saying people should have a choice of whether to smoke or not. The risks of smoking are pretty well known, and its easy to make that call. This is more like deciding whether to take a new party drug - your friends take it and everything is fine, but you've all heard about the story of that couple that died from taking it. (And that doesn't take into account that you can infect others who are more vulnerable than you)