Live data from Hacker News

Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

twitter.com

301–310 of 595 posts

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

#301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People should be able to take a calculated risk. That is not at all what we're talking about here. People should not be able to take a calculated risk with the lives of others . Let me tell you why it's not like driving: the NHTSA reports 102 car fatalities a day in 2016. NYC just got under 500 COVID deaths a day. One city. 5x the fatalities. Compared to a country of 300 million people. This is, by far , the most o…

you realize when someone dies in a car accident that they may have otherwise lived another 40 or 80 years, whereas with covid they probably had two months.

I think it would be best if we avoided engaging in the despicable, ghoulish practice of valuing one life over another.

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

#302
post #296
post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so it's a hard topic nobody wants to think about genuinely but isn't there truth to it? the nursigng homes that are being ravaged the most -- people are there for end of life care. by definition. they are generally under a policy of do not recussitate. thats very different than any hn readers experience (nobody here is commenting as a nursing home patient). this is not to say their lives dont matter but the context d…

> but isn't there truth to it? NO. THERE IS NOT. Less than 50% of COVID deaths are over 75 years old. That means that more than 50% are under 75. A full quarter of deaths are below 64. These are not people dying anyway. These are not people in nursing homes. These are people like you.

> Less than 50% of COVID deaths are over 75 years old

That means more half of the deaths are of people over 75, and 75% of deaths are over 65.

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

#303

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…

> People should be able to take a calculated risk. That is not at all what we're talking about here. People should not be able to take a calculated risk with the lives of others . Let me tell you why it's not like driving: the NHTSA reports 102 car fatalities a day in 2016. NYC just got under 500 COVID deaths a day. One city. 5x the fatalities. Compared to a country of 300 million people. This is, by far , the most o…

Hyperbole much? People do take calculated risks with the lives of others - again driving is a dangerous activity, you take the lives of everyone in your car and those around you in your hands while driving. Even chefs are responsible for not giving people food poisoning. Because of our hyperconnected world, we depend on people taking risks around us constantly.

Additionally, NYC had 500 deaths because its approaching its peak - soon most people will recover and be immune to this disease, then its gone forever. But the economic costs - the careers and education opportunities lost to regular people will impact their whole lives.

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

#304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, I skimmed your comment history. I'm opting out of this conversation. I think we disagree too much to find common ground here.

Unfortunate for me. :( I'm sincerely uncertain. I'm probably closer to the middle of the Bell-curve of smarts than the majority of this board, which is why it's the only community I try to engage with. I don't know how to filter the wheat from the chaff, so to speak, when it comes to the online fire-hose of (what seems to be) an increasingly loud amount of ignorance, vitriol, panic-porn, condescension and misinformat…

The discomfort is probably the one and only thing you should really trust.

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

#305
I usually stay out of the political/topical threads on HN but this is personal to me. From my point of view few if any of us commenting here are knowledgeable enough to connect all the disparate data points we keep snatching at and synthesize them into conclusions that are likely to be correct. The people who can do that are working on it, and generally too busy at the moment to post on forums or give interviews. The misinformation and unfounded conclusions that are flying around, and especially the atmosphere of political strife and mistrust are very frustrating to them (and all of us I'm sure). Most of us here have chafed at similar situations when people who don't really understand what we do express strong opinions about how we should do it. They understand how people are being impacted, but they can't give us certainty at the moment however badly we want it.

The mortality rate in this place or that; the experience on a cruise ship, or in Sweden, or in North Dakota vs. that in New York or Italy; the percentage of people who are positive and asymptomatic vs. presymptomatic vs. symptomatic; whether this or that drug seems to have a good effect on outcomes; they absolutely don't know how all of this fits together yet. All of them, doctors, nurses, researchers, are going in every day, treating patients, participating in daily conference calls to share information on outcomes, trying different therapies. They're figuring this out and all they have asked us for is some time. All these studies and hypotheses and numbers from various places don't always reflect what's actually happening on the ground.

Someone mentioned quarantining the "vulnerable" people and letting everyone else get back to work and develop our "herd immunity." Are researchers certain we gain long term immunity? Can they precisely define "vulnerable?" My wife is clinical care coordinator on a covid unit in northern New Jersey (that's the personal part). Her first patient was 51. I bet that's younger than most of you are thinking when you think "vulnerable." It looks like he's going to make it and drop into that large "didn't die" bucket I see referred to here over and over, but to get there he spent _five weeks_ in an ICU bed on a ventilator. My wife has treated lots of elderly people. She's also treated people in their 30's and 40's. People in those age groups have died. Children have died, too. How many of each type of person will be affected by this or that containment policy? We don't know.

When this thing started my wife's hospital was running about 2:1 patients to nurses. They're now flirting with 4-6:1. They don't have proper PPE. At another hospital near us a nurse was suspended for bringing her own to work. The general opinion is that the system can't handle much additional strain, and I don't think any of us are in a position to argue the point with them. It's been a month. We can absolutely make it through a few months if we have to, while they do their work. I personally think that would be easier with strong and consistent federal leadership, but that's a separate discussion. At the very least we should be willing to heed the people we expect to save our lives if we get sick.

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

#306
post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but isn't there truth to it? NO. THERE IS NOT. Less than 50% of COVID deaths are over 75 years old. That means that more than 50% are under 75. A full quarter of deaths are below 64. These are not people dying anyway. These are not people in nursing homes. These are people like you.

> Less than 50% of COVID deaths are over 75 years old That means more half of the deaths are of people over 75, and 75% of deaths are over 65.

read what you quoted again

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

#307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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? Most people sound more like the latter than the former. If people were saying "We have a need for haircuts etc, this is serious", they'd get a lot more consideration than some appea…

I just learned that Facebook censors gifs from Team America World Police, so I’m not sure that it should be relied on for a conversation about anything critical.

America is strange. The idea of censorship seems to rile up more than the practicalities of it. Facebook is hugely censored, and has been for years. There's a distinct lack of gore, of child porn, or even just porn in general. There aren't torrent links to download the latest TV show or video game. And, dare I say it, it's better for it.

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

#308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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? Most people sound more like the latter than the former. If people were saying "We have a need for haircuts etc, this is serious", they'd get a lot more consideration than some appea…

I just learned that Facebook censors gifs from Team America World Police, so I’m not sure that it should be relied on for a conversation about anything critical.

Really, you mean I can't post an "America, Fuck Yeah" gif, but it's not because of the language? FB usually has a rationale for something, do you know the reasoning here?

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

#309

I usually stay out of the political/topical threads on HN but this is personal to me. From my point of view few if any of us commenting here are knowledgeable enough to connect all the disparate data points we keep snatching at and synthesize them into conclusions that are likely to be correct. The people who can do that are working on it, and generally too busy at the moment to post on forums or give interviews. The…

> It's been a month. We can absolutely make it through a few months if we have to, while they do their work.

You and I can. Many of my friends have missed a rent or car payment, and may soon miss another. Most people cannot work from home.

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

#310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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? Most people sound more like the latter than the former. If people were saying "We have a need for haircuts etc, this is serious", they'd get a lot more consideration than some appea…

> Most people sensibly realize that a lock-down in the face of a pandemic is not a regression in our fundamental rights as US citizens, but just a temporary measure to save lives . But that's not what we're talking about here. Facebook isn't going to an event and shutting it down, they're preventing people from discussing having an event. There is also a bit of a different trouble with the government shutting down th…

fb is a private company and can do whatever they want. their job is to make money. so many people are swayed by lies and propaganda.
Post reply on HN