Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 595 posts

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

#321

Post by AnthonyMouse »

Barrin92 wrote: post #298
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 at…

> 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. By putting the quote into the context of the founding fathers the precise meaning is to imbue it with the idea that a sort of anti-governmental stance is Ur-A…

> By putting the quote into the context of the founding fathers the precise meaning is to imbue it with the idea that a sort of anti-governmental stance is Ur-American

A sort of anti-governmental stance is Ur-American. They didn't fight a revolution because they were satisfied to live under the rule of a far away unaccountable government. The implication being ascribed isn't out of character.

Franklin also said things like this:

> Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins. Republics and limited monarchies derive their strength and vigor from a popular examination into the action of the magistrates.

Which isn't as pithy but was treasonously anti-government in that era.

More to the point, he said the one about liberty and temporary safety more than once, so focusing on one instance as if that context is the only one is just as misleading. Here's a different one:

https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-21-02-02...

Where we see this:

> As to the other two Acts, The Massachusetts must suffer all the Hazards and Mischiefs of War, rather than admit the Alteration of their Charters and Laws by Parliament. They who can give up essential Liberty to obtain a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

So here's Franklin arguing that they must go to war sooner than give up their liberty to Parliament in peace, i.e. context in accordance with the usage for which it's typically quoted.

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

#322

Post by helaoban »

camgunz wrote: post #301
bagacrap wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

We assign value to human life all the time, in dollar terms or otherwise. And we most certainly assign a higher value to certain lives over others, you just do it implicitly. It’s the reason you don’t drop everything you’re doing in your life right now to go fight HIV in Africa, or aren’t organizing protests in front of the White House Lawn everyday to try to prevent the US from dropping another bomb on a Pakistani village. The personal and economic costs to do so are too great, therefore you’ve at least placed an upper bound on the value of those lives, which is something like the cost of maintaining your current lifestyle. In fact, the the true price of those lives can probably be approximated by looking at how much you’ve actually contributed in dollar terms to trying to preserve them, which is basically zero.

Are you saying that it’s immoral to at least consider the implications of a prolonged economic shutdown, or to advance a timetable for reopening that isn’t contingent on waiting 6 months for a vaccine?

Save us the sanctimony, you and everybody else is engaged in the exercise of assigning different values to different lives everyday.

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

#323

Post by otterley »

mehrdadn wrote: post #315
otterley wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately many states are suspending unlawful detainer and eviction actions until the crisis is over and people can get back to work. They are similarly restricting foreclosure actions for impacted landlords who would otherwise use the rental income to pay their mortgages. This is also the humane thing to do because this crisis is no fault of the renters.

> many states are suspending unlawful detainer and eviction actions until the crisis is over and people can get back to work So how does that work? Instead of right now, they'll get evicted and become homeless as soon as things open up, because they've been piling up rent with no income in the meantime? Would you find that comforting?

Why do you assume that would be the outcome? That is the cruelest, most pessimistic prediction that one could make. Come on, have a little faith in common sense and decency.

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

#324

Post by wiradikusuma »

I'm overly simplifying, but I don't understand the fuss.

The incubation is ~14 days. So if _everyone_ can act together, stay at home for 2-3 weeks, then it'll all be over and we can get on with our lives, right?

For those who don't want to follow (the deviants): force them to sign agreement, "If COVID-19 happens to me, that's solely my problem." and let them do whatever freedom they want, as long as they're not near non-deviants.

This is similar with smokers. In many countries, smoking is still allowed in designated areas: closed room where all smokers smoke. You think smoking is okay? Fine, do it with the rest of you, but don't inflict damage to non-smokers.

Sorry for the rant, but I'm perplexed by the selfishness. You want it your way? Go ahead, but don't risk others.

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

#325

Post by baggy_trough »

wiradikusuma wrote: post #324

I'm overly simplifying, but I don't understand the fuss. The incubation is ~14 days. So if _everyone_ can act together, stay at home for 2-3 weeks, then it'll all be over and we can get on with our lives, right? For those who don't want to follow (the deviants): force them to sign agreement, "If COVID-19 happens to me, that's solely my problem." and let them do whatever freedom they want, as long as they're not near…

That’s not the case because households have an average size > 1.

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

#326

Post by downerending »

wiradikusuma wrote: post #324

I'm overly simplifying, but I don't understand the fuss. The incubation is ~14 days. So if _everyone_ can act together, stay at home for 2-3 weeks, then it'll all be over and we can get on with our lives, right? For those who don't want to follow (the deviants): force them to sign agreement, "If COVID-19 happens to me, that's solely my problem." and let them do whatever freedom they want, as long as they're not near…

No, no group of ordinary humans can all act together at the same time, with discipline. Occasionally this works in the military or something, but they're heavily trained.

Plus, the problem with "deviants" as you put it, is that if they don't "conform", they can infect a lot of other non-deviants.

The problem is a complex one, for sure.

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

#327

Post by FpUser »

jfim wrote: post #219
FpUser wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"That's because many people in Sweden live alone." - got a link to a credible study confirming this? It sounds rather like a fantasy to me.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/526013/sweden-number-of-...

What does that link have anything to do with the "loneliness" being the cause of Sweden's Covid policy relative success?

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

#328

Post by mindslight »

kfrzcode wrote: post #282
staticassertion wrote: post #260

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…

IMO, fall back on first principles. Trust no one and err on the side of caution. Weigh your actions as if you will be turned away at the hospital if you do get sick.

Trying to choose between one size fits all top down solutions is the path to madness. State shutdown orders are really just a crude response to an economic treadmill meant to push everyone into working. They're imperfect, as all one size fits all solutions are.

If you do need to continue to come into contact with others to take care of yourself and family, consciously accept the risk and do the prep work to minimize it rather than going full cognitive dissonance and backfitting justifications as to why it's perfectly safe. We've seen enough twitboast->obituary pairings.

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

#329

Post by AnthonyMouse »

NotSammyHagar wrote: post #310
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Facebook is unambiguously being threatened by Congress with unfavorable legislation over not doing things like this.

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

#330

Post by camgunz »

helaoban wrote: post #322
camgunz wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

We assign value to human life all the time, in dollar terms or otherwise. And we most certainly assign a higher value to certain lives over others, you just do it implicitly. It’s the reason you don’t drop everything you’re doing in your life right now to go fight HIV in Africa, or aren’t organizing protests in front of the White House Lawn everyday to try to prevent the US from dropping another bomb on a Pakistani v…

Hi, let me try and defuse this a little. I'm sure we're both doing our best and these are trying times. Let's endeavor to be civil and not assume things about each other. For example, you have no idea what I did all day, so let me tell you. I work in social good, trying to close the access to justice gap. The way I justify not taking a plane to some hotspot is that I think I can "do the most good" (in the immortal words of Hillary Clinton) as a software engineer working in this field.

I'm not letting you in on this to high road you. I also bought a new phone instead of donating that money to COVID relief, for example.

Rather, my point is that we need to find sustainable ways to improve the world. We're not gonna solve genocide, famine, etc any time soon, and we shouldn't beat ourselves up for enjoying life while we work to improve it. It's the only way it will ever get done.

> Are you saying that it’s immoral to at least consider the implications of a prolonged economic shutdown, or to advance a timetable for reopening that isn’t contingent on waiting 6 months for a vaccine?

I'm confident that isn't what I said. Consider away. Please don't minimize the danger of COVID-19.

Post reply on HN