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

451–460 of 595 posts

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

#451

Post by TopHand »

markbnj wrote: post #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…

Your right, we should ignore statistical evidence and go with your wife's anecdotal evidence. Your also right about letting the experts run our lives. After all they know far more about how the world works than we could ever know and we should just buckle down and do the menial tasks we're good at and let the experts take care of us.

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

#452

Post by FpUser »

totony wrote: post #364
FpUser wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What support? Said person will just have higher chances to die. Their choice. They're not inflicting death upon the others as accordingly to proposal there are no restrictions on younger carriers without symptoms.

I'm unsure if the person you responded to undertstood what you meant. I understood it as "if I am >60+, e.g. at risk, would i be free to not participate in the quarantine if partial quarantine were to happen" I'd argue that no, you should not be. Because if you get it, you will most likely require care and overload hospitals, which is what the whole point of that (partial) quarantine is. Either that or you forfeit yo…

Well you've got no moral rights to lock person up for a year or two with totally unknown outcome. If you are so eager to save public funds you have a lots of places to start shaving. You might be amazed when you look how governments spend money. Also if locked up for extended amount of time said person is likely develop whole bunch of ailments include mental that would "overwhelm"(tm) healthcare as well unless you deny them treatment and let them wonder the streets. Likely loss of income will cause the same thing, them being kicked out from their dwellings.

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

#453

Post by ugexe »

TopHand wrote: post #451
markbnj wrote: post #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…

Your right, we should ignore statistical evidence and go with your wife's anecdotal evidence. Your also right about letting the experts run our lives. After all they know far more about how the world works than we could ever know and we should just buckle down and do the menial tasks we're good at and let the experts take care of us.

What non-menial task has this situation stolen from you that is also more important than solving the current medical crisis?

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

#454

Post by projektfu »

NotSammyHagar wrote: post #308
projektfu wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

It was an “I’m ronery” gif. It claimed it was spam but ... really?

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

#455

Post by ModernMech »

thu2111 wrote: post #422
samdamsam wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The idea you can simply shut down the economy at will and balance it with relief doesn't make economic sense. Funny you say that because it seems to be no problem when it comes to bailing out corporate investors. Of course, near-zero federal interest rates didn’t make “economic sense” either, but yet here we are.

Bailing them out of what? The term "bail out" is usually understood to mean replacing funds after the owner of them lost them through bad decision making. What's happening here isn't a conventional bailout. Governments have destroyed the businesses of private investors deliberately and explicitly - reductions in the damage aren't bail outs.

The virus would have shut them down anyway if they had stayed open and their employees and customers became ill. The bad decision making here is the lack of foresight to keep cash on hand to weather a storm like this, despite making record profits in the billions. We are all told if we don’t keep 6 months of cash on hand we are financially negligent. Large companies were begging for money within two weeks of shutdowns happening, after spending so much of their cash on stock buybacks to pump up stock prices.

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

#456

Post by meheleventyone »

kofejnik wrote: post #417
pbourke wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’d assume most people, particularly landlords and local government would want to avoid that. This seems like a “prisoner’s dilemma” situation. It’s rational for an individual landlord to evict a delinquent tenant and seek a new one. However, if everyone does this the entire market collapses. It’s better for everyone if the landlord takes a short term haircut to preserve the market. Since cooperation is expected to…

... or maybe this "landlord" is a parent who just rents out their old small house, and is now unable to make the rent or car payments

At least they have an asset they can use to survive and make those payments.

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

#457

Post by lixtra »

ubercow13 wrote: post #443
alyx wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think you read his post. You are endangering others‘ lives each time you drive. And yet you’re not inline at the DMV surrendering your license, why? Seasonal sickness also isn’t new. My coworker gave me the flu and I gave it to my grandmother. Who’s at fault there?

Some of the UK/US response was supposedly based on this study [0], which predicted maybe 250,000 deaths if there was no lockdown. That's something like 140 years worth of traffic deaths for the UK, in one go. So yes, we take calculated risks all the time, but the comparison to driving isn't useful IMO. [0] https://www.ft.com/content/16764a22-69ca-11ea-a3c9-1fe6fedcc...

If it was just about throwing around numbers, you can compare it to 480,000 tobacco deaths per year [0] in the US.

Of course it’s about taking calculated risks everywhere.

[0] https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast...

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

#458

Post by pjc50 »

101404 wrote: post #446
pjc50 wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something I've been wondering for a while is how long Facebook et al would let conspiracy stuff run wild once it came close to damaging their own interests. It's one thing to look at a forest fire from a distance and say "it's people's right to play with matches", quite another thing when it reaches your own office. Neither Facebook staff nor management are immune to the consequences of a pandemic. There is a legitim…

Always remember that "the NSA is spying on everybody" was "conspiracy stuff" too. Right until it wasn't. And regarding Corona: Sweden never introduced a quarantine, and they seem to be in good shape compared to others. Not saying I agree with that policy, because I don't. But the topic isn't as "black and white" as it appears. Here in Germany, as of today, many of the already few restrictions where lifted as well.

Funny, I just heard today that Oktoberfest was going to be cancelled. That's hardly a back to normal situation.

Germany is one of the few countries that has managed to do test+trace well enough to contain outbreaks. It's definitely a model to be copied .. but you have to get the testing in place first!

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

#459

Post by irq11 »

staticassertion wrote: post #213
abnry wrote: post #189

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. The problem is that it may not be temporary due to legal creep. See: U.S. Patriot Act.

Very little about this feels like the Patriot Act. I also don't really see why the government would want to tank its economy. I mean, I can think of some really out there reasons, but I don't really feel it's worth entertaining given the far more reasonable reason for lock-in during a pandemic. edit: When I say 'this' I mean enforced lock in, specifically.

Nobody wants to “tank the economy”, but lots of panicky people are on HN and reddit, every day, calling for extensions of these lockdowns “because people are dying!”, even though the original pretense was quite different (“flattening the curve” doesn’t change the area under the curve). The premise of the thing is shifting, and censorship of contrary opinions is growing (as you can see from reflexive downvoting of comments here).

The people who are doing this are mostly well-off enough not to feel the direct consequences of their actions (yet), which is why they do it.

It’s the same moral hazard that leads politicians into war: gauzy moral sentiments can be very compelling when you’re paying with someone else’s lives.

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

#460

Post by megavolcano »

phakding wrote: post #221
megavolcano wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paraphrasing Dr. Birx: "There are other countries that if you had a pre-existing condition, and let's say the virus caused you to go to the ICU and then have a heart or kidney problem, some countries are recording that as a heart issue or a kidney issue and not a COVID-19 death. The intent is ... if someone dies with COVID-19 we are counting that." Paraphrasing mostly, but this is Dr. Birx admitting that the governme…

That's how that works. Take for example, HIV. Nobody dies of HIV, but because HIV causes immunodeficiency, you can die because of common cold or flu. That doesn't mean the person died because of common cold, they died because of HIV/AIDS. Similarly if you have type 1 diabetes and you get infected with corona, you probably died with diabetic complications, but without corona you would have been totally fine. Not sure…

People aren't catching type 1 diabetes because they are sick by coronavirus - they already had it. Comparing it to an immunodeficiency disease is not the same. It makes zero sense to generalize the fatality rate across a healthy population and include those with pre-existing conditions when trying to gauge the response for an entire state/country when the vast majority are healthy and those who are dying are not. When I want to know the risk to me or my family, I don't care that an 81 year old with stage 4 lung cancer died when he got COVID-19 - I want to know what my chances are among healthy people - but the media hysterics cling to the vulnerable people when it has no bearing on healthy ones.

We need detailed demographics of infections and deaths. We need to break down the risks, because a blanket totalitarian response of "SHUT DOWN LITERALLY EVERYTHING" is absolutely ridiculous when the general population is going to be fine. We didn't shut down the world economy for SARS, H1N1, MERS or any particularly bad flu season and we shouldn't shut down for this. We should focus our limited resources on protecting the vulnerable and let everyone else get back to work. More lives will be destroyed from an extended shutdown than this virus ever could.

Post reply on HN