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

511–520 of 595 posts

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

#511

Post by smichel17 »

mehrdadn wrote: post #332
otterley wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I'm not saying that will be for everyone , just that it is likely to be for many people , and those people may not be able to know if they're in that category until it's too late either. Obviously some landlords will be understanding and defer/waive payments long enough that people can repay, but my common sense says that, as cruel as it might be, what I described will also happen to a lot of people. I imagine in tho…

I am having trouble understanding the landlord's perspective here. Say my tenant just missed 3 months of rent because they could not work during quarantine. Now, the economy reopens and they get their job back (yes, this is an assumption). Now they are able to pay rent but, because their job is not high-paying, they are unable to pay back the 3 months of debt. I can either waive the debt or evict and find a new tenant. But I lose the debt in either case, so why would I prefer to evict and have to suffer the hassle of finding a new tenant?

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

#512

Post by 101404 »

jaynetics wrote: post #478
101404 wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Here in Germany, as of today, many of the already few restrictions where lifted as well. This is a misleading way to phrase (or perceive) it. Yes, most shops are open again under strict limitations. No restaurants, bars, churches, stadia, theaters, big shopping malls etc., even in the most permissive state (NRW). No gatherings even in private. At the same time, more and more German states are requiring citizens to…

So what was "misleading" about it? Compared to Spain or Italy, the limitations were fewer. And of those, many have now been lifted.

Not sure why you felt the need to call it "misleading".

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

#513

Post by smichel17 »

jacobush wrote: post #464
triyambakam wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are increasing reports that ventilators are doing more harm than good, that in fact the way this virus starves the body of oxygen isn't pneumonia, but rather in the blood. It's like a reverse survivorship bias - most patients vented die.

Sounds crazy - even if it was something in the blood, if you are oxygen starved, how can it be worse to flush your lungs with pure oxygen than not?

I have no expertise in this subject area. My layperson understanding is that ventilation is a fairly invasive procedure. There are risks involved, such as infection from improperly sterilized equipment. Maybe someone more knowledgeable can elaborate further.

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

#514

Post by bargl »

mcculley wrote: post #200
bargl wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. I'd like to point out that some people equate "invest in public health infrastructure" with free healthcare. The two aren't the same. To deal with a pandemic you need a pandemic response plan for the spike to the system. This can be done in even in the US under our current system. It'd just magnify the pros/cons of our any system in place. I'm for state run healthcare, but the argument about pandemic readines…

I agree that they are two separate concepts. But if a community ensures that homeless people are vaccinated and not a risk to those privately insured and also wants all children vaccinated, no matter who their parents are, that is a form of healthcare. Public health requires an investment in healthcare. Healthcare is never free. Some cultures invest in it. Some don't.

But as we've seen from spots in Europe, you also have to invest wisely. I think (as harsh as it is to say) we can learn from this and pick healthcare models that work well even under strain.

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

#515

Post by stanfordkid »

52-6F-62 wrote: post #509
stanfordkid wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow -- really enjoyed the write up by Balaji S. -- I had heard about these flaws earlier, but didn't realize how great they really were. I still maintain the gist of my point though -- we don't have sufficient evidence for widespread quarantine. New York and Italy are outliers, and should be understood as such. Even if the results are 5x or 10x instead of 50x -- it still means decisions were made on grossly inflated…

There is some data. https://toronto.citynews.ca/2020/04/20/new-modelling-shows-p... Ontario is largely a rural province. > New modelling predictions show that the wave of new, community spread cases of coronavirus in Ontario appears to have peaked, but the spread in long-term care homes and other group settings is still growing. > Earlier models predicted the peak would be hit in May, however according to data releas…

Totally... no one is saying that we get off scot-free if we stop quarantine. The quarantine can't last forever, and the virus at some point will spread... so even if you are at-risk if you don't get it now you might get it 6 months from now -- unless of course, younger folks get out there and build herd immunity.

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

#516

Post by zarkov99 »

mumblemumble wrote: post #491
zarkov99 wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is relying on FB as the arbiter of truth. Ideas that sounded insane a few weeks back, and might have been censored for the sake of the confused masses, like the possibility the virus escaped from a bio-lab or that masks really help, are now respectable. FB, Google, Twitter, etc, will, by default, protect the status quo, the safe, consensual views, and censor anything else. This is very dangerous.

This isn't a first amendment problem. This is what an antitrust problem looks like in the information age. Privately-run communication channels have always been arbiters of truth. Fanzines and newsletters chose what to publish. The town supermarket chose what flyers it would allow on its bulletin board. The local book store chose what books and magazines it would sell. Social clubs imposed standards on their membersh…

Yes, you have it exactly. Facebook is used as if it was a the utility for information dissemination but it is run as a publisher with editorial license to suppress and boost whatever it wants. This is a new and unholy combination that should be explicitly considered in the law.

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

#517

Post by stanfordkid »

elgenie wrote: post #281
stanfordkid wrote: post #269

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 ris…

That preprint [1] is a great example of how far ahead of the skis you can get with motivated reasoning, bad math, and no peer review. They recruited people over Facebook at a time that California's COVID tests were backlogged (with ads not presented in the paper, with links to signup that could, anecdotally, be shared out); in that situation, avoiding selection bias towards people that were sick with something previo…

I'll add that this high rate is mirrored in several countries doing anti-body tests on blood donors (though one could argue blood donors are a self-selecting group):

>In this sample 11% has antibodies and the test detects 70-80% of people with antibodies. So, that leaves us with 14.6% immune. With a population of 2,377,081, that means 347053 people would be immune in Stockholm now, for an IFR of 0.27%.

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/g4znbg/at_least_11...

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

#518

Post by viridian »

mumblemumble wrote: post #491
zarkov99 wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is relying on FB as the arbiter of truth. Ideas that sounded insane a few weeks back, and might have been censored for the sake of the confused masses, like the possibility the virus escaped from a bio-lab or that masks really help, are now respectable. FB, Google, Twitter, etc, will, by default, protect the status quo, the safe, consensual views, and censor anything else. This is very dangerous.

This isn't a first amendment problem. This is what an antitrust problem looks like in the information age. Privately-run communication channels have always been arbiters of truth. Fanzines and newsletters chose what to publish. The town supermarket chose what flyers it would allow on its bulletin board. The local book store chose what books and magazines it would sell. Social clubs imposed standards on their membersh…

Best comment in this whole thread. While people war over the morality of Facebook Inc. banning speech is disfavors from it's own platform, most people aren't addressing the fact that Facebook shouldn't hold such a market position in the first place.

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

#519

Post by glitcher »

0xy wrote: post #35
glitcher wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Source?

Apologies, I thought it would be obvious that poverty causes higher mortality. http://news.mit.edu/2016/study-rich-poor-huge-mortality-gap-... https://www.mailman.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/how-...

2.5x was a little too specific to be obvious.

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

#520

Post by camgunz »

TheOtherDave wrote: post #415
kelnos wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you take the lives of everyone in your car and those around you in your hands while driving. The key point there is that you do that with their consent . Also you are required to be insured to cover you in the case that you screw up and hurt or kill people. Please show me the insurance company that will cover you if you recklessly spread COVID-19 to someone who then dies. I don't consent to you risking my life and…

What about the lives lost to the increased rates of suicide and drug/alcohol abuse that will accompany an economic collapse?

We have tools to combat an economic collapse. The defense we have against COVID is to shelter in place until we get a huge testing system up and running (which we currently don't have a plan for).
Post reply on HN