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

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

#551

Post by mcculley » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 6:13 PM UTC

bargl wrote: post #514

mcculley wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The good news is that we don't have to learn everything ourselves the hard way. We can ask South Korea for advice and assistance.

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

#552

Post by totony » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 6:13 PM UTC

FpUser wrote: post #452

totony wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 de…

I agree that you have no rights to lock someone up, but society seem to have already accepted that others have the right to tell you what to do with your life, e.g. locking down someone for suicide attempt

I was also comparing lockdown vs partial lockdown, which I feel still does more damage to more people to be total

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

#553

Post by downerending » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 6:24 PM UTC

aclsid wrote: post #542

downerending wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody has excluded Taiwan from anything, but they are not a member state of the UN and therefore not part of the WHO. Speaking from the cheap seats, Taiwan is obviously a sovereign country. They'd like to be in the UN. The UN apparently excludes them because of the influence of mainland China. So yes, they are excluded.

There are areas of Colombia that are a sovereign country because they are controlled by guerrillas. The same goes for Russian controlled areas of the Ukraine and Georgia. What makes them sovereign countries with a right to be in the UN is the amount of recognition they get from their peers. I don't have anything against the Taiwanese, but they are embroiled in a conflict just like the previous regions I described. Un…

Really the only thing Taiwan "lacks" is the approval of China. It's not unlike Macedonia, which "lacks" the approval of Greece (with respect to its name).

One can imagine guerilla-controlled areas Columbia to be just like Taiwan, but I won't be travelling there...

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

#554

Post by davvolun » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 6:35 PM UTC

zarkov99 wrote: post #480

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…

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.

If you're treating FB as the arbiter of truth, that's a you problem.

The internet allows a wealth of information, and you should not trust FB as the arbiter of information anymore than you should absolutely-without-question trust Washington Post, Buzzfeed News or the freaking Daily Stormer.

FB 'censoring' some ridiculously unscientific and dangerous information, like COVID19 disinformation, doesn't completely hide that. You can still find it out there, but you have to look for it.

I would agree it opens up a door. You censor one thing, you think it might be worth censoring another thing and so on. But 'slippery slope' is a logical fallacy for a reason, and this disinformation is an inherently difficult problem, we can't just look to easy answers like "don't allow censorship."

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

#555

Post by ntsplnkv2 » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 6:50 PM UTC

AdrianB1 wrote: post #550

ntsplnkv2 wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> think of the children, How is this any different than "think of our freedoms!" which has been used endlessly to oppress other nations and peoples, and, ironically, our own.

Can you please provide a such example? I really have no idea what you are talking about.

Operation Enduring Freedom, the Iraq War, the Patriot act, etc, were all based on the premise of defending our freedom, when the reality is Iraq nor Al-Qaeda posed any existential threat to it.

The reason freedoms are often infringed upon in times of crisis are because it is often pragmatic to do so. Also, most of these protestors have little to any idea how the US government works, let alone how its founding father's intended it to. Many would probably be upset at what they read.

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

#556

Post by SerLava » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 7:05 PM UTC

ogre_magi wrote: post #291

SerLava wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Inflammatory language is appropriate to describe an ongoing attempt to end the lives of millions of people. It's necessary to point out that we live in a failed state because some of the solutions being presented are assuming some kind of capability which we have not come close to demonstrating. It looks like we're going to have to kill quite a few poor people is fundamentally inflammatory, even when you act like you…

Wait why are their lives more valuable than others?

It's close, but their lives are marginally more valuable. Because when someone says "oh, looks like somebody is going to have to commit suicide for the group" that person has just volunteered.

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

#557

Post by SerLava » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 7:09 PM UTC

totony wrote: post #360

SerLava wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. We can't even get PPE. We won't have PPE for a long time. Not even doctors have enough. 2. We're not going to train minimum wage workers and quarantined vulnerable individuals to follow sanitary procedures to any adequate degree. 3. We don't even have enough trained medical workers to treat dying people, so no they aren't going to make the deliveries. This problem will only get worse if you go all "herd immunity"…

Instead of testing people who already have symptoms, maybe we could use those tests to ensure sick people don't come into contact with their groceries? Of course quarantining part of the population is hard, but I fail to see how it is harder than quarantining the whole population

We can't test people doing deliveries because we don't even have tests.

Even if we did have tests, at some point nearly everyone is going to have the virus- especially delivery workers. There will literally not be enough people to make clean deliveries.

Quarantining the population is easier for us because the majority of us have dwellings already. We do not have tests or ppe.

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

#558

Post by modzu » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 7:28 PM UTC

camgunz wrote: post #546

modzu wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is a classic moral dilemma. a train heading for some people on track a or you can pull a lever and send divert it to track b where there is one person. if you do nothing, many die, if you pull the lever, one dies, but you killed him because he wouldn't have died otherwise. what would you do? there isnt one right answer, but our world is complex and we are always making decions that affect everyone else. it turns out…

This isn't the trolley problem. We have tools to address the economic destruction, but we only have 1 tool to address coronavirus: shelter in place. It's not any more complicated than that.

that is false. first of all, a lack of imagination does not mean we have a single tool to fight a coronavirus. shelter in place is perhaps the single tool in your mind, not in the world. secondly, it is absolutely more complicated than that. economy vs health is a flase dichotomy. like the trolly problem one option seems obvious (save the crowd) but the implications for the other choice are, importantly, equally valid if less obvious : it means mudering a person. so maybe letting the trolly hit the crowd is the moral choice? in this case what are the effects of each choice? im not an american but dont americans pay for healthcare? so isnt a poor american worse off in terms of health outcomes? anyway even focusing on the health, here's an exercise that might get you to think deeply about it. coronavirus is a respiratory disease. it turns out that means if you're in good lung health you have much better odds of recovering. so one way to think about 'treatment' is treating lung health. many health problems are addressed this way -- holistically. where is our cure against lung cancer? its too hard to fight lung cancer qua cancer. but we are doing a fantastic job of eliminating it by eliminating smoking. you can stay inside your home and not catch any transmissable disease whatsoever. but the consequences of this are absolutely not merely economic!

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

#559

Post by camgunz » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 8:30 PM UTC

modzu wrote: post #558

camgunz wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't the trolley problem. We have tools to address the economic destruction, but we only have 1 tool to address coronavirus: shelter in place. It's not any more complicated than that.

that is false. first of all, a lack of imagination does not mean we have a single tool to fight a coronavirus. shelter in place is perhaps the single tool in your mind, not in the world. secondly, it is absolutely more complicated than that. economy vs health is a flase dichotomy. like the trolly problem one option seems obvious (save the crowd) but the implications for the other choice are, importantly, equally vali…

> that is false. first of all, a lack of imagination does not mean we have a single tool to fight a coronavirus.

The fact that we need to imagine more options means we only have the one.

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

#560

Post by lazyasciiart » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 8:48 PM UTC

pacala wrote: post #544

lazyasciiart wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you reconcile this argument with the hospitals being full and morgues overrun? Do you think that happens every flu season?

[Not the person you addressed this question to]. I don't. Do you? We are 3 months into this mess and have wildly divergent facts that can't be reasonably reconciled. Some attempts: * The regular flu season uses 75% capacity of the system. A disease that's 3x worse will lead to 225% capacity needs. * Maybe this disease is remarkably more contagious than the flu. In a tightly packed place like NYC, you might get all th…

Those aren't reconciliations, they are contradicting the assertion that this is just another seasonal flu by identifying a way in which it is worse. I don't know what you mean about having "wildly divergent facts"?