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

YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 1001 posts

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#491

Post by alentist »

adatavizguy wrote: post #398
grawprog wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when am I beholden to the WHO? I don't remember voting for any of them or agreeing for them to represent me in any way. They are not my elected government, why should I give the slightest fuck what they tell me to do?

I hate to be the one to have to explain this to you. A private entity is deciding what content is and is not allowed to be hosted on their private servers using their private services. This is very different from government officials that you vote for censoring free speech. Anyone who doesn't like YouTube's policies are welcome to post their content on Facebook to share with their friends, on Twitter, stream it live…

> Anyone who doesn't like YouTube's policies are welcome to

...criticize them on HackerNews.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#492

Post by knzhou »

twblalock wrote: post #125
Pxtl wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Misinformation is killing people. Given that, who should YouTube use as a source of truth? The US government? Bill Nye the Science Guy? Or should they let 4chan tell your grandma to drink bleach to fight the Rona?

> Misinformation is killing people. How many? I don't think it's very many.

The ban is meant for 4chan-based messages like "drink bleach/rubbing alcohol/methanol to cure yourself now!", which have killed plenty of people.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#493

Post by Angostura »

bobcostas55 wrote: post #440
glenstein wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Where we live, due to local laws, we are now obliged to wear a mask to go shopping. Can one discuss that on YouTube, or would one be contradicting the WHO? Examples like these are frivolous. There's a heartland of obvious, flagrant misinformation that is indisputably worth banning and for which a moral case exists to ban immediately: '5g caused corona, this home remedy will cure it!' etc. The go-to move of internet…

The WHO has been spreading misinformation from the start, including claims that covid does not spread from human to human after it was abundantly clear that it does[0], claims that travel bans would be unnecessary to halt its spread[1], and claims that people should not wear masks[2]. These are not mere edge cases. We have structured our public organizations in a way that gives credentialed "experts" enormous amounts…

>including claims that covid does not spread from human to human.

That's how you interpret 'no clear evidence from preliminary investigations' is it?

Why bother attempting to twist the WHO's words? What does it get you?

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#494

Post by glenstein »

OrderlyTiamat wrote: post #461
glenstein wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 99.99999% case scenario concerns videos that are saying '5g caused coronavirus', and meanwhile you're trying to tie up everybodies attention with special cases that don't represent the majority of cases. People get disoriented with special cases and trick questions. Let me put it this way. If you're not just pointing to the mask example as a tentative, academic exercise, and sincerely believe that they constitute…

Well, than I don't know what to say to you. I have already explained my view on the proportions, I have already given argument and explanation for it, and you seem to be intent on not supporting your own conclusions apart from a rather lame "you're a contrarianist" argument. Why not actually defend your arguments and attack mine instead of circling about the issue with "this actual real life example is a what if hypo…

>(Particularly this hammering that these are contrived examples is bordering on the ridiculous: we know this is true!)

I'm just going to note you agree that these examples are contrived yet nevertheless want to debate them, apparently to performatively exhibit your appreciation for the values open-mindedness and free speech.

That's a not a constructive use of anybody's time. It's a frivolous distraction. Youtube is doing what they can to save lives by stopping misinformation in the face of a global pandemic. If you're more interested in turning this into a navel gazing exercise, I'd say you're suffering from a serious lack of perspective.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#495

Post by knzhou »

freehunter wrote: post #480
glenstein wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So far as I can tell, your extremely confident, categorical interpretations of your own citations are basically mistaken, across the board. As I read [0] it is not, in fact, a blanket declaration about transmissibility. As I read [1] it is not in any way an inaccurate statement (see [3]). When read [2] it's clear that it is not a blanket declaration not to wear masks. Meanwhile Youtube is going to take down videos cl…

Is it appropriate to flag HN comments that are so blatantly wrong like the one you replied to? If YouTube is taking down misinformation, is HN doing the same?

There's an endless flood of these bad comments. I'm just going through them (a new one posted every 2 minutes) and making the same rebuttal. People are stupid -- especially people who think they're smart contrarians.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#496

Post by nraynaud »

knzhou wrote: post #474
bobcostas55 wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The WHO has been spreading misinformation from the start, including claims that covid does not spread from human to human after it was abundantly clear that it does[0], claims that travel bans would be unnecessary to halt its spread[1], and claims that people should not wear masks[2]. These are not mere edge cases. We have structured our public organizations in a way that gives credentialed "experts" enormous amounts…

> The WHO has been spreading misinformation from the start, including claims that covid does not spread from human to human Go back and actually read the full set of WHO statements in mid-January. They have a bunch of statements saying that nations should get prepared, one saying that specific studies haven’t yet found hard evidence for person-to-person transmission (because at that point most of the cases they’d man…

I would add that WHO requires nations to inform them of the measures they are intending to take so that WHO can do some coordination, and nations don’t tell them and WHO has to do catch up by reading the newspapers.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#497

Post by xster »

deelowe wrote: post #69
pmiller2 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has what to do with their medical and public health recommendations?

Taiwan data was being counted with China's. This means that many of the early safeguards Taiwan was taking to protect their country was overlooked as it's effectiveness didn't show up in the global trends reported by the WHO. In fact, when specifically questioned by the press on how Taiwan was so successful at containment and preventing the spread, the WHO leadership acted like they had never heard the term Taiwan be…

Is that quantifiably true? There are the same number of deaths in Shanghai and Beijing as Taiwan and the population is about the same size while Shanghai and Beijing have much less "travel restriction" from Taiwan. Why should the WHO, an agency of the UN, make an extremely aggressive political and undemocratic move and special case Taiwan when only 14 of the 193 members of the UN have diplomatic relations with Taiwan and when it performed average vis a vis other Chinese provinces.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#498

Post by knzhou »

brlewis wrote: post #364
mmazing wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the age of misinformation, how do we better equip our society to know (or even desire to know) what is accurate information? I think it's easy to think of censorship as the answer, and it's easy to think that in this extreme circumstance that it's the answer. Maybe it is a slippery slope. It is a problem though. People aren't doing a very good job of handling it on their own, either. So what's the answer? Genuinel…

Concise statements, concise pro arguments, concise con arguments, each pro/con having its own pro/con arguments behind it via hypertext. Make it easier to explore the tree of evidence.

It doesn't work that way. It's trivial to build a rigged tree of evidence that makes any claim look good. Remember gish gallops from 90s internet arguments?

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#499

Post by rangibaby »

guscost wrote: post #402
judge2020 wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Revoking 230 won't make the executives at YouTube go "gosh darn, guess we'll have to start taking a loss by employing hundreds of thousands of moderators to literally watch every video uploaded", they'll constrain and limit the platform in any way which still guarantees similar or greater ad revenue. That is, if there isn't any legal loophole like requiring creators sign legal paperwork which makes creators their own…

They'll probably cull everything that doesn't earn them ad revenue, to minimize the fallout. The content will trend toward sanitized garbage and the viewers will start leaking to somewhere else.

YouTube will finally become “Tube”

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#500

Post by rglullis »

knzhou wrote: post #474
bobcostas55 wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The WHO has been spreading misinformation from the start, including claims that covid does not spread from human to human after it was abundantly clear that it does[0], claims that travel bans would be unnecessary to halt its spread[1], and claims that people should not wear masks[2]. These are not mere edge cases. We have structured our public organizations in a way that gives credentialed "experts" enormous amounts…

> The WHO has been spreading misinformation from the start, including claims that covid does not spread from human to human Go back and actually read the full set of WHO statements in mid-January. They have a bunch of statements saying that nations should get prepared, one saying that specific studies haven’t yet found hard evidence for person-to-person transmission (because at that point most of the cases they’d man…

They did say though that flying to China was still okay in as late as February. For what? Fear of CCP?

If this virus had come in some African country, they would have no problem in closing everything out - as anyone that understands tail risks would. But because it's China, then the recommendations for actions come after the evidence can not be hidden anymore. It is immoral.

Post reply on HN