111–120 of 714 posts
I completely disagree with most of what the doctors in the video are saying. However I really really don't like YouTube removing content like this.
I really really like it, just like I really really like what's his name being deplatformed. I like it even more that I can't readily remember his name, right, Alex Jones. YouTube has no duty to be a platform for Diamond and Silk in scrubs.
It's literally terrifying that they removed this video. Someone uploaded a copy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25m0fm2LSIg
They said they're culling misinformation and they're doing it. I don't see what's terrifying about this. Maybe unsettling if you're aggressively pro-free speech, but 'terrifying' is very hyperbolic.
The insidious part about sometimes-censorship is that it is invisible and deniable. Everyone knows the press in China or under the USSR is/was censored 24/7.
YouTube is only censored sometimes. It’s like a seatbelt that works every day except the day you crash (emergencies/crises are the times when open and free communications systems are most critical to the functioning of society).
I believe this poses an existential threat to a free society, because everyone flocks to these censorship platforms in peacetime, and they pose a mortal danger in war/crisis. I wrote at length about this failure mode recently:
Here's a useful twitter thread that talks about mistakes these doctors made: https://twitter.com/CT_Bergstrom/status/1254481543759683584?... > What they did was simple: they looked at the fraction of patients who tested positive for #COVID19 at the clinics they own. They found 340 out of 5213 tests were postive, about 6.6% > Then they assume the same fraction of the whole population are infected.
That was an obvious error in their reasoning. Not surprising, though. Idiotic (and, yes, such an error IS idiotic) fumbling with statistics is displayed on a daily basis. It doesn't matter what 'side' you are on: idiots abound. Doomer fallacies: Charts showing exponential growth of positives, without taking into account the exponential growth of tests... Flu-Bro fallacies: Antibody surveys that don't take into accoun…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The last flu to cause such a severe spike in mortality statistics was the devastating 1918 Spanish flu The second wave of the 1918 flu killed between 17 to 50 million people, perhaps as high as 100 million people, during the fall of 1918, with a higher than expected mortality rate for the young and healthy. It killed between 1 and 6 percent of the world's population. So far 200,000 people have died from the coronavi…
Your argument assumes that coronavirus deaths will stop tomorrow, and also that mitigation measures used to reduce deaths from coronavirus via social distancing don’t affect the evaluation of whether it is “deadly”. It feels like you didn’t engage with the data I presented at all. (Edit: removed sentences that would only apply if you had read my other post) Edit 2: if your only argument is that COVID-19 is not worse…
Plus, as someone pointed out, drawing conclusions from the numbers we have so far in comparison with the 1918 flu is difficult.
I've been working with NYC numbers. The link you gave was for NY State deaths. NYC has reported about 12.3k deaths [1], has a population of about 8.4 million [2] and 21% of people appear to have antibodies at this time.
Doing some math with the above numbers I end up with .14% dead so far with 1/5th of people exposed. From there I assume the amount of dead would quadruple before we reach herd immunity. I also assume that antibodies provide at least a handful of years of immunity, just like for other coronaviruses, reducing the severity of future infections. A likely outcome is that this becomes another variant of several coronaviruses that circulate with the common cold.
I guess even for those who might agree with all of the above there still exists differences in opinion on what actions should be taken. I personally understand some people's comparison with the yearly flu, but realize that is most definately not an apples to apples comparison.
[1] https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data.page [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City [3] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/nyregion/coronavirus-new-...
It's literally terrifying that they removed this video. Someone uploaded a copy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25m0fm2LSIg
They said they're culling misinformation and they're doing it. I don't see what's terrifying about this. Maybe unsettling if you're aggressively pro-free speech, but 'terrifying' is very hyperbolic.
Yes - get banned on YouTube for disagreeing with WHO
No - go against the data we have so far
The thing with not valuing free speech is that eventually you will find that a rational position you hold (regardless of whether it is actually rational or if you just feel it is) will run afoul of the censors and you will be left without a voice.
"Misinformation" may seem obvious at times. But its classification can very be easily be bent towards any kind of political agenda.
This is lazy reporting. It's not wrong, but there's no insight here. No critical assessment of the claims made in the video nor the Youtube T&C, just a few clickbaity excerpts and some reaction comments. Compare with this excellent piece by the CBC on a somewhat similar viral video in Canada: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/u-of-r-biology-p...
Is CBC known to question the position of Canadian government, especially the majority opinion there? They are a state-owned entity, as far as I know, but I'm not Canadian so I know little about how independently they operate.
One of the comments made in the video (referenced in the article as well) is "We always have between 37,000 and 60,000 deaths in the United States, every single year. No pandemic talk. No shelter in place. No shutting down businesses." Since early Feb we've seen ~54K deaths from Coronavirus alone (excluding influenza deaths) [0]. The argument that this is just part of the normal flu cycle doesn't make any sense. [0]…
those deaths are after the seasonal flu is heavily vaccinated against. in 2017-2018, flu vaccine generation was at a record high [0] (in the US).
its heavily vaccinated against (with many sectors like military and healthcare requiring vaccination) exactly because its dangerous.
isnt this a normal flu? what would happen if we stopped producing normal flu vaccines? in other words, what if a new flu came out that ignored our current vaccines - a novel virus?
[0] https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/season/flu-season-2017-2018.ht...
I completely disagree with most of what the doctors in the video are saying. However I really really don't like YouTube removing content like this.
I really really like it, just like I really really like what's his name being deplatformed. I like it even more that I can't readily remember his name, right, Alex Jones. YouTube has no duty to be a platform for Diamond and Silk in scrubs.
This is lazy reporting. It's not wrong, but there's no insight here. No critical assessment of the claims made in the video nor the Youtube T&C, just a few clickbaity excerpts and some reaction comments. Compare with this excellent piece by the CBC on a somewhat similar viral video in Canada: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/u-of-r-biology-p...
But that misses the point. The very fact that a few people at Google/Youtube have the power to censor whomever they want for whatever reason they choose is a problem in itself. Are the doctors in the video saying untruths or misrepresenting data? I think what they said in the video was eminently reasonable. But perhaps I'm wrong. Luckily we have the freedom to publicly critique their claims - assuming our critiques a…
They aren't stopping them voicing their opinions or views... they're just stopping them posting it on THEIR service.
Newspapers do that all the time, TV and Radio does it all the time. Why is this different?
I completely disagree with most of what the doctors in the video are saying. However I really really don't like YouTube removing content like this.
I really really like it, just like I really really like what's his name being deplatformed. I like it even more that I can't readily remember his name, right, Alex Jones. YouTube has no duty to be a platform for Diamond and Silk in scrubs.
YouTube here has decided what the “correct” messaging is for the many based on the decisions of a few. Is there no room for dissenting opinion?
Perhaps more dangerous are the people who now are firmly convinced the lockdown should be over simply because the video was taken down.
When is the proper approach to discuss and counter instead of suppress?