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

YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

theblaze.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 714 posts

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#581

Post by Retric »

nostrebored wrote: post #466
Retric wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

State level data is collected using the exact same methods. In many places people with symptoms are told to self isolate until they have difficulty breathing etc. This makes state level data a highly biased sample. There are a few population studies for very specific areas, but no widespread statewide sampling anywhere. PS: The US has ~50,000 Coronavirus deaths. Assuming a very optimistic mortality rate of 0.5% sugge…

Your 'very optimistic mortality rate' makes a number of assumptions about the rate of asymptomatic cases, the population which experiences asymptomatic cases, etc. It ignores data coming out which suggest that interventions like ventilators may be harming more than helping. Making any assumptions about the mortality rate with the abysmal state of testing in the US and around the world is guesswork. Making assumptions…

Diamond Princess had a slightly older population but healthy population, tested everyone, provided good medical care. They still hit 14 deaths out of 712 infected or ~2% and only had 20% asymptotic cases. South Korea has very good testing, a younger than US population, similar rates of hospitalization to DP and a slightly worse mortality rate likely due to missing some people but having a more at risk population.

The US has an older and sicker population than SK, and in NYC an overworked healthcare system. So, a 1% US mortality rate discounted to 0.5% due to recent infections not having time to die is extremely optimistic. It would also mean testing was only discovering 10% of cases.

PS: Many more people are exposed without having sufficient infections to trigger long term immunity. But, it’s herd immunity or deaths/long term issues we care about making such cases irrelevant as their still at risk.

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#582

Post by ceejayoz »

stOneskull wrote: post #548
soamv wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did watch it. Their extrapolations were wrong. You can't just multiply positivity rate found in a biased sample by the whole population. That's not a meaningful extrapolation. Then using that extrapolation to say the death rate is low is just building up the error even more. And then, comparing that to the flu and saying this isn't much worse, we're now well into the "this video is a potentially a public health haz…

No, you just debate it. A follow up video where there's a debate. Simple.

That puts you in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop territory, where watching hours of video and an epidemiology and stats degree is needed to tease out the truth.

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#583

Post by dependenttypes »

r0s wrote: post #429
blisterpeanuts wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suppose you're right. Does it justify censorship? Fauci can defend himself, and the docs are welcome to express their opinions. What gives Google/YouTube the justification to silence them?

> Suppose you're right. Easy to verify, why suppose anything? > censorship? On a privately owned site? Try again.

> On a privately owned site?

Yes, censorship is not exclusive to the government.

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#584

Post by dependenttypes »

aliminator8 wrote: post #366
blisterpeanuts wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suppose you're right. Does it justify censorship? Fauci can defend himself, and the docs are welcome to express their opinions. What gives Google/YouTube the justification to silence them?

YouTube has the right to censor anything it likes. It's their platform. If you don't like it, don't use YouTube.

Just like a bakery has the right to refuse service to whoever they feel like, it is their shop after all, right?

Anyway, they may be able to legally do what they want but this is not a free "get out of jail" card against any criticism.

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#585

Post by camccar »

aliminator8 wrote: post #366
blisterpeanuts wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suppose you're right. Does it justify censorship? Fauci can defend himself, and the docs are welcome to express their opinions. What gives Google/YouTube the justification to silence them?

YouTube has the right to censor anything it likes. It's their platform. If you don't like it, don't use YouTube.

Bitchute is getting really nice and they don't censor stuff like this. I personally recommend it.

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#586

Post by dependenttypes »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #556
wvenable wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, using a free service is not the same as purchasing something that happens to be zero dollars. If there is a contractual relationship you can be sure that the terms are that Google can remove your video for any reason of their choosing and by using their service you are agreeing to that. And you do agree with that because it's free. Nobody says you have to build your own YouTube as that is certainly not the only w…

It has nothing to do with cheap. Anybody can register a domain name and buy a web server and buy a building to put it in and internet service to host it with and post all their videos and they'll get zero page views even after spending all of that money because nobody can find them. The thing YouTube has that isn't available to the average Joe isn't web servers, it's all the glue that comes from being a part of Googl…

> Anybody can register a domain name and buy a web server

Until they kick you out. The only solution would be to use tor but then you would get even less views.

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#588

Post by dependenttypes »

wvenable wrote: post #492
autoexec wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Free speech" does not mean you also are entitled to a platform and an audience. "Free speech" is a right but also an ideal. When speech is being silenced (de-platformed) or people (the audience) are forbidden from hearing it even when they want to, it violates those principles. > YouTube is not a public service. Youtube is a powerful and unique resource without meaningful competition which I think does give them a…

> "Free speech" is a right but also an ideal. The problem with the ideal is that most people have it wrong. "Free speech" is not speech without consequences. Nobody here thinks that speech should be criminalized but that doesn't mean you have the right to be heard. If nobody wants to associate with you because of your speech, that's their right. You are not entitled to a soapbox.

> "Free speech" is not speech without consequences

This is literally what free speech is. "You can speak your mind or I will kill you" or "You can speak your mind but if I disagree with you I will make sure that nobody can hear you again (by de-platforming you)" is not very free speech-y.

> but that doesn't mean you have the right to be heard

You should certainly have the right to be heard by these that want to hear you.

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#589

Post by ceejayoz »

ab_testing wrote: post #262
ceejayoz wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are the doctors in the video saying untruths or misrepresenting data? Yes, they are. https://www.dailynews.com/2020/04/28/california-doctors-with... > But public health experts were quick to debunk the doctors’ findings as misguided and riddled with statistical errors — and an example of the kind of misleading information they are forced to waste precious time disputing. > The doctors should never have assumed that…

The point here is that youtube is not a harbinger of scientific truth. These doctors present their findings with their collected data to come to this conclusion that the according to them, this virus is not dangerous and the quarantine should end. Does Youtube also censor videos where plumbers present an incorrect way to install a toilet that can lead to backflow and flooding. The point to make here is that Youtube i…

> Does Youtube also censor videos where plumbers present an incorrect way to install a toilet that can lead to backflow and flooding.

This is more akin to YouTube removing a “I’m a plumber, trust me, clean your bathroom by mixing bleach and ammonia in your toilet” video.

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#590

Post by paulcole »

kerkeslager wrote: post #248
paulcole wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> America was built on the idea that I can have an absolutely stupid idea and that's my right. Was it though? First Amendment says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” Until YouTube…

It's certainly their right under ownership laws to censor on their platform. But just because it's your legal right to do something doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. The question isn't "do social media platforms have the right to censor?". The question is, "given social media platforms have the legal right to censor, should they censor?". The bill of rights is a legal document, and it can only govern the actio…

I believe I shouldn’t go to jail or be killed for the things I say. I don’t believe I have the right to say whatever I want without consequence.
Post reply on HN