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

YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

unherd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 596 posts

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#181

Post by okreallywtf »

I think that we often get hung up on the what-ifs of censorship while misinformation is doing damage right this second.

The problem is that people don't evaluate 2 narratives equally based on the information in them. If that was the case, you would just have to make sure that for every bogus report there is a reliable report, but once misinformation takes hold it takes a lot more than that to dislodge. The analogy I think of is that when presented with a table full of junk food, its hard to get people to pay attention to the veggie platter.

This study[1] indicates more success could be had with a new narrative that doesn't just refute the misinformation, but crafts a new narrative with additional information that can dislodge the other one, like a flank attack instead a head on one. Anecdotally I've seen that work and I've also been guilty of the lazy head on approach and seen it fail.

[1] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/09/170912134904.h...

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#182

Post by drunkpotato »

ksk wrote: post #134
drunkpotato wrote: post #124

YouTube consistently followed their policy of removing videos which promote misinformation, disinformation, and policy proposals that contradict the World Health Organization's official guidelines during an emergency pandemic. I have my problems with YouTube, but this isn't censorship, and it isn't a conspiracy to silence anyone. It's an effort to be responsible to public health and safety. The hysteria I see here is…

An advertising company deciding what is credible or not is scary.

But YouTube is not deciding on the credibility of the video. They are simply saying that in this emergency, in the interests of public safety, they will not allow videos that contradict World Health Organization information and policy guidelines. And they removed a video that violated that policy. It's a very narrowly defined exception to their normally open platform. I don't see what is scary or sinister about that.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#183

Post by javagram »

zumu wrote: post #178
acituan wrote: post #51

I don’t agree with the interview contents, nor think professorship alone gives sufficient credibility in the face of a novel pandemic, data of which is in the process of emerging. That said, I don’t want youtube to be in charge of deciding what is credible or not. They don’t have in-house experts on these domains, they don’t have a magic epistemology machine that spits out the “facts”. They are good at writing web se…

The fact there is a global pandemic going on that requires the cooperation of virtually everyone is important context here. Meanwhile, YouTube does little moderation of zany philosophical, conspiratorial, or otherwise disruptive, unconventional content. The ideas of Galieo, Socrates, Jesus etc. fall into this category. That is to say those figures did not promote public health opinions that undermined a global cooper…

> That is to say those figures did not promote public health opinions that undermined a global cooperative effort in a time of crisis.

I think the figures running the Inquisition and the counter-reformation at the time of Galileo might have disagreed. Remember the 30 Years War was also ongoing from 1618-1648 during the whole time, a Catholic-Protestant religious conflict that engulfed all of Europe and resulted in 8 million deaths.

Bucking the authority of the Church/inquisition at that time was seen as a serious issue against social order in a way that’s hard for us to understand from a modern perspective.

BTW, I strongly disagree with the this video, but really not sure if YouTube removing it is the right way to do this or will be effective in suppressing virus truthers.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#184

Post by takeda »

DiffEq wrote: post #78
alabaster_punt wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have a specific reason to believe that the model resulted in an incorrect conclusion, feel free to share it, instead of casting aspersions with cryptic nothings.

The model said if we don't lock things down China-style millions will die. But we see now from Sweden it was not true. See top graph: https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/covid-19-c... Also Neil's other predictions have been completely wrong on the Swine Flu and Bird flu. Why this "expert in his field" is still listened to is a mystery to me.

Sweden is pitched as as some kind of example of handling the pandemic correctly, when their numbers[1] don't look good at all. From their numbers[2] 44% of people diagnosed ends up dead, implying they are way under tested or they have ridiculously deadly strain (I think it is the former). Because of that the most reliable indicator from them is number of deaths.

Now compare number of deaths with countries that reacted quickly, for example: South Korea, Taiwan, Australia, New Zealand, Norway and others.

[1] https://covidgraph.com/

[2] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#185

Post by restingrobot »

MattGaiser wrote: post #20

I suggest everyone read this fellow's Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karol_Sikora

You know that anyone can edit a wikipedia page right? I think it's telling that this man is an ex director at the WHO with over 50 years experience as an Oncologist and rather than listen to what he is saying, people are continually trying to discredit him.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#186

Post by dang »

lmilcin wrote: post #158
dang wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't post in the flamewar style to HN. Internet threads can't handle denunciatory rhetoric without collapsing. It's the way the medium works, and we have to consciously compensate for it, if we're going to keep curious conversation going here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I think flamewar is for when people will have polarized views on a particular topic and the poster posts only to bring the people to fight each other. My post is what I think a necessary reminder in a topic that I honestly don't think is very polarizing. It just needs to be repeated, over, and over again. The same way it gets taught to kids at school so they teach it to their kids, and so on. Because it is important.…

This is a site for curiosity, and repetition and curiosity don't go together.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

Multiply that 10x when the repetition is indignant or inflammatory.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

I doubt that you would want other commenters to drill you like a schoolchild, but even if I'm wrong about that, please don't do it to others on this site. We're trying for entirely the opposite sort of discussion. Basically, if it's predictable, it is off topic here.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#187

Post by restingrobot »

alabaster_punt wrote: post #49
kerkeslager wrote: post #40

There are two separate issues here: 1. Non-science: calling Karol Sikora a "professor of medicine" hides the fact that he's an oncologist; if he ever had any expertise it was in cancer, not epidemics, and he has no business speaking outside his field. Sikora is also a fellow of The Princes Foundation For Integrated Health and a professional member of the generically-named College Of Medicine. Both of these organizati…

Sakora is the latter, and the problem with this viewpoint is publishing the truth elsewhere doesn't stop people from absorbing the lies here. Somebody consuming this content is not likely to seek out alternative viewpoints to correct themselves. The information is dangerous, it should not be available.

What are your credentials to say that his statements aren't the truth?

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#188

Post by lmilcin »

dang wrote: post #186
lmilcin wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think flamewar is for when people will have polarized views on a particular topic and the poster posts only to bring the people to fight each other. My post is what I think a necessary reminder in a topic that I honestly don't think is very polarizing. It just needs to be repeated, over, and over again. The same way it gets taught to kids at school so they teach it to their kids, and so on. Because it is important.…

This is a site for curiosity, and repetition and curiosity don't go together. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... Multiply that 10x when the repetition is indignant or inflammatory. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... I doubt that you would want other commenters to drill you like a schoolchild, but even if I'm wrong about that, please don't do it to others on th…

Ok. I think you are right.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#189

Post by zupreme »

okreallywtf wrote: post #181

I think that we often get hung up on the what-ifs of censorship while misinformation is doing damage right this second. The problem is that people don't evaluate 2 narratives equally based on the information in them. If that was the case, you would just have to make sure that for every bogus report there is a reliable report, but once misinformation takes hold it takes a lot more than that to dislodge. The analogy I…

And THAT is exactly the issue. "Misinformation" uses the prefix "Mis", which is "...a prefix applied to various parts of speech, meaning “ill,” “mistaken,” “wrong,” “wrongly,” “incorrectly,” or simply negating: mistrial; misprint; mistrust."

As the Covid-19 situation, prognoses, diagnoses, testing procedures, and far more are PUBLICLY ADMITTED to be flawed, it is RIDICULOUS to silence ANYONE, let alone legitimate experts, even if they are engaging in WILD speculation.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH ONLY MATTERS WHEN THE SPEECH IS DISLIKED.

Think over that...deeply...speculation and experimentation may save your life....or not.

wa inna Allahu Al Alim

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#190

Post by scarface74 »

filoleg wrote: post #152
scarface74 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A distributor is a private business that has the right to ban anyone they want except for protected classes. He can be his own distributor that’s the power of the internet.

You are missing the point. Yes, I fully agree with you that they have the right to remove whatever content they want. And I absolutely don't want that right to be taken away from them. However, I disagree with how they are currently utilizing that power, even though they have full rights to do so. It's kind of similar to how I support the 2nd amendment rights and don't want them to be taken away from people (includin…

I can see that. But the same reason that I am against the government regulating tech is similar to why my position on gun control has gone from being pro gun control to anti-gun control.

The government would probably go out of it’s way to make sure “Focus on the Family” content would be allowed but not “Black Lives Matter” just like they shut down the government in Michigan but the same conservatives passed laws for stricter gun control when minorities started exercising their 2nd amendment rights (the Mulliford Act).

Post reply on HN