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

Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

axisofeasy.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 345 posts

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#261

Post by _-o-_ »

entropyneur wrote: post #237

I am all for private businesses' right to censor their platforms as they please. But let's consider why they do so. Amazon and others aren't banning "covid dissidents" because they are worried about people's health nor is it because of some evil conspiracy. The reason is simple and obvious: because they've determined it to be the best course of action PR-wise. Or in other words, it's because what the public wants. An…

And how average Joes form opinions on complex subjects? They don't.

Opinions are hammered into general public by a limited number of major media platforms or independent influences.

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#262

Post by zarkov99 »

reaperducer wrote: post #50
zepto wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

‘who decides what is bullshit’ Is the usual problem with this.

I don't buy the argument that bullshit exists on a perpetually grey gradient. There are things that are clearly bullshit.

Yes, that is what they told Galileo. They were wrong of course, but we are so much wiser now, we could not possibly make the same mistakes.

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#263

Post by natechols »

StuntPope wrote: post #168
natechols wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure Berenson is a libertarian? He seems to be a much bigger fan of drug prohibition than any self-proclaimed libertarian I've ever met.

Berenson isn't a libertarian, the guy who wrote the article (me), is. And I grapple with the dissonance between free market libertarian principles and big tech "take-it-or-leave-it" control over discourse all the time. As Voltaire says... "uncertainty is an uncomfortable position, but certainty is an absurd one". Every ideology has these complicated areas within them and you're either aware of them and grapple with i…

Sorry for the confusion. I take your point about conflicting principles, as I grapple with similar problems, but Alex Berenson's book would be very low on my list of reasons why the government might be justified in looking into Amazon's business practices. The guy doesn't seem to have a problem being heard recently.

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#264

Post by catalogia »

jaredklewis wrote: post #198
Will_Parker wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is no scientific evidence they are effective in reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission It's a disease spread by exhaled droplets. How the heck could masks _not_ work? Why has common sense, as an acceptable way to obtain knowledge, died in the general public?

Because common sense has been used to justify all manner of things which are thoroughly debunked. Blood letting, bed rest, alcohol for pregnant mothers. Common sense doesn’t have a great track record.

Common sense has an excellent track record. What is it that keeps you from walking into traffic without looking, touching fire, or eating broken glass? Common sense.

Obviously common sense will sometimes lead you astray. But it kept our ancestors alive long enough for us to be here, and it stops most of us from doing life-ending stupid shit every day. It's not a silver bullet, but nothing is, not even the scientific method. If you went looking for empirical peer-reviewed studies before making all your decisions, you'd never get anything done. "Should I poke my eyeball with this fork? Common sense says no, but fuck that shit. I better consult pubmed..." "Should I cough into Grandma's face, or into this handkerchief?"

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#265

Post by StuntPope »

basic612 wrote: post #197
ncr wrote: post #175

The book is back on amazon as of now https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B089P216NP/

I wonder if this will be noted on the easy blog or on hacker news. It seems that people are too caught up being outraged to notice. Comments made here three hours ago about the book now being available on Amazon are buried under piles of diatribes. Let’s not let the truth get in the way of a good sanctimonious rant.

AxisOfEasy blog updated

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#266

Post by HideousKojima »

ianai wrote: post #244
HideousKojima wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also ignores a third option (and one that was actually used anyways), blocking all shipments of n95 masks to retail outlets to send to hospitals instead

That’s not an option. Apparently hospitals get their stock from essentially the same places as the rest of us. Like not the target down the road but the warehouse target gets its stock of ppe.

Yes, and those warehouses halted shipments of PPE to retailers like Target at the start of the pandemic

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#267

Post by zarkov99 »

ardy42 wrote: post #83
solarkraft wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's not what free speech is. The argument becomes more difficult the more widely used and essential a platform is. Would you make the same argument about being restricted in what you can say over a private chat service? Over the last decades and especially during the pandemic how people assemble and use their right to free speech has massively shifted. Before you assume that I hold an strong opinion on this: I d…

>> That's not what free speech is. > The argument becomes more difficult the more widely used and essential a platform is. The solution is to not let any one platform get that big and essential as a matter of policy. For free speech to actually be positive, I'm starting to think it's actually pretty important for that speech to be subjected to some kind of peer review process before it's broadcast widely. We used to…

The reviews are not coming from peers. The are exclusively coming from a niche section of the population: urban, young, affluent and left leaning. Not that this it would be OK even if it was a "diverse" gang of censors.

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#268

Post by mnm1 »

pen2l wrote: post #2

After a half hour long conversation with my neighbor last week of him trying to convince me that Bill Gates is behind coronavirus, please, for the love of our future, continue banning information that is blatantly put up on a bad faith basis. It's exhausting to see my mom and dad succumb to a new conspiracy every other day. I don't see how else we can curb this other than for the tech companies to start aggressively…

So you blame the stupidity of your parents and others who believe idiotic conspiracy theories on platforms not banning things? How about we expect people to be minimally educated (because that is all it takes to figure out the difference) and have critical thinking so they can decide? Some of the things the CDC and WHO have put out should have been banned by this logic. Now we're supposed to trust Jeff Bezos and his crew to be the arbiters of truth? That's beyond absurd.

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#269

Post by ksdale »

DanBC wrote: post #242
ksdale wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Further down, under "Added value of this study," it says "Physical distancing of 1 m or more was associated with a much lower risk of infection, as was use of face masks (including N95 respirators or similar and surgical or similar masks [eg, 12–16-layer cotton or gauze masks]) and eye protection (eg, goggles or face shields)"

Yes, but that's a low certainty finding.

Low certainty * "large reduction in risk of infection" doesn't equal masks being marginal though, does it? (Not rhetorical, I'm an amateur at statistics) That means they need more data, but if an effect exists, it is large?

And I feel like we can reason about this to some extent from first principles - If the virus is spread through particles from faces, then face coverings will decrease the numbers of particles from faces that 1) get into the air and 2) get into peoples' faces, no matter how crappy the face coverings are. It seems more plausible to me that the problem is lack of data rather than incorrect conclusion, which seems like a reasonable interpretation of this particular study?

Re: Amazon refuses to sell book on Covid-19 and lockdowns

#270

Post by DenisM »

claytongulick wrote: post #115
misiti3780 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does he think bill gates is behind COVID? That's a new one I have not seen yet.

Most of what I've seen follows this general thinking (note, I don't agree with it, just what I've seen): 1) Bill Gates was convicted of monopolistic practices while he was running a global company attempting to seize power. 2) Almost immediately after this conviction, he suddenly becomes philanthropic and donates most of his wealth to a non-profit that he's in control of. 3) This non-profit runs social experiments th…

Fascinating. We need to write a book about it... right..
Post reply on HN