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

Facebook is now claiming official CDC.gov links are “False Information”

i.postimg.cc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 654 posts

Re: Facebook is now claiming official CDC.gov links are “False Information”

#541

Post by tekknik »

intended wrote: post #484
quotemstr wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government, in theory, is bound by the first amendment. FB being run by a government bound by traditional first amendment restrictions would be worlds better than what we have now.

If the majority of people here are software engineers, would it surprise people that someone has automated the job of crafting believable bullshit? Not to mention disseminate it faster and better than we have ever been able to? I see it as a problem that we can iterate “content” faster, identify “audience groups”, run marketing analytics, A/b test “narratives”, all to craft believable, plausible “content” and then ma…

> We’ve built systems that create content faster and better than a normal human BS filter can block.

How does this work? Specifically the faster than a normal humans BS filter.

Re: Facebook is now claiming official CDC.gov links are “False Information”

#542

Post by IAmEveryone »

native_samples wrote: post #538
IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #536

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"There are three deaths that appear to be linked to blood clots that occurred after people got the J&J vaccine." https://covid-101.org/science/how-many-people-have-died-from... Yes, that's probably more than "all vaccine programmes in the last 10 years combined" because, contrary to popular believe, vaccines are incredibly save. It's also 1/100th of daily COVID deaths, or about 15 minutes' worth.

Look at the graph of post-vaccine deaths. It's vertical: https://www.openvaers.com/covid-data/mortality

Wow, this whole issue so low...

In the years before, how often were you vaccinated? Exactly: you probably weren't. Millions of vaccinations were given ib the last few months, orders of magnitude more than usual. And while most are usually given to toddlers, now the 60 to 95 year-olds got most of the vaccinations.

You know what happens a lot to 80 year olds in the six months after they are vaccinated? They die.

You know what happens a lot to 80 year olds in the six months after eating ice cream? They die.

Also, as has been reported plenty of times, read by you (in, for example, the article above), and ignored because it doesn't fit your worldview, is that VAERS is, as the URL says, "open". It's a relic from a time where people tended to be sane, and wouldn't just submit all sorts of imaginary things to a medical database.

The article cited above summarises what the people collecting that data have concluded from it. How can you make an argument about the data they collect and publish, implying that you trust them, and then, in the very next breath ignore them and, I assume, next accuse them of being either too stupid or corrupt to say anything about that data?

Re: Facebook is now claiming official CDC.gov links are “False Information”

#543

Post by tekknik »

emodendroket wrote: post #522
rayiner wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So you say, but is there really? Yes. The US has managed fine with exactly such a dichotomy. The reason it’s easy to draw a bright line at obscenity/porn is because you know it when you see it. > What about hate speech? Should that go there? No, but speech inciting violence is pretty easy to recognize. Again, First Amendment jurisprudence has developed clear rules for this.

It’s not illegal to post shock videos. It’s protected by the first amendment. The same is true of porn, for the most part (while “you know it when you see it” is a suggested standard for obscenity the concept differs greatly from one observer to another — see what answers you get from Los Angeles and Karachi about what’s manifestly obscene and I bet the answers are different). I still don’t think most people want to…

Are you really attempting to justify censorship to keep porn off of the site? We’ve had algorithms for years now that can detect nudity. It’s a simple filter that can be added that allows the user to select if they want to see it or not. Much like DDG and Google image search.

Re: Facebook is now claiming official CDC.gov links are “False Information”

#544

Post by tekknik »

raxxorrax wrote: post #496
emodendroket wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody actually wants an "uncensored" Facebook. If you went there and your feed were full of spam, porn, and shock videos, you'd stop going.

Censoring opinions isn't equivalent to removing scam and spam.

Ok, how is it not equivalent? Without that info we can refute, and you’re telling people to just believe you.

Re: Facebook is now claiming official CDC.gov links are “False Information”

#545

Post by tekknik »

cududa wrote: post #266
snowwrestler wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook is removing content because that is ground they want to stand on. Removing content feels like censorship, so it lends itself to political grandstanding in their favor. Millions of people get upset and demand that Facebook handle all content neutrally, which is exactly what Facebook wanted everyone to think in the first place. The real issue with Facebook is the editorial decisions they make about promoting s…

I’m sorry but my profession is vaccine hesitancy and persuasion researcher and OP is just wrong. I have n=20,000 polls showing people get disinformation from Facebook that informs their decision to not get vaccinated and hours of focus group recordings also showing this.

What about those who have never stepped foot on the platform yet are still hesitant? Not everybody is on Facebook.

Also while we're here, if you are what you say you are, add the military forcing vaccinations, people witnessing side effects while being forced to continue duty, and the network effects this has on them and their friends / family after leaving the service. Look at how many people try to go the route of court martial to avoid some vaccines only to change their mind later when they're literally sitting in jail and have no rights. Then think about how this plays out in a civilized society when you can't throw the person in jail.

Re: Facebook is now claiming official CDC.gov links are “False Information”

#546

Post by tekknik »

mackwell wrote: post #381
epicureanideal wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although we should be careful not to lump everyone opposed to the current vaccines in with the anti-vaxers.

Why?

Because some people have witnessed rushed vaccines first hand, some have the the test subject of other vaccines. Sometimes this doesn’t go well (see anthrax vax). So some of us want to wait to allow others to be the test subject. You definitely can’t count on a Dr telling you something is safe, it didn’t work out for us in the military there either.

Re: Facebook is now claiming official CDC.gov links are “False Information”

#547

Post by native_samples »

IAmEveryone wrote: post #542
native_samples wrote: post #538

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at the graph of post-vaccine deaths. It's vertical: https://www.openvaers.com/covid-data/mortality

Wow, this whole issue so low... In the years before, how often were you vaccinated? Exactly: you probably weren't. Millions of vaccinations were given ib the last few months, orders of magnitude more than usual. And while most are usually given to toddlers, now the 60 to 95 year-olds got most of the vaccinations. You know what happens a lot to 80 year olds in the six months after they are vaccinated? They die. You kn…

[flagged]

Re: Facebook is now claiming official CDC.gov links are “False Information”

#548

Post by tekknik »

majewsky wrote: post #501
Dylan16807 wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many people are opposed to all of the major covid vaccines, but are not anti-vaxers?

Anecdata: I've seen several people in my circle who have never identified as anti-vax in the past, who reject SARS-CoV-2 vaccines on the grounds of "they were made too quick, we didn't have enough time for testing". Of course this argument completely falls apart when you know how vaccine development works, but it's an argument that genuinely only applies to this specific group of vaccines.

> Of course this argument completely falls apart when you know how vaccine development works, but it's an argument that genuinely only applies to this specific group of vaccines.

So if this is true then there should be no testing period right? We should know out the gate if a vaccine is safe or not right? Clearly this is incorrect.

If you like testing vaccines, join the military. Then let’s see after you’re injected with various chemicals and get a 100% disability from it if you feel the same way and attempt to force others into your line of thought.

Re: Facebook is now claiming official CDC.gov links are “False Information”

#549

Post by gunapologist99 »

busymom0 wrote: post #434
gunapologist99 wrote: post #317

An irony here is that Facebook is now censoring the CDC, when it previously claimed that it was censoring using the guidelines of the CDC . Another irony is that the White House said that it was flagging comments for Facebook fact-checkers just last week: “We’ve increased disinformation research and tracking within the Surgeon General’s Office. We are flagging problematic posts for Facebook that spread disinformation…

The same press secretary claims vaccines have gone through FDA approval when none of them have: > "This is what they’re — what the information — some of this misinformation is doing — and misleads the public by falsely alleging that mRNA vaccines are untested and, thus, risky, even though many of them are approved and have gone through the gold standard of the FDA approval process." https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefin…

This appears to be 100% correct.

None of the vaccines have gone through "the gold standard" of the full vaccine approval process. They have only received FDA approval for emergency use and have not received full approval.

Biden is planning to push through full approval this fall:

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/biden-predicts-full-fda-vaccin... [video]

https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/biden-admin-signals-int...

Re: Facebook is now claiming official CDC.gov links are “False Information”

#550

Post by native_samples »

IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #535
native_samples wrote: post #513

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

That's nonsense, or, more likely, wilful misrepresentation. You're referring to this story: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/30/health/covid-cdc-delta-ma... Quote: "Infections in vaccinated Americans also may be as transmissible as those in unvaccinated people." That doesn't mean that vaccinated people are spreading the disease as much as the unvaccinated. Only the infected vaccinated people do. But, as happens with v…

By the way, for everyone else who - like me - doesn't have a NYT subscription and thus don't know what the above comment is talking about, the Washington Post has what looks like an equivalent version of the same story:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/07/29/cdc-mask-gu...

Internal CDC documents have leaked. Here are some quotes from the report:

"It cites a combination of recently obtained, still-unpublished data from outbreak investigations and outside studies showing that vaccinated individuals infected with delta may be able to transmit the virus as easily as those who are unvaccinated. Vaccinated people infected with delta have measurable viral loads similar to those who are unvaccinated and infected with the variant."

"The breakthrough cases are to be expected, the CDC briefing states, and will probably rise as a proportion of all cases because there are so many more people vaccinated now. This echoes data seen from studies in other countries, including highly vaccinated Singapore, where 75 percent of new infections reportedly occur in people who are partially and fully vaccinated."

"The presentation highlights the daunting task the CDC faces. It must continue to emphasize the proven efficacy of the vaccines at preventing severe illness and death while acknowledging milder breakthrough infections may not be so rare after all, and that vaccinated individuals are transmitting the virus. The agency must move the goal posts of success in full public view."

There are some other points worth noting from the presentation:

1. The frequent and very US specific claim that "99% of hospitalizations are in the unvaccinated" isn't true. CDC stats show 15% of hospitalizations are from vaccinated people and the number is growing. Why are they claiming otherwise in public?

2. The confidential data is not really surprising, because it brings the USA into line with what every other country is seeing.

There's a good summary of some of the latest non-US data from UK and Israel here. Efficacy against infection and "mild illness" keeps falling:

https://swprs.org/covid-vaccines-the-good-the-bad-the-ugly/

Post reply on HN