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

YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

mercurynews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 803 posts

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#51

Post by mimixco »

javajosh wrote: post #24
dtagames wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. Tech companies now silence politicians unilaterally, while governments made up of the same politicians do nothing to stop the widespread flow of toxic misinformation on tech platforms. So, who is really in charge?

At some point, the adults need to be in charge. I for one applaud YouTube for taking this step, because it's not an easy choice, because they'll get pushback like this. Misinformation about Covid is deadly. Rand Paul is spreading misinformation - masks stop the spread of everything because it prevents bodily fluid particles from getting on everything, and also stops people from touching their face. Both of these are…

Lots of misinformation on YouTube is bad for people and isn't stopped. And I would hardly call Google, YouTube's owners, a "company with a conscience" since nearly their entire business is based on predatory surveillance advertising.

In a democratic society, the elected leaders need to communicate their ideas, however wrongheaded. If they aren't allowed to communicate, how do they reach their electors and how do they tell potential voters they're right (or wrong)? When you are at the platform level like YouTube, you have a responsibility to carry information from the government even if you don't like it because you didn't elect Ron Paul, his constituents did.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#52

Post by Veen »

swashboon wrote: post #26
corndoge wrote: post #3

> YouTube indicated that examples of the offending content in the video included the line: “Most of the masks you get over the counter don’t work. They don’t prevent infection.” > It also included the quote: “Trying to shape human behavior isn’t the same as following the actual science which tells us that cloth masks don’t work.” Regardless of what you think about YouTube's misinformation policy, I don't think this i…

Except they are effective. They are not as effective as a N95 mask but all scientific data shows they are still effective and reducing transmission rate in a population.

Are they though? I wear a mask and don't have much of a problem with doing so (although it is no longer required where I live), but at this point I do it because of social pressure, not scientific evidence. So far as I can see, the cloth masks most people wear are of minimal benefit compared to social distancing and avoiding enclosed spaces with inadequate ventilation.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#53

Post by vlovich123 »

Took a bit of searching to find Paul’s statement where he claims to have support from studies. Does anyone know which studies these are?

> A Danish study of 6000 participants found that wearing a surgical mask did not significantly reduce a person's risk of COVID-19 infection, compared to the risks facing those who did not wear masks.

> And a Vietnamese study of 1600 participants found that cloth masks allow for 97% penetration of particles. This study also found that cloth mask wearers had a higher rate of infection than the control group who wore no masks.

What’s interesting is this (intentional or otherwise) game being played with terminology. Mask proponents are arguing cloth masks reduce the R0 of the virus and less so about your own personal risk. Mask opponents seem to be saying “but it doesn’t change your own personal chances of infection” which may be true but is a weird way to look at controlling a pandemic. It’s also weird to me that some studies would conclude that cloth masks have a negative impact on your personal infection. Is the theory that coronavirus particles somehow just get trapped in the cloth?

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#54

Post by gameswithgo »

danhak wrote: post #32
swashboon wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except they are effective. They are not as effective as a N95 mask but all scientific data shows they are still effective and reducing transmission rate in a population.

Why haven't we seen significantly better outcomes in states with mask mandates vs. those without?

There has been data showing areas with greater mask compliance have slower infection rates.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#55

Post by rsba »

corndoge wrote: post #3

> YouTube indicated that examples of the offending content in the video included the line: “Most of the masks you get over the counter don’t work. They don’t prevent infection.” > It also included the quote: “Trying to shape human behavior isn’t the same as following the actual science which tells us that cloth masks don’t work.” Regardless of what you think about YouTube's misinformation policy, I don't think this i…

I read one study that indicated an N95/KN95 mask was 10 times more effective than the regular (non) medical masks. I always thought it was unusual that the US government just didn’t mail KN95 masks to people, or widely distribute them at cost. And encourage their use.

If something is 10 times less effective, it’s basically not even effective in comparison to what’s possible.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#56

Post by 34679 »

corndoge wrote: post #3

> YouTube indicated that examples of the offending content in the video included the line: “Most of the masks you get over the counter don’t work. They don’t prevent infection.” > It also included the quote: “Trying to shape human behavior isn’t the same as following the actual science which tells us that cloth masks don’t work.” Regardless of what you think about YouTube's misinformation policy, I don't think this i…

I have to wonder if the people who made this decision even have a medical degree. Software engineers banning doctors for making medical statements seems wrong.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#57

Post by andybak »

endisneigh wrote: post #5

So if Rand Paul is democratically elected and YouTube silences him, then in effect YouTube is silencing the population that elected Rand Paul. Furthermore (I can't see the video) - if he did indeed simply quote two peer-reviewed papers is it right to suspend him? As an exercise, which of the following statements are correct: 1. Gaiter masks will stop you from getting COVID-19 2. Surgical masks will stop you from gett…

Why is the obviously incorrect phrase "will stop you" in all of those options?

As opposed to a more reasonable "will reduce the probability of"?

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#58

Post by leereeves »

andybak wrote: post #36
makomk wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it really doesn't seem all that plausible that cloth masks do much at this point. Not only was there never good evidence for them working, the best ones only block something like 90% of virus-bearing particles. To put this in context current estimates seem to be that people infected with Delta produce 100-1000x the amount of virus that previous variants did; the effect of mask wearing is absolutely miniscule co…

I don't follow this reasoning. An imperfect mask is surely going to result in a borderline contacts with infection being non-infections. The debate is "by how much" and without really clear evidence to the contrary, the precautionary principle wins. Wearing masks is usually only a minor inconvenience. I'm gobsmacked how it's become such a battleground.

> An imperfect mask is surely going to result in a borderline contacts with infection being non-infections.

Not necessarily. The mask blocks the virus going both ways, so maybe only 10% of the virus particles get inside the mask, but 90% of those that would be exhaled also stay inside the mask.

This is not an opinion on whether masks work, just an illustration that it's plausible they don't.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#59

Post by rootsudo »

1MachineElf wrote: post #28
thaumasiotes wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Seeing platforms control the narrative to this extent is truly fascinating. I never thought it would be as overt as it is. Remember the Hunter Biden's laptop story?

Add to that, remember when a president was impeached over a "conspiracy theory" regarding Hunter Biden's time at Burisma? One year later, fact checkers had to admit that the FBI was indeed investigating him. Edit: From +5 points to -1 in one hour - I didn't realize so many Burisma employees read HN!

And at that point, the damage was done - the first expose was to discredit, eliminate and silence.

And it works.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#60

Post by MisterBastahrd »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #15
corndoge wrote: post #3

> YouTube indicated that examples of the offending content in the video included the line: “Most of the masks you get over the counter don’t work. They don’t prevent infection.” > It also included the quote: “Trying to shape human behavior isn’t the same as following the actual science which tells us that cloth masks don’t work.” Regardless of what you think about YouTube's misinformation policy, I don't think this i…

> Seeing platforms control the narrative to this extent is truly fascinating. I never thought it would be as overt as it is. Remember the Hunter Biden's laptop story?

You mean the one where Rudy Giuliani sat in front of a camera with a "Macbook" purported to be Hunter Biden's even though it was an LG and ole Rudy just wasn't smart enough to know the difference?
Post reply on HN