YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days • Hacker News Board

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#261

Post by fhood » Wed, Aug 11, 2021, 10:42 PM UTC

__blockcipher__ wrote: post #223

Bud wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is unquestionably misinformation, and Rand Paul needs to have a permanent muzzle installed until covid is extinct. Masks DO WORK. Yes, N95s work better than cloth masks, usually, but cloth masks work very well for reducing the likelihood that a covid-positive person will transmit the virus. This isn't controversial. Rand Paul needs to stop spreading lies on purpose, and if he won't, I fully support YouTube telli…

You are actively spreading disinformation. SARS-2 ("covid") will never be extinct. It is completely infeasible to eradicate a highly infectious zoonotic respiratory virus w/ abundant animal reservoirs. > but cloth masks work very well for reducing the likelihood that a covid-positive person will transmit the virus You cannot possibly honestly make this statement in good faith, considering that there has only ever bee…

That study was measuring masks ability to prevent being infected with the virus, not spreading it, so not directly applicable to parent's claim

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#262

Post by cogman10 » Wed, Aug 11, 2021, 10:42 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #207

ryandrake wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The phrases "doesn't work" and "doesn't prevent" have become staples of the COVID disinformation toolkit. Anything that is not exactly 100% effective transforms into "doesn't work" in the narrative. Educated experts will never say something is 100% effective, so this is always an easy way for detractors to "prove" that the experts agree XYZ doesn't work. EDIT: Other examples: Some people have gotten pregnant while on…

That’s not “misinformation.” It’s a perfectly legitimate argument against ineffective government mandates. In a cost-benefit balancing framework, it points out that the benefits will be much less than expected.

> ineffective government mandates

There's the bait and switch.

You see, cloth masks aren't as effective as N95 mask, that doesn't mean they aren't effective. Nor does it mean that the government mandates to wear masks are ineffective.

Frankly, you can look at nearly every other world government that issued similar guidance to the CDC and in all cases those countries did better than the US. Why? Because it wasn't a political issue. The countries that faired the worst all turned COVID into a game of the left vs right.

You can't say masking and social distancing don't work or are ineffective when 40% of the population goes out of it's way to not wear masks, wear them under their nose, and decides to hold big rallies and gathering to celebrate how much they hate wearing masks.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#263

Post by rhizome » Wed, Aug 11, 2021, 10:42 PM UTC

convery wrote: post #247

IIAOPSW wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is misinformation. Masks (cloth or otherwise) were meant to reduce infectiousness, not completely prevent the possibility of infection. Masks (cloth or otherwise) do in fact reduce infectiousness. The misinformation is the implication that masks are pointless because you can still get infected. The point of masks is to get the probability of spreading it down by some multiple, not to be a personal not-my-problem-a…

His comment was on masks reducing the risk of you getting infected, not infecting others. Which is a selfish point, but nonetheless a correct one.

The masks work, but he only mentions a narrow use that isn't the current reason for wearing them. That's the misinformation; he got you, too.

Think of it this way: "Don't wear a seatbelt because they don't keep other cars from hitting you."

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#264

Post by pupdogg » Wed, Aug 11, 2021, 10:42 PM UTC

Bud wrote: post #208

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…

This is unquestionably misinformation, and Rand Paul needs to have a permanent muzzle installed until covid is extinct. Masks DO WORK. Yes, N95s work better than cloth masks, usually, but cloth masks work very well for reducing the likelihood that a covid-positive person will transmit the virus. This isn't controversial. Rand Paul needs to stop spreading lies on purpose, and if he won't, I fully support YouTube telli…

I could be a novice in this subject matter so please correct me if I'm wrong but I think that a state board certified Ocular Immunologist with an active license to practice would know a lot more about masks than an Information Technology expert...which part did I miss? Are you letting your emotions get the best of you?

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#265

Post by NonContro » Wed, Aug 11, 2021, 10:42 PM UTC

kingTug wrote: post #235

natural219 wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

mass civil disobedience against COVID restrictions is not only awesome, it a very explicit and central civic value of the American political mythology. I can't emphasize enough how bizarre and soviet-esque that this is even on the table as a contentious issue these days.

Probably has something to do with the 600k+ dead Americans.

Not much evidence that any of these interventions would have prevented that: https://www.covidchartsquiz.com/state-vs-state

The major underlying factor behind the deaths (apart from just old age) is obesity, secondly probably air pollution, but these factors are ignored.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#266

Post by __blockcipher__ » Wed, Aug 11, 2021, 10:42 PM UTC

kingTug wrote: post #235

natural219 wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

mass civil disobedience against COVID restrictions is not only awesome, it a very explicit and central civic value of the American political mythology. I can't emphasize enough how bizarre and soviet-esque that this is even on the table as a contentious issue these days.

Probably has something to do with the 600k+ dead Americans.

Every year, ~647,000 Americans die from heart disease alone. Even if the COVID death numbers aren't over-inflated, I guarantee you that if I were to time-travel to 2019 and ask you if you think that it would be worth precipitating a global supply chain disruption, missed schooling and medical appointments for children around the globe, both first and third world, and the greatest erosion in civil liberties in Western society since at least WW2 (since we've already eclipsed 9/11 in loss of liberty, shockingly)...all over 4 million and change deaths globally, you would think that was crazy

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#267

Post by rwcarlsen » Wed, Aug 11, 2021, 10:43 PM UTC

kingTug wrote: post #235

natural219 wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

mass civil disobedience against COVID restrictions is not only awesome, it a very explicit and central civic value of the American political mythology. I can't emphasize enough how bizarre and soviet-esque that this is even on the table as a contentious issue these days.

Probably has something to do with the 600k+ dead Americans.

To say nothing about the costs of globally increased hunger, unrest, depression, deaths of despair, neglected+abused children, and on and on - that billions of people in the world will continue to pay for years to come in order to try to save at most a couple million lives of people with mostly significant pre-existing conditions and of advanced years that were mostly "on their way out".

Why not forget about the future and younger generation - they don't matter - we need to save the people that are going to die soon anyway at _all costs_! \s

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#268

Post by maxerickson » Wed, Aug 11, 2021, 10:44 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #200

kube-system wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he meant that "cloth masks aren't good enough " he could have said that. But he's a senator. His statement was a dog whistle to his base. They're not looking for an argument that people should be wearing N95s, they want to discredit all masking. The word "prevent" is a red herring -- nothing is 100% -- the goal is to decrease infection, not prevent it.

They want to discredit mask mandates. Pointing out that they won’t work in practice, because people will mostly use these cloth masks that work poorly, is a perfectly legitimate basis for discrediting mask mandates that is also based on the science. It’s like pointing out that an assault weapons ban won’t meaningfully reduce homicides because the vast majority of homicides are committed using handguns. That’s a perfe…

Have you watched the video? He's not making a nuanced argument about mask mandates being undermined by people using ineffective masks.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#269

Post by Sohcahtoa82 » Wed, Aug 11, 2021, 10:44 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #207

ryandrake wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The phrases "doesn't work" and "doesn't prevent" have become staples of the COVID disinformation toolkit. Anything that is not exactly 100% effective transforms into "doesn't work" in the narrative. Educated experts will never say something is 100% effective, so this is always an easy way for detractors to "prove" that the experts agree XYZ doesn't work. EDIT: Other examples: Some people have gotten pregnant while on…

That’s not “misinformation.” It’s a perfectly legitimate argument against ineffective government mandates. In a cost-benefit balancing framework, it points out that the benefits will be much less than expected.

It's misinformation because of the implication it carries.

The vaccines are 95% effective, yet someone who has not yet seen the studies showing their 95% efficacy would be told "The vaccine won't stop you from getting COVID" will understand the statement as meaning that they're worthless.

It is absolutely misinformation, and no playing coy and claiming "But it's only 95%, not 100%, so the statement is still true!" is going to change that. It's nothing more than a technically correct "WELL ACKSHUALLY", except in the case of COVID, it's not just a distraction, but a dangerous statement that is literally costing lives.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#270

Post by __blockcipher__ » Wed, Aug 11, 2021, 10:44 PM UTC

fhood wrote: post #261

__blockcipher__ wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are actively spreading disinformation. SARS-2 ("covid") will never be extinct. It is completely infeasible to eradicate a highly infectious zoonotic respiratory virus w/ abundant animal reservoirs. > but cloth masks work very well for reducing the likelihood that a covid-positive person will transmit the virus You cannot possibly honestly make this statement in good faith, considering that there has only ever bee…

That study was measuring masks ability to prevent being infected with the virus, not spreading it, so not directly applicable to parent's claim

I agree but the issue is no such study exists. Which is why I told them straight-up that their claim is not in good faith. Masks have never been shown to stop community transmission of respiratory viruses.

In fact if we back up for a bit and look at the immunology and population dynamics involved it's not even clear that we should want to slow the spread of SARS-2 or other respiratory viruses in the general population. We literally did a "stop, drop, and roll" of almost the entire global economy, got vaccines out in record time, and what do you know, SARS-2 is still ripping through the population just like it was always destined to.

We're fighting against quicksand.