491–500 of 803 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
YouTube doing the right thing and banning some stupid misinformation is nowhere near civil war.
Misinformation is the excuse. This is banning a political party on whatever reason they think they can get away with.
> 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…
How much of this is about 'masks' and really about Rand Paul calling for mass civil disobedience against COVID restrictions? Here's the full video: https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/1424399282447298563
Just about every other day I see a new protest against Covid restrictions involving tens of thousands of people in a random European nation (Spain, Italy, Britain, France, etc). Or how about the giant anti-lockdown protest in Sydney in July.
Rand Paul should be calling for civil disobedience. The authorities have been wrong over and over and over and over again about Covid. They've lied, over and over and over again. They're not worthy of being trusted. And the typical cloth mask most people are wearing doesn't work for shit against Delta, it's entirely a sick joke on the public at this point. And lately the grotesque political elites have been telling the public to do one thing, while they party at large gatherings entirely without masks, blatantly mocking the public.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok. Say you do crash without wearing a seatbelt and smash your head against a windshield and sustain a head injury and survive. You're going to use additional medical resources and require months of physical therapy. You're going to drain the time and money of your family who has to now support your incapicated state. You may never be able to talk or walk again and become a drain on society for the rest of your days.…
So which are you arguing against, public healthcare or the mandates that hospitals admit emergency patients regardless of ability to pay?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you read the article or watch the offending video? Because he did cite research. Now you start requiring YouTube to decide what research is ok and which isn’t. [1] “YouTube banning me for 7 days for a video that quotes 2 peer reviewed articles saying cloth masks don’t work”
Yes and I agree with Rand Paul for that very reason. He's not just foaming at the mouth like most politicians; he's an actual professional with decades of experience and backs his points up with real data.
The mask thing is actually frustrating to me in the opposite direction. The theory/intent behind cloth masks is that they might capture respiratory droplets, which might decrease mixing in a congregate setting. The cost is low, the risk is low, and the benefit (if it works) would be high. It's a no brainer: wear a mask if you are in a congregate setting until we have better data. But that isn't what MANY lay-people u…
Historically medical professionals used cloth masks which where repeatedly shown to reduce transmission risk of many airborne infections though minimal usefulness vs influenza. Modern masks may be significantly more effective, but nothing suggests cloth masks are useless when it comes to COVID, just less effective.
Because that's the messaging that a lot of people got. "Masks work" [if enough people are wearing them in congregate settings] might make sense to some tiny subset of people who obsessively follow the current understanding of various covid mitigation strategies. For people who don't, that reads as "masks protect you from covid", which I don't think is a claim that anybody serious is even making.
"Masks work", without the additional context and nuance is itself misinformation.
> 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…
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty conclusive. It's been conclusive for years and years, before COVID-19. There's no question at all that masks reduce infectiousness through the extremely obvious method of preventing some virus particles from going from one person to another, and also no question at all that probability of infection depends on number of virus particles around, and that viruses in general produce worse symptoms when the ini…
It wasn't hard to find sources that disagree: > The use of masks, which are medical devices, requires correct use, based on medical principles unfortunately not known by the whole population. This cultural deficiency, linked to the breathing difficulties caused by the use of this filter, has led to incorrect management of these important medical devices, facilitating the commission of errors that can make the masks i…
Read your link. Proper usage isn't hard to understand. If you touch your mask with your dirty hands it might increase the chance that you breathe in the germs that were on your hands.
Don't put a dirty mask on your face. Don't touch your mask with dirty hands.
Notice that these messages are different than "masks are a mind-control conspiracy" and "masks are ineffective."
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…
You had me up until the word "multiple". A more appropriate word would be percentage. I'm willing to cede ground that masks may reduce infections 5-20%. If it were more, there would be correlates in the real world. As it is, it's a statistical shit show to even show that masks have any effect at all, much less how much.
It's also a statistical shit show to show that condoms have any effect (against unwanted pregnancies, or sexually transmitted diseases), in studies using RCT settings:
https://jech.bmj.com/content/65/2/100
Do you think this should make us conclude, that condoms may reduce STDs or unwanted pregnancies at max 5-20%?
If YouTube had been around in the 50s, they’d be banning kooks who claimed smoking wasn’t healthy for you.
In the 70s they'd be banning people who claimed the Earth wasn't cooling.
Global warming was suspected as far back as the late 1800s, and well established by the 1970s.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Totally agree, YouTube is in the wrong here. They are no arbitrator of truth or facts, leave that to the courts and allow 'real free speech' in online platforms.
Is there any "real free speech" that you think YouTube should be allowed to block? People advocating for shooting the president? People describing how to make a nuclear bomb? People advocating for killing cops? People sharing people's social security numbers? People explaining the best suicide methods? People trying to organize terrorist attacks? People threatening violence on other people? Anything?