YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days • Hacker News Board

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#711

Post by MisterBastahrd » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 4:25 PM UTC

iammisc wrote: post #697

MisterBastahrd wrote: post #648

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's like pretending that the lead developer on MS Word and John Carmack are equally qualified and capable to speak on 3d graphics algorithm optimizations because they both know computer things. The best Paul can hope to do is to read the results research that these experts ACTUALLY PERFORMED. He's not on their level and his opinion on the matter has zero importance other than his vote in the Senate.

If the lead MS word developer listens to Carmack's thoughts and points out problems, he's more than qualified.

"listens to Carmack's thoughts"

Because hearing a high level overview is anything even remotely like having foundational knowledge, much less a deep expertise.

I said equally qualified. You don't get to have the argument you want by disregarding the core of it simply because it disagrees with your politics.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#712

Post by kube-system » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 4:26 PM UTC

whiddershins wrote: post #701

kube-system wrote: post #641

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that’s the entire point of a dog whistle. They’re intentionally vague enough to encourage listeners to draw their own conclusions. They’re not hard to identify if you understand the viewpoints of the listeners or even just observe their reactions. If two groups like a statement, but they both thought it meant a different thing, that’s probably a dog whistle. Take for instance: “Vote for kube-system, he’s one of…

That’s ambiguity.

Yes, dog whistles are ambiguous by definition. That is the entire point. What makes it a dog whistle is the intent of the speaker. I assure you that politicians don’t make ambiguous statements like the above because they have poor speaking skills. They do it intentionally to appeal to more groups of people. And they hire teams of well-paid writers, strategists, and psychologists to write these statements. These words are chosen very carefully. There’s no accidental ambiguity in a well funded political campaign speech.

Have you ever paid attention to the way candidate change their phrasing on the same topic throughout an election cycle as they speak to different audiences? It’s like clockwork. A candidate who is talking to a special interest group in the primaries will say something like “I support a woman’s right to universal access to abortions”, and then in the general election on CNN they’ll say something like “I support woman’s reproductive rights”. The entire point of doing this is to get the moderate pro-life vote who thinks to theirselves: “oh yeah I support women’s rights too”

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#713

Post by timr » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 4:52 PM UTC

kgarten wrote: post #677

timr wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, any rational conversation about Japan has to start with the observation that cases are at an all-time high right now: https://www.asahi.com/topics/word/%E3%82%B3%E3%83%AD%E3%83%8... I don't think changing rates of masking can explain that change. > Anecdotal, how do you explain the non existing flue season (last autumn ) and the low incidences in Japan? We got higher rates during the Olympic. I haven't seen any…

... the increase in incidences are coinciding with early travel and reducing the state of emergency related to the olympic. I work at a place that housed one of the teams, and the incidence increased around 1-2 weeks after some people arrived. NHK made a lot of efforts like the one bellow: https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/backstories/1247/ Check the video,I would say masks help. It's basic physics ... it's sim…

> Check the video,I would say masks help. It's basic physics

Masks leak. Airflow seeks the path of least resistance. Also basic physics. People are not mannequins in a fume hood with scrap of cloth glued to their slobberhole.

I don't think anyone is disputing the idea that if you could somehow hermetically seal off everyone's face holes, you'd stop the spread of a respiratory virus. But we can't, and we don't, so the question becomes: in the real world (i.e. not a mannequin in a lab), does it make a difference?

All of the real-world evidence on the question is mixed, at best.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#714

Post by nickthemagicman » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 4:55 PM UTC

newacct583 wrote: post #705

nickthemagicman wrote: post #645

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would love a citation for that. Texas lifted all restrictions including masks and has lower infection rates per capita than most places with mask mandates and Covid restrictions. So the statement you make with arrogance may actually be wrong misinformation.

> Would love a citation for that. Are you living in a cave? How can you not have seen all this. UCSF has this amazing review, and it's right at the top of the google results page: https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-abou... You are claiming not to have seen this not because you have looked for this evidence and failed to find it, but because you have been CONVINCED BY YOUR MEDIA that this evidence…

You use opinion pieces for 'science'?

The modern day Covid Evangelist... views opinion pieces and the media as science....

Also...it's an opinion piece from....a university....in San Francisco...the two most notoriously political places in the entire universe and you're saying I'm convinced by MY MEDIA.

Despite that terrible citation....even the opinion piece you linked says there are 'compelling strands of evidence'.

NOT CONCLUSIVE.

> You also cite lies.

Whatever off the wall data set you posted seems to disagree with Statistica which puts TX in the bottom half of states for population adjusted rate of new Coronavirus cases.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109004/coronavirus-covi...

Here's a publication stating that Mask usage INCREASED chances of infection thats NOT AN OPINION PIECE FROM UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCO.

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577

Here's a collection of studies showing the ineffectiveness of face masks.

https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence/

You're clearly radicalized, anti-science, and pro-fascist from your media/peer group and you would support supression of discussion, demonizing dissent, and controlling of the narrative through force.

You would destroy Democracy to be right. It's sad.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#715

Post by timr » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 4:58 PM UTC

kgarten wrote: post #679

timr wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, any rational conversation about Japan has to start with the observation that cases are at an all-time high right now: https://www.asahi.com/topics/word/%E3%82%B3%E3%83%AD%E3%83%8... I don't think changing rates of masking can explain that change. > Anecdotal, how do you explain the non existing flue season (last autumn ) and the low incidences in Japan? We got higher rates during the Olympic. I haven't seen any…

anything that interfere with droplet dispersion is better than nothing ... no? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwOwMsCc6NA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAvO_QdO9eM Seems basic to me ... If the droplets from me don't reach to the first person in the cinema I cannot infect them.

Science is the history of people debunking ideas that "seem basic" to other people.

Those are called "hypotheses", and they're great. The next step is to find evidence that proves the hypothesis...and that's where we're stuck here.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#716

Post by nickthemagicman » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 5:14 PM UTC

srinivgp wrote: post #314

nickthemagicman wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's so much contradictory science on what you're claiming as ultimate truth. There's paper saying masks don't work there's paper saying masks do work. This is not a conclusive settled fact.

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…

> You will find literally zero papers credibly claiming otherwise.

Here's a paper that says cloth mask usage increases rate of infection.

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577

Here's a collection of studies refuting mask efficacy.

https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence/

You're literally a vector for disinformation which is a bannable offense but only the Rand Pauls who go against the narrative get banned.

Your false information you just posted will be celebrated by the echo chamber members of the internet.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#717

Post by nickthemagicman » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 5:23 PM UTC

FireBeyond wrote: post #710

nickthemagicman wrote: post #688

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those arent personal attacks I'm truly doubtful of your credentials. A discussion about an inconclusive subject=willful misrepresentation to you? Barry Marshall, Semmelweis, and Galileo would like to have a word. Fascists are not interested in the scientific process of discussion or democracy. Over half the country thinks a policy of wearing a dirty rag on your face until the waiter brings the breadsticks is stupid a…

> A discussion about an inconclusive subject=willful misrepresentation to you? No. This is a disingenuous depiction at best. Study: "Do masks hold the virus in the cloth/material and can it survive on that cloth/material". Rand Paul: "Studies (points to the one above) show that masks are unable to prevent the spread of COVID and doesn't stop it". That's not inconclusivity - we don't know "everything" about COVID. Tha…

>This is a disingenuous depiction at best

Numerous studies DO show that masks are unable to prevent the spread of COVID and stop it.

Here's a publication stating that cloth Mask usage INCREASED chances of infection.

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577

Here's a collection of studies showing the ineffectiveness of face masks.

https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence/

This is still an open discussion but the people like you continue to suppress dissent and demonize the opposition because either your ego is so big or your virtue signaling is so strong, that you can't admin you might be wrong.

If Galileo was around right now he would have been deplatformed for trying to tell the world that the Earth revolves around the Sun which was counter to the narrative.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#718

Post by nradov » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 6:30 PM UTC

hedgehog wrote: post #628

nradov wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not scientifically correct. Because the vaccines are not fully sterilizing and there are multiple animal host species the virus will never be eradicated regardless of what we do. It's now endemic. You can't expect people to wear masks indefinitely.

Ending the pandemic is different from eradicating the virus. It'll likely end up being something we manage just as we manage viruses like measles or Ebola. Vaccination and surveillance will slow the sporadic smaller outbreaks and make it feasible to contain them.

There's no scientific reason to expect that outbreaks of a highly infectious respiratory virus can be contained by measures short of the drastic lockdowns used in authoritarian countries like China and Australia. Most people in most countries won't go along with that, and in many countries the governments don't even have the resources to even try. A more realistic scenario is that we all get infected eventually but vaccines keep the death toll low.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#719

Post by nielsbot » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 6:43 PM UTC

rajin444 wrote: post #525

nielsbot wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just look at the trend line? You might also want to look at the excess statistically significant deaths numbers. https://www.ft.com/content/6bd88b7d-3386-4543-b2e9-0d5c6fac8...

You need controls to account for confounding factors. Looking at a trend line does not account for confounding factors.

Ok, what would be a confounding factor?

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#720

Post by seanicus » Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 7:08 PM UTC

chlodwig wrote: post #93

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.

Cloth masks are effective in preventing covid in the same way that "the rhythm method is effective at preventing pregnancy." Which is to say it reduces the probability a small amount, but not nearly enough to justify a person treating it as an effective prophylactic. So it depends on what your definition of "effective" is, but it seems to me more like disinformation to call cloth masks or rhythm method "effective" th…

Well the problem is that people who are purveying information in this country at large - but especially between Paul and his base - is a lack of nuance. Calling cloth masks or "OTC" masks ineffective, esp. w/o pointing out that n95 masks are effective is over the line between disingenuous and lying imo.