Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#171

Post by orangecat » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:03 AM UTC

phakding wrote: post #139

Press2forEN wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The choice between being alive and being jobless is a false dichotomy.

May be for healthy, but not for the people with certain underlying conditions like diabetes, high BP, obesity etc. Also even if you are not vulnerable to the disease, you could be spreading this to the others who are even without showing symptoms. Look at Sweden. They decided to let the people at risk stay home while others go out and about their business. Didn't work out too well for them.

Sweden has about the same per-capita death rate as the US and Switzerland, and lower than the UK, Spain, and Belgium. (See https://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/). It's certainly possible that they'd be doing better with more restrictions, but if their strategy is as disastrous as many people seem to think then they'd be at the top of the charts, and they're not.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#172

Post by thelean12 » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:03 AM UTC

SerLava wrote: post #157

thelean12 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For how long? You can't keep society inside for a long period of time. It just won't work. Couple weeks? Sure. 3 months? Barely, it seems. 1 year? No. It just won't work. (I don't think we'll get to that point, but I think that the point stands: quarantine is a short term fix.)

Without doing a real bailout of normal people, no we can't go more than a few months. If we're going to demand grocery store workers get buried in the ground for the sake of keeping things running, we can afford to radically shift the distribution of wealth toward the people we're literally condeming.

You're using quite inflammatory language here that's distracting from your points. Calling the US a failed state, saying we're demanding workers be buried in the ground, etc.

If you want to discuss actual policy, then do so. I'm not interested in following platitudes.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#173

Post by SerLava » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:04 AM UTC

downerending wrote: post #129

SerLava wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I see little reason to doubt that all involved are trying to minimize general death and misery, even if they may disagree radically about how to do that. Wait, are you talking about the people who want to send everyone back to work now, even though we don't even have masks for doctors yet? Are you saying they are trying to minimize death and misery? Or are we talking about completely different people here?

I don't know about the particular motives of each protester. But it's obvious that there are large numbers of people facing immediate financial ruin. And very shortly thereafter, risk of death for themselves and their loved ones. I'm not in that situation, but I wouldn't be caught dead silencing their voices.

The answer to financial ruin is not to force everyone back into contact again, it's to give normal people their fair share of the bailout. We took something like 15,000 dollars out of everyone's future earnings for the bailout, and threw them back 1,200 of it.

With those people taken care of, the protests are reduced to landowners demanding blood for their haircuts and Fuddruckers.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#174

Post by whiddershins » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:06 AM UTC

SamWhited wrote: post #10

chrisco255 wrote: post #3

These are Americans exercising their constitutional rights to freedom of speech and assembly. Whether you agree with the protestors or not is irrelevant. Your rights are impacted, too, by this arbitrary platform bias. This cannot stand for long. We have to move away from centralized monopolies on the web.

This entire comment is a strawman. This is not the same as "arbitrary platform bias". This is not Facebook saying "we have a certain political view and we talked to the government and they agreed so no other views are acceptable". This is them stopping stupid people from killing a lot of other people. Also, your rights aren't affected. This is Facebook telling stupid people to shut up and stop spreading fud that coul…

People always think they are serving the greater good when they curtail someone’s rights.

It’s not generally people sitting around maliciously wanting to oppress other people.

It’s more often someone who thinks they are doing good, and that “right” is just in the way.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#175

Post by perl4ever » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:07 AM UTC

SerLava wrote: post #110

oldsklgdfth wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, that sounds reasonable. I'm guessing you would need to wait for immunization to be developed for restrictions on high risk people are loosened?

It's not reasonable. You can't quarantine vulnerable people completely. If everyone gets it, every bag of groceries is going to be covered in COVID and an enormous number of quarantined people will die. You can't tell who's going to die from it. You can't have everyone getting sick at once. The death rate will go up tremendously if nobody can get treatment when they have treatable symptoms. This is what "flattening t…

"every bag of groceries is going to be covered in COVID"

Just as a random factoid, somewhere I was just reading that someone was doing testing of surfaces in a hospital, and on average they found maybe 80% contaminated with the virus, but the floor of the pharmacy was 100% even though no patients had been in there...

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#176

Post by SerLava » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:08 AM UTC

perl4ever wrote: post #175

SerLava wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not reasonable. You can't quarantine vulnerable people completely. If everyone gets it, every bag of groceries is going to be covered in COVID and an enormous number of quarantined people will die. You can't tell who's going to die from it. You can't have everyone getting sick at once. The death rate will go up tremendously if nobody can get treatment when they have treatable symptoms. This is what "flattening t…

"every bag of groceries is going to be covered in COVID" Just as a random factoid, somewhere I was just reading that someone was doing testing of surfaces in a hospital, and on average they found maybe 80% contaminated with the virus, but the floor of the pharmacy was 100% even though no patients had been in there...

That's terrifying.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#177

Post by pacala » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:08 AM UTC

megavolcano wrote: post #156

phakding wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you are okay with 16 out of every 1000, 30-39 year old person with a family and young kids who are otherwise healthy, die just so you could go out to eat in your favorite restaurant? You are willing to sacrifice them for your benefit. How altruistic of you!

Considering that the more data we get with regards to fatality rate, it's looking more and more along the lines of the seasonal flu (which has a vaccine, generally). The drastic measures taken to protect a tiny minority of people are looking to be more and more pointless. We would not tolerate shutting down the world economy to protect people from the seasonal flu, and we should not tolerate it for this.

I would love to bound the death rate, both lower and upper, ideally by age group. Right now I'm torn between 'it's a nasty flu, soldier up' vs. 'it's a supernasty disease that's going to severely upend life once it becomes endemic'. With the caveat that, given how easy it spreads, we might not be able to realistically do anything to prevent it becoming endemic.

Would you please be able to expand on the 'seasonal flu' point you made?

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#178

Post by Gatsky » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:09 AM UTC

I guess Facebook has done some calculation about the potential fines/time sitting in congressional hearings in the aftermath of this versus revenue.

I think it is strange to criticise this move as suppressing free speech. If you value free speech you wouldn’t be using facebook, a for-profit venture controlled by a few people with their own agenda.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#179

Post by megavolcano » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:09 AM UTC

phakding wrote: post #164

megavolcano wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering that the more data we get with regards to fatality rate, it's looking more and more along the lines of the seasonal flu (which has a vaccine, generally). The drastic measures taken to protect a tiny minority of people are looking to be more and more pointless. We would not tolerate shutting down the world economy to protect people from the seasonal flu, and we should not tolerate it for this.

And how do you know the fatality rate of flu? That stat is not even reported. Even CDC only has an estimation of flu deaths. Besides, many strains of flu has a vaccines available. Nothing of that sort exists for corona. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/season/flu-season-2017-2018.ht...

You answered your own question. When comparing estimated flu deaths to the overinflatted corona reported deaths. Do I really need to be so pedantic?

Vaccines existing for the flu is the point, COVID is way less deadly considering we don't_ have a vaccine.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#180

Post by perl4ever » Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:10 AM UTC

TechBro8615 wrote: post #170

phakding wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should know that this is not a grass root movement rather someone astroturfing. https://krebsonsecurity.com/2020/04/whos-behind-the-reopen-d... https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/salvadorhernandez/coron... Also take a look at this Reddit comment https://www.reddit.com/r/maryland/comments/g3niq3/comment/fn... If you don't trust BuzzFeed you can go look at the domain registration information for open[enter state…

It's only "astroturfing" insofar as at least some of these protests are part of an organized drive to protest. I think you'll find that most protests entail some level of organization. Do you think black lives matter protests or women's march protests are "grassroots?" Would you be surprised to learn they are also backed by organizers?

I wouldn't be surprised if some of them were also backed by the same organizers. It would match the push-pull dynamic I imagine I see with online controversy. Not to mention the reported activity on Facebook and elsewhere around the 2016 elections.