YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice • Hacker News Board

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#181

Post by knzhou » Thu, Apr 23, 2020, 8:53 PM UTC

throwaway_USD wrote: post #178

knzhou wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of those completely false things that people only believe is true by repetition. Go back and actually read the full set of WHO statements in mid-January. They have a bunch of statements saying there probably is person-to-person transmission, and a bunch saying that specific studies haven’t yet found hard evidence for person-to-person transmission (because at that point most of the cases they’d managed to…

>This is one of those completely false things that people only believe is true by repetition. Go back and actually read the full set of WHO statements in mid-January. You say it is "completely false" that people only believe is true by repetition, well WHO has a twitter account and their whole tweet is: Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human tran…

"No clear evidence" uncovered in a "preliminary investigation" was a completely true statement. They never ever said "okay, this definitely isn't transmissible, everybody can ignore it". They said in the early stages that it was too soon to be sure. All the other tweets from this period are saying the same thing: something might be coming, so countries should prepare.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#182

Post by imjustsaying » Thu, Apr 23, 2020, 8:54 PM UTC

YouTube also delists from search results content that details non-strawman evidence against the Apollo moon landings and videos of rockets appearing to hit the firmament, among many others. You can still find those videos with the same search terms by searching YouTube with Yandex or with a direct URL.

They also have unclear "hate speech" guidelines where they will remove videos and ban channels without specifying why.

The point is, this behavior is consistent with YouTube.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#183

Post by TomMckenny » Thu, Apr 23, 2020, 8:55 PM UTC

subhobroto wrote: post #21

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. WHO is a political organization with medical leanings just like Fox News is an entertainment channel that covers newslike topics. Yes, there's a lot of information out there about SARS-COV2 and COVID-19 infections out there that are downright misleading at best and life threatening at worst. No, censoring that content including videos is NOT the role of a hosting platfo…

There is a great deal of complexity here.

On the broader topic, breaking up Youtube, Facebook and the like is entirely desirable but would probably be pointless unfortunately. Increases in copyright zeal make a new competitor to YouTube impossible and the network effect guarantees both theirs and Faceebook's dominance. In light of this, I imagine the only solution is to legislatively guarantee an uncensored platform on essentially the same logic that requires net-neutrality.

But I point out that "uncensored" is entirely ambiguous. For better or worse, the vast mass of people want and expect it with the percentage very dependent on the particular item. From archaic restrictions on "dirty" words over radio waves through to displays of sex to recruiting terrorists to national secrets to doxing individuals to child pornography.

For right or wrong, somewhere, the public, legislators and each individual decides to draw a line. In addition, for short periods of crisis or certain locations or certain influencers, the line can move. The often misused example of yelling fire in a theater comes to mind but a national leader harmfully using false announcements to raise the value of stock he owns would be an example. More relevant would be the South African leader who zealously told his people AIDS can only come from drug abuse.

On the YouTube issue, for right or wrong, they drew the line in a place some would not. I would guess because they view such messaging as unusually fatal in the short term and they don't want to be a part of it. And that they could not find any simple judgement criterion that would do what they want without doing too much and yet be palatable world wide. If we legally require them to carry every upload regardless of content then it will lift all their burdens. But it will certainly create very real problems for others.

My point is that the issue is far more complex than bumper sticker sized answers.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#184

Post by brobinson » Thu, Apr 23, 2020, 8:55 PM UTC

himinlomax wrote: post #117

brobinson wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edit: since people are misunderstanding this post, I am 100% pro-ROC and anti-PRC. I wish the ROC could rename itself to something else without triggering a PRC invasion. Check my comment history. I'm 100% pro-ROC and I support the ROC's continued (since 1912) independence as a sovereign entity. 中華民國萬歲 "Taiwan" isn't a country. It's an island controlled by the Republic of China alongside its other holdings. The ROC i…

Taiwan has: - a military - a government - a language - a judicial system - foreign relations, however hampered they are by the Communist party It also happens to be in a state of cold war with their nominally Communist neighbour. If it's not a country, nothing is.

So you're saying that the Republic of China Armed Forces belong to an entity called "Taiwan"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_China_Armed_Forces

"Taiwan" passports say "Republic of China" on them.

My passport stamps from when I entered Taiwan say "Republic of China".

Taiwan is just _one_ of the islands that the ROC controls. Calling the ROC "Taiwan" muddies the conversation and helps the PRC narrative that "Taiwan is a province of China".

The ROC has been a de facto independent country since 1912 when it was founded. The existence of the PRC since 1949 has not changed that.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#185

Post by akersten » Thu, Apr 23, 2020, 8:55 PM UTC

redml wrote: post #73

tree3 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube. It's their platform, they make decisions. If you don't like their platform/decisions, go elsewhere.

You know its funny how I only see this argument when the service is doing something they agree with. When it's something they don't like there's suddenly outrage. Remember a few years ago ISPs wanting to remove net neutrality and wanting to potentially charge for access to websites on "their platform"? Suddenly they're big enough to be a "public utility" and "invasion of free speech". You can't have it both ways.

Completely different. ISPs are often a government granted monopoly. You can't just up and start one to compete, so it makes sense that they must be neutral. It's not a free market.

Anyone can start a YouTube clone, and if enough people disagree with YouTube's policies, they'll come use the clone. That's the free market of ideas.

See: Reddit/Voat

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#186

Post by phs318u » Thu, Apr 23, 2020, 8:56 PM UTC

thorwasdfasdf wrote: post #154

subhobroto wrote: post #21

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. WHO is a political organization with medical leanings just like Fox News is an entertainment channel that covers newslike topics. Yes, there's a lot of information out there about SARS-COV2 and COVID-19 infections out there that are downright misleading at best and life threatening at worst. No, censoring that content including videos is NOT the role of a hosting platfo…

this is an excellent idea: safe mode. let people who can't decide for themselves what's safe to watch, let them watch safe mode only. everyone else, should be able to decide for themselves (opt in)

The problem isn’t letting people decide for themselves. It’s the fact that when it comes to some things, even a small minority “deciding stupid” can destroy the commons eg endanger lots of lives. Isn’t there a saying that’s something like, “your right to swing your arms ends where my nose begins”?

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#187

Post by brobinson » Thu, Apr 23, 2020, 8:56 PM UTC

core-questions wrote: post #161

brobinson wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edit: since people are misunderstanding this post, I am 100% pro-ROC and anti-PRC. I wish the ROC could rename itself to something else without triggering a PRC invasion. Check my comment history. I'm 100% pro-ROC and I support the ROC's continued (since 1912) independence as a sovereign entity. 中華民國萬歲 "Taiwan" isn't a country. It's an island controlled by the Republic of China alongside its other holdings. The ROC i…

You should try talking to a Taiwanese person to see what they think, instead of being a shill for PRC.

See my edit. I'm 100% pro-ROC and 100% anti-PRC. Calling the ROC and its other non-Taiwan holdings "Taiwan" helps the PRC with their "Taiwan is a province of China" narrative. First time I, a stringent anti-communist, have ever been called a PRC shill. There's zero chance I'd be allowed to enter the PRC if they can see my internet posting history.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#188

Post by sebastianconcpt » Thu, Apr 23, 2020, 8:57 PM UTC

This is going to inject a distortion on medical innovation in a time of crisis. Manipulative in the worst possible way. The moment they start censoring they become editors and not a platform.