Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The media's lab leak fiasco

slowboring.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 736 posts

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#221

Post by philjohn »

RV86 wrote: post #107

IMO, determining the origin of the virus is of much more consequence than who was right and who was wrong back in 2020. If the virus crossed over naturally, it's reasonable to conjecture that this sort of thing is going to happen more and more often in the future. If it was human error in a lab, I would actually be relieved -- this seems like something that's much easier to correct. FWIW, I do think available evidenc…

I read spillover a few years ago, which is all about zoonotic crossover events, would recommend it, even if it is a bit dry in parts.

The problem is, as an expansionist species we're naturally going to encroach on natural reservoirs for pathogens.

The smoking gun of people working at the virology institute may yet turn out to be nothing more than a red herring, if they live and work in the epicentre of where the outbreak started, it only stands to reason they'd also run the risk of catching it.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#222

Post by pedalpete »

Am I the only one who feels like this is mostly a non-issue. I feel like the case of if this came from a lab for from a market is mostly taking a political side against China - if it came from a lab, or for China - if it was naturally developed.

If it came from a Chinese lab as part of a conscious effort of weaponizing a virus, sure, that's important, but I don't think anyone is saying that.

If it came from a lab accidental breach, it is important that the parties involved are aware of that, and steps are taken to improve security.

However, this is an event that happens every century. It's not a one-time thing. We had been warned it was coming. So now it's here.

If the source had been Belgium (just as an example), would the source be covered by the media at all?

Does anybody else feel this way? Yes, the WHO etc needs to continue researching to understand the source. But I don't believe the amount of energy the average person is expending on their "thoughts" really amounts to much at all. It's just the story of the hour.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#223

Post by R0b0t1 »

pavlov wrote: post #218
scottrogowski wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This should be the top comment. Social media companies can either be monopolies or they can put limits on the speech of their platform... but they can't do both. While not against the law of freedom of speech, political moderation processes are certainly against the intent. Every once in a while we get a case like this where an unpopular fringe opinion becomes mainstream and underlines the point. But this isn't just…

This argument seems to assume that Internet hosting is like air — a natural resource which by default is available for everyone to use, but social media companies restrict unfairly. As everyone here should know, it’s not like that: hosting can be awfully expensive, especially for media content. Social media companies receive money from advertisers, and use that money to host content from users and partners that hopef…

Real estate is expensive too, but there are "town square" doctrines in some states where presenting yourself as a public space means you must not discriminate on usage.

This goes further -- in some states where such doctrine does not exist it was kind of synthesized because some electoral districts have, say, 80% of the electorate in an apartment building which a judge ruled must be accessible to candidates who run.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#224

Post by knz_ »

caddemon wrote: post #192
cratermoon wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They never will, because there is no such intelligence, it was reported as a statement from an unnamed intelligence official. It's garbage.

What incentive would the US government have to lie about this though? They were funding research at that lab, I don't understand why they would want people to think lab leak is correct all of a sudden - if that's what you're claiming?

> What incentive would the US government have to lie about this though?

The US government hasn't even made any statement.

> They were funding research at that lab, I don't understand why they would want people to think lab leak is correct all of a sudden - if that's what you're claiming?

No they weren't? You need to either get off the internet until you turn 18 or learn some serious critical thinking skills. The fact you're even considering the theory that the US is covertly funding virology research in it's biggest geopolitical enemy territory is completely unhinged and is classic schizophrenic type delusion.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#225

Post by swader999 »

seattle_spring wrote: post #202
narrator wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zerohedge getting banned from Twitter for publishing an expose of the Wuhan Lab which is pretty close to what is acknowledged as a probable story these days is the most high profile example. https://www.zdnet.com/article/zerohedge-banned-from-twitter-...

Is the majority of HN really fighting for Zerohedge to be recognized as a legitimate source of information?

"Recognized as a legitimate source of information" So default censor all non legitimate sources? Who gets to decide what is legitimate?

I don't care for the comments on that site but many times they've had scoops and been proven correct after time has passed.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#226

Post by YeezyMode »

codeulike wrote: post #151
cratermoon wrote: post #29

"If the question is “are both hypotheses possible?” the answer is yes. Both are possible. If the question is “are they equally likely?” the answer is absolutely not. One hypothesis requires a colossal cover-up and the silent, unswerving, leak-proof compliance of a vast network of scientists, civilians, and government officials for over a year. The other requires only for biology to behave as it always has, for a fami…

People keep conflating 'lab leak' with 'made in a lab'. Think about this: If it was a natural virus that escaped from a lab, China wouldn't necessarily even know about the escape for sure. We could imagine a scenario where maybe China started to suspect that might be what happened around Jan/Feb 2020. So then you don't need a collosal cover up, because hardly anyone knows for sure anyway - you just need to obstruct a…

This is the entire reason the media took actions like banning the very topic from being discussed. Someone else mentioned it higher up in the thread but there was a huge overlap between people claiming to simply sincerely investigate the possibility of a lab leak, and the group of people who believed that the virus was a bioengineered weapon released on purpose by China to disrupt other nations.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#227

Post by dylan604 »

wearywanderer wrote: post #166
dylan604 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The evidence?

"Evidence" is not a person, and can't make decisions. Decisions are made by people, who we hope are informed by evidence. Who are these people and how are they chosen? What mechanisms exist to evaluate their effectiveness and recall them when they fail? These questions are currently being answered by American corporations, which is not confidence inspiring.

>Decisions are made by people, who we hope are informed by evidence.

That hope is lost. It's really easy to get overwhelmed in how doomed we seemed to be because of it. People are believing things in spite of evidence, and are absolutely rooted in that belief to society's detrement. How much further could be be if beliefs were no longer held onto once evidence were present that shows that belief to just not be correct? Sadly, I don't think we will ever know.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#228

Post by wuwuno »

andybak wrote: post #6
deadalus wrote: post #5

Reminder that Facebook and Twitter banned users for talking about the lab-leak theory. Youtube accounts also got demontized/banned.

I'm generally in favour of the actions taken against misinformation but this situation surprises me. Lab leak always seemed plausible and non-crazy even if you think the odds are against it. I don't envy the task of making a call on any of this stuff.

Frankly the odds of a lab leak are much greater than a bat virus from a thousand miles away jumping across two species in a the Wuhan market.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#229

Post by swader999 »

asdff wrote: post #176
arduinomancer wrote: post #137

I hate how it feels like there's such a "collective narrative" for everything now days with the internet. Whenever I talk to people about recent news stories in real life it feels like everyone is just repeating talking points they read online. Its like we've been absorbed into the internet consciousness and talking to a person is like talking to "the internet brain".

People stopped reading the source material, and started just parroting the talking points. It's even gotten to the point where people are even convinced the talking points are the source material.

There's very little real reporting. Most of it is regurgitation of one source article for any given story. Very often that source article is fabricated for a purpose.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#230

Post by RV86 »

philjohn wrote: post #221
RV86 wrote: post #107

IMO, determining the origin of the virus is of much more consequence than who was right and who was wrong back in 2020. If the virus crossed over naturally, it's reasonable to conjecture that this sort of thing is going to happen more and more often in the future. If it was human error in a lab, I would actually be relieved -- this seems like something that's much easier to correct. FWIW, I do think available evidenc…

I read spillover a few years ago, which is all about zoonotic crossover events, would recommend it, even if it is a bit dry in parts. The problem is, as an expansionist species we're naturally going to encroach on natural reservoirs for pathogens. The smoking gun of people working at the virology institute may yet turn out to be nothing more than a red herring, if they live and work in the epicentre of where the outb…

Thanks for the recommendation. I will check this out asap!

To return the favor, I recommend checking out the Lapham's Quarterly issue on "Epidemic" that collected historical writings across many instances of widespread plague and disease.

Post reply on HN