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

YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 933 posts

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#461

Post by rptr4 »

owlbynight wrote: post #174

I'll preface this by stating that I hate the idea of censorship and I always have. However, were I to happen across someone motionless on the floor with a needle in their arm, I would give them NARCAN instead of a ride to a rehab center. I'm from the United States. Social media is currently poisoning our country to a degree that I think it may be too late to try and draw out the fight for free speech by using free sp…

I do worry specifically about what defines “misinformation”—sure, let’s ban “the vaccine has a microchip programmed to kill you” or something, but would we ban a vaccine recipient reporting adverse reactions they experienced? This will probably be the most widely and rapidly deployed vaccine in the history of the world, and I think it’s important that any and all necessary information becomes widely available, and I don’t necessarily trust the proper and official channels to always report all of that information.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#462

Post by etripe »

Smithalicious wrote: post #302
owlbynight wrote: post #174

I'll preface this by stating that I hate the idea of censorship and I always have. However, were I to happen across someone motionless on the floor with a needle in their arm, I would give them NARCAN instead of a ride to a rehab center. I'm from the United States. Social media is currently poisoning our country to a degree that I think it may be too late to try and draw out the fight for free speech by using free sp…

If social media is poisonous and the powerful are using it to control ideas, the solution isn't to let the billionaire class social media giants be the arbiter of truth, methinks. "misinformation" is indistinguishable from "thinks I think are false" which in turn is hard to distinguish from "things I disagree with".

> "misinformation" is indistinguishable from "thinks I think are false" which in turn is hard to distinguish from "things I disagree with".

Only if you believe the post-modern claim that there's no objectively verifiable truth and that all narratives are equally valid.

There is a huge difference between "vaccines contain microchips" and "water retains the essence of homeopathic ingredients" on the one hand and "COVID spreads through droplets" on the other.

EDIT: I do agree billionaires shouldn't be the final arbiter, though.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#463

Post by dtoma »

teddyh wrote: post #451
dtoma wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're posting this on HN, a platform that has moderators and doesn't allow certain things to be said. So you implicitly agree that there is a trade-off between free speech and ability to live in a community.

“Yet you participate in society! Curious.” — Mister Gotcha ( https://thenib.com/mister-gotcha/ )

Unlike the people in this comic, I'm actually making a point, which you seem to have missed: community, by necessity, doesn't work with absolute freedom. What matters is what we agree to compromise over and why we do so.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#464

Post by eternalban »

owlbynight wrote: post #174

I'll preface this by stating that I hate the idea of censorship and I always have. However, were I to happen across someone motionless on the floor with a needle in their arm, I would give them NARCAN instead of a ride to a rehab center. I'm from the United States. Social media is currently poisoning our country to a degree that I think it may be too late to try and draw out the fight for free speech by using free sp…

"The video platform said it would now ban any content with claims about [planetary motion] that contradict consensus from local [priests] or the [Catholic Church]."

__Any__ qualified individual/institution that deviates from the "authority" falls under this guidance. That means no dissent is tolerated, regardless of qualification of the source.

Authoritarianism is authoritarianism.

> The ability for one person to amplify their voice or ideas via hundreds or thousands of bots, paid assholes, and gullible people who lack the capacity for critical thought is a problem. It's a big problem.

The problem is, actually, "gullible people who lack the capacity for critical thought". It doesn't really matter if it is "one person", or a tightly knit group, or even one's own government.

> The ability for one person to amplify their voice or ideas

A wonderful ability, and a cherished Human Right.

> Truth, facts, and hoping that people can apply logic to find their way to them isn't enough anymore and the people exploiting this advantage are getting better at it.

That is your opinion, and imo highly likely not even an original opinion. Where did you first read that "truth, facts, and [logic] isn't enough anymore"? It a very 'interesting' meme, don't you agree?

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#465

Post by nomdep »

nl wrote: post #394
AlchemistCamp wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Completely false. The WHO claimed there was no evidence of human to human transmission after doctors in Wuhan were already getting sick, failed to share warnings from Taiwanese researchers with the rest of the world, argued against travel restrictions from China and also claimed mask use wasn't helpful. They did a horrible job that has cost many, many lives. I've been in Taiwan and was gritting my teeth while diffing…

China and WHO confirmed human to human transmission on Jan 20, before any doctors died and before China closed Wuhan province. Anyone who says or implies otherwise are lying or misinformed. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/20/coronavirus-sp...

And they were denying it a week earlier: https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1217043229427761152

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#467

Post by scoutt »

tomp wrote: post #286
owlbynight wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

COVID-19 is a novel virus. All information is misinformation until it isn't. I could say that the reason that some people are asymptomatic is that the virus is lying dormant in them like herpes. Can anyone credibly refute that? Logic would dictate that a novel virus -- novel in that we don't know everything about it -- is a threat to the survival of our species as a whole until disproven otherwise and that we should…

Why do you want to curb the infection rate? What’s the end goal? I’m strongly on the Swedish/Trump side here. We know that the virus is practically harmless for youth and young adults. If immunity persists, we should let them get infected ASAP while protecting the old/vulnerable. If immunity fades, then waiting for the vaccine is pointless anyways. As a young person, I won’t be taking the vaccine anytime soon anyways…

> Why do you want to curb the infection rate? What’s the end goal?

To not saturate the healthcare system.

> practically harmless

We still don't know the long term effects of the disease, or please define the term "practically harmless".

> If immunity persists... If immunity fades

So you want to expose an entire healthy population to a deadly virus and stop looking for a vaccine based on a couple of "if"?

> But hey, say this on YouTube and I’ll be banned!

Saying it here wouldn't get you banned (probably) but your comment will probably go grey (whenever you care or not).

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#468

Post by m3kw9 »

This type of censorship is what other authoritarian countries viewed as half assed attempt to censorship. You are trying to censor somethings but need to really decide and every decision is scrutinized by everyone, also from the media. This is definitely a slippery slope towards censorship of even scrutiny

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#469

Post by fouric »

dandare wrote: post #186

Now think about all the conspiracy theories that actually turned out to be truth. MK ULTRA, Dark Alliance, Tuskegee Syphilis Study, COINTELPRO, PRISM, you name it. Would these be banned ("fact checked") from YouTube, Facebook or Twitter under these new rules? On the other hand, there is a clear evidence that authoritarian regimes (Russia) are weaponizing social media, using troll farms, puppet accounts and fake news,…

Don't forget Epstein! "US media and political elites are engaging in a child sex trafficking ring" was (still is?) a conspiracy theory for years, if not decades.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#470

Post by throwaway0a5e »

owlbynight wrote: post #174

I'll preface this by stating that I hate the idea of censorship and I always have. However, were I to happen across someone motionless on the floor with a needle in their arm, I would give them NARCAN instead of a ride to a rehab center. I'm from the United States. Social media is currently poisoning our country to a degree that I think it may be too late to try and draw out the fight for free speech by using free sp…

How is your comment substantively different from someone saying "I love freedom but..." and then proceeding to sing the virtues of how ignoring the 4th amendment will save us from terrorists?

We've already gone down a very similar road once we we don't like where it leads. Turns out ignoring the 4th amendment didn't help us stop terrorists and now 20yr later the government is still ignoring the 4th amendment to our detriment despite the whole terrorism thing having mostly run its course and reached a steady state. Why will it be different if we take a similar approach to a different right?

Post reply on HN