The media's lab leak fiasco • Hacker News Board

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#701

Post by correct_horse » Fri, May 28, 2021, 9:40 PM UTC

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.

"Let your ideas be second-hand, and if possible tenth-hand, for then they will be far removed from that disturbing element — direct observation." The Machine Stops, page 18

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#702

Post by the_optimist » Fri, May 28, 2021, 10:20 PM UTC

triceratops wrote: post #515

beaner wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong. The things it does get wrong have more impact. Russiagate is just one prior example. It was patently false from the outset, but led to mass delusions, promotions of fake news propagandists to the point that they are now embedded within and celebrated by the MSM, the discrediting of the media and the intelligence community, breakdown of trust of those institutions by those who had been clear-headed, and fever-d…

> Russiagate is just one prior example. It was patently false from the outset What is "Russiagate"? What about it was "patently false"? The Mueller investigation got multiple indictments against Russian nationals. They also obtained convictions of people working in the Trump campaign or administration for election-related offenses. They found evidence of Russian attempts to influence voters in swing states by illegal…

DOJ indicted ham-sandwich Russians, then later retreated. Only process crimes charged (lying, interfering). Buying ads on social media isn't illegal, and the amount was de minimus (< $30k). FARA crimes were reverse-engineered, selectively prosecuted, and didn't related to Russia in any way. Everything about these headlines is an utter farce.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#703

Post by narrator » Fri, May 28, 2021, 10:20 PM UTC

narrator wrote: post #496

seattle_spring wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So default censor all non legitimate sources No? Censor sources that have proven time and time again to provide verifiably false information. Zerohedge and Infowars specifically fit into that bucket and it's completely reasonable to shine a light on their lack of trustworthiness. A lot of folks are saying, "let the people decide what is false!" Well, here's the thing: People are really mind-numbingly stupid. Spend…

The New York Times had two years of bad RussiaGate scoops and everyone still trusts them.

Speaking of The New York Times, a NYT reporter tweeted that it was racist to even discuss the lab leak theory:

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/new-york-times-covid-repo...

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#704

Post by skinkestek » Fri, May 28, 2021, 11:14 PM UTC

dougmwne wrote: post #339

nfoz wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree and have experienced what you wrote, except I have no idea what your last paragraph means. What are you referring to / talking about? It feels like maybe an example of the phenomenon we're talking about lol

What I mean is to really address climate change all 8 billion of us are going to have to come together and make huge changes to our lives and each make personal sacrifices for the greater good. There will be new government mandates and it will affect how we live and work. There will be a huge social pressure to conform and a huge backlash. But we will have no choice because our environment will have changed to be mor…

Please take all that with a grain of salt everyone:

comments like this is for me a good signal that this whole climate change thing is just a front for something else.

Please note: I have no shares in fossil companies, I work for railway companies, I buy my stuff used and reuse and sort waste so much my wife gets crazy.

So I'm almost there already but for other reasons: I belive in ecology. Not wasting wildlife areas. Not polluting.

Climate? Anthropogenic changes?

Look at a globe. Put your fingers at the oil fields. Then think that all CO2 from these fields has to be spread out thin across the whole rest of the globe.

Or do something else: try to ask someone about some real numbers. I've been interested in those numbers.

I never get any numbers. I get dismissed rudely for using the "Just Asking Questions" tactic, a tactic I didn't know until I was told that I used it.

The only number I get is 2500 infallible scientists and as far as I now know a fair number of them weren't scientists but authors etc.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#705

Post by spfzero » Fri, May 28, 2021, 11:54 PM UTC

tootie wrote: post #670

spfzero wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its only recently that research labs could engineer these viruses. Only recently have you been able to engineer mice with human ACE2 receptors, and breed viruses in them. History is not what you base your conclusions on in 2020’s biochemistry.

It has been strongly asserted by the scientific community that Covid-19 bears no hallmarks of an engineered virus. In fact, no one in this thread is even suggested it was engineered. That's the whole point of the article. The "accidental leak" theory is being conflated with "engineered weapon theory". The only options on the table are "animal -> human" or "animal -> lab -> human". Both are plausible and we have no co…

Engineering a virus, in the sense that you're talking about, is not what was meant. Allowing the virus to naturally mutate in an animal host, over thousands of generations, will get you to the same endpoint. This is gain of function research, the whole point is to find out if the virus could naturally evolve some feature you are interested in. Engineering it to do so would defeat the point.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#706

Post by wpietri » Sat, May 29, 2021, 3:49 AM UTC

monoideism wrote: post #694

wpietri wrote: post #677

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. Many things are possible. Twitter could be using an embedded hypnotron in their apps to control elite opinion. But when people are talking about effectively nationalizing one company because they don't like its moderation policies, I think we need more than speculation. And you might not care about why we have antitrust laws or how monopoly impairs free markets. But I sure do. If somebody wants to make the clai…

> Gab and Parler are eternally claiming success in attracting millions of users. So Gab and Parler should be absolutely free to operate as they wish, in accordance with US laws? (Because there many folks who like Twitter's moderation who also believe Gab and Parler should be run off the internet, and have tried their best to do so)

I think Gab and Parler should face no legal sanction for hosting content that is legal but awful. But people critical of that also have freedom of speech, and everybody involved has freedom of association. Telling Gab's vendors that maybe they should stop helping Nazis is just as much "in accordance with US laws" as anything on Gab, so I don't see on what grounds you could object to it.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#707

Post by remarkEon » Sat, May 29, 2021, 4:04 AM UTC

christophilus wrote: post #639

remarkEon wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My shit test for "is this article likely a bunch of FUD or just outright BS" is if they actually link to the source material. If they don't, I usually continue reading it but make a mental note that they're likely pushing some specific version of the event or facts in question.

It’s challenging to do this without being swayed— particularly if the writer is a good rhetorician. Listening to propaganda over and over again, even while knowing that it is propaganda, tends to influence your opinions. I don’t know what the solution to that is. But it does feel like reading the news requires a mental rigor that is both rare and exhausting. Someone recommended that I supplement my news reading with…

Yeah, no disagreement from me. It's the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect at scale.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton#GellMannAmnes...

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#708

Post by admax88q » Sat, May 29, 2021, 4:17 AM UTC

shaicoleman wrote: post #693

admax88q wrote: post #681

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there widespread censorship? https://ivmmeta.com links to all sorts of studies published on the effectiveness of ivwhatever, all as support for using it. It sounds more like the rest of the research/medical community is just not convinced.

Yes, indeed. Again, this discussed here: https://covid19criticalcare.com/videos-and-press/flccc-relea... And in video form here: https://youtu.be/LkIKCbwBcLU?t=702

Yeah I don't buy it. You're moving the goalposts. Censorship is when they prohibit information being distributed. It looks like Government Health Agencies are just not believing the evidence and are therefore not recommending it. They're not saying "don't talk about it" they're not saying "don't research it" they're saying "the evidence so far is inconclusive, we don't recommend treating with it"

That's not censorship.

Just found this overview by NIH on why they don't recommend treament. https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/antiviral-the...

Pretty detailed overview of why they are not convinced. Are they wrong? Maybe, but they're not censoring anything in my books.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#709

Post by shaicoleman » Sat, May 29, 2021, 6:06 AM UTC

admax88q wrote: post #708

shaicoleman wrote: post #693

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, indeed. Again, this discussed here: https://covid19criticalcare.com/videos-and-press/flccc-relea... And in video form here: https://youtu.be/LkIKCbwBcLU?t=702

Yeah I don't buy it. You're moving the goalposts. Censorship is when they prohibit information being distributed. It looks like Government Health Agencies are just not believing the evidence and are therefore not recommending it. They're not saying "don't talk about it" they're not saying "don't research it" they're saying "the evidence so far is inconclusive, we don't recommend treating with it" That's not censorshi…

> Just found this overview by NIH on why they don't recommend treatment.

What do they recommend? Wait until you're sick enough to go to hospital. This a year in a half into the pandemic, and you don't see the problem?

Compare this to the treatment protocol of the FLCCC

https://covid19criticalcare.com/covid-19-protocols/i-mask-pl...

> Maybe, but they're not censoring anything in my books.

I'd estimate about 90% of social media posts about Ivermectin get censored on social media.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/youtube-cancels-the-u-s-senate-...

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/feb/16/craig...

They literally have policies saying if you're posting anything about Ivermectin, it's misinformation, and it will get removed. How is that not censorship?

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/9891785

Just now the Ivermectin Global Summit has been removed from YouTube. A medical conference gets removed and you claim that there's no censorship?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGefHqcnmio

You probably won't believe the censorship until you'll experience it first hand.

Re: The media's lab leak fiasco

#710

Post by tekknik » Sat, May 29, 2021, 12:11 PM UTC

crispyambulance wrote: post #635

fartcannon wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is a good place for authorship attribution AI's. A plugin that will identify text that resembles known PR and propaganda and links to the original source. Is this a real review or is this person writing their review from a script? Am I interacting with a real person or someone paid to sway the public opinion of something on a forum? Edit: Maybe we could prevent more influence by Satya @ MS and the like.…

> A plugin that will identify text that resembles known PR and propaganda and links to the original source. Certainly such a tool might be useful to someone analyzing disinformation campaigns, but it only goes so far. If the intent with such plugins and other forms of human/AI moderation is merely identify the source of what looks like disinformation, you're going to disappointed to hear that those who are influenced…

> It's why meatheads on Fox News can blabber non-stop garbage and get the highest news media ratings in history.

Interesting how you had to throw a right wing site in there with your underhanded attack. So you think the left is immune to this? Can you actually get through a CNN article without wanting to vomit?

With that one statement you lost me entirely.