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

YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

mercurynews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

721–730 of 803 posts

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#721

Post by FireBeyond »

nickthemagicman wrote: post #717
FireBeyond wrote: post #710

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A discussion about an inconclusive subject=willful misrepresentation to you? No. This is a disingenuous depiction at best. Study: "Do masks hold the virus in the cloth/material and can it survive on that cloth/material". Rand Paul: "Studies (points to the one above) show that masks are unable to prevent the spread of COVID and doesn't stop it". That's not inconclusivity - we don't know "everything" about COVID. Tha…

>This is a disingenuous depiction at best Numerous studies DO show that masks are unable to prevent the spread of COVID and stop it. Here's a publication stating that cloth Mask usage INCREASED chances of infection. https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577 Here's a collection of studies showing the ineffectiveness of face masks. https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence/ This is still an open discussion but the people…

Did you pass elementary school comprehension?

Study: in simple terms, "can COVID live on and in masks"

Rand Paul: "this study shows that these masks don't prevent COVID".

I'm not talking about other studies. I'm not talking about anything else. There are plenty of inconclusive and concerning studies.

But Rand Paul, who as you keep reminding us, is far more educated than all of us fascists, wilfully and repeatedly held up the specific study above as being "undeniable proof" of masks being a problem. They may be a problem. But that study doesn't show it. It doesn't imply it. It does nothing other than talk about the ability or lack thereof of the virus to grow and survive in the material of the mask itself.

And he knows that, as an educated scientist.

And he doesn't care. He also knows that people will see keywords and draw matching conclusions to the factually incorrect statements about the study that he makes, repeatedly.

That's why he got banned.

Your martyrdom is unbecoming. And your assumptions of my beliefs on the matter are entirely broken because you're too focused on foaming at the mouth about fascists demonizing you while comparing yourself and Rand Paul to Galileo.

I work in EMS as a critical care paramedic. Every year I get the flu vaccine because I'm around vulnerable populations a lot. My girlfriend and my step daughter don't get these vaccines, and rather than suppressing and demonizing them, I think that's entirely reasonable, because they're not around those populations as I am.

I also have never said - because I don't believe - that every person needs to be vaccinated for COVID.

For someone who has spent a large chunk of these discussions building up these strawmen, your radar needs a lot more calibration.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#722

Post by newacct583 »

nickthemagicman wrote: post #714
newacct583 wrote: post #705

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would love a citation for that. Are you living in a cave? How can you not have seen all this. UCSF has this amazing review, and it's right at the top of the google results page: https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-abou... You are claiming not to have seen this not because you have looked for this evidence and failed to find it, but because you have been CONVINCED BY YOUR MEDIA that this evidence…

You use opinion pieces for 'science'? The modern day Covid Evangelist... views opinion pieces and the media as science.... Also...it's an opinion piece from....a university....in San Francisco...the two most notoriously political places in the entire universe and you're saying I'm convinced by MY MEDIA. Despite that terrible citation....even the opinion piece you linked says there are 'compelling strands of evidence'…

> Also...it's an opinion piece from....a university....in San Francisco...the two most notoriously political places in the entire universe and you're saying I'm convinced by MY MEDIA.

It's... a medical school. An elite one, no less, doing public outreach. Effectively that link is a review paper written for non-experts, it's certainly not "opinion journalism". I mean, it links to studies throughout the piece. It absolutely represents (and I don't understand why you think this is controversial) virtually uniformly held scientific consensus on this topic.

I mean, I don't know what to say. If you don't trust doctors about medical issues, preferring to read pieces from (literal) Swiss conspiracy theory sites and citing isolated single Vietnamese studies, then I guess I can't help you.

But yes: SWPRS and sites like that are LYING TO YOU. Very effectively, since now you trust them more than you do one of the best med schools in the country.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#723

Post by sampo »

nickthemagicman wrote: post #716
srinivgp wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty conclusive. It's been conclusive for years and years, before COVID-19. There's no question at all that masks reduce infectiousness through the extremely obvious method of preventing some virus particles from going from one person to another, and also no question at all that probability of infection depends on number of virus particles around, and that viruses in general produce worse symptoms when the ini…

> You will find literally zero papers credibly claiming otherwise. Here's a paper that says cloth mask usage increases rate of infection. https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577 Here's a collection of studies refuting mask efficacy. https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence/ You're literally a vector for disinformation which is a bannable offense but only the Rand Pauls who go against the narrative get banned. Your f…

> Here's a paper that says cloth mask usage increases rate of infection.

> https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577

Using cloth masks only, increased rate of infection in relation to the control group. And the control group: "In the control arm, 170/458 (37%) used medical masks, 38/458 (8%) used cloth masks, and 245/458 (53%) used a combination of both medical and cloth masks during the study period."

So we can conclude that the medical masks, used in the control arm, worked better than cloth masks.

If you were trying to coyly imply that the study said that cloth masks increased infections compared to using no mask at all, you were being dishonest.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#724

Post by iammisc »

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #554
iammisc wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> YouTube doesn't have any responsibility (especially legal) to the public discourse. Of course it does, should the government decide it does. Just like how the Civil Rights acts mandated that certain private businesses have responsibilities to serve certain classes of citizens equally. Just like the federal housing law requires landlords, corporate or not, to rent out to all people. The government is allowed to mand…

I would suggest that should congress decide to pass a law requiring youtube to carry Rand Paul's videos, the Supreme Court would toss it out as an infringement of youtube's first amendment right to free speech. As they should. If the government can require private media to carry government messages, the first amendment is toast.

> If the government can require private media to carry government messages, the first amendment is toast.

Currently, the government is directly involved in Facebook and Twitter's moderation decisions, by their own admission, and the Supreme Court is doing nothing, so I don't see your hypothetical as being very realistic.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#725

Post by CamperBob2 »

kgarten wrote: post #678
CamperBob2 wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cloth masks might not keep you safe. They do, however, improve safety for those around you. Anything that reduces droplet velocity and interferes with aerosol disperson is by definition better than nothing.

Don't understand the downvotes ... basic science: "Anything that reduces droplet velocity and interferes with aerosol dispersion is by definition better than nothing." here are some supercomputer simulations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAvO_QdO9eM

This site is full of people who, in defiance of Feynman, are absolutely sure that they're the ones who will finally come up with a way to fool Mother Nature. They don't care about science, simulations, or common sense.

To be fair, as insufferable as this attitude can be, it's probably necessary in order for progress to happen. It usually drags us in the other direction, though.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#726

Post by hedgehog »

nradov wrote: post #718
hedgehog wrote: post #628

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ending the pandemic is different from eradicating the virus. It'll likely end up being something we manage just as we manage viruses like measles or Ebola. Vaccination and surveillance will slow the sporadic smaller outbreaks and make it feasible to contain them.

There's no scientific reason to expect that outbreaks of a highly infectious respiratory virus can be contained by measures short of the drastic lockdowns used in authoritarian countries like China and Australia. Most people in most countries won't go along with that, and in many countries the governments don't even have the resources to even try. A more realistic scenario is that we all get infected eventually but v…

I hope you're wrong but unclear. Best I can tell it's likely populations with near-100% vaccination rates and reasonable public health teams will be protected from large outbreaks. That strategy has worked for measles, we'll see what happens on this one.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#727

Post by nickthemagicman »

newacct583 wrote: post #722
nickthemagicman wrote: post #714

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You use opinion pieces for 'science'? The modern day Covid Evangelist... views opinion pieces and the media as science.... Also...it's an opinion piece from....a university....in San Francisco...the two most notoriously political places in the entire universe and you're saying I'm convinced by MY MEDIA. Despite that terrible citation....even the opinion piece you linked says there are 'compelling strands of evidence'…

> Also...it's an opinion piece from....a university....in San Francisco...the two most notoriously political places in the entire universe and you're saying I'm convinced by MY MEDIA. It's... a medical school. An elite one, no less, doing public outreach. Effectively that link is a review paper written for non-experts, it's certainly not "opinion journalism". I mean, it links to studies throughout the piece. It absol…

A collection of links to Pubmed, CDC, PlosOne, Oxford and other papers.

vs

An opinion piece.

The absolute state of Covid fanatics.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#728

Post by nickthemagicman »

FireBeyond wrote: post #721
nickthemagicman wrote: post #717

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is a disingenuous depiction at best Numerous studies DO show that masks are unable to prevent the spread of COVID and stop it. Here's a publication stating that cloth Mask usage INCREASED chances of infection. https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577 Here's a collection of studies showing the ineffectiveness of face masks. https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence/ This is still an open discussion but the people…

Did you pass elementary school comprehension? Study: in simple terms, "can COVID live on and in masks" Rand Paul: "this study shows that these masks don't prevent COVID". I'm not talking about other studies. I'm not talking about anything else. There are plenty of inconclusive and concerning studies. But Rand Paul, who as you keep reminding us, is far more educated than all of us fascists, wilfully and repeatedly hel…

Numerous studies show that masks don't prevent Covid.

He's right.

Whether he's wrong about that one article or not (I'm not spending time looking into some technical little gotcha), there are numerous articles that corroborate his claim.

Fascists deny alternative ideas by any means necessary including technicalitys even if the spirit of the idea is correct.

It's what fascists do.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#729

Post by nradov »

hedgehog wrote: post #726
nradov wrote: post #718

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no scientific reason to expect that outbreaks of a highly infectious respiratory virus can be contained by measures short of the drastic lockdowns used in authoritarian countries like China and Australia. Most people in most countries won't go along with that, and in many countries the governments don't even have the resources to even try. A more realistic scenario is that we all get infected eventually but v…

I hope you're wrong but unclear. Best I can tell it's likely populations with near-100% vaccination rates and reasonable public health teams will be protected from large outbreaks. That strategy has worked for measles, we'll see what happens on this one.

Measles isn't a valid comparison for a control strategy. It isn't commonly spread by asymptomatic patients. There are no animal reservoirs. The measles vaccine is far more effective at really blocking infections rather than just preventing severe symptoms. So your hopes are unfounded.

Re: YouTube suspends Rand Paul for seven days

#730

Post by Thorentis »

thethethethe wrote: post #624
Thorentis wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Welcome to another installment of "but they're a private company". Who decides what rights private companies have? Do private companies have a right to dump waste into rivers? What about to fire employees because of their race? The rights of private companies are not transcendental - we define them. And if we decide as a society that deleting information from publishing platforms goes against the common good, then we…

> if we decide as a society that deleting information from publishing platforms goes against the common good, then we can do that. Yeah this sounds nice and all but ultimately someone has to make the rules about what can and cannot be said. Should we never delete any content period? What about child abuse or calls to violence? who gets to define violence? Is telling people that masks don't work a call to violence? Ma…

Just because drawing a line in the sand is tricky, doesn't mean we should offload our responsibility to do so in a reasonable way. I'm not advocating for no line - I'm advocating that the entity making the decision is not the private company.
Post reply on HN