6 ms·

People in HN need to start understanding, that while most of us can work from home, earn a living, be fairly happy (especially if you're living with someone).

by zpeti 6y ago

People in HN need to start understanding, that while most of us can work from home, earn a living, be fairly happy (especially if you're living with someone). You simply cannot even begin to asses the financial and psychological damage of every single waiter, or coffee shop barrista, dance artist, theatre actor, or god forbid business owner who might have spent decades building a business that is now bankrupt, sitting at home, with nothing to do, no one to speak to, doing what? Its well known in psychology that spending too much time alone basically makes you go crazy. Look at the numbers on domestic abuse, drug abuse, mental health issues. Have a little empathy. There are legitimate viewpoints about whether these lockdowns are worth it, and especially for how long. This isn't disinformation. It's just people who are different from you.

mantap 6y ago
What about the damage of not having a functional healthcare system? The only reason that the death rate is so low is because people can get to hospital and get treatment. If we just let the thing rip then hospitals would have to start having policies of not providing care to people with covid-19, or we just say goodbye to the concept of emergency care in general.
- zpeti 6y ago
  Please don’t make out like my comment is some black and white anti lockdown comment. It’s not. It’s not saying let’s not lockdown. It’s saying there are serious consequences on the other end. That many people who still have their livelihoods and happiness dismiss as “misinformation”
  - cerebellum42 6y ago
    Have you read the link? This is not about dismissing the genuine plight of people affected by the lockdown. This is about actual, literal, disinformation being spread. We need to weigh the consequences of restrictions against the consequences of not having those restrictions, and this kind of disinformation is simply trying to tip the scales by diluting the factual basis on which we all make that assessment with lies.
- tinus_hn 6y ago
  One does not preclude the other. Governments should be obliged to cover 100% of the damage caused to businesses and employees by their measures. Instead of having businesses foot the government bills.
  - cerebellum42 6y ago
    And why do you think this should be strictly a "government bill"? I think it's a lot more nuanced than that. One perspective would be to say this is a cost all of society needs to pay as a whole (in which case everyone simply pays it in taxes at the end) or you could say "we just require your business to behave in such a way that it doesn't end up killing people, you pay the cost for it". These are the extremes of course, but we need to figure out where we fall on that spectrum.
    - tinus_hn 6y ago
      Because the government is the party deciding on the restrictions. If the government has to pay the price there’s a chance they’ll keep that part of the equation in mind. If they can just brush it off by having others foot the bill, they’ll simply make the choice which minimizes the impact that can be directly attributed to them. Which definitely is not always the right choice. It’s just so much easier to chant for safety whatever the costs if you don’t have to pay the bill.
      - cerebellum42 6y ago
        Just to be clear, I think it's within the responsibility of the government to pay for much of the hardship incurred by lockdowns to help get society and the economy as a whole through it halfway intact; but I do not think that applies to _everything_. Two examples: If a Business is closed due to lockdown - there should be government assistance to compensate. Buying masks for employees and changing interior layouts to allow for safer interactions, to comply with new regulations - cost of doing business. This alone: >Because the government is the party deciding on the restrictions. is not a valid reason to me. We don't (or at least I don't) expect the government to pay for every impact of new environmental legislation either even though they ultimately pass the legislation.
notahacker 6y ago
There is a big difference between legitimate arguments about the risks involved in lockdown vs not locking down and entirely false claims about hospital admissions being at normal levels, PCR testing not working and the purpose of the lockdown being to make it 'easier for us to control' being spread by groups mentioned at this link. The fact the rich, educated and connected people discussed in the article are seeking to exploit the discontent felt by ordinary people impoverished by being unable to work and lonely in their personal lives makes them worse, not better.
- thepangolino 6y ago
  > false claims about hospital admissions being at normal levels. "Normal level" is all relative. If you look up the press, "on the brink of the apocalypse" seems to be the normal level for at least the last couple of years in the UK. 2012: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/dec/02/hospitals-full-bursting-nhs-report https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/dec/02/hospitals-fu... 2013: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/nov/24/nhs-hospitals-toughest-winter-flu-weather-vomiting https://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/nov/24/nhs-hospital... 2014: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/27/nhs-winter-crisis-more-patients-fewer-doctors https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/27/nhs-winter-c... 2015: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/mar/27/nhs-hospital-bed-occupancy-rates-hit-record-figures-risking-care https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/mar/27/nhs-hospital... 2016: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/dec/16/hospitals-in-england-told-to-put-operations-on-hold-to-free-up-beds https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/dec/16/hospitals-in... 2017: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/dec/07/nhs-bosses-sound-alarm-over-hospital-bed-shortages-patient-safety-concern https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/dec/07/nhs-bosses-s... 2018: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/mar/07/patients-turned-away-intensive-care-lack-beds-shortage-hospitals https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/mar/07/patients-tur... 2019: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/25/hospital-beds-at-record-low-in-england-as-nhs-struggles-with-demand https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/25/hospital-be...
  - matthewmacleod 6y ago
    Okay, but you’re participating in amplification of disinformation right now. It’s the “just asking questions” sort or approach that doesn’t actually say anything specific, but aims to create a general fog of doubt and confusion. If there is a specific point you want to make, then do so. It might be valid. Back that point up with details or an explanation that shows why you think it is the case, and expect to provide more information if your view is a challenging or unlikely one.
_jal 6y ago
That's fine, and I agree with you to a large extent, but that's not at all what the article is about. The article is about the alt-right and plague disinformation, not down-and-out restaurant owners.
- bananapear 6y ago
  The problem is that the article lazily conflates the usual alt-right attention seeker and 5G conspiracy types with some academics who have raised genuinely-held concerns about the costs vs benefits of the current approach. It’s difficult to take these sort of articles seriously because “you are spreading disinformation” is a lot easier than a dispassionate analysis of the issue at hand.
  - pjc50 6y ago
    > genuinely-held concerns about the costs vs benefits Very few of them are honestly saying "we should accept another few hundred thousand dead in order to keep the restaurants open". They're just lying about the costs.
    - Nextgrid 6y ago
      The psychological cost of the lockdowns is starting to be significantly more than restaurants being closed. UK has more or less been locked down since last March (with minor interruptions).
      - pjc50 6y ago
        We've had the worst of both worlds: the death toll is worse than Sweden, because the "lockdown" was so porous with so many exempt employers, so many people have been spreading it at work and school. But nonetheless we have the cost of lockdown.
  - dalbasal 6y ago
    Dispassion isn't hard, it just isn't as saucy... And people are passionate about this stuff. That's what they want. These things are "conflated" in real life, not just in rhetoric and reporting... lazy or otherwise. That's kind of the point of this article. There is a ton of political power at stake here, and consolidation is how you win at politics. Whether or not this article, the media, etc. give a fair shake to the (most rational/dispassionate version of) the opposing viewpoint is what.. it is what it is. The biggest reasons why a dispassionate opposition doesn't get much press is (a) the "ruling" version is the more relevant, practically, because it's in charge. and (b) the crazy version of the dissident position is saucier. This is true for both old and new media, just in different ways. There are also, obviously biases. But, we're also biased in our perceptions of bias. Bias is a mess... but I generally think we over-attribute to bias. Anyway, the topic of this article actually is relevant. Covid/Lockdown and 2020 generally are massive multipliers for shady, exploitative attempts to acquire political power. That has nothing to do with dispassionate analysis. It's all about channeling the passions that are already ignited. A lot of people got screwed by covid. A lot of shady cats want to channel those feelings into whatever their cause it. Remember that lockdown/covid is temporary. Most of the actual political maneuvering is not actually about it anymore. I guess it's a cliche to end with "the medium is the message." It's just so true here. None of these political actors care about the message (covid policies, good or bad). They care about the medium.
TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
You also can't begin to assess the financial and psychological damage of health care workers in constant burn out and businesses being forced to work on half- or quarter-measures because staff are off sick. Or the damage to people who get Long Covid and have permanent health consequences. Pleading for empathy might be more convincing with a more inclusive view of what's happening, and less heavy-handedly selective emotional rhetoric.
tlb 6y ago
Indeed, there exists a reasonable set of values under which the cost of lockdowns exceeds the benefit. The question of how to value death relative to happiness, freedom, and community is a worthy topic for debate. But trying to win a debate about values by lying about the facts is not OK.
- mbg721 6y ago
  The problem is that no one's actually having the important debate about values. The emotional "grandma-killer" appeals started last March, and any remaining dissenters are dismissed as "a bunch of covid-deniers agree with you, so your argument is invalid." Nobody really wants to think about the price-tag they put on lives, so all that's left is disputing the evidence. It's like any time a country goes to war, really, except that there aren't any clear criteria for ever declaring it over.
dukoid 6y ago
That's not the only reason why short and strict seems more reasonable to me than years of different levels of half-measures
bob_doggo 6y ago
You are absolutely right, there are legitimate viewpoints about whether these lockdowns are worth it or not. The question is if the people/organizations mentioned in the article just disagree, or if it is disinformation. Do you have any reason to believe that it isn't disinformation?
simonh 6y ago
If the people originating and propagating this stuff know it to be false, or don’t care, or recklessly avoid checking it so they can deny culpability then yes, it very much is disinformation. They are responsible for what they are doing. Yes a lot of people are suffering under the lockdown, but hundreds of thousands, millions, are dead or dying and health care workers are being driven to exhaustion and even suicide by the stress and emotional costs. These lies are stabbing them right in the back.
gspr 6y ago
Those legitimate views are in no way an excuse for the disinformation campaigns this article is about. The two cannot be compared just because they're directed at the same thing. One is honest debate, the other is vile society-undermining disinformation.
raverbashing 6y ago
Correct. Hence why misinformation is so insidious. It's throwing some 70% facts with some 20% distorted or misrepresented facts and some 10% bald-faced lies Whoever thinks the "number of hospitalizations" is normal should be mandated to visit a Covid ward (no masks, of course). Put your money where your nose is.
dalbasal 6y ago
You are right. People are affected very differently by lockdown, and that creates (almost by definition) divergent viewpoints. The whole thing is exasperated by isolation from one another, making opposing viewpoints seem even more alien than usual. News and social media amplify the most obnoxious versions of any position, and we don't have normal contact with normal people to bring us back to earth. That said, covid is being exploited, politically, by some very shady actors. We're already at a boiling point with social media's takeover of politics. We already failed to notice the dead canaries in more politically unstable countries. The arab spring, Myanmar. The hardest part is discerning the emergent malign effects of this from coordinated attacks... for which cambridge analytica is now emblematic. It's quite literally a rage machine, and it is dangerous. The legitimate discussion have been hijacked. The point of many anti-lockdown movements, especially at this point, is the "movement" itself. Lockdown is going to go away. These movements are not.
app4soft 6y ago
> People in HN need to start understanding, that... ... Cambridge Analytica probably was (is?) disinformation company, which has no any relation to Cambridge University.[0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Analytica https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Analytica
- alentist 6y ago
  What does your comment have to do with the GP?
  - app4soft 6y ago
    > GP? Google Play?
FriedrichN 6y ago
That's all fine and dandy, but that has nothing to do with spreading disinformation. I can have compassion for those suffering worse than me, be it because they are on a ventilator, have to watch their business fall apart, missing a year of their precious childhood, whatever it may be without resorting to contrarian opinions, misinformation, and conspiracy theories.
legacynl 6y ago
Don't equate 'having a little empathy' with supporting or allowing these kinds of disinformation campaigns. Everybody has 'a little empathy', but these self-serving anti-vax anti-lockdown cronies deserve none of it. Yes it's sad that people lose their jobs. But do you know what else is sad? if they would lose their lives :( > This isn't disinformation. It certainly is. Don't try to whitewash what's happening here. People know how trollfactories shape online discussion, and you're being very obvious.
playcache 6y ago
There was a time not long back where people in London communted back to their families over Christmas. A lot of my friends on social media were ripping into them 'selfish c*ts, can't they see they are killing people?' The thing is we all live in a rural area where most of us have a nice remote job living in an area that means we can afford a house with a decent garden and a lot of us with young families at home. Whereas those in London have likely been sitting in a single room 'bedsit' going out of their mind from beingf stuck in the same four walls for hours everyday.
- pjc50 6y ago
  Yes. But, by doing actions that are likely to spread the virus, they're extending the lockdown!

by zpeti 6y ago

mantap 6y ago

What about the damage of not having a functional healthcare system? The only reason that the death rate is so low is because people can get to hospital and get treatment. If we just let the thing rip then hospitals would have to start having policies of not providing care to people with covid-19, or we just say goodbye to the concept of emergency care in general.

zpeti 6y ago
Please don’t make out like my comment is some black and white anti lockdown comment. It’s not. It’s not saying let’s not lockdown. It’s saying there are serious consequences on the other end. That many people who still have their livelihoods and happiness dismiss as “misinformation”
- cerebellum42 6y ago
  Have you read the link? This is not about dismissing the genuine plight of people affected by the lockdown. This is about actual, literal, disinformation being spread. We need to weigh the consequences of restrictions against the consequences of not having those restrictions, and this kind of disinformation is simply trying to tip the scales by diluting the factual basis on which we all make that assessment with lies.
tinus_hn 6y ago
One does not preclude the other. Governments should be obliged to cover 100% of the damage caused to businesses and employees by their measures. Instead of having businesses foot the government bills.
- cerebellum42 6y ago
  And why do you think this should be strictly a "government bill"? I think it's a lot more nuanced than that. One perspective would be to say this is a cost all of society needs to pay as a whole (in which case everyone simply pays it in taxes at the end) or you could say "we just require your business to behave in such a way that it doesn't end up killing people, you pay the cost for it". These are the extremes of course, but we need to figure out where we fall on that spectrum.
  - tinus_hn 6y ago
    Because the government is the party deciding on the restrictions. If the government has to pay the price there’s a chance they’ll keep that part of the equation in mind. If they can just brush it off by having others foot the bill, they’ll simply make the choice which minimizes the impact that can be directly attributed to them. Which definitely is not always the right choice. It’s just so much easier to chant for safety whatever the costs if you don’t have to pay the bill.
    - cerebellum42 6y ago
      Just to be clear, I think it's within the responsibility of the government to pay for much of the hardship incurred by lockdowns to help get society and the economy as a whole through it halfway intact; but I do not think that applies to _everything_. Two examples: If a Business is closed due to lockdown - there should be government assistance to compensate. Buying masks for employees and changing interior layouts to allow for safer interactions, to comply with new regulations - cost of doing business. This alone: >Because the government is the party deciding on the restrictions. is not a valid reason to me. We don't (or at least I don't) expect the government to pay for every impact of new environmental legislation either even though they ultimately pass the legislation.

notahacker 6y ago

There is a big difference between legitimate arguments about the risks involved in lockdown vs not locking down and entirely false claims about hospital admissions being at normal levels, PCR testing not working and the purpose of the lockdown being to make it 'easier for us to control' being spread by groups mentioned at this link. The fact the rich, educated and connected people discussed in the article are seeking to exploit the discontent felt by ordinary people impoverished by being unable to work and lonely in their personal lives makes them worse, not better.

thepangolino 6y ago
> false claims about hospital admissions being at normal levels. "Normal level" is all relative. If you look up the press, "on the brink of the apocalypse" seems to be the normal level for at least the last couple of years in the UK. 2012: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/dec/02/hospitals-full-bursting-nhs-report https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/dec/02/hospitals-fu... 2013: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/nov/24/nhs-hospitals-toughest-winter-flu-weather-vomiting https://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/nov/24/nhs-hospital... 2014: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/27/nhs-winter-crisis-more-patients-fewer-doctors https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/27/nhs-winter-c... 2015: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/mar/27/nhs-hospital-bed-occupancy-rates-hit-record-figures-risking-care https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/mar/27/nhs-hospital... 2016: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/dec/16/hospitals-in-england-told-to-put-operations-on-hold-to-free-up-beds https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/dec/16/hospitals-in... 2017: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/dec/07/nhs-bosses-sound-alarm-over-hospital-bed-shortages-patient-safety-concern https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/dec/07/nhs-bosses-s... 2018: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/mar/07/patients-turned-away-intensive-care-lack-beds-shortage-hospitals https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/mar/07/patients-tur... 2019: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/25/hospital-beds-at-record-low-in-england-as-nhs-struggles-with-demand https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/25/hospital-be...
- matthewmacleod 6y ago
  Okay, but you’re participating in amplification of disinformation right now. It’s the “just asking questions” sort or approach that doesn’t actually say anything specific, but aims to create a general fog of doubt and confusion. If there is a specific point you want to make, then do so. It might be valid. Back that point up with details or an explanation that shows why you think it is the case, and expect to provide more information if your view is a challenging or unlikely one.

_jal 6y ago

That's fine, and I agree with you to a large extent, but that's not at all what the article is about. The article is about the alt-right and plague disinformation, not down-and-out restaurant owners.

bananapear 6y ago
The problem is that the article lazily conflates the usual alt-right attention seeker and 5G conspiracy types with some academics who have raised genuinely-held concerns about the costs vs benefits of the current approach. It’s difficult to take these sort of articles seriously because “you are spreading disinformation” is a lot easier than a dispassionate analysis of the issue at hand.
- pjc50 6y ago
  > genuinely-held concerns about the costs vs benefits Very few of them are honestly saying "we should accept another few hundred thousand dead in order to keep the restaurants open". They're just lying about the costs.
  - Nextgrid 6y ago
    The psychological cost of the lockdowns is starting to be significantly more than restaurants being closed. UK has more or less been locked down since last March (with minor interruptions).
    - pjc50 6y ago
      We've had the worst of both worlds: the death toll is worse than Sweden, because the "lockdown" was so porous with so many exempt employers, so many people have been spreading it at work and school. But nonetheless we have the cost of lockdown.
- dalbasal 6y ago
  Dispassion isn't hard, it just isn't as saucy... And people are passionate about this stuff. That's what they want. These things are "conflated" in real life, not just in rhetoric and reporting... lazy or otherwise. That's kind of the point of this article. There is a ton of political power at stake here, and consolidation is how you win at politics. Whether or not this article, the media, etc. give a fair shake to the (most rational/dispassionate version of) the opposing viewpoint is what.. it is what it is. The biggest reasons why a dispassionate opposition doesn't get much press is (a) the "ruling" version is the more relevant, practically, because it's in charge. and (b) the crazy version of the dissident position is saucier. This is true for both old and new media, just in different ways. There are also, obviously biases. But, we're also biased in our perceptions of bias. Bias is a mess... but I generally think we over-attribute to bias. Anyway, the topic of this article actually is relevant. Covid/Lockdown and 2020 generally are massive multipliers for shady, exploitative attempts to acquire political power. That has nothing to do with dispassionate analysis. It's all about channeling the passions that are already ignited. A lot of people got screwed by covid. A lot of shady cats want to channel those feelings into whatever their cause it. Remember that lockdown/covid is temporary. Most of the actual political maneuvering is not actually about it anymore. I guess it's a cliche to end with "the medium is the message." It's just so true here. None of these political actors care about the message (covid policies, good or bad). They care about the medium.

TheOtherHobbes 6y ago

You also can't begin to assess the financial and psychological damage of health care workers in constant burn out and businesses being forced to work on half- or quarter-measures because staff are off sick. Or the damage to people who get Long Covid and have permanent health consequences. Pleading for empathy might be more convincing with a more inclusive view of what's happening, and less heavy-handedly selective emotional rhetoric.

tlb 6y ago

Indeed, there exists a reasonable set of values under which the cost of lockdowns exceeds the benefit. The question of how to value death relative to happiness, freedom, and community is a worthy topic for debate. But trying to win a debate about values by lying about the facts is not OK.

mbg721 6y ago
The problem is that no one's actually having the important debate about values. The emotional "grandma-killer" appeals started last March, and any remaining dissenters are dismissed as "a bunch of covid-deniers agree with you, so your argument is invalid." Nobody really wants to think about the price-tag they put on lives, so all that's left is disputing the evidence. It's like any time a country goes to war, really, except that there aren't any clear criteria for ever declaring it over.

dukoid 6y ago

That's not the only reason why short and strict seems more reasonable to me than years of different levels of half-measures

bob_doggo 6y ago

You are absolutely right, there are legitimate viewpoints about whether these lockdowns are worth it or not. The question is if the people/organizations mentioned in the article just disagree, or if it is disinformation. Do you have any reason to believe that it isn't disinformation?

simonh 6y ago

If the people originating and propagating this stuff know it to be false, or don’t care, or recklessly avoid checking it so they can deny culpability then yes, it very much is disinformation. They are responsible for what they are doing. Yes a lot of people are suffering under the lockdown, but hundreds of thousands, millions, are dead or dying and health care workers are being driven to exhaustion and even suicide by the stress and emotional costs. These lies are stabbing them right in the back.

gspr 6y ago

Those legitimate views are in no way an excuse for the disinformation campaigns this article is about. The two cannot be compared just because they're directed at the same thing. One is honest debate, the other is vile society-undermining disinformation.

raverbashing 6y ago

Correct. Hence why misinformation is so insidious. It's throwing some 70% facts with some 20% distorted or misrepresented facts and some 10% bald-faced lies Whoever thinks the "number of hospitalizations" is normal should be mandated to visit a Covid ward (no masks, of course). Put your money where your nose is.

dalbasal 6y ago

You are right. People are affected very differently by lockdown, and that creates (almost by definition) divergent viewpoints. The whole thing is exasperated by isolation from one another, making opposing viewpoints seem even more alien than usual. News and social media amplify the most obnoxious versions of any position, and we don't have normal contact with normal people to bring us back to earth. That said, covid is being exploited, politically, by some very shady actors. We're already at a boiling point with social media's takeover of politics. We already failed to notice the dead canaries in more politically unstable countries. The arab spring, Myanmar. The hardest part is discerning the emergent malign effects of this from coordinated attacks... for which cambridge analytica is now emblematic. It's quite literally a rage machine, and it is dangerous. The legitimate discussion have been hijacked. The point of many anti-lockdown movements, especially at this point, is the "movement" itself. Lockdown is going to go away. These movements are not.

app4soft 6y ago

> People in HN need to start understanding, that... ... Cambridge Analytica probably was (is?) disinformation company, which has no any relation to Cambridge University.[0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Analytica https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Analytica

alentist 6y ago
What does your comment have to do with the GP?
- app4soft 6y ago
  > GP? Google Play?

FriedrichN 6y ago

That's all fine and dandy, but that has nothing to do with spreading disinformation. I can have compassion for those suffering worse than me, be it because they are on a ventilator, have to watch their business fall apart, missing a year of their precious childhood, whatever it may be without resorting to contrarian opinions, misinformation, and conspiracy theories.

legacynl 6y ago

Don't equate 'having a little empathy' with supporting or allowing these kinds of disinformation campaigns. Everybody has 'a little empathy', but these self-serving anti-vax anti-lockdown cronies deserve none of it. Yes it's sad that people lose their jobs. But do you know what else is sad? if they would lose their lives :( > This isn't disinformation. It certainly is. Don't try to whitewash what's happening here. People know how trollfactories shape online discussion, and you're being very obvious.

playcache 6y ago

There was a time not long back where people in London communted back to their families over Christmas. A lot of my friends on social media were ripping into them 'selfish c*ts, can't they see they are killing people?' The thing is we all live in a rural area where most of us have a nice remote job living in an area that means we can afford a house with a decent garden and a lot of us with young families at home. Whereas those in London have likely been sitting in a single room 'bedsit' going out of their mind from beingf stuck in the same four walls for hours everyday.

pjc50 6y ago
Yes. But, by doing actions that are likely to spread the virus, they're extending the lockdown!