They can have whatever policy they want. The problem though is that what they are doing is unethical and antithesis to their own stated beliefs. Less than 6 months ago their CEO said free speech was a "core value." The thing is it shouldn't ever even need to be said that something on the internet could be a lie but apparently that is not taught in schools and YouTube feels everyone is too stupid to decide for themselves. Frankly it should be included in their terms of service or on every single video on their platform that what is said might not be true, manipulated, or omitting facts. Maybe we need nutrition labels of the internet so that before you visit YouTube it states clearly how much banning of information they are doing. We don't need a platform to be the judge, jury, and executioner for misinformation but if they want to be I want to see big bold text at the top of their website saying "We ban channels and information we deem to be false. Videos with a checkmark are deemed to contain 100% true facts and if a video is found to reference untrue facts, it will be banned upon review." Everyone needs to know this before people are tricked into thinking it is a neutral platform where judgement of information and misinformation is the responsibility of the individual.
Literally just talking to people is becoming a problem? He's done nothing but talk and you will see through this thread all of a sudden people who have problem never listened telling all sorts of lies. We are in a literal book burning era, and it is self imposed. Insane.
The way TV always had a censor to filter out what was deemed bad, now for no reason at all the same is happening on tech. They assume everyone is a child and they have to be the parent. At the very least they could put an EXPLICIT filter on like they do with songs, because we should all assume once you are 18 you can do a half decent job of deciding what is bullshit for yourself.
Imagine if they removed every song that someone claimed 'demeaned' woman. Hell, just remove every song with the n word, f word, and more. It's actually really surprising Spotify would do this over what.. someone who claimed vaccines were bad? I guess soon all that will be left on Spotify is loves songs and children's songs.
There are actually videos of people at the trucker protest shouting out those people, from their area at least and just because YOU haven't seen that doesn't mean it isn't happening. Those 'swastika' people always seem to be fully masked up, with even full face masks, hiding their identity. Just because they aren't beating them up in the street doesn't mean they aren't against them. You see some protests with some people burning down multiple buildings that are called mostly peaceful protests, and yet you are claiming because there may be 1 or 2 people out of 50,000 carrying a confederate flag that that is now represents the protest. Again, these people are against vaccine mandates and are not vaccine deniers - there is a big difference. Many countries have even removed all forms of vaccine passports and mandates because it has been proven that vaccines do not stop the spread of the virus. Canada is simply behind the curve in recognizing this.
The crux of what makes it popular is decentralization which is a fantastic feature and I'd argue the single feature that it has that regular currencies can't ever have. However, everyone doesn't have a wallet and about 60% of all bitcoin is in the hands of only about 10,000 wallets. It's one of those things, if everyone had it then it would work great but because no one has it, it doesn't work at all. In order to get it you need someone you trust to trade you it, which means a centralized exchange, high fees, and slow transactions. However, if you only ever live in a bitcoin or other decentralized coin economy, meaning you never have to trade out of it into another currency, then it can work for you. Say Tesla accepts bitcoin, and everyonjhe pays in bitcoin, it still has to pay it's suppliers who don't accept bitcoin, this means it has to make a conversion to regular currency, adding an additional step, making things slower and less liquid. It's one of those things that just won't work, until it does.
They make it extremely personal every time because that is was calls to action. My point is, yes, for politicians actual policy is an illusion and everyone is now on a team. They are exactly the most successful when they convince others to make it personal and join their team. I'd go as far as to say that policies issues don't even align exactly on party lines except when it benefits them. Look at the filibuster rule, the exact same politicians want to eliminate the rule that said it was the most important thing in our democracy, just because now eliminating the rule would benefit their side. I don't think it would surprise everyone that politicians are self serving only. There were a number of laws that democrats said they would not vote for specifically because it would make Trump look good, not because they didn't think the law as good for people, and they would say this out loud. This is what happens in this tribe based environment.
The science is suppressed because people are and have been fearful to even research and make a claim contrary to the socially allowed claim. There is actually lack of solid evidence of natural evolution of the virus as well and they have yet to find any connection to any animal with the virus, not to mention the viruses spike protein would make it not infectious in bats where the origin was hypothesized. Yet, speaking about natural growth has not resulted in censures or labeling of researchers ass fringe. The issue is not that there isn't solid evidence of a lab leak, it's that there isn't solid evidence that it wasn't a lab leak either. This article goes into detail on why lab leak is still a leading theory: https://bprice.substack.com/p/yes-we-need-to-keep-talking-ab...
The story is more about how this was covered up which destroys any faith you had in our scientific leaders who are clearly making decisions base on their political goals, and not on the truth. It is the same way Dr. Fauci admitted to lying to the public about masks not working so that he could achieve his goal of having masks being saved for healthcare professionals. When your leaders are known to be lying to you, especially on something much bigger than even 9/11 or pearl harbor, this sparks the kind of outrage that should get those in charge fired. They by their own e-mails and admissions are lying about the science of the biggest event in our lifetime in order to achieve completely separate goals from science. Even if their goals are the most noble in their own eyes to serve as preventing international issues, it is still a disservice to every single scientist that is practicing with the goal of finding the truth. They are trying to act like the parents and that everyone else is the child. It's like those movies when they hide things from the public so as 'not to cause a panic,' but even worse as their hiding of the truth has resulted in censorship of actual science being researched, not to mention censorship on social media platforms.
The Omicron variant is actual prior to Delta variant and prior to all other variants even so named Alpha variant. This article indicates why Omicron could be yet another lab leak.
https://bprice.substack.com/p/lab-leak-20
To counter this though. The actual inventor of the PCR test and Nobel prize winner in chemistry said Fauci "doesn't know anything about anything" however that was in relation to the HIV virus. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPJnBSh_gXQ
Ending up in the ICU with covid and from covid are very different things. You literally cannot get admitted to a hospital without getting a covid test and becoming a covid hospitalization or death. The testing itself causes issues as my son was admitted for appendicitis and they refused to remove the appendix until he had results from a covid test which at the time took about 2 days. Well they let his appendix burst and he ended up having to stay in the hospital for 2 weeks instead of what should have been a couple hour stay.
That is incorrect, the decision making numbers used to test vaccine effectiveness having nothing to do with lab antigen numbers, they are based on how much symptomatic illness is avoided. All of the results such as as 95%-96% efficacy for Phizer and Moderna and 66% for J&J are based on the % reduction of symptomatic illness only. Not the reduction in actual illness or based on lab tests of antigen response.
The deaths/case was only so high because they literally didn't have any testing available. Only those the absolute sickest even got testing. Then for a couple months you couldn't get a test unless you knew someone who had tested positive, which you didn't because they couldn't get a test either. Those inflated the deaths/case. Early on they tested an entire naval ship and 40% of the ship tested positive but was completely asymptomatic. This is why we all started wearing masks even if you weren't sick, because it wasn't just sick people who were cases. The case numbers were underestimated by huge factor, especially early on, and with Omicron the case number even though it is high, is still underestimated for the same reason, that people that don't get that sick just don't get tested.
If you had no profit motivation then there is no incentive to do the best and most efficient job. This is why government organizations are always extremely bloated, inefficient, and employees don't care about the service level. It's because a monopoly means you don't have to care about any of that anymore.
The article is very well written, as was the last article on lab origin theory. Previous articles have already recognized that this mutation (technically 33 mutations) emerged from a strain prior to even the naming of the Alpha strain. That by itself had resulted in several theories, a few of which were mentioned: a lab leak, that this was mutating within a single population for over a year before spreading, that is was mutating within a single person, or that it traveled to another species where it spread rampantly and mutated then traveled back. This adds further data and it's great to see articles that use highly credible PHD sources like this, and the explains things in easy to understand ways. I feel it does move the probability closer to a lab origin but as the article states it is still only more likely in their opinion. Some articles or people have an odd level of conviction behind non-definitive data or an emotional attachment to the origin of the virus and I'm not seeing that in this article.