The US government protects Facebook, and is what enabled them to become they company they are today. There are plenty of examples of their loyalty to the US government. They make back doors available and allow the US government to moderate content. Seems like they are very aligned!
It is mind blowing to me that this fact is not widely understood. A mountain was made out of a molehill. $4B was spent in 2016. $12B in 2024. Yet $100,000 somehow is believed to have made any difference whatsoever. Literally 0.0025% of the total in 2016.
Here are some statistics about Termination for Medical Reasons (TFMR):
Pregnancies with major congenital fetal abnormalities: Most pregnancies with a major congenital fetal abnormality end in TFMR. The percentage of pregnancies that end in TFMR can range from 70% to 95% depending on the severity of the abnormality.
Stillbirth: TFMR is almost twice as common as stillbirth. In 2018, Tommy's statistics reported 2,943 babies lost after being stillborn, while the DHSC reported 3,269 TFMR during that same time period.
Down's syndrome: 20% of TFMRs are due to Down's syndrome.
Pregnancies with Turner syndrome: Turner syndrome leads to the highest rate of pregnancy termination (100%).
Pregnancies with Klinefelter syndrome: Klinefelter syndrome leads to the second highest rate of termination (73.9%).
In the UK, over 70% of congenital anomalies are detected during pregnancy and, of those, around 37% will result in TFMR. In Europe, the prevalence rate of TFMR is 4.6 per 1,000 births.
Seven percent of women cited health concerns for themselves or possible problems affecting the health of the fetus as their most important reason in 2004, about the same as in 1987.
It's hard to tell what you're actually asking but the Louisiana department of health claims it's about 1 in 10,000 die from pregnancy complications [0]. University of California San Francisco claims 6%-8% of pregnancies are high risk [1].
The World Health Organization claims a global rate of 4.3 mother deaths per 1000 live births in low income countries versus 1.2 deaths per 10,000 live births in high income countries [2].
The fact that reports on "misinformation" don't look at the denominator when considering the volume of impressions is a great example of selectively reporting statistics to support a preconceived notion.
Not to mention bot farms. The most-viewed source of “misinformation” in the linked 2020 report simply… doesn’t exist anymore. Have we just been hearing about crappy sites buying views these past few years?
The videos they find also show view counts. This allows them to estimate (very roughly!) the view counts across all videos, because it allows them to see the distribution.
The issue with that is if there is one or a handful of videos that have a significant portion of all youtube views. Most likely they will not be in your sample which could lead to a big underestimate.
It should be obvious, but "misinformation" is an arbitrary political designation and therefore a constantly moving target. "You should wear an N95 mask to avoid getting COVID" was misinformation in March 2020 but not 3 months later. "Vaccines may not prevent COVID transmission" was misinformation from 2020 until sometime in 2022. "COVID infection may confer significant immunity from future infection" was misinformation for about the same period. The "lab leak hypothesis" was a "racist conspiracy theory" from 2020 until 2023, when it was officially endorsed by YouTube's political sponsors. And so on.
There is no correlation in practice between these benefits and greater birth rates. Countries with some of the most friendly policies to parenting have the lowest birth rates. In the past, people with much more difficult lives had many more children. This sounds nice in theory, but doesn't hold up in the real world.
They’re missing the whole point of free speech. The purpose of it is to protect the type of speech people despise and don’t want to hear. This is important because the most evil form of censorship comes from examples like those quoted in the article above. The “limit reach” people effectively are explicitly targeting the very types of ideas that free speech was designed to protect. You can’t have your cake and eat it too. This is basic free speech 101 that is, or at least used to be, taught in high school.
And for kids to not see each others faces, honestly even adults, has implications for communication and empathy you have for others. You are “anonymous” in your mask. For kids it really impacts development for them not to see each other.
No, the EPA test is designed to produce a characteristic value that is useful for comparing between vehicles, it's not designed to produce an algorithm that takes the state of charge of the battery and recent energy demand and produces an estimated remaining driving range.
And it's good that it's designed to produce a characteristic value that is useful for comparison.
reply