Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

But is that true? Did they remove all videos based on false premises? And how did they decide the premise was false?



They need not decide the premise is false; they can rely on scientific consensus. It's not a perfect heuristic but it's the most useful one we have. If they're transparent about the sources they use and they're impartial and consistent in their application (read: no videos given special treatment), they're not arbitrating. They're (actively) reporting.


Arguable that sugar is more harmful than a video.


It sure is! Tell you what, I'm all on board for a massive awareness campaign by Google, Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Netflix on the dangers of sugar intake as well.


That's like the tobacco industry advertising the dangers of skin cancer.

Sure, good, I guess, but I'm left very confused.


The one movie looks like it was 4.5 stars out of 5, with 3900 people rating it.

It has more reviews than the Matrix.


Sex sells.

This is why the whole popular vote thing doesn't really work for stuff like this.

Humans are way too easily biased.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: