TN

Google is Evil - Jeremy Kauffman Introduces LBRY and Odysee

Recommended Posts

One has to be living under a rock not to be aware that Google actively manipulates and suppresses alternative SEARCH results.  Certainly, anyone with two brain cells recognizes that YouTube and Social Media platforms censor alternative information.

Jeremy Kauffman joins us to discuss LBRY, an open-source, decentralized protocol that is helping creators share video content peer-to-peer through the LBRY app and LBRY.tv. Today we talk about the newly-launched LBRY web portal, Odysee.com, and how the LBRY app was (briefly) banned from the Google Playstore in the latest attempt to burn the LBRY of Alexandria.

LINKS and Show Notes - Other alternative platforms are also in the link.

https://www.corbettreport.com/interview-1579-jeremy-kauffman-introduces-lbry-and-odysee/

https://www.corbettreport.com/

 

 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 9/29/2020 at 7:07 AM, Tom Nolan said:

One has to be living under a rock not to be aware that Google actively manipulates and suppresses alternative SEARCH results.  Certainly, anyone with two brain cells recognizes that YouTube and Social Media platforms censor alternative information.

Jeremy Kauffman joins us to discuss LBRY, an open-source, decentralized protocol that is helping creators share video content peer-to-peer through the LBRY app and LBRY.tv. Today we talk about the newly-launched LBRY web portal, Odysee.com, and how the LBRY app was (briefly) banned from the Google Playstore in the latest attempt to burn the LBRY of Alexandria.

LINKS and Show Notes - Other alternative platforms are also in the link.

https://www.corbettreport.com/interview-1579-jeremy-kauffman-introduces-lbry-and-odysee/

https://www.corbettreport.com/

 

 

Thanks for this. Everyone should also check out Bitchute.

  • Great Response! 3
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree.  Many censored YouTube videos are now on Bitchute.  Most people miss out on the censored information.  But they won't embed here.

MASKS - OSHA WHISTLEBLOWERS TELL ALL

https://www.bitchute.com/video/nKU8JO1YPL6m/

 

<iframe width="640" height="360" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border: none;" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/nKU8JO1YPL6m/"></iframe>
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

2 hours ago, Tom Nolan said:

I agree.  Many censored YouTube videos are now on Bitchute.  Most people miss out on the censored information.  But they won't embed here.

MASKS - OSHA WHISTLEBLOWERS TELL ALL

https://www.bitchute.com/video/nKU8JO1YPL6m/

 

<iframe width="640" height="360" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border: none;" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/nKU8JO1YPL6m/"></iframe>

I've found the embed from Youtube never worked but if you just copy the link in it embeds automatically. Don't know about bitchute vids though.

Edited by shadowkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tom Nolan said:

I agree.  Many censored YouTube videos are now on Bitchute.  Most people miss out on the censored information.  But they won't embed here.

MASKS - OSHA WHISTLEBLOWERS TELL ALL

https://www.bitchute.com/video/nKU8JO1YPL6m/

 

<iframe width="640" height="360" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border: none;" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/nKU8JO1YPL6m/"></iframe>

Testing 

Used the link widget

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2020 at 5:43 AM, Ward Smith said:

The presenter is an imbecile - he is measuring the CO2 content of exhaled air which is going to be 30,000-40,000 ppm with or without a mask. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NickW said:

The presenter is an imbecile - he is measuring the CO2 content of exhaled air which is going to be 30,000-40,000 ppm with or without a mask. 

Yes, but normally exhaled air is not constrained by a mask, inches from the face. Likewise normally inhaled air is not constrained by a mask. The CO2 rapidly dissipates into the surrounding air, it isn't immediately sucked in with the next breath, unless you're breathing into a paper bag, and you remember why people needed to do that? 

The ladies in the video are OSHA experts with advanced degrees and training. You might have missed the part in the video where they talk about specialized air handling systems in hospitals, specifically designed to compensate for the staff who are wearing masks. My good friend owns a company that specialises in inspections of HVAC systems in hospitals and other public buildings. Unlike your home, they are required to exert a positive air pressure well beyond ambient to compensate for all those pesky humans.  🧐

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

Yes, but normally exhaled air is not constrained by a mask, inches from the face. Likewise normally inhaled air is not constrained by a mask. The CO2 rapidly dissipates into the surrounding air, it isn't immediately sucked in with the next breath, unless you're breathing into a paper bag, and you remember why people needed to do that? 

The ladies in the video are OSHA experts with advanced degrees and training. You might have missed the part in the video where they talk about specialized air handling systems in hospitals, specifically designed to compensate for the staff who are wearing masks. My good friend owns a company that specialises in inspections of HVAC systems in hospitals and other public buildings. Unlike your home, they are required to exert a positive air pressure well beyond ambient to compensate for all those pesky humans.  🧐

My Masters degree is Occupational Hygiene and Toxicology

The mask will hold about 20-30ml of air close to the face. The rest will be clean air so you may breath about 1000ppm of CO2 in each shallow breath of about 1 litre. So thats about 20% of the occupational exposure limit time weighted average over 8 hours. 

Funny because many of the people who want to hot the earth up to 1000-2000ppm  CO2 (on the claimed basis of it not causing any issues) will be citing that video as evidence of the konspiracy

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, NickW said:

My Masters degree is Occupational Hygiene and Toxicology

The mask will hold about 20-30ml of air close to the face. The rest will be clean air so you may breath about 1000ppm of CO2 in each shallow breath of about 1 litre. So thats about 20% of the occupational exposure limit time weighted average over 8 hours. 

Funny because many of the people who want to hot the earth up to 1000-2000ppm  CO2 (on the claimed basis of it not causing any issues) will be citing that video as evidence of the konspiracy

 

Hey @NickW.  Sorry, but I don't understand what you just stated.  Layman's terms?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, NickW said:

My Masters degree is Occupational Hygiene and Toxicology

The mask will hold about 20-30ml of air close to the face. The rest will be clean air so you may breath about 1000ppm of CO2 in each shallow breath of about 1 litre. So thats about 20% of the occupational exposure limit time weighted average over 8 hours. 

Funny because many of the people who want to hot the earth up to 1000-2000ppm  CO2 (on the claimed basis of it not causing any issues) will be citing that video as evidence of the konspiracy

 

Show me the masks with 20-30 cubic centimeters of volume "close to the face". Aren't you off by a factor of ten? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

Hey @NickW.  Sorry, but I don't understand what you just stated.  Layman's terms?

Only a very small quantity of exhaled air will be held against the face behind the mask. The rest will be fresh air. Fresh air has a CO2 content of 412ppm (+2-3ppm each year) . More inside buildings - usually around 600-800ppm. Exhaled air is 35-40,000 ppm. The fresh air massively dilutes the exhaled air so you intake is around the 1000ppm mark. 

The regulatory occupational exposure limit in the USA (and UK and OZ) is 5000ppm (Time weighted average over 8 hours) so the exposure the worker wearing masks are getting over a typical 8 hour shift is only 20% of the exposure limit. 

If the Industrial Hygienist did a personal sample and found workers exposed at this level then no further action would be the likely outcome. When I do personal exposure monitoring for any substance if the exposure is more than 25% of the exposure limit I recommend a risk assessment to see if it can be lowered further. Employers have a general duty to lower so far as is reasonably practicable. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

3 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

Show me the masks with 20-30 cubic centimeters of volume "close to the face". Aren't you off by a factor of ten? 

20-30 ml is probably an over estimate. A surgical face mask flat against the face has very little air space between the mask and skin it covers. I am wearing one now out of curiousity and there is nowhere near a 3rd of a litre trapped behind the mask. 

A N95/99 or FFP 2/3 will have more air behind the mask due to the shape. 

Edited by NickW
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, NickW said:

Only a very small quantity of exhaled air will be held against the face behind the mask. The rest will be fresh air. Fresh air has a CO2 content of 412ppm (+2-3ppm each year) . More inside buildings - usually around 600-800ppm. Exhaled air is 35-40,000 ppm. The fresh air massively dilutes the exhaled air so you intake is around the 1000ppm mark. 

The regulatory occupational exposure limit in the USA (and UK and OZ) is 5000ppm (Time weighted average over 8 hours) so the exposure the worker wearing masks are getting over a typical 8 hour shift is only 20% of the exposure limit. 

If the Industrial Hygienist did a personal sample and found workers exposed at this level then no further action would be the likely outcome. When I do personal exposure monitoring for any substance if the exposure is more than 25% of the exposure limit I recommend a risk assessment to see if it can be lowered further. Employers have a general duty to lower so far as is reasonably practicable. 

Thanks.  Got it now.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

Thanks.  Got it now.

I said back in the Spring that if look at the 4 countries*, close to the source of the outbreak but which got this under control early and kept it under control mask wearing is almost universal. These countries are also packed like a sardine tin. 

I hear all the arguments of it wont work everytime etc but if even if masks stop 1/4 potential transmissions it will have a major impact on the RO rate. 

 

*Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The effectiveness of masks has been a subject of debate, at least in part because public health officials have sent mixed messages. Early in the coronavirus pandemic, the World Health Organization (WHO), the US Surgeon General, and Dr. Anthony Fauci, a leading member of the Trump administration's White House Coronavirus Task Force, all advised against using a mask in public if you were healthy.

While the WHO, the Surgeon General, and Fauci eventually modified their position, some of Europe’s top health officials have continued to resist calls to mandate or even recommend the use of masks to slow the spread of COVID-19, saying there is little empirical evidence to suggest they have a positive impact.

“The studies so far have not shown a dramatic effect, countries such as France and others, which have obligatory mask-wearing in place, have still experienced a big spread of the disease,” Dr. Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s top infectious disease expert, recently observed.

https://fee.org/articles/authors-retract-study-showing-efficacy-of-mask-mandates-as-biden-pushes-nationwide-requirement/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also checkout Rumble as an alternative to YT

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, shadowkin said:

Also checkout Rumble as an alternative to YT

Worth checking out.  Could be the new go-to channel.

https://rumble.com/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 hour ago, NickW said:

20-30 ml is probably an over estimate. A surgical face mask flat against the face has very little air space between the mask and skin it covers. I am wearing one now out of curiousity and there is nowhere near a 3rd of a litre trapped behind the mask. 

I believe the point of the video was that if you wore a mask good enough to, you know, stop the virus, there wouldn't be enough airflow. If your mask is porous enough to allow good airflow, it's kinda useless for stopping a sub micron virus, no? And as they pointed out, even doctors with their fairly porous masks are in artificially high air pressure / air exchange environments to help compensate. 

My favorite running back named Marshawn Lynch used to wear a mask while practicing to artificially lower his oxygen intake, simulating practicing at a higher altitude. Doesn't work that well for grandma, who already suffers from COPD. for example. I might dig up a pic of him in the mask. Hell he should be selling masks right now 🤧

https://www.trainingmask.com/marshawnlynch/

And of course he is 😎

Edited by Ward Smith
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

I believe the point of the video was that if you wore a mask good enough to, you know, stop the virus, there wouldn't be enough airflow. If your mask is porous enough to allow good airflow, it's kinda useless for stopping a sub micron virus, no? And as they pointed out, even doctors with their fairly porous masks are in artificially high air pressure / air exchange environments to help compensate. 

My favorite running back named Marshawn Lynch used to wear a mask while practicing to artificially lower his oxygen intake, simulating practicing at a higher altitude. Doesn't work that well for grandma, who already suffers from COPD. for example. I might dig up a pic of him in the mask. Hell he should be selling masks right now 🤧

https://www.trainingmask.com/marshawnlynch/

And of course he is 😎

There are a number of misconceptions regarding face masks and Viruses. 

Firstly the Virus does not generally float about in free form - its in aerosol form encapsulated in saliva & mucus. The particle size is much larger than the virus itself. 

The other biggy which even many Occ Hygienists fall for is comparing the diameter of the virus against the pore size of the mask filter and assume the virus will pass straight through it. This assumes the filter material works like a seize. It doesn't - a high proportion of the capture efficiency is down to electrostatic forces and inertia on impact combined with the inevitable turbulent movement of the particle. 

A surgical face mask is roughly comparable to an FFP 1 / N90 mask. Its far from ideal but its better than nothing. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.