3 ms·

He said "these drugs", obviously referring to LSD, weed and other psychotropic drugs that are relatively harmless physiologically, i.e. the drugs your post is a

by zeofig 9y ago

He said "these drugs", obviously referring to LSD, weed and other psychotropic drugs that are relatively harmless physiologically, i.e. the drugs your post is about. Of course, this is only one vector of incoherence in your rambling bundle.

agreewiththis 9y ago
>other psychotropic drugs that are relatively harmless physiologically > one vector of incoherence in your rambling bundle. All the evidence of harm is played down while minuscule "benefits" are widely exaggerated in the media - by the same media companies that "just happen" to be funded by the same people promoting these same drugs. If I was instead talking about private industry, like say, Monsanto, I would be social media points on social media properties like Hacker News and reddit.com, which are typically funded by In-Q-Tel. But going against the institutional agenda of In-Q-Tel (i.e., intel agency) funded sites like Hacker News and reddit.com will - obviously - get downvotes and hostile trolling like "rambling bundle." I would challenge anyone to find In-Q-Tel funded media properties publishing anything even slightly negative about LSD - or even marijuana. In fact, try to find a published article that is not overtly pro-LSD in the various online publications funded by In-Q-Tel (CIA) since the 1990s - it's more difficult than it would seem. You will, on the other hand, be greeted with a well coordinated campaign of insults and "trolling" typified by such ad hom as "incoherence" and "rambling." It's a pattern that is extremely easy to detect."
- KGIII 9y ago
  <meta/> Meh, I say stuff against the grain all the time. It is how you say it, defend it, and listen to replies. Stick around, you'll figure it out. Loads of smart people here. I often get voted down and then someone comes along and reads it. Votes don't much matter, so long as you try to follow the written rules. If you do make a claim, be ready to defend it with civility. Like all forums, some are more receptive than others. Here? I notice a higher percentage of reasonable and smart people. Keep am open mind, you can learn a lot here. HN is a great educational resource. That's how I typically see it. Sometimes, I get to share what I know but I usually just learn and click links. I lurked for like a year and a half before I posted. Seriously, stick it out. Civility goes a long ways here. It's sometimes amusing to see the crowd deal with uncivil responses. </meta>
- pstuart 9y ago
  Of course there's possibilities of harm. That's a given in every legal drug out there. Are there risks with LSD, fuck yeah. Is cannabis completely benign? Fuck no. The problem that you just don't seem to fully comprehend is that demonizing and criminalizing them are actually in the government's interest far more than your conspiracy theories. And as far as this rash of celebrating newfound drug freedom, maybe that's because it's been in the shadows so long that people get excited to have it come out into the light? Take a break from the reefer and get your head on straight.

by zeofig 9y ago

agreewiththis 9y ago

>other psychotropic drugs that are relatively harmless physiologically > one vector of incoherence in your rambling bundle. All the evidence of harm is played down while minuscule "benefits" are widely exaggerated in the media - by the same media companies that "just happen" to be funded by the same people promoting these same drugs. If I was instead talking about private industry, like say, Monsanto, I would be social media points on social media properties like Hacker News and reddit.com, which are typically funded by In-Q-Tel. But going against the institutional agenda of In-Q-Tel (i.e., intel agency) funded sites like Hacker News and reddit.com will - obviously - get downvotes and hostile trolling like "rambling bundle." I would challenge anyone to find In-Q-Tel funded media properties publishing anything even slightly negative about LSD - or even marijuana. In fact, try to find a published article that is not overtly pro-LSD in the various online publications funded by In-Q-Tel (CIA) since the 1990s - it's more difficult than it would seem. You will, on the other hand, be greeted with a well coordinated campaign of insults and "trolling" typified by such ad hom as "incoherence" and "rambling." It's a pattern that is extremely easy to detect."

KGIII 9y ago
<meta/> Meh, I say stuff against the grain all the time. It is how you say it, defend it, and listen to replies. Stick around, you'll figure it out. Loads of smart people here. I often get voted down and then someone comes along and reads it. Votes don't much matter, so long as you try to follow the written rules. If you do make a claim, be ready to defend it with civility. Like all forums, some are more receptive than others. Here? I notice a higher percentage of reasonable and smart people. Keep am open mind, you can learn a lot here. HN is a great educational resource. That's how I typically see it. Sometimes, I get to share what I know but I usually just learn and click links. I lurked for like a year and a half before I posted. Seriously, stick it out. Civility goes a long ways here. It's sometimes amusing to see the crowd deal with uncivil responses. </meta>
pstuart 9y ago
Of course there's possibilities of harm. That's a given in every legal drug out there. Are there risks with LSD, fuck yeah. Is cannabis completely benign? Fuck no. The problem that you just don't seem to fully comprehend is that demonizing and criminalizing them are actually in the government's interest far more than your conspiracy theories. And as far as this rash of celebrating newfound drug freedom, maybe that's because it's been in the shadows so long that people get excited to have it come out into the light? Take a break from the reefer and get your head on straight.