4 ms·
I refuse to engage with your ridiculous virtue signalling. You can do that somewhere else with someone who will be impressed. Nobody is denying smart phones ha
by scottlocklin 7y ago
I refuse to engage with your ridiculous virtue signalling. You can do that somewhere else with someone who will be impressed.
Nobody is denying smart phones have had a large impact on the world. I do deny they are anywhere near in importance to, say, the invention of the computer, space flight, the atom bomb or antibiotics. There is absolutely no comparison.
It's like comparing the invention of a specific kind of internal combustion engine to ... the invention of the heat engine in the first place. The harnessing of heat into mechanical energy was a cataclysmic event for humanity. It made possible industrial civilization. The invention, say, of the diesel engine was an improvement which also had consequences. It's not really comparable to "heat engines" though!
- scarface74 7y agoSo it’s “virtue signaling” that a goal for a blog that you hope to turn into a book should be factually correct?
- scottlocklin 7y agoYou've made a bunch of moralistic hogwash arguments about matters of fact: I do indeed call that virtue signalling. In the real world of matter, physics and technology, that doesn't mean you win the argument. FWIIW, the spread of this sort of moosh headed moralistic thinking and the ensuing witch hunts is something I'd identify as an authentic technological regress, and one of the reasons it's harder to get anything useful done. If you'd like to make a point of fact, I'm happy to debate it with you.
- scarface74 7y agoSo yes, I have this crazy idea that it’s a “virtue” to present facts when it comes to stuff like insulin. How much “usefulness” are you “getting done” by spreading scientifically proven false information?
- scottlocklin 7y agoWhich fact did you "prove" false, please? Be specific.
- scarface74 7y ago“allow fat people to eat more sugar without slaughtering horses and pigs” - there is gestational diabetes that has nothing to do with weight - also certain diseases, medications, surgeries, and infections can cause diabetes. - type 1 diabetes also has a genetic component.
- scottlocklin 7y agoUhhh, that was a joke, bro. Yes I am aware of the etiology of diabetes. But ultimately: my point is factual and stands -the main result of using biotech to treat diabetes is to allow more fat people to make themselves sick without killing more pigs and horses. Which is how diabetics were treated in the old days; with pig and horse insulin.
- scarface74 7y agoSo it was “a joke”, factually incorrect, but you still defend it and say that by pointing out that you were factually incorrect, it prevented you from “getting anything useful done” and that it was “regressive”. And if you are aware of the “etiology of diabetes” how was it useful to spread a falsehood? You asked which fact was proved false - here it is. Would the book you want to write also be full of factually incorrect “jokes”?
- scottlocklin 7y agoAs I said: there is nothing factually incorrect in my statement, and it's not my fault you can't parse humor.
- scarface74 7y ago
- tempguy9999 7y agoIs the point about insulin not a fact?
- selimthegrim 7y agoScott, from the perspective of some hitherto unwired second or third world country (ie Indian Kashmir) it’s probably a lot bigger deal than some OECD country ca. 1979
- pegasus 7y agoBtw. ancient greeks already had a form of steam engine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeolipile https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeolipile. Why it didn't produce an industrial revolution is debatable (they had slaves, for one).
- scottlocklin 7y agoThere's a decent book on the history of steam engines called "The Most Powerful Idea in the World" which answers the question fairly convincingly.