3 ms·

"Honestly I’m kinda unnerved that this clear clickbait has made it to the front page of HN. 6 out 272k people experienced this reaction." Only X amount of Y po

by bsd44 6y ago

"Honestly I’m kinda unnerved that this clear clickbait has made it to the front page of HN. 6 out 272k people experienced this reaction." Only X amount of Y population feel the consequences of contracting C19. Most of us have been perfectly fine. So what is your point?

oblio 6y ago
Let's compare and contrast, shall we? M (where M is very small) out of N (where N is very large) people have experienced an allergic reaction due to the vaccine (allergic reactions can be bad, but are generally manageable). X (where is is somewhat small) out of Y (where N is not super large) have died contracting C19. Another Z (which is small, but not as small as X) out of Y are facing long term consequences contracting C19 (and these consequences are more severe than an allergic reaction in many cases). So, which one is the intellectually disingenuous argument?
chairmanwow1 6y ago
This is a non-news story and worse is designed to alarm the headline-reading, TLDRing average American. Encouraging more people to “delay” getting the vaccine until “the bugs have been worked out”. I’m revolted to find that here when I expect to find this shit on /r/news.
- bsd44 6y ago
  Every single news "article" has been designed that way since Mar 2020 and yet a surprising amount of people with questionable intellectual capacity have endorsed the news, including the self-proclaimed intellectual elite of HN. Supporting a piece of information only when it aligns with your views and opinions is not very rational and objective, is it? It's playing double-standards or just being a hypocrite. To say that this should be disregarded because it only affects a small amount of people is like saying C19 should be disregarded because it only affects a small amount of people. I guess drawing parallels doesn't work well with majority.
baq 6y ago
most as in 99% is three orders of magnitude worse than most as in 99.997%.

by bsd44 6y ago

oblio 6y ago

Let's compare and contrast, shall we? M (where M is very small) out of N (where N is very large) people have experienced an allergic reaction due to the vaccine (allergic reactions can be bad, but are generally manageable). X (where is is somewhat small) out of Y (where N is not super large) have died contracting C19. Another Z (which is small, but not as small as X) out of Y are facing long term consequences contracting C19 (and these consequences are more severe than an allergic reaction in many cases). So, which one is the intellectually disingenuous argument?

chairmanwow1 6y ago

This is a non-news story and worse is designed to alarm the headline-reading, TLDRing average American. Encouraging more people to “delay” getting the vaccine until “the bugs have been worked out”. I’m revolted to find that here when I expect to find this shit on /r/news.

bsd44 6y ago
Every single news "article" has been designed that way since Mar 2020 and yet a surprising amount of people with questionable intellectual capacity have endorsed the news, including the self-proclaimed intellectual elite of HN. Supporting a piece of information only when it aligns with your views and opinions is not very rational and objective, is it? It's playing double-standards or just being a hypocrite. To say that this should be disregarded because it only affects a small amount of people is like saying C19 should be disregarded because it only affects a small amount of people. I guess drawing parallels doesn't work well with majority.

baq 6y ago

most as in 99% is three orders of magnitude worse than most as in 99.997%.