4 ms·

Did we read the same article? Just because someone doesn't agree with your view of the world doesn't automatically make them untrustworthy. From your perspecti

by umvi 6y ago

Did we read the same article? Just because someone doesn't agree with your view of the world doesn't automatically make them untrustworthy. From your perspective, maybe lives are more important than freedoms and you are willing to limit some freedoms temporarily or permanently if it means saving more lives. From someone else's perspective, maybe freedom is more important than lives, and they are willing to let some people (including themselves) die in order to avoid temporary or permanent limits on existing freedoms. I think the point of the article is that if you suppress your instinct to mistrust people who think differently than you, your community will avoid incurring the social and economic costs that would otherwise accumulate.

roywiggins 6y ago
Other people not wearing a mask makes me less safe. I don't know why I would want to trust such people. If they can't even take a basic precaution during a deadly pandemic then their judgement seems dangerously impaired. I don't trust them because I don't think they're trustworthy. Even if masks didn't work, stubborn refusal to wear them is nearly as bad- people should wear the even if they are skeptical on the effectiveness just in case they do work, because doing small things to possibly help your neighbors is part of the social contract. I'm not talking about forcing people to wear masks, I'm talking about not trusting the people who don't voluntarily wear masks.
- slibhb 6y ago
  But where does it end? People not wearing gas masks makes you less safe. People leaving their homes at all makes you less safe. A certain amount of risk is necessary if you're going to get out of your bed in the morning. What most people (including me) do is this: we follow the law (in almost all cases) and we use our own subjective judgements to determine how to act besides that. This gets tricky because even if none of us breaks the law, our subjective judgements often differ. Some examples: 1. The law where I live says I need to wear a mask inside public places/stores, which I do happily. 2. I wear a mask when I'm outside and there's lots of people around, because according to my subjective judgement, this makes sense (the law does not require this). 3. I don't wear a mask when I'm outside and there aren't a lot of people around. 4. I don't wear a mask when I'm running along a trail. 5. I don't eat-in at restaurants, even though the law allows maskless, indoor dining. What I find wrong about your comment is that you seem to be holding people accountable for not sharing the same subjective judgements as you. If I see people dining, maskless, inside a restaurant, I think "well, I wouldn't do that, but other people disagree". I don't categorize them as untrustworthy, bad people.
  - roywiggins 6y ago
    I'm not wearing a mask when I am not within breath distance of anyone either. That's not what I'm talking about. Sometimes I am as charitable as you toward people who make dumb choices. Sometimes I am much less so, because those choices are helping fuck this all up for the rest of us. People having terrible judgement is, unfortunately, a good reason not to trust them as much as you otherwise would.
    - Proziam 6y ago
      I understand your point of view and I see similar sentiments everywhere. Let me just deposit one thought: Basically all people hate being lied to, or to feel manipulated or controlled. A lot of people on the anti-mask train were totally on board for the '2 week lockdown' to flatten the curve. Those same people then saw their government officials repeatedly lie to them ("masks don't work!" ~ "Herd Immunity @ X%", etc), the media painted the picture of airborne ebola, and then those same politicians went out and violated their own lockdown orders. Meanwhile, their local economy is destroyed and they or people they care about are suffering/struggling. And for those that take a more global view of things, there is some [0,1]evidence that supply chain disruption is killing more people than Covid itself. It's easy to feel like those people are complete idiots and ruining it for everyone else. It's much harder, but much more valuable, to focus on solutions to the underlying problem. Ultimately, we need to restore trust in our institutions before we can begin to repair the divide. [0]https://time.com/5864803/oxfam-hunger-covid-19/ https://time.com/5864803/oxfam-hunger-covid-19/ [1]https://www.un.org/press/en/2020/ga12294.doc.htm https://www.un.org/press/en/2020/ga12294.doc.htm
      - foolinaround 6y ago
        and to add to this point, the folks advocating for usage of masks for all were not advocating to compensate the loss of income for the lockdowns. this immediately created 2 classes -- folks who will get their salaries from their professions inspite of the lockdowns and those who won't and would be left to suffer
        6y ago
- umvi 6y ago
  > Other people not wearing a mask makes me less safe Yes, but that's been true for a long time, even before covid. I'm betting you didn't mistrust non-mask-wearers pre-covid even though I'm sure several millions have died in the US alone since early 1920s because people with the flu or other contagious diseases didn't wear a mask and went to work sick, etc. You just didn't notice because it happened at a rate that didn't overload hospitals. > If they can't even take a basic precaution during a deadly pandemic then their judgement seems dangerously impaired. Well imagine all of your news sources downplay covid and even when you get it yourself it's not as bad as the hysteria led you to believe - just some mild flulike symptoms and loss of smell and taste. You start to mistrust all of the zealots forcing you destroy the economy^, handicap an entire generation of students, destroy the mental wellbeing of many millions, in order to extend the lives of the elderly and immunocompromised by a few years. It's hard to put the blame 100% on the anti-masker. Plus, just because someone isn't wearing a mask doesn't automatically make them an anti-masker. I don't wear a mask when social distancing is possible, for example (like when going on runs). ^ Yes I know stock market is at all time high right now, but you can't just keep running an economy on printed money. If you aren't actually producing, soon all that paper you've printed will become a lot less valuable ("inflation") and the bubble will burst and you'll see what a real crisis looks like.
  - roywiggins 6y ago
    > You start to mistrust all of the zealots forcing you destroy the economy^, handicap an entire generation of students, destroy the mental wellbeing of many millions, in order to extend the lives of the elderly and immunocompromised by a few years Wearing a mask doesn't destroy the economy or hurt students. It's the cheapest possible intervention. If wearing a mask helps, it actually sucks the wind out of the sails of people who want draconian lockdowns. People with a libertarian bent should be even more pro-masks, since it's very nearly the only thing that everyone can do in their personal lives to try stave off massive government interventions. If people can't mentally separate masks from the other interventions then that seems like a problem in itself.
    - Nasrudith 6y ago
      I feel like I am taking crazy pills whenever people bring up the economy with COVID responses. The virus doesn't and cannot care about the economy or holidays, or any other irrelvancy brought up for arguments. Not to mention the obvious - sick people and people trying to avoid being sick aren't good for the economy. It is just such blatant illogic you would expect from primary schoolers and not adults with college degrees and sought after positions to use. Like declaring "but there is a picnic scheduled today!" and proceeding to go and hold a picnic in the middle of a record breaking forest fire.
- opwieurposiu 6y ago
  I finally met an anti-masker in person and it was not at all like I expected. I was at the playground and my kids started playing with this hippie mom's kids. We started talking about what a weird time it is to be a kid. We ended up making a playdate for the kids and she mentioned she does not wear masks because of some spiritual reasons. I was surprised because I thought that anti maskers were all right leaning. I told her no mask is fine we can just do our playdate outside somewheres. I am a conservative atheist hunter and think it is good for my kids to be able to play with spiritual hippie vegan kids. Anyway I guess my point is life is better if you judge people on their individual merits rather than group membership.
  - roywiggins 6y ago
    I'd worry that their kids wouldn't be up to date on their vaccines. You really don't want measles. It's a low risk, obviously, especially if you are up to date. But as much as I like hippy vegans (not being sarcastic!) I would still worry they are walking around as potential measles incubators. If they have religious objections to wearing a piece of cloth over their face they probably aren't too excited about vaccines. It's way down the list of things to worry about nowadays, obviously. But still.
    - wott 6y ago
      What's this obsession of anti-anti-vax with measles? When I was on my national Reddit sub, it would come up 40 times a year. When I was a kid, everyone was catching it. That was just one of those diseases you catch once and then you are done with it. It is so low-risk that doctors didn't even declare the cases as they were supposed to be. They just observed them in case it would turn bad. Watching well and treating the few difficult case well made it so that there was just around 5 deaths a year, amongst cohorts of 800.000 who almost all caught it. At the scale of my department, that would be one letal case every 80 years... Outdoor leisure kill more in half a week here, as it was noticeable after lockdown (as we were very lucky with Covid, there were more outdoor leisure related death in 4 days of reopening than Covid related death from 9 months of first wave. NB: it was unfortunately different with second wave)
- sfink 6y ago
  I suggest looking outside of your filter bubble. I agree with your conclusions on when one should wear a mask. I disagree with your conclusions about the intelligence, reasoning ability, or basic humanity of anti-maskers. If you're someone who is flooded with reports of scientists waffling, of problematic reasons why people want you to wear masks, of health officials adjusting the rules du jour independent of defensible rationalizations, of higher-ups enforcing rules that they do not themselves follow, etc., and are NOT exposed to the (imho correct) arguments as to why mask-wearing is necessary and important... why wouldn't you conclude that it's a scam? None of the conclusions about mask wearing can be made with 100% certainty. There really is a lot of bullshit going around on all sides. Even a fairly weak selection filter is enough to make perfectly rational actors come to opposite conclusions. Our society is based on the implicit assumption that we all see more or less the same thing, so we can depend on (trust) that our sense of "normal" is shared, at least to some degree. That assumption no longer holds. (Or rather, it holds for far fewer topics than it used to.)
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
leetcrew 6y ago
shared values is an important part of trust though. suppose I'm an executive and I'm trying to hire a more diverse group of employees. one of my hiring managers says they're happy to apply whatever criteria I ask for, but they fundamentally don't believe diversity is important. I'm going to have a hard time trusting this person to do what I want.
- AZRS 6y ago
  Ding Ding Ding. You should win a prize for the only comment here to get it. In the absence of both shared values and goals, trust is harmful.
- nitrogen 6y ago
  shared values is an important part of trust though That's actually a pretty big mistake society has made. You emphatically don't need to share values with someone to get along with them or work with them or trust them. Focusing on values instead of goals and behaviors creates the environment of mistrust, because you don't know when someone is going to decide you don't share their values strongly enough and try to purge you. It also creates an environment where the people you want least are most willing to lie to fit in, and it gives them a weapon to use to push out anyone they don't like by amping up the values rhetoric. If you want to build a club of terrified pretenders, filter by and focus on values. If you want to get something done and build an environment of trust, focus on shared goals, behaviors, and outcomes, and learn how to disagree and move on where consensus can't be reached.
  - umvi 6y ago
    Very insightful comment, reminds me 1984's Two Minutes Hate[0] where Winston is pretending to go along with the wailing and gnashing of teeth in order to not be discovered that he has different values. Your comment should be a top-level comment in some form, IMO. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Minutes_Hate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Minutes_Hate
  - leetcrew 6y ago
    > You emphatically don't need to share values with someone to get along with them or work with them or trust them. I guess it depends what "trust" means to you. to me it often means something like "I can expect this person to make the same (or similar) decision I would in situation X, therefore I do not need to watch them as closely". some values can be irrelevant in certain contexts. if I'm a communist and my coworker is an ancap, it probably doesn't affect our ability to work together on a software project. but if I'm very risk averse (in an engineering sense) and my coworker has a "move fast and break things" mindset, I am going to have to pay a lot more attention to their code reviews.
jancsika 6y ago
> From someone else's perspective, maybe freedom is more important than lives, and they are willing to let some people (including themselves) die in order to avoid temporary or permanent limits on existing freedoms. > (including themselves) Including others, which is against any serious code of ethics. > From your perspective, maybe lives are more important than freedoms and you are willing to limit some freedoms temporarily or permanently if it means saving more lives. It's extremely difficult for me to imagine a more fallacious argument than this. The closest I can come is imagining a mass movement against DUI checkpoints by people who refuse to show their license, but who purposely get drunk before speeding through the checkpoint. It is not only philosophically consistent to protest mask laws while at the same time wearing a mask during this pandemic-- it's ethically required. The fact that you don't seem to realize you've hard-coupled a defense of freedom with wanton irresponsibility is legitimately worrisome. It reeks of the success of online filter bubbles dividing consumers into the most destructive two poles of potential behavior/opinion. Luckily, in my own community, talking in person to other humans, I don't witness anything like these two poles. Rather, I see a lot of pandemic fatigue, results of shit messaging from the government, some disinformation, and the occasional asshole who must be addicted to a political feed like a degenerate gambler in Vegas. Honestly, for most people it's not going to matter what side of the political spectrum they were on. Nearly everyone has made at least one critical safety mistake, failing to protect themselves or their loved ones. At least in the U.S., noses peeking out from masks is a bi-partisan issue. High ground is a luxury of social media self-delusion.
- jancsika 6y ago
  Note-- in the time it took me to click reload in my browser, somebody had upvoted this post. @dang-- what the hell? There's no way somebody read this whole comment in that amount of time. Is it just a given that bots can freely upvote/downvote and attempt to screw with the flow of messages on here? I honestly cannot understand how HN has convinced a coterie of tinkerers and reverse engineers not to discuss the system that sorts and rates their own expressions of ideas.
  - umvi 6y ago
    It could be that someone read just the first line of your comment, realized it jived with their view, and upvoted before continuing on and finishing reading the rest of your comment. If HN stores timestamps of upvotes in the backend we could confirm (i.e. upvoting within milliseconds of submission = bot)
Nasrudith 6y ago
What views are the real question. If they have by my standards horrible tastes certainly. If they deny that hugging you while they are on fire will burn you, that juggling loaded guns is dangerous, or view you as subhumans to be exploited not distrusting them is frankly dangerously stupid. Looking at costs alone without context is a bad idea here as it is for beancounters.

by umvi 6y ago

roywiggins 6y ago

Other people not wearing a mask makes me less safe. I don't know why I would want to trust such people. If they can't even take a basic precaution during a deadly pandemic then their judgement seems dangerously impaired. I don't trust them because I don't think they're trustworthy. Even if masks didn't work, stubborn refusal to wear them is nearly as bad- people should wear the even if they are skeptical on the effectiveness just in case they do work, because doing small things to possibly help your neighbors is part of the social contract. I'm not talking about forcing people to wear masks, I'm talking about not trusting the people who don't voluntarily wear masks.

slibhb 6y ago
But where does it end? People not wearing gas masks makes you less safe. People leaving their homes at all makes you less safe. A certain amount of risk is necessary if you're going to get out of your bed in the morning. What most people (including me) do is this: we follow the law (in almost all cases) and we use our own subjective judgements to determine how to act besides that. This gets tricky because even if none of us breaks the law, our subjective judgements often differ. Some examples: 1. The law where I live says I need to wear a mask inside public places/stores, which I do happily. 2. I wear a mask when I'm outside and there's lots of people around, because according to my subjective judgement, this makes sense (the law does not require this). 3. I don't wear a mask when I'm outside and there aren't a lot of people around. 4. I don't wear a mask when I'm running along a trail. 5. I don't eat-in at restaurants, even though the law allows maskless, indoor dining. What I find wrong about your comment is that you seem to be holding people accountable for not sharing the same subjective judgements as you. If I see people dining, maskless, inside a restaurant, I think "well, I wouldn't do that, but other people disagree". I don't categorize them as untrustworthy, bad people.
- roywiggins 6y ago
  I'm not wearing a mask when I am not within breath distance of anyone either. That's not what I'm talking about. Sometimes I am as charitable as you toward people who make dumb choices. Sometimes I am much less so, because those choices are helping fuck this all up for the rest of us. People having terrible judgement is, unfortunately, a good reason not to trust them as much as you otherwise would.
  - Proziam 6y ago
    I understand your point of view and I see similar sentiments everywhere. Let me just deposit one thought: Basically all people hate being lied to, or to feel manipulated or controlled. A lot of people on the anti-mask train were totally on board for the '2 week lockdown' to flatten the curve. Those same people then saw their government officials repeatedly lie to them ("masks don't work!" ~ "Herd Immunity @ X%", etc), the media painted the picture of airborne ebola, and then those same politicians went out and violated their own lockdown orders. Meanwhile, their local economy is destroyed and they or people they care about are suffering/struggling. And for those that take a more global view of things, there is some [0,1]evidence that supply chain disruption is killing more people than Covid itself. It's easy to feel like those people are complete idiots and ruining it for everyone else. It's much harder, but much more valuable, to focus on solutions to the underlying problem. Ultimately, we need to restore trust in our institutions before we can begin to repair the divide. [0]https://time.com/5864803/oxfam-hunger-covid-19/ https://time.com/5864803/oxfam-hunger-covid-19/ [1]https://www.un.org/press/en/2020/ga12294.doc.htm https://www.un.org/press/en/2020/ga12294.doc.htm
    - foolinaround 6y ago
      and to add to this point, the folks advocating for usage of masks for all were not advocating to compensate the loss of income for the lockdowns. this immediately created 2 classes -- folks who will get their salaries from their professions inspite of the lockdowns and those who won't and would be left to suffer
      - 6y ago
umvi 6y ago
> Other people not wearing a mask makes me less safe Yes, but that's been true for a long time, even before covid. I'm betting you didn't mistrust non-mask-wearers pre-covid even though I'm sure several millions have died in the US alone since early 1920s because people with the flu or other contagious diseases didn't wear a mask and went to work sick, etc. You just didn't notice because it happened at a rate that didn't overload hospitals. > If they can't even take a basic precaution during a deadly pandemic then their judgement seems dangerously impaired. Well imagine all of your news sources downplay covid and even when you get it yourself it's not as bad as the hysteria led you to believe - just some mild flulike symptoms and loss of smell and taste. You start to mistrust all of the zealots forcing you destroy the economy^, handicap an entire generation of students, destroy the mental wellbeing of many millions, in order to extend the lives of the elderly and immunocompromised by a few years. It's hard to put the blame 100% on the anti-masker. Plus, just because someone isn't wearing a mask doesn't automatically make them an anti-masker. I don't wear a mask when social distancing is possible, for example (like when going on runs). ^ Yes I know stock market is at all time high right now, but you can't just keep running an economy on printed money. If you aren't actually producing, soon all that paper you've printed will become a lot less valuable ("inflation") and the bubble will burst and you'll see what a real crisis looks like.
- roywiggins 6y ago
  > You start to mistrust all of the zealots forcing you destroy the economy^, handicap an entire generation of students, destroy the mental wellbeing of many millions, in order to extend the lives of the elderly and immunocompromised by a few years Wearing a mask doesn't destroy the economy or hurt students. It's the cheapest possible intervention. If wearing a mask helps, it actually sucks the wind out of the sails of people who want draconian lockdowns. People with a libertarian bent should be even more pro-masks, since it's very nearly the only thing that everyone can do in their personal lives to try stave off massive government interventions. If people can't mentally separate masks from the other interventions then that seems like a problem in itself.
  - Nasrudith 6y ago
    I feel like I am taking crazy pills whenever people bring up the economy with COVID responses. The virus doesn't and cannot care about the economy or holidays, or any other irrelvancy brought up for arguments. Not to mention the obvious - sick people and people trying to avoid being sick aren't good for the economy. It is just such blatant illogic you would expect from primary schoolers and not adults with college degrees and sought after positions to use. Like declaring "but there is a picnic scheduled today!" and proceeding to go and hold a picnic in the middle of a record breaking forest fire.
opwieurposiu 6y ago
I finally met an anti-masker in person and it was not at all like I expected. I was at the playground and my kids started playing with this hippie mom's kids. We started talking about what a weird time it is to be a kid. We ended up making a playdate for the kids and she mentioned she does not wear masks because of some spiritual reasons. I was surprised because I thought that anti maskers were all right leaning. I told her no mask is fine we can just do our playdate outside somewheres. I am a conservative atheist hunter and think it is good for my kids to be able to play with spiritual hippie vegan kids. Anyway I guess my point is life is better if you judge people on their individual merits rather than group membership.
- roywiggins 6y ago
  I'd worry that their kids wouldn't be up to date on their vaccines. You really don't want measles. It's a low risk, obviously, especially if you are up to date. But as much as I like hippy vegans (not being sarcastic!) I would still worry they are walking around as potential measles incubators. If they have religious objections to wearing a piece of cloth over their face they probably aren't too excited about vaccines. It's way down the list of things to worry about nowadays, obviously. But still.
  - wott 6y ago
    What's this obsession of anti-anti-vax with measles? When I was on my national Reddit sub, it would come up 40 times a year. When I was a kid, everyone was catching it. That was just one of those diseases you catch once and then you are done with it. It is so low-risk that doctors didn't even declare the cases as they were supposed to be. They just observed them in case it would turn bad. Watching well and treating the few difficult case well made it so that there was just around 5 deaths a year, amongst cohorts of 800.000 who almost all caught it. At the scale of my department, that would be one letal case every 80 years... Outdoor leisure kill more in half a week here, as it was noticeable after lockdown (as we were very lucky with Covid, there were more outdoor leisure related death in 4 days of reopening than Covid related death from 9 months of first wave. NB: it was unfortunately different with second wave)
sfink 6y ago
I suggest looking outside of your filter bubble. I agree with your conclusions on when one should wear a mask. I disagree with your conclusions about the intelligence, reasoning ability, or basic humanity of anti-maskers. If you're someone who is flooded with reports of scientists waffling, of problematic reasons why people want you to wear masks, of health officials adjusting the rules du jour independent of defensible rationalizations, of higher-ups enforcing rules that they do not themselves follow, etc., and are NOT exposed to the (imho correct) arguments as to why mask-wearing is necessary and important... why wouldn't you conclude that it's a scam? None of the conclusions about mask wearing can be made with 100% certainty. There really is a lot of bullshit going around on all sides. Even a fairly weak selection filter is enough to make perfectly rational actors come to opposite conclusions. Our society is based on the implicit assumption that we all see more or less the same thing, so we can depend on (trust) that our sense of "normal" is shared, at least to some degree. That assumption no longer holds. (Or rather, it holds for far fewer topics than it used to.)
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

leetcrew 6y ago

shared values is an important part of trust though. suppose I'm an executive and I'm trying to hire a more diverse group of employees. one of my hiring managers says they're happy to apply whatever criteria I ask for, but they fundamentally don't believe diversity is important. I'm going to have a hard time trusting this person to do what I want.

AZRS 6y ago
Ding Ding Ding. You should win a prize for the only comment here to get it. In the absence of both shared values and goals, trust is harmful.
nitrogen 6y ago
shared values is an important part of trust though That's actually a pretty big mistake society has made. You emphatically don't need to share values with someone to get along with them or work with them or trust them. Focusing on values instead of goals and behaviors creates the environment of mistrust, because you don't know when someone is going to decide you don't share their values strongly enough and try to purge you. It also creates an environment where the people you want least are most willing to lie to fit in, and it gives them a weapon to use to push out anyone they don't like by amping up the values rhetoric. If you want to build a club of terrified pretenders, filter by and focus on values. If you want to get something done and build an environment of trust, focus on shared goals, behaviors, and outcomes, and learn how to disagree and move on where consensus can't be reached.
- umvi 6y ago
  Very insightful comment, reminds me 1984's Two Minutes Hate[0] where Winston is pretending to go along with the wailing and gnashing of teeth in order to not be discovered that he has different values. Your comment should be a top-level comment in some form, IMO. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Minutes_Hate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Minutes_Hate
- leetcrew 6y ago
  > You emphatically don't need to share values with someone to get along with them or work with them or trust them. I guess it depends what "trust" means to you. to me it often means something like "I can expect this person to make the same (or similar) decision I would in situation X, therefore I do not need to watch them as closely". some values can be irrelevant in certain contexts. if I'm a communist and my coworker is an ancap, it probably doesn't affect our ability to work together on a software project. but if I'm very risk averse (in an engineering sense) and my coworker has a "move fast and break things" mindset, I am going to have to pay a lot more attention to their code reviews.

jancsika 6y ago

> From someone else's perspective, maybe freedom is more important than lives, and they are willing to let some people (including themselves) die in order to avoid temporary or permanent limits on existing freedoms. > (including themselves) Including others, which is against any serious code of ethics. > From your perspective, maybe lives are more important than freedoms and you are willing to limit some freedoms temporarily or permanently if it means saving more lives. It's extremely difficult for me to imagine a more fallacious argument than this. The closest I can come is imagining a mass movement against DUI checkpoints by people who refuse to show their license, but who purposely get drunk before speeding through the checkpoint. It is not only philosophically consistent to protest mask laws while at the same time wearing a mask during this pandemic-- it's ethically required. The fact that you don't seem to realize you've hard-coupled a defense of freedom with wanton irresponsibility is legitimately worrisome. It reeks of the success of online filter bubbles dividing consumers into the most destructive two poles of potential behavior/opinion. Luckily, in my own community, talking in person to other humans, I don't witness anything like these two poles. Rather, I see a lot of pandemic fatigue, results of shit messaging from the government, some disinformation, and the occasional asshole who must be addicted to a political feed like a degenerate gambler in Vegas. Honestly, for most people it's not going to matter what side of the political spectrum they were on. Nearly everyone has made at least one critical safety mistake, failing to protect themselves or their loved ones. At least in the U.S., noses peeking out from masks is a bi-partisan issue. High ground is a luxury of social media self-delusion.

jancsika 6y ago
Note-- in the time it took me to click reload in my browser, somebody had upvoted this post. @dang-- what the hell? There's no way somebody read this whole comment in that amount of time. Is it just a given that bots can freely upvote/downvote and attempt to screw with the flow of messages on here? I honestly cannot understand how HN has convinced a coterie of tinkerers and reverse engineers not to discuss the system that sorts and rates their own expressions of ideas.
- umvi 6y ago
  It could be that someone read just the first line of your comment, realized it jived with their view, and upvoted before continuing on and finishing reading the rest of your comment. If HN stores timestamps of upvotes in the backend we could confirm (i.e. upvoting within milliseconds of submission = bot)

Nasrudith 6y ago

What views are the real question. If they have by my standards horrible tastes certainly. If they deny that hugging you while they are on fire will burn you, that juggling loaded guns is dangerous, or view you as subhumans to be exploited not distrusting them is frankly dangerously stupid. Looking at costs alone without context is a bad idea here as it is for beancounters.