3 ms·
How are the questions loaded? They are relevant in making my point. In order to have debate you need information. If there's no transparency debate becomes poin
by choward 5y ago
How are the questions loaded? They are relevant in making my point. In order to have debate you need information. If there's no transparency debate becomes pointless. The debate just comes from to who you trust and not real data.
ceejayoz said they're pro medical privacy but thinks that people should have to let people know if they're vaccinated. It makes no sense.
They also want people to be fired from their jobs for not taking a vaccine whose data isn't being released.
In summary I find it hypocritical to be against vaccine transparency but for mandates. It's also hypocritical to be for medical privacy but be for vaccine mandates.
- aakresearch 5y agoI am for privacy and against mandates. Especially against mandates as currently implemented. I just think that it is not overly hypocritical to take a pro-privacy and pro-mandate position at the same. These positions can co-exist. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29401254 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29401254. Mandate does not need to include public display of compliance at irrelevant points. The current implementation seems to be driven by assumption that many could be shamed into compliance. I believe it is very misguided policy, which works in a completely opposite way with people it aimed upon. Also, believe it or not, many people technically compliant are at the same time pretty disgusted with the privacy-breaking aspect.