6 ms·

Nice pivot. I look forward to this "economy" stabilizing in the same way that Truth Social or Parler did - at about a tenth of the scale of their competition.

Nice pivot. I look forward to this "economy" stabilizing in the same way that Truth Social or Parler did - at about a tenth of the scale of their competition. Happy to let the pill-sellers and woke-fearers spend their money in their own little walled garden, well away from where I every have to hear about it (or be advertised to).

wedn3sday 4y ago
Ya, this is pretty much how I felt about the whole Ivermectin thing. Who am I to tell someone not to take horse de-wormer, when I also advocate for the freedom to take psychedelics? If someone _really_ wants to make sure they dont have horse heart worms, I dont see how they're hurting anyone else (besides being a disease vector, but thats not going to get worse).
- catapart 4y ago
  Same. It's dangerous to tell people that it does stuff that it doesn't do (more dangerous as an audience grows to the point that anecdotal data should be left out entirely, for audiences of an appropriate size), but as long as you're just doing you, have at it. But then, I'm that way about pretty much everything, including rat poison. Do what you're gonna do to yourself, just don't make it other people's problem (note that suicide is almost universally going to be someone else's problem, so that's not an endorsement of taking rat poison).
- blisterpeanuts 4y ago
  In addition to veterinary applications in horses, Ivermectin is approved for human use and is a powerful anti-viral that is effective against "wide range of RNA and DNA viruses, for example, dengue, Zika, yellow fever, and others"[1]. There is, to date, no evidence that it is effective as a treatment for the Covid-19 variants. However, it's certainly harmful to post in a public forum that it's just "horse de-wormer", which could lead patients to reject approved treatment for these other diseases. 1. https://www.drugs.com/ivermectin.html https://www.drugs.com/ivermectin.html
pessimizer 4y ago
> at about a tenth of the scale of their competition. I wish they were all at that scale, instead of being part of oligopolies/monopolies that depend on the silence/support of government to maintain that position.
- catapart 4y ago
  Competition is great, and you'll never see me use PayPal for personal concerns over their own anti-consumer practices, but I don't see any particular value in introducing side-shows to the event. Stripe was a real contender for PayPal because it was playing the same game. Now they actually compete. Introducing a "competitor" that is promising to NOT play the same game just means that it's a novelty. There is value in it, but it isn't going to change the monopolistic landscape because the powers that control that sector got that way by survival of the fittest. Disruption has to prove that the fitness test was invalid. And, in money, that's a LOOOOONG history of fitness testing. The financial industry is the "theory of evolution" of the business world. Its machinations are rock-solid, as far as anyone is concerned. And, to be clear, that's not to say that they don't evolve. It's been a VERY recent trend for financial institutions to deal in social responsiveness as a metric for financial success. The whole "ESG" framework wasn't thought up by controlling parties, it was DEDUCED by analysts and bureaucrats watching market trends as the world changed. And this type of evolution is WHY finances are so rock solid - finances offer the most auditable ledger humans have ever created. We can run data analytics on finances for the rest of eternity and get amazingly predictive results. So yeah - when other parties show up to the plate, offering to either disrupt the status quo based on solid analytical data, or to throw their own weight around (wherever it came from) within the status quo - I'll be 100% on board. But there's nothing I find substantial about a company that is pretending that eschewing the ESG methodology will make them competitive. Happy to invest some interest if they start making some headway, but until then it's just another tantrum thrown by people who are mad that they can't make money and say they hate people at the same time. But I will at least commiserate that we deserve better than our monopolistic overlords. I'm hoping there are more people willing to play the game in our favor (rather than for the interests of the money class), even though that isn't immediately and overwhelmingly profitable.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

wedn3sday 4y ago

Ya, this is pretty much how I felt about the whole Ivermectin thing. Who am I to tell someone not to take horse de-wormer, when I also advocate for the freedom to take psychedelics? If someone _really_ wants to make sure they dont have horse heart worms, I dont see how they're hurting anyone else (besides being a disease vector, but thats not going to get worse).

catapart 4y ago
Same. It's dangerous to tell people that it does stuff that it doesn't do (more dangerous as an audience grows to the point that anecdotal data should be left out entirely, for audiences of an appropriate size), but as long as you're just doing you, have at it. But then, I'm that way about pretty much everything, including rat poison. Do what you're gonna do to yourself, just don't make it other people's problem (note that suicide is almost universally going to be someone else's problem, so that's not an endorsement of taking rat poison).
blisterpeanuts 4y ago
In addition to veterinary applications in horses, Ivermectin is approved for human use and is a powerful anti-viral that is effective against "wide range of RNA and DNA viruses, for example, dengue, Zika, yellow fever, and others"[1]. There is, to date, no evidence that it is effective as a treatment for the Covid-19 variants. However, it's certainly harmful to post in a public forum that it's just "horse de-wormer", which could lead patients to reject approved treatment for these other diseases. 1. https://www.drugs.com/ivermectin.html https://www.drugs.com/ivermectin.html

pessimizer 4y ago

> at about a tenth of the scale of their competition. I wish they were all at that scale, instead of being part of oligopolies/monopolies that depend on the silence/support of government to maintain that position.

catapart 4y ago
Competition is great, and you'll never see me use PayPal for personal concerns over their own anti-consumer practices, but I don't see any particular value in introducing side-shows to the event. Stripe was a real contender for PayPal because it was playing the same game. Now they actually compete. Introducing a "competitor" that is promising to NOT play the same game just means that it's a novelty. There is value in it, but it isn't going to change the monopolistic landscape because the powers that control that sector got that way by survival of the fittest. Disruption has to prove that the fitness test was invalid. And, in money, that's a LOOOOONG history of fitness testing. The financial industry is the "theory of evolution" of the business world. Its machinations are rock-solid, as far as anyone is concerned. And, to be clear, that's not to say that they don't evolve. It's been a VERY recent trend for financial institutions to deal in social responsiveness as a metric for financial success. The whole "ESG" framework wasn't thought up by controlling parties, it was DEDUCED by analysts and bureaucrats watching market trends as the world changed. And this type of evolution is WHY finances are so rock solid - finances offer the most auditable ledger humans have ever created. We can run data analytics on finances for the rest of eternity and get amazingly predictive results. So yeah - when other parties show up to the plate, offering to either disrupt the status quo based on solid analytical data, or to throw their own weight around (wherever it came from) within the status quo - I'll be 100% on board. But there's nothing I find substantial about a company that is pretending that eschewing the ESG methodology will make them competitive. Happy to invest some interest if they start making some headway, but until then it's just another tantrum thrown by people who are mad that they can't make money and say they hate people at the same time. But I will at least commiserate that we deserve better than our monopolistic overlords. I'm hoping there are more people willing to play the game in our favor (rather than for the interests of the money class), even though that isn't immediately and overwhelmingly profitable.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]