9 ms·

Good step, but companies will find untested alternatives. “9 out of 12,000”

by tankaiji 3y ago

mouse_ 3y ago
[flagged]
- NeuNeurosis 3y ago
  Its not just the rich and powerful, its the knowledgeable experts and powerbrokers that facilitate and actually build out the power structure that enables the rich to take advantage of these opportunities. As long as one of the most lucrative and prestigious routes to success for exceptionally talented people lie in the power structures that require the compromise of society, the rich will have abundant opportunity to harvest the wealth that lies in damaging the world we live in and make money on the "solutions".
- wolverine876 3y ago
  No reprocussions if you don't do anything about it and promote a culture of helplessness - probably exactly what they hope you will do.
  - mouse_ 3y ago
    What do you suggest, then? Vote? Formally complain? Spread awareness? I've been doing all that, that's how we got here.
    - wolverine876 3y ago
      People have been organizing and effectively doing things politically for generations. That's how we got here. All the current law, etc. is a product of political activity, all the good, all the bad (good and bad as we perceive it). How you got to where you are is to complain and promote powerlessness. Excuses are tools to build monuments of nothingness. Seriously, if your opponents could fund you, they would; you could earn some money at least.
- infamouscow 3y ago
  This will continue until the population becomes comfortable with extra-judicial violence against those in power. (Also, look at how old my account is and consider whether or not I care about your downvote. Reply with something that directly refutes the point I'm making so we can have the vibrant discussion this website used to be known for. Downvotes are simply pathetic attempts to silence correct views. Intellectuals have discussions, not censor their opponents. Only the most indefensible and mediocre positions depend on censorship. It also explains why the most unimpressive people depend on it.)
mensetmanusman 3y ago
This is the inevitable process of humanity's understanding of technology.
- VyseofArcadia 3y ago
  My understanding is that in a lot of countries, the perspective is backwards from what we have in the US. We have, "prove it's harmful." They have "prove it's safe". You can still progress technologically without being reckless.
  - pkaye 3y ago
    > My understanding is that in a lot of countries, the perspective is backwards from what we have in the US. Which countries do it that way?
    - pimlottc 3y ago
      The EU uses a whitelist approach for food additives, vs the US's blacklist approach: > Europe has chosen a precautionary approach in regulating, while the U.S. governing bodies tend to be more reactive. In other words, in the United States, food additives are innocent until proven guilty, while in Europe, only those additives proven not to be harmful are approved for use. http://www.germinalorganic.com/2018/02/eu-versus-us-a-closer-look-at-food-standards/ http://www.germinalorganic.com/2018/02/eu-versus-us-a-closer...
  - CodeWriter23 3y ago
    > in the US. We have, "prove it's harmful." They have "prove it's safe Until you get into pharmaceuticals, then the world standard is a step beyond "prove it's harmful" to "no evidence of harm is proof that it is safe".
    - Kuinox 3y ago
      You have to prove that the benefits is worth the potential harm. Vaccines are known to be harmful to very few persons, yet we vaccine because the benefits outweigh the very small potential of harm.
stainablesteel 3y ago
that's also the point too, you might find one that's a lot better in every way

Good step, but companies will find untested alternatives. “9 out of 12,000”

mouse_ 3y ago

[flagged]

NeuNeurosis 3y ago
Its not just the rich and powerful, its the knowledgeable experts and powerbrokers that facilitate and actually build out the power structure that enables the rich to take advantage of these opportunities. As long as one of the most lucrative and prestigious routes to success for exceptionally talented people lie in the power structures that require the compromise of society, the rich will have abundant opportunity to harvest the wealth that lies in damaging the world we live in and make money on the "solutions".
wolverine876 3y ago
No reprocussions if you don't do anything about it and promote a culture of helplessness - probably exactly what they hope you will do.
- mouse_ 3y ago
  What do you suggest, then? Vote? Formally complain? Spread awareness? I've been doing all that, that's how we got here.
  - wolverine876 3y ago
    People have been organizing and effectively doing things politically for generations. That's how we got here. All the current law, etc. is a product of political activity, all the good, all the bad (good and bad as we perceive it). How you got to where you are is to complain and promote powerlessness. Excuses are tools to build monuments of nothingness. Seriously, if your opponents could fund you, they would; you could earn some money at least.
infamouscow 3y ago
This will continue until the population becomes comfortable with extra-judicial violence against those in power. (Also, look at how old my account is and consider whether or not I care about your downvote. Reply with something that directly refutes the point I'm making so we can have the vibrant discussion this website used to be known for. Downvotes are simply pathetic attempts to silence correct views. Intellectuals have discussions, not censor their opponents. Only the most indefensible and mediocre positions depend on censorship. It also explains why the most unimpressive people depend on it.)

mensetmanusman 3y ago

This is the inevitable process of humanity's understanding of technology.

VyseofArcadia 3y ago
My understanding is that in a lot of countries, the perspective is backwards from what we have in the US. We have, "prove it's harmful." They have "prove it's safe". You can still progress technologically without being reckless.
- pkaye 3y ago
  > My understanding is that in a lot of countries, the perspective is backwards from what we have in the US. Which countries do it that way?
  - pimlottc 3y ago
    The EU uses a whitelist approach for food additives, vs the US's blacklist approach: > Europe has chosen a precautionary approach in regulating, while the U.S. governing bodies tend to be more reactive. In other words, in the United States, food additives are innocent until proven guilty, while in Europe, only those additives proven not to be harmful are approved for use. http://www.germinalorganic.com/2018/02/eu-versus-us-a-closer-look-at-food-standards/ http://www.germinalorganic.com/2018/02/eu-versus-us-a-closer...
- CodeWriter23 3y ago
  > in the US. We have, "prove it's harmful." They have "prove it's safe Until you get into pharmaceuticals, then the world standard is a step beyond "prove it's harmful" to "no evidence of harm is proof that it is safe".
  - Kuinox 3y ago
    You have to prove that the benefits is worth the potential harm. Vaccines are known to be harmful to very few persons, yet we vaccine because the benefits outweigh the very small potential of harm.

stainablesteel 3y ago

that's also the point too, you might find one that's a lot better in every way