5 ms·

Look to Idiocracy for a documentary of what happens if this keeps going unchecked?

by Aeolun 2y ago

stingraycharles 2y ago
Gatorade to water the plants? Not a far fetch from injecting bleach to cure Covid.
- almostgotcaught 2y ago
  And removing fluoride from the water
  - cpursley 2y ago
    Why does American drinking water need fluoride - for the few seconds people brush their teeth? Other developed nations seem to do get by just fine without it (i.e, most of Europe). Does modern tooth paste not contain the components for proper cleaning? I feel like I'm missing something here, because I don't swallow my tooth paste but I drink my tap water. But if fluoride is fine in water that we drink, why not just add all the other vital chemicals to the tap water that our bodies crave, like soma? Because it really smells like peoples opposition to this is not science-based but emotion-based (i.e., anti-RFK and Trump admin).
    - jdiff 2y ago
      "For the few seconds people brush their teeth"? That's not how fluoridated drinking water works. Fluoridated water works all of the time, not just when brushing teeth, and it's not a vital chemical that the body craves. You are missing something. If you're this confused about a topic, you should at a bare minimum read the Wikipedia page.
      - cpursley 2y ago
        I've read it and am not convinced we need to be ingesting fluoride water. Nor is Europe or most other countries and their dental health is fine. Said another way - brush yo teeth, brush yo GD teeth: https://youtu.be/GlKL_EpnSp8?si=NeKJWKNlcHxtDUYD&t=112 https://youtu.be/GlKL_EpnSp8?si=NeKJWKNlcHxtDUYD&t=112
        jdiff 2y ago
        The questions you posed are not questioning fluoride, they're asking what the basic premise even is. If you don't understand that, you are far from the position needed to be evaluating and analyzing the necessity or benefits of it. The Wikipedia page you mentioned reading also points out that it's not only a US thing. Or even a water-only thing.
        imcritic 2y ago
        When I see an argument with a phrase like "basic premise" I know I'm reading some word mambo jambo, otherwise the author would just give their summary of that "basic premise" instead of deadlinking it (refer to something without actually referring it). You don't have an argument yourself, you just wanted to share that you are pro some position.
        cpursley 2y ago
        [flagged]
        jdiff 2y ago
        There are clear factual errors in the underlying assumptions of what was stated about water fluoridation. Those are simply table stakes for having a discussion about anything at all. If one thinks that water fluoridation is useful "just for a few seconds," that it's not done outside of the United States, that it's a replacement for toothpaste, that it's a vital chemical, or that we don't fortify other foods, then they do not know enough about the topic to talk about it, let alone hold the opinion that they know better. If someone came in with a curious mindset, that'd be one thing. But this is someone walking into a room with an agenda (get rid of fluoride) and a shocking lack of knowledge about that agenda.
    - Spooky23 2y ago
      Because just like we have stupid people who don’t vaccinate their children from measles, we have stupid people who don’t make them brush their teeth. So rather than have them suffer with a lifetime of oral health problems, you can intervene in a transparent and cheap way to prevent these issues altogether. The introduction of fluoride dramatically improved oral health. NYC has been doing it since the 1960s, so one would think we’d see evidence of the supposed negative effects.
      - cpursley 2y ago
        Any actual stats on people not brushing their teeth? It's not 1960 any more... And my entire point was to compare to other nations with similar development levels that don't pump it into their water supply and are doing just fine in terms of oral health. And by your metric, should we also pump in vitamins and other substances that our bodies crave? Maybe the Fed gov't could just skip that and force drip IV everyone a compliance cocktail after their breakfast of USDA approved and SNAP subsidized Captain Crunch?
        Kirby64 2y ago
        > Any actual stats on people not brushing their teeth? It's not 1960 any more... And my entire point was to compare to other nations with similar development levels that don't pump it into their water supply and are doing just fine in terms of oral health. Something like 30% of people report not brushing their teeth at least once a day. Unclear if that means most of them brush every other day or some even lower frequency, but I’d assume if you report not brushing at least once a day then you likely aren’t brushing consistently every other day or something. > And by your metric, should we also pump in vitamins and other substances that our bodies crave? Maybe the Fed gov't could just skip that and force drip IV everyone a compliance cocktail after their breakfast of USDA approved and SNAP subsidized Captain Crunch? We already do this, all the time! Vitamin and mineral fortified foods are everywhere. Iodine is in a lot of salt. It’s a good thing, not something to be mocked. Most vitamins and minerals have minimal cost, no issues with taking “too much” of them, and have significant health benefits if you are deficit on that particular thing.
- nwienert 1y ago
  The injecting bleach thing was just loosely worded, but it was technically based on a real study and fine. Actually, ironically, you end up being wrong here, though in less of an Idiocracy way and more of a Orwellian "news propaganda machine tricked you" way.
jameskilton 2y ago
Who would have guessed that Idiocracy was an optimistic look at our possible future...
- bilbo0s 2y ago
  It sounds like a lot of people are kind of missing the mark a bit on what happened here in the US. I mean: Next up is propaganda and filling Americans' minds with only what he wants you to know No. "Propaganda and filling Americans' minds with only what he wants you to know" is what happened first using the internet to radicalize those without the wisdom to have seen this outcome. And Idiocracy may not be so much an optimistic look at our future as the conservatives continue to implement their policies, as it is a cynical look at the results that conservatives implementing their policies have had on our present. And things can get so much worse.
FirmwareBurner 2y ago
It's worse than that. In the movie Idiocracy, they were searching for the smartest man alive to put him in charge to fix things. That's not what governments are doing now.
- blooalien 2y ago
  Nope. They just put the dumbest man alive in charge of an entire nation, and cheer him on every time he proclaims himself the smartest man alive.
  - FirmwareBurner 2y ago
    Wrong. Not Sure got appointed to identify and fix the crops issue by the US president Camacho. I can't believe these words have been said on HN.
    - blooalien 1y ago
      Yeah, I wasn't talking about the movie... :shrug:
timdiggerm 2y ago
You may have missed that Idiocracy is a pro-eugenics film, in which the populace got stupider by way of being fecund. It's not about this problem, really.
- rapind 2y ago
  > You may have missed that Idiocracy is a pro-eugenics film I kinda see how you got there, but man. This is the same guy behind Office Space and Bevis and Butthead. He's poking fun at out of touch intellectuals and consumption. Calling it pro-eugenics though...
  - torlok 2y ago
    The whole premise hinges on "dumb" people outbreeding "high IQ" people. The movie isn't about the failure of the education system, consumer compliance, or anything like that. The movie feels pro-eugenics, even if that wasn't the intention, and it's just trying to poke fun at stereotypes.
- potato3732842 2y ago
  Idiocracy is only pro eugenics in the same way that any piece of comedy that criticizes anything or takes something to the extreme can be construed as being for the opposite thing.
- blooalien 2y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Marching_Morons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Marching_Morons
TechDebtDevin 2y ago
Just rewatched this for thr first time in a decade the other day. I have some serious concerns lmao

Look to Idiocracy for a documentary of what happens if this keeps going unchecked?

by Aeolun 2y ago

Look to Idiocracy for a documentary of what happens if this keeps going unchecked?

stingraycharles 2y ago

Gatorade to water the plants? Not a far fetch from injecting bleach to cure Covid.

almostgotcaught 2y ago
And removing fluoride from the water
- cpursley 2y ago
  Why does American drinking water need fluoride - for the few seconds people brush their teeth? Other developed nations seem to do get by just fine without it (i.e, most of Europe). Does modern tooth paste not contain the components for proper cleaning? I feel like I'm missing something here, because I don't swallow my tooth paste but I drink my tap water. But if fluoride is fine in water that we drink, why not just add all the other vital chemicals to the tap water that our bodies crave, like soma? Because it really smells like peoples opposition to this is not science-based but emotion-based (i.e., anti-RFK and Trump admin).
  - jdiff 2y ago
    "For the few seconds people brush their teeth"? That's not how fluoridated drinking water works. Fluoridated water works all of the time, not just when brushing teeth, and it's not a vital chemical that the body craves. You are missing something. If you're this confused about a topic, you should at a bare minimum read the Wikipedia page.
    - cpursley 2y ago
      I've read it and am not convinced we need to be ingesting fluoride water. Nor is Europe or most other countries and their dental health is fine. Said another way - brush yo teeth, brush yo GD teeth: https://youtu.be/GlKL_EpnSp8?si=NeKJWKNlcHxtDUYD&t=112 https://youtu.be/GlKL_EpnSp8?si=NeKJWKNlcHxtDUYD&t=112
      - jdiff 2y ago
        The questions you posed are not questioning fluoride, they're asking what the basic premise even is. If you don't understand that, you are far from the position needed to be evaluating and analyzing the necessity or benefits of it. The Wikipedia page you mentioned reading also points out that it's not only a US thing. Or even a water-only thing.
        imcritic 2y ago
        When I see an argument with a phrase like "basic premise" I know I'm reading some word mambo jambo, otherwise the author would just give their summary of that "basic premise" instead of deadlinking it (refer to something without actually referring it). You don't have an argument yourself, you just wanted to share that you are pro some position.
        cpursley 2y ago
        [flagged]
        jdiff 2y ago
        There are clear factual errors in the underlying assumptions of what was stated about water fluoridation. Those are simply table stakes for having a discussion about anything at all. If one thinks that water fluoridation is useful "just for a few seconds," that it's not done outside of the United States, that it's a replacement for toothpaste, that it's a vital chemical, or that we don't fortify other foods, then they do not know enough about the topic to talk about it, let alone hold the opinion that they know better. If someone came in with a curious mindset, that'd be one thing. But this is someone walking into a room with an agenda (get rid of fluoride) and a shocking lack of knowledge about that agenda.
  - Spooky23 2y ago
    Because just like we have stupid people who don’t vaccinate their children from measles, we have stupid people who don’t make them brush their teeth. So rather than have them suffer with a lifetime of oral health problems, you can intervene in a transparent and cheap way to prevent these issues altogether. The introduction of fluoride dramatically improved oral health. NYC has been doing it since the 1960s, so one would think we’d see evidence of the supposed negative effects.
    - cpursley 2y ago
      Any actual stats on people not brushing their teeth? It's not 1960 any more... And my entire point was to compare to other nations with similar development levels that don't pump it into their water supply and are doing just fine in terms of oral health. And by your metric, should we also pump in vitamins and other substances that our bodies crave? Maybe the Fed gov't could just skip that and force drip IV everyone a compliance cocktail after their breakfast of USDA approved and SNAP subsidized Captain Crunch?
      - Kirby64 2y ago
        > Any actual stats on people not brushing their teeth? It's not 1960 any more... And my entire point was to compare to other nations with similar development levels that don't pump it into their water supply and are doing just fine in terms of oral health. Something like 30% of people report not brushing their teeth at least once a day. Unclear if that means most of them brush every other day or some even lower frequency, but I’d assume if you report not brushing at least once a day then you likely aren’t brushing consistently every other day or something. > And by your metric, should we also pump in vitamins and other substances that our bodies crave? Maybe the Fed gov't could just skip that and force drip IV everyone a compliance cocktail after their breakfast of USDA approved and SNAP subsidized Captain Crunch? We already do this, all the time! Vitamin and mineral fortified foods are everywhere. Iodine is in a lot of salt. It’s a good thing, not something to be mocked. Most vitamins and minerals have minimal cost, no issues with taking “too much” of them, and have significant health benefits if you are deficit on that particular thing.
nwienert 1y ago
The injecting bleach thing was just loosely worded, but it was technically based on a real study and fine. Actually, ironically, you end up being wrong here, though in less of an Idiocracy way and more of a Orwellian "news propaganda machine tricked you" way.

jameskilton 2y ago

Who would have guessed that Idiocracy was an optimistic look at our possible future...

bilbo0s 2y ago
It sounds like a lot of people are kind of missing the mark a bit on what happened here in the US. I mean: Next up is propaganda and filling Americans' minds with only what he wants you to know No. "Propaganda and filling Americans' minds with only what he wants you to know" is what happened first using the internet to radicalize those without the wisdom to have seen this outcome. And Idiocracy may not be so much an optimistic look at our future as the conservatives continue to implement their policies, as it is a cynical look at the results that conservatives implementing their policies have had on our present. And things can get so much worse.

FirmwareBurner 2y ago

It's worse than that. In the movie Idiocracy, they were searching for the smartest man alive to put him in charge to fix things. That's not what governments are doing now.

blooalien 2y ago
Nope. They just put the dumbest man alive in charge of an entire nation, and cheer him on every time he proclaims himself the smartest man alive.
- FirmwareBurner 2y ago
  Wrong. Not Sure got appointed to identify and fix the crops issue by the US president Camacho. I can't believe these words have been said on HN.
  - blooalien 1y ago
    Yeah, I wasn't talking about the movie... :shrug:

timdiggerm 2y ago

You may have missed that Idiocracy is a pro-eugenics film, in which the populace got stupider by way of being fecund. It's not about this problem, really.

rapind 2y ago
> You may have missed that Idiocracy is a pro-eugenics film I kinda see how you got there, but man. This is the same guy behind Office Space and Bevis and Butthead. He's poking fun at out of touch intellectuals and consumption. Calling it pro-eugenics though...
- torlok 2y ago
  The whole premise hinges on "dumb" people outbreeding "high IQ" people. The movie isn't about the failure of the education system, consumer compliance, or anything like that. The movie feels pro-eugenics, even if that wasn't the intention, and it's just trying to poke fun at stereotypes.
potato3732842 2y ago
Idiocracy is only pro eugenics in the same way that any piece of comedy that criticizes anything or takes something to the extreme can be construed as being for the opposite thing.
blooalien 2y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Marching_Morons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Marching_Morons

TechDebtDevin 2y ago

Just rewatched this for thr first time in a decade the other day. I have some serious concerns lmao