7 ms·

Can we start a serious discussion about whether you might start taking responsibility of who you elect instead of wasting your time fantasizing? I mean, it is

by Arodex 3mo ago

Can we start a serious discussion about whether you might start taking responsibility of who you elect instead of wasting your time fantasizing? I mean, it is not as if RFK was the darling candidate of HN at one time?

monkpit 3mo ago
Yes because everyone else on HN is one hivemind, other than you of course.
SpicyLemonZest 3mo ago
You might benefit from looking up the Goomba Fallacy. As a former anti-anti-RFK guy, I absolutely have to take responsibility, I severely misunderstood the wellness movement and didn't realize that inflicting disease on people was their goal. But I don't know why you think the person you're responding to supported RFK.
- pstuart 3mo ago
  He's definitely got the broken clock syndrome. And back in the day he was a strong defender of the environment. I've got a family member and ex friend (both trained in science) and they drank the koolaid hard. A funny story about them -- both had stayed at my home (different times) and I had taken to heating the water for my coffee in the microwave. Both of them were horrified by that and refused to use that water. Neither could give reason why, and artfully deflected when I pressed the matter. I think antivaxers caught a virus that melted their brains.
  - jacobolus 3mo ago
    I think the worldwide disruption of the pandemic melted people's brains, and the recent surge in the anti-vax movement is a symptom. Along the lines of: if all this bad stuff happened and my life was significantly harmed, it must be someone's fault; all those doctors and scientists kept advising everyone on what they thought was happening and what to do, so they're probably the ones who caused the problem.
    - noduerme 3mo ago
      I say this as a committed fan of RNA vaccines and masking, who believed we could have contained covid with more serious lockdowns very early in the pandemic: In point of fact, it was someone's fault, and the someones whose fault it was - the ones doing gain of function research - were the same people who took control of lockdown policy in the US. That would be enough to melt a lot of people's brains, even if it weren't for the psychological effects of lockdowns, remote schooling, and the consequent arrested development of an entire generation. At a bare minimum, the concealment by the CCP of what they knew of covid was an act of war. The cover-up itself killed millions of people and caused untold economic damage to their adversaries, with the collusion of health officials in the US government who had offshored illegal research there.
      - pstuart 3mo ago
        From what I've read about GOF research, it's essentially explored in defensive posture, because viruses mutate and they're looking at how to get ahead of the curve (not a researcher, just my take). But what is never discussed in the Lab Leak pursuit is: so what? I mean, yes, poor biosecurity and containment should be called out and not covered up, but the real value is in being the foundation of a conspiracy. "The government conspired to make you sick!". Think about this: covid has mutated consistently since it's been tracked. Were those mutations coming from a lab or was it viruses doing virus things. Was Ebola made in a lab or did it come from a place we know viruses come from. Was the Spanish Flu a Chinese plot? Was AIDS? The handling of the outbreak was clearly bungled, but let's remember who was in charge in the US when it happened. The guy who shut down research and tracking teams because Obama had funded them (So had Bush -- until then, this kind of stuff was non-political and taken seriously as a non-partisan issue). The failure for masking was again, on the then POTUS, and it's been conjectured by many (including myself) that he was against masks because it would mess up his makeup. Yes, it could have been handled so much better, and sadly, could have been an incredibly valuable teachable moment that made us all safer in the future. But instead it was used to further divide us and foster the literal fucking insanity of antivaxxers. I have nothing but contempt for those people because they are a danger to humanity.
  - ChoGGi 3mo ago
    Ahem, let me try; the atoms are too excited they will bounce through my stomach lining straight into cancer. They also tend to contaminate the raw milk bacteria you aren't using. Close enough?
  - preg_match 3mo ago
    Broken clock syndrome is very easy to "pull off" in medicine because medicine is incredibly complex and it's all risk calculus. For even the most benign or life-saving drugs, you can conjure up examples of how they've killed people. That includes vaccines, unfortunately. So these people have a leg to stand on. It's a wooden leg (arrrg) but they have a leg. Of course they, and their supporters, are never doing any kind of statistical analysis or risk calculus. The the "risk" part is the thing that really, really matters. I mean, we have chemotherapies which have a very high chance of fucking your shit up or even killing you. But untreated cancers are fatal, and sometimes very quickly. It's all nuanced.
- thisisit 3mo ago
  > didn't realize that inflicting disease on people was their goal I think the lesson here is just because someone is anti-something doesn't exactly mean they stand for something. Just because someone is anti-corruption it doesn't mean they are pro corruption etc. Because people always find it easy to run their mouths and be arm chair experts. I had a chance to see the full 10 year cycle of an anti corruption candidate. He got elected into power and did nothing. Nada. Because all he knew was to fight and find someone to blame. He was just a weasel. 10 years later the place was worse off and corruption was even higher. When I pointed this out to some MAGA folks - they were like but how do you know until we try. Its like Americans want to tempt fate and want to see for themselves how institutions which took multi decades to get destroyed in few years. RFK is similar case. He has a stance - whether right or wrong. But under pressure he just abandons them to save his own skin. He has never owned up to the issues his anti vax crusade causing the Samoa measles epidemic. And just like that Americans wanted to tempt fate with - "he is making good points about food". He is not. He demand accountability from others but owns up to nothing. He will weasel out of every issue is causing.
epistasis 3mo ago
I've been a long time foe of RFK Jr., spend way too much time here, and have never been under the impression that RFK Jr. was a darling here at all.
- Arodex 3mo ago
  Filter for dates around his presidential run: "he's not really anti Vax", "he's the only candidate talking about health"... With Dorsey and other SV actors boosting him. https://archive.is/kce6f https://archive.is/kce6f
  - idiotsecant 3mo ago
    This was never a majority opinion here
    - lostlogin 3mo ago
      There are plenty of topics here where you’ll find that statement untrue.
  - pstuart 3mo ago
    Wait, so techbros angling for influence represent the HN population? Sadly, there's enough MAGA here to share their downvotes but your "evidence" is pointing in a different direction.
  - ZeroGravitas 3mo ago
    "Darling candidate" is overselling it but there's a solid chunk of anti-vax, covid-truthing, lab-leak is-proven-fact, JFK just wants better food nutballs on HN. They overlap with the climate deniers, the nukecels, libertarians and Trump fans. And it clearly goes to the top, since his vice-president and primary funded was a Google CEO ex-wife, and he had high level support even before he went back on his stated opinions and joined the Trump campaign. "Trump isn't Hitler, Hitler had policies" being one memorable zinger of his.
    - 3mo ago
rozap 3mo ago
Goomba fallacy
Waterluvian 3mo ago
The Americans have what’s basically a cultural trait at this point of deflecting ownership of their government’s actions with “not my president so not my failure” abdication of responsibility. I wish we could open trade talks with these people instead. But, alas, that’s not how it works.
- w0de0 3mo ago
  Fine, it’s all my fault. Neither me nor my state voted that way, I’ve protested like hell, but nonetheless at your insistence I accept personal responsibility for the policy choices of the federal government. What do you propose I do? Or did you just want my permission to be personally angry at me? Not sure you needed it, but you’ve now got it.
  - deleted 3mo ago
    [deleted]
  - close04 3mo ago
    [flagged]
    - Klonoar 3mo ago
      I don’t think you want to do anything here except rub Americans nose in failure. Which is fine, but attempting to grandstand while doing it is just boring to read. Or maybe you just need more practice at this kind of internet kickdown.
      - close04 3mo ago
        [flagged]
        hack1312 3mo ago
        3 paragraphs? Dude they wrote 3 sentences. Your edit to claim a sentence can be a paragraph just makes you look even more pathetic
lovich 3mo ago
>I mean, it is not as if RFK was the darling candidate of HN at one time? Wasn't my darling candidate. Mostly because I can read research papers and understand that drinking raw milk and avoiding vaccines doesn't make me healthier.
- ExoticPearTree 3mo ago
  FWIW raw milk is actually OK. Drank it “directly” from the cows, never got sick from it. *directly = cow milked into a cup.
  - manarth 3mo ago
    the plural of anecdote is not data.
    - inigyou 3mo ago
      Yes, it is, actually. Especially in social sciences.
  - lostlogin 3mo ago
    There were a few times when I didn’t look as I crossed the road. It was fine.
  - sjsdaiuasgdia 3mo ago
    "The objective of this review is to provide an integrated historical account of the complex, often convoluted events impacting milk hygiene and its resultant effect on infant mortality from 1875 to 1925. Heat pasteurization of cow's milk is necessary for rendering this important nutrient source safe for humans-particularly infants. Developed by Louis Pasteur in 1864, pasteurization evolved from the commercially important parboiling of wine and beer when the Industrial Revolution was effecting rapid societal change in Western societies. In European and American societies of the early and mid-19th century, infant mortality rates were 30- to 60-fold higher than the current rates of five or six deaths per 1,000 live births per year." https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30234385/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30234385/ Not every pre-pasteurization child died, but far more died than post-pasteurization. Raw milk is just a bad idea at anything beyond incredibly tiny tightly controlled scale. Sure, you got lucky. It's still not a good way to feed a society.
cyanydeez 3mo ago
the republicans spent the last 50 years gerrymandering and disenfranchising. the "who you elect" is a specious argument. Everyone in California could elect democrarts forever, and 2 senators in Wyoming still have a larger sway per capita.
- analog31 3mo ago
  They should stop calling themselves republicans, since they don't represent a republic.
  - collingreen 3mo ago
    Don't get me started on the words being all used incorrectly or misunderstood! Liberal, conservative, democracy, socialism, communism, free market. These are core concepts to a lot of current political debate and yet the words are effectively meaningless the way people use them. It wouldn't matter except the gap in understanding is exploited to paper over a bunch of dishonesty and corruption.
    - FireBeyond 3mo ago
      Tangential but nonetheless, I always think of this quote from Lord of War: > Yuri Orlov: [Narrating] Every faction in Africa calls themselves by these noble names - Liberation this, Patriotic that, Democratic Republic of something-or-other... I guess they can't own up to what they usually are: the Federation of Worse Oppressors Than the Last Bunch of Oppressors. Often, the most barbaric atrocities occur when both combatants proclaim themselves Freedom Fighters.

by Arodex 3mo ago

monkpit 3mo ago

Yes because everyone else on HN is one hivemind, other than you of course.

SpicyLemonZest 3mo ago

You might benefit from looking up the Goomba Fallacy. As a former anti-anti-RFK guy, I absolutely have to take responsibility, I severely misunderstood the wellness movement and didn't realize that inflicting disease on people was their goal. But I don't know why you think the person you're responding to supported RFK.

pstuart 3mo ago
He's definitely got the broken clock syndrome. And back in the day he was a strong defender of the environment. I've got a family member and ex friend (both trained in science) and they drank the koolaid hard. A funny story about them -- both had stayed at my home (different times) and I had taken to heating the water for my coffee in the microwave. Both of them were horrified by that and refused to use that water. Neither could give reason why, and artfully deflected when I pressed the matter. I think antivaxers caught a virus that melted their brains.
- jacobolus 3mo ago
  I think the worldwide disruption of the pandemic melted people's brains, and the recent surge in the anti-vax movement is a symptom. Along the lines of: if all this bad stuff happened and my life was significantly harmed, it must be someone's fault; all those doctors and scientists kept advising everyone on what they thought was happening and what to do, so they're probably the ones who caused the problem.
  - noduerme 3mo ago
    I say this as a committed fan of RNA vaccines and masking, who believed we could have contained covid with more serious lockdowns very early in the pandemic: In point of fact, it was someone's fault, and the someones whose fault it was - the ones doing gain of function research - were the same people who took control of lockdown policy in the US. That would be enough to melt a lot of people's brains, even if it weren't for the psychological effects of lockdowns, remote schooling, and the consequent arrested development of an entire generation. At a bare minimum, the concealment by the CCP of what they knew of covid was an act of war. The cover-up itself killed millions of people and caused untold economic damage to their adversaries, with the collusion of health officials in the US government who had offshored illegal research there.
    - pstuart 3mo ago
      From what I've read about GOF research, it's essentially explored in defensive posture, because viruses mutate and they're looking at how to get ahead of the curve (not a researcher, just my take). But what is never discussed in the Lab Leak pursuit is: so what? I mean, yes, poor biosecurity and containment should be called out and not covered up, but the real value is in being the foundation of a conspiracy. "The government conspired to make you sick!". Think about this: covid has mutated consistently since it's been tracked. Were those mutations coming from a lab or was it viruses doing virus things. Was Ebola made in a lab or did it come from a place we know viruses come from. Was the Spanish Flu a Chinese plot? Was AIDS? The handling of the outbreak was clearly bungled, but let's remember who was in charge in the US when it happened. The guy who shut down research and tracking teams because Obama had funded them (So had Bush -- until then, this kind of stuff was non-political and taken seriously as a non-partisan issue). The failure for masking was again, on the then POTUS, and it's been conjectured by many (including myself) that he was against masks because it would mess up his makeup. Yes, it could have been handled so much better, and sadly, could have been an incredibly valuable teachable moment that made us all safer in the future. But instead it was used to further divide us and foster the literal fucking insanity of antivaxxers. I have nothing but contempt for those people because they are a danger to humanity.
- ChoGGi 3mo ago
  Ahem, let me try; the atoms are too excited they will bounce through my stomach lining straight into cancer. They also tend to contaminate the raw milk bacteria you aren't using. Close enough?
- preg_match 3mo ago
  Broken clock syndrome is very easy to "pull off" in medicine because medicine is incredibly complex and it's all risk calculus. For even the most benign or life-saving drugs, you can conjure up examples of how they've killed people. That includes vaccines, unfortunately. So these people have a leg to stand on. It's a wooden leg (arrrg) but they have a leg. Of course they, and their supporters, are never doing any kind of statistical analysis or risk calculus. The the "risk" part is the thing that really, really matters. I mean, we have chemotherapies which have a very high chance of fucking your shit up or even killing you. But untreated cancers are fatal, and sometimes very quickly. It's all nuanced.
thisisit 3mo ago
> didn't realize that inflicting disease on people was their goal I think the lesson here is just because someone is anti-something doesn't exactly mean they stand for something. Just because someone is anti-corruption it doesn't mean they are pro corruption etc. Because people always find it easy to run their mouths and be arm chair experts. I had a chance to see the full 10 year cycle of an anti corruption candidate. He got elected into power and did nothing. Nada. Because all he knew was to fight and find someone to blame. He was just a weasel. 10 years later the place was worse off and corruption was even higher. When I pointed this out to some MAGA folks - they were like but how do you know until we try. Its like Americans want to tempt fate and want to see for themselves how institutions which took multi decades to get destroyed in few years. RFK is similar case. He has a stance - whether right or wrong. But under pressure he just abandons them to save his own skin. He has never owned up to the issues his anti vax crusade causing the Samoa measles epidemic. And just like that Americans wanted to tempt fate with - "he is making good points about food". He is not. He demand accountability from others but owns up to nothing. He will weasel out of every issue is causing.

epistasis 3mo ago

I've been a long time foe of RFK Jr., spend way too much time here, and have never been under the impression that RFK Jr. was a darling here at all.

Arodex 3mo ago
Filter for dates around his presidential run: "he's not really anti Vax", "he's the only candidate talking about health"... With Dorsey and other SV actors boosting him. https://archive.is/kce6f https://archive.is/kce6f
- idiotsecant 3mo ago
  This was never a majority opinion here
  - lostlogin 3mo ago
    There are plenty of topics here where you’ll find that statement untrue.
- pstuart 3mo ago
  Wait, so techbros angling for influence represent the HN population? Sadly, there's enough MAGA here to share their downvotes but your "evidence" is pointing in a different direction.
- ZeroGravitas 3mo ago
  "Darling candidate" is overselling it but there's a solid chunk of anti-vax, covid-truthing, lab-leak is-proven-fact, JFK just wants better food nutballs on HN. They overlap with the climate deniers, the nukecels, libertarians and Trump fans. And it clearly goes to the top, since his vice-president and primary funded was a Google CEO ex-wife, and he had high level support even before he went back on his stated opinions and joined the Trump campaign. "Trump isn't Hitler, Hitler had policies" being one memorable zinger of his.
  - 3mo ago

rozap 3mo ago

Goomba fallacy

Waterluvian 3mo ago

The Americans have what’s basically a cultural trait at this point of deflecting ownership of their government’s actions with “not my president so not my failure” abdication of responsibility. I wish we could open trade talks with these people instead. But, alas, that’s not how it works.

w0de0 3mo ago
Fine, it’s all my fault. Neither me nor my state voted that way, I’ve protested like hell, but nonetheless at your insistence I accept personal responsibility for the policy choices of the federal government. What do you propose I do? Or did you just want my permission to be personally angry at me? Not sure you needed it, but you’ve now got it.
- deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
- close04 3mo ago
  [flagged]
  - Klonoar 3mo ago
    I don’t think you want to do anything here except rub Americans nose in failure. Which is fine, but attempting to grandstand while doing it is just boring to read. Or maybe you just need more practice at this kind of internet kickdown.
    - close04 3mo ago
      [flagged]
      - hack1312 3mo ago
        3 paragraphs? Dude they wrote 3 sentences. Your edit to claim a sentence can be a paragraph just makes you look even more pathetic

lovich 3mo ago

>I mean, it is not as if RFK was the darling candidate of HN at one time? Wasn't my darling candidate. Mostly because I can read research papers and understand that drinking raw milk and avoiding vaccines doesn't make me healthier.

ExoticPearTree 3mo ago
FWIW raw milk is actually OK. Drank it “directly” from the cows, never got sick from it. *directly = cow milked into a cup.
- manarth 3mo ago
  the plural of anecdote is not data.
  - inigyou 3mo ago
    Yes, it is, actually. Especially in social sciences.
- lostlogin 3mo ago
  There were a few times when I didn’t look as I crossed the road. It was fine.
- sjsdaiuasgdia 3mo ago
  "The objective of this review is to provide an integrated historical account of the complex, often convoluted events impacting milk hygiene and its resultant effect on infant mortality from 1875 to 1925. Heat pasteurization of cow's milk is necessary for rendering this important nutrient source safe for humans-particularly infants. Developed by Louis Pasteur in 1864, pasteurization evolved from the commercially important parboiling of wine and beer when the Industrial Revolution was effecting rapid societal change in Western societies. In European and American societies of the early and mid-19th century, infant mortality rates were 30- to 60-fold higher than the current rates of five or six deaths per 1,000 live births per year." https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30234385/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30234385/ Not every pre-pasteurization child died, but far more died than post-pasteurization. Raw milk is just a bad idea at anything beyond incredibly tiny tightly controlled scale. Sure, you got lucky. It's still not a good way to feed a society.

cyanydeez 3mo ago

the republicans spent the last 50 years gerrymandering and disenfranchising. the "who you elect" is a specious argument. Everyone in California could elect democrarts forever, and 2 senators in Wyoming still have a larger sway per capita.

analog31 3mo ago
They should stop calling themselves republicans, since they don't represent a republic.
- collingreen 3mo ago
  Don't get me started on the words being all used incorrectly or misunderstood! Liberal, conservative, democracy, socialism, communism, free market. These are core concepts to a lot of current political debate and yet the words are effectively meaningless the way people use them. It wouldn't matter except the gap in understanding is exploited to paper over a bunch of dishonesty and corruption.
  - FireBeyond 3mo ago
    Tangential but nonetheless, I always think of this quote from Lord of War: > Yuri Orlov: [Narrating] Every faction in Africa calls themselves by these noble names - Liberation this, Patriotic that, Democratic Republic of something-or-other... I guess they can't own up to what they usually are: the Federation of Worse Oppressors Than the Last Bunch of Oppressors. Often, the most barbaric atrocities occur when both combatants proclaim themselves Freedom Fighters.