hnthrowaway8493

3 ms·

1.
by hnthrowaway8493 3y ago
Those two ruin more lives because they're legal and way more widely available, so more people abuse them - not because they're worse. Larger sample size means larger number affected overall. And yet we have people here arguing tha
2.
by hnthrowaway8493 4y ago
It doesn't directly contradict the paper you linked, but figured it's worth mentioning - the hypothesis about a diabetes-Alzheimer's link might have originally stemmed from fraudulent work. From the "related story"
3.
by hnthrowaway8493 5y ago
>if autonomous driving can save 1+ life, it's better than what we have now so we should keep it and accept that crashes will occur This argument ignores the reality of driving: by being a competent, attentive, careful driver you can
4.
by hnthrowaway8493 5y ago
Wow. Phrase above was almost certainly talking about the Holocaust.
5.
by hnthrowaway8493 5y ago
Here's a nice article answering your question and explaining the confusion here. It definitely seems like people who want to believe that covid is a hoax are taking this CDC post (which is technical and directed at scientists in testin
6.
by hnthrowaway8493 5y ago
Interesting - I've only worked on pretty small eng teams, but I couldn't live without git blame (or an editor/IDE feature using git blame). It's like another dimension, seeing the history of code line-by-line and learnin
7.
by hnthrowaway8493 5y ago
Read this: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/21/health/vaccine-nursing-ho... "An unvaccinated worker set off an outbreak at a U.S. nursing home where most residents were immunized." One vaccinate
8.
by hnthrowaway8493 5y ago
That's not how evolution works. The question to ask is, if most food sources except for grass disappeared, would humanity as a whole (through mass starvation and the resulting natural selection) adapt to be able to survive on grass wit