pinipedman

7 ms·

1.
by pinipedman 5y ago
This is not the most effective malaria vaccine. Three doses of intravenous PfSPZ-CVac is more effective. https://www.nature.com/articles/nature21060
2.
by pinipedman 6y ago
So, you think this is unrelated to human activities?
3.
by pinipedman 6y ago
Are those articles suggesting how to fix capitalism or are they actually suggesting eliminating private ownership of the means of production? There are numerous example of the latter being crushed by, e.g. the CIA among others, for around a
4.
by pinipedman 6y ago
Criticizing such details are not the same as criticizing the system itself. Preferring one implementation of capitalism over another isn't a criticism of capitalism. Similarly, espousing one political party over another isn't crit
5.
by pinipedman 6y ago
This is true of any political system. You are not allowed to criticize what the system claims to be. For state capitalist nations like China or the former USSR which claim to be communist you are unable to criticize communism. In an oligarc
6.
by pinipedman 6y ago
This is true of capitalist economic systems and democratic political systems. The USSR was not unusual in eliminating heterodox views, not that it was ever communist in more than name.
7.
by pinipedman 6y ago
> If we have all eternity, would we have the drive to keep improving ourselves and our society? Are we improving ourselves or society now? I doubt many decisions humans make are concerned with improving society. Even if they are it is wi
8.
by pinipedman 6y ago
The purpose of a legal system is not preventing people from doing things deemed illegal. Its purpose is the maintenance and expansion of state power. Laws are not designed for your benefit. If you benefit from a law that is merely incidenta
9.
by pinipedman 6y ago
Enough exercise, or physical activity of any form, will fix this. The time and motivation to do enough is the challenging part.
10.
by pinipedman 6y ago
Presumably to make it less bleak than it would be otherwise. I don't see how it would be possible to avoid climate change. But attempting to minimize it, or at least minimize humans' contribution seems preferable to doing nothin
11.
by pinipedman 6y ago
> Engaging further with our cultural and religious psychoses should be disincentivized The sort of techno-optimism you're espousing here amounts to a religion as well. It's a religion to which the majority of the developed worl
12.
by pinipedman 6y ago
What if the necessary change is something like lowering the standard of living in order to reduce net resource consumption? If people will never voluntarily do that, then how do you propose to sell that as leading to a sunny future? This mi
13.
by pinipedman 6y ago
Climate change is one of the main factors in "wiping out most life on earth." Habitat fragmantation means that flora and fauna cannot shift (generally poleward) to remain in regions they are suited to climatically, so the effects
14.
by pinipedman 6y ago
They should re-introduce moose, wolves, and brown bears as well. But lynx would make a great start.
15.
by pinipedman 6y ago
It is not defined as such, but it certainly only seems possible in the absence of the state. One well known dictionary phrases the relevant definition as "the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action". Man
16.
by pinipedman 6y ago
I don't think anyone would disagree that a better home environment is fundamental. But do you think that, in general, the longer sentences and higher rates of incarceration (especially for non-violent crime) in the US compared with oth
17.
by pinipedman 6y ago
Is this really a surprise to anyone? The US is second only to the USSR in incarceration rate. The disenfranchised, e.g. foster children, will certainly suffer disproportionately under such a system. The lack of social safety nets, mental he
18.
by pinipedman 6y ago
> Outside of work I certainly live in a free society. Only if you define freedom as the capacity to do whatever is allowed or at least not expressly prohibited by the state without legal consequence. Fortunately no one defines it that wa
19.
by pinipedman 6y ago
That was my point. Humans celebrate themselves for possessing the ability to reason, think, or have values. But judging other species by this standard is a preposterous notion. Just as a dolphin judging humans inferior for our limited abili
20.
by pinipedman 6y ago
I can't prove that a sufficiently impaired mentally disabled human can reason, think, or have values. But I suppose if I wanted to raise thousands of mentally disabled humans in cages for the purpose of skinning them and selling their
21.
by pinipedman 6y ago
You're giving human measures of value undue precedence here. It's the same way racists give precedence to their own race, colonialists give precedence to their own culture, and how most humans give precedence to their own species.
22.
by pinipedman 6y ago
Humans raise mink in horrible conditions just to be slaughtered so we can make a fashion statement. Then, when the very conditions we created become an inconvenience to us, we slaughter them and fail to make even frivolous use of them, rend