Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> So whose interests are served by mandating a leaky vaccine that prevents neither infection nor transmission of a disease that is chiefly dangerous to people over 75 or with serious preexisting medical conditions?

Should I keep reading? I think not



Should I explore perspectives outside of accepted party narratives? I think not


Rather like minmaxing, once you encounter something severely discredited there's no point going on and you can prune that whole dialogue tree.

If people want to convince me, they need to lead with their strongest evidence.


Exactly. My personal catalog of "fast fail" heuristics. Alas, it takes a while to compile all the tropes, dog whistles, talking points.

> If people want to convince me, they need to lead with their strongest evidence.

Yes and:

I considered myself a Popperian. I used to think discourse and reason could solve all of our problems. Ha.

How do I talk to my creationist (for instance) family members? What can I say that hasn't been said before?

I can't. And even if I could, I don't have the resources or wherewithal to counterbalance the tsunami of noise.

So I adapted.

One consequence is I'm now a predictionist. Whatever that's called. (Utilitarian?) For public discourse, rhetoric, policy I no longer care about base truth, objective reality.

Just make some predictions and stand by them. How does a belief in creationism, young earth, supply side economics, herd immunity, or whatever (for instances) help me navigate the world?

As I aged, I had less drive to refute every utterance about astrology (for instance). Now I no longer feel compelled or obligated to refute any other given cult.

Okay, I think that's my rant. Oh my god, family can push our buttons.


“Man muss aber nicht an jeder Mülltonne schnuppern, um zu wissen, dass sie stinkt.” (Loosely translated: you don’t need to sniff on every trash can to know that it smells.”

There’s value in reading things that fall outside your preferred narrative. But that’s not an excuse to value everything, no matter how far removed from reality it is.


aka Teach the controversy.


Should I eat manure to know it tastes awful? I think not, it is enough to know where it comes from.

But, if you disagree, by all means feast yourself.


Don’t forget this gem:

> almost half of the COVID-19 cases in hospitals are mild or asymptomatic

Why on earth would asymptomatic people be hospitalized?

And “mild” just means “you are not at immediate risk of death,” not “it’s going to be an easy illness.”


My wife went to the hospital with a mild case. She’s pregnant and had a monoclonal antibody infusion. We went home and she immediately developed a fever/chills/shakes when she hadn’t had any before.

So back to the hospital we went, just in case it was a reaction. They gave her some IV fluids and sent us home after 2 hours.

So there’s one. I bet a good portion of them are people freaking out once they realize they have it as a considerable portion of the population thinks the survival rate is ridiculously low.


Because they are in a hospital with other issues?

Testing patients is reasonable. If they are counted in the statistic, it can easily be misleading. Not sure if that's the case.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: