>If you want to use HN as intended—for intellectual curiosity—then you're welcome, but ideological agendas are the opposite of that, irrespective of which ideology.
You may not be interested in any ideology, but Ideology is surely interested in what you believe. That world where internet was for intellectual curiosity and not
ideology battle at every step, is long gone and never coming back.
Maybe so, but the site guidelines haven't changed. If we have to ban more accounts for breaking them, that's fine. It's certainly better than not banning them.
Besides analytical skill, people also posses intuition which is a valid tool to interpret the world. A wife that is cheated on by her husband, intuitively knows that she s cheated on even though she has no proof. She might see the unusual behavior of her husband, the fact that he s secretive doesn't give her attention as he used to or comes home very late. She might even confront him about this only to be met with a lot of logical explanations and alibies(I had to work till late, I went on a teambuilding trip, etc). His reasons might be completely rational and logical but she knows something is wrong. He might even attempt to make it seems she s the hysterical and crazy one while he s the rational and calm guy. See where I m going? Your friends and family don t contest "the data",they couldn t do this even if they wanted. But they have serious reasons to believe something s off. Their intuition is telling that. They might not have the data, only a feeling. But that feeling is strong. They don t deny your good intentions,it s just that you made yourself the defender of a certain conclusion.They have an issue with the mainstream source of that data, with the government and the the industry behind, which academics ar legitimizing through skewed papers, paid research, etc. I suggest to take their skepticism more serious, since even I, from the other side of the world, can see they probably they are right. There is definitely something off and skepticism is reasonable these days.
> You know who also is not on the gold standard? Every other country where a large range of conditions exist.
Every other country follows usa. After the second world war finished europe was reconstructing and depleted of any financial power
so america set the tone in finance since it was the biggest winner. That s how we got the removal of the gold standard and dollar as the reserve currency for every other country.You make it seem as if every country reached the conclusion that gold standard must go by itself.
>People have a right to be unvaccinated, and the rest of us have a right to protect ourselves from them.
No you don t. You took a vaccine that s supposed to protect you. You don t have any right to impose it through mandates on others. This is hiding malicious intent behind "what about the children" argument. You got your shot, you re protected
and under no threat, move on with your life and leave people and their rights alone.
The politicians in your country also heavily indebted the country further just to buy said vaccines even though ~26% took it and the rest firmly reject it. You would think said politicians would stop with this bs and try tackle actual issues, maybe create more Emergency Rooms or improve the poor state of hospitals.
Ahahhaa, and somehow, you ve got here like a solid 70% of this forum that not only do not question any measure by the governments media and big pharma in the last 18 months, but actively find excuses for any inconsistency and lack of logic for any measure, or the lack of any positive results. These people are mostly phds, bay area engineers, entrepreneurs, highly skilled specialists and scientists mind you. These people work with deadlines, need to show scientific papers, or some working snippet of code, or some working infrastructure at the end of the day. Somehow, they never question the moving deadline for pandemic(2 weeks to flatten the curve) or the abysmal results of vaccination and lockdowns in stopping covid infections and hospitalisations. Covid is truly the afghanistan of the nerds it seems. See you in 20 years.
I’ve also worked in feminism. None of the scientific results are correct (We often think women have always been oppressed, remembering the right to vote, but disregarding that ILO’s convention on slavery in 1930 excluded men 18-49 - which literally reverses the conclusion about oppression). And yet this scientific field was funded and hyped in 2013-2020.
The common points with Afghanistan and Covid: Every study is slightly wrong enough to lead to an incorrect global picture, and obviously enough that simply reading the studies is enough to find the major flaws; Laws are written in emergency; Actions that are undertaken either amplify the problem or are orthogonal to solving it; Those very actions harm the bystanders in a significant way, enough that it causes major outrage and focalises everyone’s mind.
I wonder to which point they are rotating the topics, whether they have a major cycle on 20 years (otherwise people would get too knowledgeable and able to disprove the sophisms) and a short cycle on 6 years (perhaps election cycle, the swings of the two-party), or whether this is a natural phenomenon emerging from large nations in peace.
Next topic will be something else such as microrobot attacks, so they are not visible but everyone will have to protect themselves.
If you're counting on acquiring immunity naturally consider this:
1. You got sick and now you have antibodies but your internal organs, like lungs are scarred. You'd have likely avoided some if not all of that damage if you were vaccinated.
2. Your immune system might be targeting parts of the virus that are less universal across virus' mutations so it gives you less or little immunity against mutants. mRNA vaccine is specifically targeting the spike protein which so far has been unchanged enough for vaccines to be more or less effective against mutations.
>Became it's not about you, it's about everyone around you as a group. Those who are "comfortable catching the disease" are taking... Bla bla...
Then why are you smoking, or why are you eating fast food, why are you not exercising? These actions also put a burden on the health system. Why do covid and not tobacco? You know the answer already. This is not about anyone s health
Tobacco isn't communicable like a virus, doesn't produce symptoms in 2 weeks, hasn't ground the world to a halt and actually serves a purpose as a heretofore deeply ingrained cultural activity. The rest of the comparisons arent any better.
Dont take this as me agreeing with the previous comment but I just want to point out that smoking, fast food, etc are all things that kill you "slowly", therefore has less of a risk of overrunning the healthcare system.
It would have been smarter IMO (though probably not politically possible) to mandate the vaccine for specific age groups. If what they are trying to do avoid hospitalization, they should focus on the groups that are most susceptible. If you're under 40 for example you won't be required to take it but if you're older you would because the risk of a 40 something getting hospitalized is way higher than a 20 something.
They do put a burden on the healthcare system, but last I checked ICUs are not presently being filled up across the country with lung cancer and heart disease patients.
You may not be interested in any ideology, but Ideology is surely interested in what you believe. That world where internet was for intellectual curiosity and not ideology battle at every step, is long gone and never coming back.