Hacker News Reader

defaultprimateon Supreme Court Halts Vaccine Mandate That Covered 80M Workers

80% of hospitalizations in the US were overweight or obese, the number is even more egregious for under-65 hospitalizations and deaths.

defaultprimateon Supreme Court Halts Vaccine Mandate That Covered 80M Workers

I'm just holding Bloomberg to the same standards the CDC director holds herself to.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wave-of-excess-deaths-not...

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2771761

https://udumbara.net/prime-age-mortality-up-40-percent-major...

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-09-covid-doesnt-account-...

https://www.usmortality.com/excess-absolute

defaultprimateon Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

>I was trying to put your exaggerated comment into context

Historical whataboutisms are in no way contextual to ongoing genocides

>You think that the existence of some black lives matter activists proves the moral superiority of USA

Yes. I'm sure there's a plethora of vocal Uyghur Lives Matter activists present in mainland China.

defaultprimateon Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

I mean anytime someone whataboutisms literal ongoing genocide, it's bad faith, period. Whether it's someone working directly on behalf of the CCP or an individual self-motivated nationalist or even a foreigner that's fallen for CCP global propaganda is irrelevant. It's bad faith, and in my opinion, outright malicious.

defaultprimateon Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

>Shrug. All evidence is that the Chinese have managed to create plenty of military tech. Stolen IP or not.

They really haven't. There's no original R&D. It's just rushed, terrible copies.

Yes, there's a massive difference in military logistics and shipping the latest knock off kitchen appliance.

> This is a hell of a non sequitur.

I don't think this means what you think it means. Most of China's military capabilities presented on the global stage are rushed to the public eye as soon as possible. That's the point. The US has no interest in doing this because of adversarial nations like China. They have no need to prove they're ahead of the game or unveil what they're capable of, it's just accepted that they are and have private capabilities that far exceed what is publicly known (because that's the case).

defaultprimateon Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

>You mean the country that manufacturers virtually everything Americans buy can’t handle supply chain logistics?

Yes, there's a massive difference in military logistics and shipping the latest knock off kitchen appliance via a third party. Global economic sanctions on China would be far more detrimental to China than the US. There's plenty of alternatives.

>You seriously don’t think the US has an interest in impressing the rest of the world with its military might? Why do you imagine we keep building aircraft carriers?

You're right, we should just declassify everything the second a contract is awarded and it enters development.

I'm talking about new R&D, not aircraft carriers. The US is very slow to unveil military capabilities on the global stage. Meanwhile China unveils their F-35 copy the second they can to try to "beat" the US.

defaultprimateon Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

Are you referring to the response to the election results and the years long investigations?

defaultprimateon Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

>Haven't there been some recent reports that the U.S. might actually not fare so well against China in direct conflict?

By CCP propagandists and agency leaders trying to retain or increase their funding, sure lol. China has nowhere close to the supply chain, materiel, experience, or quality tech necessary to challenge the US in direct conflict. They have virtually no original military R&D. It's just poorly reverse engineered tech from incomplete stolen plans. Remember China has an interest in trying to convey how "good" its military tech is on the global stage. The US does not. Any time you find out about some "new" scary Chinese military capability, just remember it's decades old stolen garbage from a nation that is better off holding its cards close to its chest.

defaultprimateon Is Google Search Deteriorating? Measuring Google's Search Quality in 2022

Search politically controversial topics incognito with a VPN on using google vs yandex vs duckduckgo? Ivermectin, January 6th arrests, BLM protest deaths, VAED, mRNA studies before 2020, Robert Malone, Geert Vanden Bossche. I mean there's an endless list of things you can experiment with.

defaultprimateon Milton Friedman’s Interest Rate Fallacy

>Why are you so sure of that?

Because I understand basic macroeconomics and how prolific and dependent global finance is on the USD.

defaultprimateon Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

This is some Chinese propaganda-esque whataboutism. It's one of the oldest propaganda plays in the book.

https://globalvoices.org/2021/08/19/the-chinese-government-d...

defaultprimateon Intel removes Xinjiang references from shareholder letter

It's something I've stated repeatedly: The most dangerous part of China is not its military or nukes (they're actually hardly an offensive threat at all). It's how effective their global propaganda, cultural warfare, and data harvesting techniques are. You don't need nukes when you can destabilize and divide an entire country from within while having everything you need and more to psychologically manipulate the population however you want. Even better because they gave you this information voluntarily

defaultprimateon Milton Friedman’s Interest Rate Fallacy

>Because USD is a bubble

lol no. Do you have any proof of this that's not a crypto blog?

>stop using USD as a global reserve currency

Not gonna happen.

defaultprimateon Milton Friedman’s Interest Rate Fallacy

It's also possible to have growing economy, increasing inequality, more people entering the middle, upper-middle, and upper class than ever, the poor gaining wealth at the fastest pace on record, and an extremely high quality of life for those in the bottom quintile, which is what's happening.

There's nothing fundamentally wrong with wealth inequality (see Denmark), or fundamentally right about wealth equality. How many "rich" countries with extremely low wealth inequality exist? Meanwhile the least wealth unequal countries are also the poorest. It's almost like wealth inequality is highly correlated with overall richness and quality of life of a population.

The rich get richer while the poor get poorer is a myth. Economies are not zero sum. Just because the wealth of the wealthiest is increasing faster than the wealth of the poorest doesn't mean the poorest aren't gaining wealth faster and faster with time too (which they are in basically every first world/rich republic/democracy).

defaultprimateon Ethereum founder talks disguising purchases to make them look like a legit ICO

> No regular buyer or seller has the capital to affect the market price in any significant way

Which is absolutely not the case in crypto, further evidence of how illiquid it is.

defaultprimateon More Americans are saying they’re ‘vaxxed and done’

I've only been rude to the asshole that came out of the gate swinging with accusations of being a conspiracy theorist.

defaultprimateon More Americans are saying they’re ‘vaxxed and done’

Mate I'm not sure how to make this any clearer to you. Literally none of the examples you gave are in any way comparable to injecting a completely novel medical intervention both in mechanism and function for which zero long term data exists. You're doing the equivalent asking me to believe there's a population of unicorns underground plotting to wipe out humanity, so we should plan to combat them by building up specific unicorn destroying weapons, with no evidence they exist in the first place. "It's safe trust me" Sorry but no.

All your examples have comparable or well studied technologies and preexisting science behind them. None of them have zero comparable long term data. HDTVs and VR are built on well understood technology, CBD oil, Impossible Burgers, Chocolate bars are built on well understood food chemistries. None of them come even close to the risks imparted by direct health intervention that has failed animal trials repeatedly.

>You had no hypothesis, no argument and designed no experiment.

I've literally explicitly stated it several times. If you choose to ignore it, that's a personal problem.

>The moment you convince everyone that it’s smarter to wait for long-term data, you lose the ability to obtain that very data you want

lol no you don't, you just do actual science and studies/trials while not fear mongering the population into authoritarian complacency over unstudied medical interventions that have not mitigated excess deaths at all.

defaultprimateon Ethereum founder talks disguising purchases to make them look like a legit ICO

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/liquidity.asp

>without affecting its market price

defaultprimateon More Americans are saying they’re ‘vaxxed and done’

>The Covid vaccine is hardly a “completely novel”

It really is. Its mechanism of action is completely new and involves cell alterations and inducing protein synthesis that has never been done before and for which no long term data exists.

>Sure the process used for this particular vaccine was novel, but do you think it’s mechanism of action is so fundamentally different from other vaccines such that it is likely to have fundamentally different long-term outcomes?

I don't know, maybe it could, maybe it couldn't. The data proving otherwise doesn't exist. That's why I'm going to wait for the actual science to be done.

defaultprimateon More Americans are saying they’re ‘vaxxed and done’

>but your decision making process was not informed by information or probabilities in any way.

That's exactly what it is and will be informed by, and that information right now is zero. There's no evidence to support the hypothesis' conclusion, therefore I reject the hypothesis at present. That's not always going to be the case.

It's in no way comparable to conspiracy theories because it's a falsifiable premise. Statistical significance can and will exist about the long term safety eventually. The question at hand is very easily quantifiable and qualifiable: are mRNA vaccines safe in the long term and relative to the risks of the afflictions they target? The current answer is: there is no evidence supporting that they are, therefore the reasonable, rational, and scientific thing to do is maintain the baseline until sufficient evidence exists.

Yeah maybe something can go wrong in 20 years in one person. That's not the argument I'm making. I'm arguing that we don't know what could go wrong or what the probability something can go wrong is in the long term because the data literally just doesn't exist you're trying to argue that we should just assume that the probability of something going wrong is already established as infinitesimally small. That's irrational and antiscientific. It's not established at all that's my entire point. The data will exist eventually, we are not stuck in this permanent state of ignorance.

defaultprimateon More Americans are saying they’re ‘vaxxed and done’

I'm not sure how you want me to respond to what you stated since it has nothing to do with what I stated.

Long term data doesn't exist. There's no evidence the vaccines are safe long term. They also experienced greatly accelerated trial periods with data and time that would have been woefully insufficient for any other medical intervention. The data, results, and methodology for the trials is currently embroiled in scientific and ethical controversy.

To state they are "the most well tested vaccines ever" is blatant gaslighting. Widely distributed is not tested.

defaultprimateon More Americans are saying they’re ‘vaxxed and done’

See my comment here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29885809

Completely novel direct health interventions are in no way comparable to technological advances built on well understood foundations and methodologies for which a wealth of data exists.

defaultprimateon More Americans are saying they’re ‘vaxxed and done’

Long term data doesn't exist, period.

Newspeak isn't newspeak. Got it.

defaultprimateon More Americans are saying they’re ‘vaxxed and done’

The probability of negative outcomes versus the a priori knowledge of outcomes, the context of the novel thing being introduced (direct health interventions versus convenience of cell phones is a great chasm), the similar evidence surrounding the novel thing.

As an example to the last point: many people did wait a long time to adopt cell phones and smart phones on the basis of worries about cancer, but there was already overwhelming evidence that non ionizing radiation doesn't cause cancer, so their concerns were misguided. Their concerns about novel devices were not applicable because the techniques and methods were not novel.

On the other end of the spectrum, X-Rays used to be a form of acne treatment, and there was no evidence on the safety of using them as such, just on the efficacy of the technique. As a result, many people ended up with all different kinds of cancer in their face, because there was no long term data on ionizing radiation's effects on DNA. The technology and the technique were completely novel and unstudied.

I never worried about getting cancer from a cell phone, because there was ample evidence proving the safety. I never would have gotten x-rays as acne treatment.

defaultprimateon More Americans are saying they’re ‘vaxxed and done’

14 cohorts of 6 individuals were injected between 2013-2016.

defaultprimateon Ethereum founder talks disguising purchases to make them look like a legit ICO

I'm not interested is discussing crypto's made up redefinitions of long standing, well understood financial terms.

Crypto is illiquid. It has no intrinsic value.

defaultprimateon More Americans are saying they’re ‘vaxxed and done’

The study was conducted in 2018, is the first and only one prior, was uncontrolled, only had 101 participants, a follow up of 64 days, and several negative outcomes.

I do stand corrected. One made it to human trials. Doesn't mitigate dozens of disastrous animal trials.

defaultprimateon More Americans are saying they’re ‘vaxxed and done’

>Is there some reason why we would expect a priori for the COVID-19 vaccine to have a particularly high risk of adverse affects that only show up long-term?

The correct question is, is there sufficient evidence that we shouldn't? You don't ever assume the confirmation of a hypothesis (in this case long term safety) when introducing something novel. That's the exact opposite of science.

My answer is: I believe in science, empirical evidence, and hypothesis testing. I'm not going to assume the hypothesis that they're safe long term is correct without empirical evidence. You don't disrupt baseline systems with something novel on the basis of faith when no empirical evidence exists. That's completely antithetical to science.

It's funny because most of your examples are great illustrations that assuming novel things are safe has disastrous consequences.

defaultprimateon More Americans are saying they’re ‘vaxxed and done’

Heart attack, stroke, and blood clots were massively up among all ages in 2021, even compared to 2020