longhairedhippy

+1 on this, folks with just enough experience to have strong, yet naive, opinions is the bane of my existence. It is almost akin to a religious discussion, whereas folks will back up their suppositions with blind faith and defend those views to the death. Sorry if this is not adding a lot to the conversation, you just really struck a nerve!

I have realized that a really good open world video game with lots of replay value has an amazing value. $60 at 200 hours of gameplay works out to $0.30/hour, which I am struggling to find anything else I am interested in that has a similar fun-to-cost ratio.

On the flip side, if the game sucks, the average goes way down. Fortunately I'm a sucker for decent open world games so there's a relatively low chance for me.

So this is total anecdata but I have never been assaulted by someone that was stoned, and never seen someone become sexually aggressive or belligerent when stoned. I'm sure they exist, however those type of folks seem to be much less frequent that people who exhibit this behavior when drunk on alcohol.

I think it really comes down to the fact that weed was originally made illegal through disinformation and policies motivated by racial discrimination, when in reality it is at absolute worst, just as bad as alcohol. We need to stop policing people from themselves, especially when it is so hypocritical because of the massive alcohol and tobacco industries. Why do we need to keep wasting money on this?

Except for the fact that the Fed increasing the US money supply by 45% in 2 years was the cause of the inflation.

If only it was the UBI and not the Fed increasing the money supply by 45% in 2 years that caused the inflation.

It's not the checks that caused the inflation, it was the Fed increasing the money supply by 45% over 2 years.

I don't think it was the stimulus checks and unemployment benefits but the Fed increasing the US money supply by more than 45% in 2 years.

This is the real reason, why worry about people/orgs that don't have money? Plus, can you imagine blast radius of a bug in the system that could get a bad signal and shutdown your entire infrastructure? As a rule, I always try to avoid any pattern where touching/changing one thing will cause everything to fail. There is currently a mechanism in AWS to shutdown/delete resources for non-paying customers (disclaimer: used to work there), however it has an enormous amount of checks and balances, as well as a significant time lag before actually removing everything, in order to cut down on false positives.

Having said all this, I would love it if this was actually a feature. I watch my personal AWS account I use for toy projects with great anxiety that one day I will get a luxury new car sized bill.

The real reason is us-east-1 was the first and by far the biggest region, the same reason that new services always launch there but other regions are are not necessarily required (some services have to launch in every region).

The us-east-1 region is consistently pushing the limits of scale for the AWS services, thus is has way more problems than other regions.

I agree with your sentiment but some of the quotes in the article from internal Google memos look pretty damning. One of interest says their "Jedi" advertising program, which was meant to subvert legitimate ad competition from other exchanges, 'generates suboptimal yields for publishers and serious risks of negative media coverage if exposed externally.'

I also would like to see some changes but this seems like a case of Google actively trying to be evil. They architected their systems to choose their exchange, even if another exchange had a higher bid, and then lied to ad publishers about the practice, along with fully acknowledging it in writing! How much more self-aware could you be? How could people, in good conscience, work for a place like that?

> In terms of time, these vaccines very much have not been fully vetted in the same manner as any other vaccine.

This is a tired, out-dated argument, all 3 vaccines in distribution in the US have been fully vetted and passed all tests, there is no more "emergency approval". If time is what you want then you're just saying there is absolutely nothing that will convince you to take it.

> In part, yes. However there seems to be roughly an equal amount of people who have never had any objection to vaccines in the past that now do.

Yes, now that is has become a political issue instead of a scientific one (like it should be), many more people have been duped.

> what about finding safer adjuvants?

How about being realistic about the side effects of the vaccine? This is one of the most studied, most widely distributed vaccines in history. If there any data to back up any sort of hesitancy, I believe the amount of people desperately searching for something useful to use in their war on science would find it.

> you're saying they should be censored?

I'm saying viewpoints that obviously have absolutely no basis in reality (Bill Gates microchips, magnetizing face spoons, etc) should not have a place to flourish alongside real scientific discourse. How about we vet an idea before we let the masses with little to no critical thinking skills consume it.

> doesn't make the scientist's conclusion wrong either, just because the nut believes it too.

I have no idea what you're trying to say here, however if a "nut" says something sane, that doesn't make them sane. I think the larger problem is there are a lot of people with a lot of money to make by preaching vaccine hesitancy. If people are maliciously influencing public opinion for personal gain and the detriment of public good, how do you suggest we combat that?

I agree censorship is not the answer but I also don't support giving a platform to people in a society where people will accept absolutely anything in their echo chamber without question or serious discourse. The media has lost the confidence of the people and everyone is so caught up in bipartisanship, it's a literal crime the vaccine hesitancy falls along political lines, if anything that should tell you it is not based in science.

As many folks as we have dog piling onto "vax bad" train, there is no shortage of people with incentive to dig in here. The fact the vaccine has been fully vetted in the same manner as any other vaccine seems to be lost on most folks. Additionally, this seems to be an extension of general vaccine hesitancy which has absolutely no scientific basis whatsoever but continues be a problem in the US.

When you have nuts sticking spoons to their face, claiming to have been magnetized, and those folks are speaking with equal authority and to as broad of an audience as respected scientists, there's a problem.

Much more nuance that the original post, makes sense. I don't think you conveyed this in the original comment, which I conflated with effectively "They keep changing what they say, therefore they are lying, therefore I am not getting vaccinated". Granted you didn't say that, I believe that's the way I interpreted it due to hearing the same argument from a bunch of different folks. Thanks for the clarity!

I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here, it doesn't seem relevant to my comment.

My point is that using the fact that science changes as new information comes in, thus the answer science gave us yesterday may be different from the answer science gives us today.

The parent comment is using the changing conditions around vaccines, the fact that they said 1 shot, then 2 shots, now there is talk of boosters, as evidence that it was irrelevant and should be ignored. My point is that must expect any answer science provides to potentially change. If people want an answer that is unchanging, science cannot give it to them.

Adenovirus vaccines have been in use since the 70s.

> What does say about your WW2 mortality claim then?

That statement doesn't even make sense. I'm refuting you statement that folks are not dying of COVID, their dying with COVID. It's just not true, if that were the case, we would see a corresponding drop in other causes of death. We didn't they actually went up, pretty close to how much they go up every year. But COVID deaths on top have gotten us to the point of WWII death rates in 1943. So in short, it completely proves my point.

> Look at those mortality rates closely, the Fully Vaccinated group is actually higher.

I think failure to interpret the study correctly does not actually make it incorrect. Try reading the whole thing instead of cherry picking numbers to try to prove your point.

> Mind you, this is if you believe the CDC and their data in the first place, which I don't.

What's there to "believe"? Deny what doesn't fit your world view is not a good playbook. Did you "believe" the CDC when Trump was in charge? Was it different then? Sometimes things we don't like still happen, even though we really don't want them to. Denying reality doesn't make it true.

Science changes as new information becomes available, that's why it's so great, it's self-correcting on a long enough timescale. If you want a 100% verifiable, stake-your-life-on-it-this-will-never-ever-change, answer, science is not for you. Using this inherent property of science as a way to deny it is disingenuous at best.

I would venture a guess that some of that is due to the people sticking spoons to their faces, saying they were magnetized by the vaccine. Do we really need to give those people a platform?

While we are walking a fine line here, people have proven they will believe anything that is said in an authoritative enough voice, regardless of merit. At what point does the harm outweigh the good? We know social media allows these people to find each other and create echo chambers to reinforce their viewpoints and recruit others. We would have no problem if this was "white supremacy" or "terrorism", however I think this will affect many more people.

Seems like you owned yourself. By your own statement "But you can't prove this because we can't go back in time and run to separate Earths". Right now in the US, we don't have an answer to either question because of people that are unable to interpret the facts.

AstraZeneca is selling their vaccine at cost. Plenty of vaccines have been required for activities in the past, I had to provide proof of vaccination for both public school and college for my children. The real power/money grab is by all the folks blasting out this misinformation. I didn't pay a dime for my vaccine, it was provided at cost by Moderna to the organization, who distributed it for free to the public.

You realize don't you that Tucker Carlson and all the Youtubers get paid based on how much they get viewed, right? That's the money grab you're looking for...

I agree with the sentiment, however it does not appear folks are putting actual science forward in their arguments. How do you rank people sticking spoons to their face and saying the vaccine magnetized them alongside serious discourse?

The "questions" that Tucker Carlson are not "questions" at all. "What if taking the vaccine turns you into a newt? I'm just asking questions here" (not an actual quote but along the lines of his questioning). People asking questions in good faith should definitely be discussed, it's the only way forward. People asking "questions" purely as a method to sow doubt and further their personal agenda is harmful.

"Think of the children!" one of my favorite ways to see people trying to get out of an argument. Who could possibly argue for wanting to hurt children!

I would love some citations here, as this seems to be the exact type of misinformation this act is trying to combat. The thought that hundreds of thousands of medical professionals across the world are willingly ignoring potentially fatal consequences for children out of some nefarious political agenda is ludicrous. If this was really happening, it would be trivial to show it, anecdotes are not hard data.

In the same vein, not 1 immunocompromised child should die from COVID when there is an easy and safe way to combat it. Not one. But many have.

Adenovirus vaccines have been in use since the 70s.

> Age standardized mortality rate (that is, accounts for an increasingly old population) is at 2008 levels in the UK. This doesn't account the total lack of treatment early on, patients were denied anti-inflammatory medicine and put on ventilators instead of normal oxygen.

Thank you for confirming my argument, vaccination rates in the UK are well over 80%.

> Not many people are dying of COVID-19, they're dying with COVID-19. Most have serious underlying conditions.

Actually, deaths from underlying health conditions are all up in addition to COVID deaths, try again.

> This is patently untrue. 87% of deaths and hospitalizations since July are vaccinated [1]. Now, this site might seem sketch, but you can download the reports from the Scottish government yourself and verify the math. I did, it's accurate. Tellingly, the latest report is missing the death count table.

That is not an honest statement, granted I should have qualified my statement with "in the US". Comparing a country with a much higher vaccination rate seems to be apples to oranges. Very interesting stat though, need to read more on that.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/09/10/moderna-mos...

> If the vaccines have any affect at all, it's marginal, and only in the elderly. Of course, they don't work, that's why they're rolling out 'boosters' because the vaccines keep failing.

This is 100% supposition, what data would you cite, if any, to back this up?

EDIT: Did some more reading, apparently Moderna, Pfizer, and J&J only account for less than 34% of the vaccines administered in the UK, they are primarily utilizing other vaccines.

I would be completely shocked if your "personal risk assessment" is accurate. There is no clear indications on which folks will get long COVID, "age, health status, lifestyle, and so on" are generalizations not absolutes. Your chance of dying of COVID, regardless of your health status, is much greater than the chance of experiencing serious side effects in what is probably one of the most widely distributed vaccines in history.

"Feelings" have no place in science. These are numbers not subjective anecdotes, which appear to be what you're basing your decision on. Say what you like, the data doesn't lie, only people do.

Have you watched Tucker Carlson? I would be pleased if they charged the man with murder after this is all over. Do you think it's odd he won't answer questions about his own vaccination status?

I call bullshit here. If you're that worried, get the J&J vaccine, it's just like all the others. Multiple orders of magnitude more people have died or come down with long haul COVID versus had these side effects so the argument that you're doing the safe thing does not hold water.

I would treat Democrats that refused a vaccination because it was Trump's FDA with the same disdain. The fact that this issue is divisive along political lines is what is so damn infuriating. This is science people, one of the few things left on the planet that can conceivably be free of emotional discourse and we're actively killing it for financial gain.

I'm not a Republican or a Democrat, I'm a scientist.

I hate to be pedantic but the poll you reference was in 2020 and Trump said that in May of 2021. I don't think it had a measurable effect on either party.

I agree, however how do you deal with folks knowingly spreading misinformation for financial gain? Most of the "sources" have an active interest in having people listen to them and will say anything that will get more people to tune in, no matter the content.

Do we just let them continue in an age where there are morons out there that will believe anything that is written in a coherent sentence or posted to Youtube with cool background music? At some point we have to hold people accountable, as this is straight up murder in some cases. Remember that girl that convinced her boyfriend to kill himself?

If only vaccine mandates were a new thing...

I remember having to provide vaccine proof to get my kids into public school, when enrolling them into college. How is this a new thing? Why is it such a big deal now? Why are these people kicking up such a fuss now?

The reason: GOP makes money and gains power by proving people will believe anything they say. This is a blind power grab and the only reason it is an issue is because it is a great talking point. Tucker Carlson and the like are only doing this to get money, why no one sees that is beyond me.