mlang23

For one, I am not sure about the side-effect-freeness. In fact, the covid vaccine is the first vaccine I know where a high percentage of people I know who have got the shot also were ill for a few days. So this is new for me. I have got a lot of vaccines around 15 years ago for a travel gig, and didn't have side-effects from a single one of them. So this is new, me having to accept that the vaccine might take me out for a few days.

And yes, of course, with a different situation, my decision might be different. If covid were as harsh as our media and government claimed at the beginning of the first lockdown, I would certainly get a shot. However, it turned out the media and government have overstated the danger, apparently to achieve compliance. This sort of lie (we were told "everyone will know someone who died") was my wakeup call. I was originally mislead and expected a deathrate of 1%. As it turns out, almost only the elderly die, and the deathrate (including the elderly) is around 0.1%. Wrong order of magnitude for real panic on my side.

Almost all vaccine producers claim effectivity for about 9 months, right? So after 9 months, you need to get another shot. Since you have decided your immune system can not handle COVID on its own, you have now a dependency on the vaccine. Thats what I call an addiction. Better english word is probably a dependency...

Frankly, if you insist I get a biannual shot for your reasons, I insist that you give up tennis because I dont see why I should pay a single penny for your spare time activities.

I am willing to retract my retarded claim if you do the same.

Yes, my "substiantial benefit" is not exposing my system to an artificially created addiction/dependency on fabricated meds. What you seem to ignore is the long term effect of going down that path as a society. If the death rate in my age group were higher, believe me, I would take a shot. But since I am statistically not really at risk, I prefer to not make myself dependent on vaccination to survive.

So following your argument, we would also need to outlaw every sort of risk-taking behaviour. Almost every sport except chess bears a risk comparable to what you say above. And most recreational activities also bear a risk that you might have an accident, which could put some stress on the people working at the hospital. Heck, the helicopter pilot could crash while they bring you to safety, so you implicitly killed them.

In fact, everything you do outisde of your workhours is your personal risk, so it needs to be banned I guess.

Sounds fine to me. I am blind and can not do most of the fancy recreational activities you sighted people are so fond of. So why should I care. In fact, I should immediately start a petition that makes your lifes more dull and miserable. But guess what, no. Thats not my thing. I am not an asshole.

Come on. If humanity were unable to survive without the help of artificial vaccines, we would never be here.

"What would it take to change your mind?" is either a starter for bribery, or it at least implies that the mind of the other needs changing. All your "rational discussion" stuff aside, please explain to me what exactly about this you are not understanding? I might add that it also does not help a rational discussion if one part is lacking the ability to empathize with the other, and tries to invalidate the other by claiming their whole point is invalid, without even trying to zoom in on it.

Wow, amazing. I hope I never stand next to you. The shiver would probably freeze me to death.

I experience similar things. Frankly, I think the media has put so many weird labels on people who choose not to vaccinate that after the lockdowns, the vaxed people found a sort of sensation in talking to non-vaxed people. It felt like in a zoo. "So, you are not vaxed because you are afraid of the pain?" The actual reason for most, which is "I have decided to risk an infection to let my immune system do its job" is never really talked about because I mostly end up terminating the conversation because it has this distinct derogatory tone from the ohter side.

This is no quote, so please dont make it look like one.

Also, the comparison is nonsense. If someone drinks and drives, they did intake something into their system which made them a risk to others. What you want is the reverse. Everyone is by default a risk to the society, and only if the get a biannual shot from the latest and greatest experimental medicine, you deem them no danger to society. You are trying to outlaw the human condition. There are people who think this is a big deal and needs to be opposed. I agree.

What I find most sad about your post is that you had to open by stating your vaccination status. So we effectively reached a point where you are only allowed to be critical of vaccination after you got yourself a shot. This is so weird and frightening, I dont know what to say. Things said and claimed by all sides in the past 1 1/2 years have made me really stop believe in humanity. It feels like a bad dream or a strange fiction story. One of these were you end up fully immersed. And you want to wake up, but this time, you realize you can't.

People are seriously writing here that they think if people are being fired, that pressure will "hopefully change their minds". Are you aware how cruel you are? You wish someone to loose their income just because they dont have the same opinion then you? When did this happen? When did we start to produce people like this? When did we stop to care? Did I really miss this wave of right-wing-minded people hiding on the left side?

Why does this technique change anything? You are still assuming the supposed superior position, since you imply that the stance of your discussion partner is wrong and needs to be changed. Dont you see how patronising this is?

The vaccination is still not mandatory, right? Why do you write "excuse"? Are you really so full of yourself that you can not accept that people make different decisions from yours? Why do you even care? I assume you got the vaccine for yourself. So what is the issue? Why do you have to speak about your fellow humans in such a derogatory tone?

I believe a DSL-done-right doesnt care about the issues you mention. The important thing about DSLs is the DS, Domain-specific. The domain experts care about a nice language fitted for their specific domain. But they dont care about evaluation order, macros, lazyness, and whatnot. If the DSL fits the domain, these are non-issues.

Your criticism seems to apply to every DSL, which in my mind makes it too generic and therefore invalid. It also reminds me of the argument which was used to push Java in the corporate world. "We need a language which protects us from the dumb programmers we hired to save money"

Understanding someone elses code is always a challenge. Outlawing custom abstractions in favour of a few very shallow ones doesnt seem like a convincing thechnical argument.

I always knew the new valium-lgbtq-ceo is going to fuck the company over.

Oh, a Google believer. So tell me, how is a deaf-blind person going to solve an audio captcha? Is it OK for you to claim that a deaf-blind person ius not a human? I guess so, because google is the bomb, right?

And we dont even have to go down the deaf-blind road. I have excellent hearing, but have failed at solving audio captchas in the past. Also, please remember that there might also be a language barrier. Give an english audio captcha to a german housewive, and learn how discrimination works.

You dont rely on accessibility, right? So please dont claim that Google is perfect in this regards. Also, using words like "ludicrous" to shame people that dont believe the propaganda is just so fucked up.

If you like larry page and his friends, say so clearly, but please dont shame people based on accessibility that is not there.

I am working in HPC, and I beg to differ. Yes, compilers should do optimisation whereever possible, but that is only a small percentage of the story. If the programmer doesnt know which algorithms to choose, the compiler is unable to fix that. If the programmer does not understand the underlying architecture at least a bit, the compiler is also likely going to fail fixing that.

Take one of the most basic programming examples, fib. Depending on how your programming language might be implemented, the recursive definition is likely slower then necessary. So at the end of the lesson, you're being taught to make a loop out of the recursion, so save stack space and such. But usually, the lesson ends here. But this is sooooo far away from the best solution. Think 2x2 matrix and the power of n. No compiler will ever transform your naiv recursive fib to that. So no, the compiler is not the ultimate answer. If you dont manage to educate more programmers, we will continue to run slow software.

And there are many stories like this. When CAPTCHA started to be widespread, a lot of my blind friends (including me) suddenly were blocked from using parts of the Internet. We had to find sighted help to solve just a captcha, while everything else basically worked to be done independently. You can not imagine how much sorrow and self-pity CAPTCHAs have generated. I hope the person(s) who willingly allowed this trend to happen will be hit by karma with full force.

CAPTCHAs are discriminating. They fail at what their name suggests they do occasionally. Which means they dehumanize humans. There are humans without eyesight, you know? And some of these have bad hearing. The web has decided that it is OK to classify these people are computers. And nobody cares because the solution is so convenient. Well, thats how society works.

I am still not impressed. My father died with 39, my aunt with 42, and both my grannies didnt go beyond 70. This was way before corona. Life isnt guaranteed to last for 100 years. Stop fucking over the whole world just because you can not accept that it is finite.

Yet another FUD-spreader.

> there's still a non-zero chance something somethin could happen to you.

That was true before the pandemic, and it is still true today. If I die, I die. No need to restrict the lives of everyone else just because you are afraid of death.

Thats a fair price to pay for being rich beyond what a single person needs. No sympathy from my part, only understanding. I wouldnt want to hang out with a rich guy as well. These people are creepy.

Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi

Keep your FUD to yourself and to your family. I am young and healthy enough that I will not need a hospital if I get a covid infection. Your FUD does not change my attitude.

I think you are spreading FUD. So no need to argue with you.

> if booster shots are required on an annual basis

Even worse, where I live the current story is a bi-annual renewal!

I will fight this as long as I can. I dont want a dependency like that. Its a socially enforced drug abuse.

As a person with a disability, I request respectfully that you leave disability out of your flawed "everyone needs to comply with my opinion" nonsense. I dont want to see disability abused by people like you. Understood? Keep your patronising to yourself and your family.

While we are at it. I also don't care if your bosses mother died or not. Since she is your bosses mother, she likely had an age where death is lurking around the corner anyway.