creddit

7 ms·

1.
by creddit 5y ago
Except it's not irrelevant even. The central claim is encapsulated in the first sentence: > Because of the way they are constructed, Randomized Control Trials will never show any benefit for any antiviral against COVID-19 By noting
2.
by creddit 5y ago
This actually isn't known to be true afaict: https://www.askamathematician.com/2009/11/since-pi-is-infini...
3.
by creddit 5y ago
HCQ and Ivermectin aren't "antivirals" so obviously the OP is not concerned with a strict definition of antiviral. Besides, it's a meaningless semantic argument.
4.
by creddit 5y ago
Except that, there are RCTs showing the positive impacts of Fluvoxamine and monoclonal antibodies so this is entirely false on all accounts.
5.
by creddit 5y ago
I’m not sure why we would care about controlling for price of the car…
6.
by creddit 5y ago
LOL pay for what? You can't even point me to the study you trust most and you're sitting here recommending a dosing schedule!! It's a comedy. I've looked at what's posted and the studies are mostly trash! This has 2
7.
by creddit 5y ago
Some shocking non-linearities in dose-response you’re expecting. Point me to the most credible study you have. Tired of being shown poorly randomized trials with like 50 subjects.
8.
by creddit 5y ago
I vouched for your comment. You're allowed to believe whatever irrational things you'd like and comment about them as much as you'd like as far as I'm concerned. Seems it got flagged to death even after the vouch, though
9.
by creddit 5y ago
Ivermectin doesn’t really have significant side effects at appropriate doses. It’s quite safe. Don’t be fooled by overblown “horse dewormer stories”. I don’t say this to advocate Ivermectin, the only RCT I know of/trust found absolutel
10.
by creddit 5y ago
> There are literally no studies proving that the Pfizer or Moderna gene therapies are safe and effective, or even that they are safe or effective, at both treating and preventing the spread of COVID-19. This is... wildly incorrect.
11.
by creddit 5y ago
> When an academic wins a Nobel prize, they have achieved a pinnacle of expertise. No, they've achieved celebrity status (perhaps well-earned by being a top expert). There are those who are experts, but who do not get Nobel prizes.
12.
by creddit 5y ago
I never even thought of configuring my pihole to allow this. Thanks! Much appreciated!!
13.
by creddit 5y ago
Alcohol itself is a carb. There is no alcohol without "too much carbs". The point, though, is if you've succeeded at cutting out carbs, then it's pretty likely you did so by no longer desiring them. So to have a set of p
14.
by creddit 5y ago
Isn't this almost tautological? Like, you can't have a high fat low carb diet that includes much alcohol and sweet confectionary.
15.
by creddit 5y ago
Still around 1% of his annual take home!
16.
by creddit 5y ago
Generous friend at $3K!
17.
by creddit 5y ago
Totally. This whole thing is just wild to me.
18.
by creddit 5y ago
It's hilarious to me that someone thinks this is about controlling thought and not a defensive legal maneuver.
19.
by creddit 5y ago
Are those not games he developed?
20.
by creddit 5y ago
> ... than by an ideological plot to reframe discourse. You seem to have read a lot into what I wrote. You're in basic agreement that "violence" in contemporary understanding has evolved to include non-physical contexts bu
21.
by creddit 5y ago
I'm not making a claim of validity. I'm pointing out how the term "violence" has evolved in contemporary society.
22.
by creddit 5y ago
It's a very contemporary interpretation of violence that has gained a lot of steam, though it is in opposition to historical use. For example, in many situations today, people will consider "silence to be violence".
23.
by creddit 5y ago
Open Source fanatics are the worst. Even if all the software on your phone was Open Source, you wouldn’t have the mental bandwidth to ever verify you trust it. You’re just farming out your trust to a different set of people and hoping they’
24.
by creddit 5y ago
You’re not understanding. Dropbox already does scan your files and I’m comparing Apples actions explicitly to that fact. I’m pointing out that people don’t care about that because you’re literally, voluntarily, giving Dropbox your files. He
25.
by creddit 5y ago
Why prefer your owned device tattling on you to Apple looking at data you give them on their servers? The reason people don't like this, as opposed to, for example, Dropbox scanning your synced files on their servers, is that a compute
26.
by creddit 5y ago
Twitter is where members of the media are given special status (blue checks) and they generally use it as a tool for self promotion. Facebook has gained huge shares of advertising revenue once owned by said members of the media.
27.
by creddit 5y ago
Facebook didn’t buy Giphy for its use on their own properties. They bought it for analytics on other properties. They love that other messaging apps use Giphy. It’s a Trojan horse.
28.
by creddit 5y ago
Consensus is irrelevant and not something I commented on at all.
29.
by creddit 5y ago
“unsolved”? Really?
30.
by creddit 5y ago
How does one check if an app running on a mac is native or electron?

More ›