cuspy

8 ms·

1.
by cuspy 4y ago
I would trust sound data and transparent analyses showing age-stratified risk analyses if they existed. With all respect, what you just wrote is essentially hand-waving and talking past what I wrote. High effectiveness for elderly people (w
2.
by cuspy 4y ago
The problem with this line of reasoning is that there is a huge difference between controlled trials (which are obviously imperfect themselves) and post-hoc analyses of uncontrolled real-world outcomes. There's a big leap of faith in t
3.
by cuspy 5y ago
My opinion is that we are seeing a mass depoliticization across many if not all communities. Paradoxically, people are becoming less capable of engaging in political discourse, while clinging ever more tightly onto simple pieties and tribal
4.
by cuspy 5y ago
These numbers are not even remotely comparable. The CDC number includes ages groups that are much more likely to have severe infections. The CDC number you cited is also based on hospitalized cases, which select for severity
5.
by cuspy 5y ago
To be clear: this is an overconfident assumption, not an evidence-based claim. It's not even plausible on the surface. Why would we assume these proteins would be distributed similarly in the infection case and the vaccination case? We
6.
by cuspy 5y ago
Those are not antivirals, which was quite clearly the subject of the post you're replying, so your rebuttal is entirely false on all accounts.
7.
by cuspy 5y ago
I am absolutely pro-vaccine, but can someone help me work through the relative risk calculations here? Vaccine: -?% reduction in likelihood of infection (there is currently no monitored control group and no transparent dataset that accurate
8.
by cuspy 5y ago
I'm not trying to deny that the vaccine has a positive effect, but this data as presented (aggregated across the entire year) is extremely misleading. Here's why: 1) The infection/hospitalization/death rates were highest
9.
by cuspy 5y ago
I'm not sure why you think I'm trolling. I want answers to my questions about the long term energy costs of handling the respective industrial waste products from each technology. I thought maybe someone would know or have some in
10.
by cuspy 5y ago
I have absolutely no personal agenda in asking, beyond a general concern about whether environmental risks are being fully considered. I support electric vehicles and want them to succeed. You're just being rude. Maybe you're havi
11.
by cuspy 5y ago
no need for that. I am asking these questions out of genuine curiosity. Are you certain that there is no extra heavy metal waste or plastic waste from the entire EV production chain? Can you nudge me towards that evidence?
12.
by cuspy 5y ago
This is interesting, but I have many questions. First of all, as a premise, to me the only practical question of interest is, "which technology is better for the long term health of ecosystems". Greenhouse emissions are one critic
13.
by cuspy 6y ago
one frightening prediction I've heard is that we will have parallel economies. One for UBI consumer serfs who receive a monthly stipend that expires at the end of each month, another for people who work and receive payment perhaps in o
14.
by cuspy 6y ago
Have you looked into the world of Tech Startups, by any chance?
15.
by cuspy 6y ago
Well, we won't know if the "anti-science movement" can actually be dealt with until we fix the corruption first, will we? Why assume that things can't be improved? You wouldn't try to secure a second funding round w
16.
by cuspy 6y ago
When you come into a conversation not knowing your interlocutor's intentions, I believe it is deeply unethical, inefficient and really a complete waste of everyone's time and energy to assume based on some weak superficial heurist
17.
by cuspy 6y ago
As someone with an undergraduate degree in engineering and some professional experience as an engineer, I would counter that the training of engineers absolutely does deprioritize the kind of high level critical thinking I'm talking ab
18.
by cuspy 6y ago
Yes, I'm familiar with this idea, and I think it really does get close to one of the roots of the problem. I hope more people start listening carefully to individuals like Mr. Weinstein before it's too late to change course. I don
19.
by cuspy 6y ago
I totally agree. I hope people like you will keep fighting for a vision like this. It's the only hope we have, and this problem is far more serious than most people are willing to admit. Unfortunately being outspoken about this viewpoi
20.
by cuspy 6y ago
Right, but what's your point? If it's an old problem we shouldn't try to address it? I think the evidence points to it getting worse and more importantly becoming more and more of a liability for our future ability to compete
21.
by cuspy 6y ago
Maybe I'm being too charitable, but wouldn't it be worse if it turned out that you were holding back progress in the conversation by insisting that ALL of your interlocutors are incapable of thinking critically? We need to be more
22.
by cuspy 6y ago
I'm not proposing anything like that. I said that I'm glad others are becoming more skeptical of the message of relying on trust without oversight. The fact that you read my comment as advocating a total disregard for training and
23.
by cuspy 6y ago
After all, the real target of these kinds of articles is obviously the supposedly right-wing extremist "science deniers" who reject the critical theory stuff even more strongly than scientists themselves do. We need to clean our o
24.
by cuspy 6y ago
I agree to some extent, but the whole "culture war" dimension of this question is far less important than people think. It has much more to do with corruption and broken incentive structures than with the identitarian critiques be
25.
by cuspy 6y ago
I was thinking primarily of other states or foreign entities who have an interest in undermining competitivity, stealing or suppressing emerging technologies. Mentioning elite families was as an illustrative contrast, since at least domesti
26.
by cuspy 6y ago
Given the track record of institutional science and the ever-growing list of regulatory failures, moral failures and outright abuses pushed in the guise of scientific expertise, why do so many people seem to think that simply doubling down
27.
by cuspy 6y ago
The 5G scare is to some extent part of an exploitative, manipulative health-concern industry. However, people are generally right to be afraid of the potential health effects of new technologies and substances that are released into their e
28.
by cuspy 8y ago
I think you're very wrong if you think all professional neuroscientists are disinterested witnesses or that they all give adequate philosophical distance to the IP metaphor. Its assumptions constrain or at least impact the landscape of
29.
by cuspy 8y ago
Models are not equivalent to the phenomena they describe. Computational models are not an exception to this. There is not even a single "part" or "function" of the brain that we fully, exhaustively understand through a c
30.
by cuspy 10y ago
What does it mean to have a meaning that is "larger than" its context. What would that look like and what would its consequence be? If you just mean that every new statement also pushes the boundaries of or expands the discourse t

More ›