DelendaEst's profile - The Motte
@DelendaEst's banner p

DelendaEst


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 14 19:15:00 UTC
Verified Email

				

User ID: 1199

DelendaEst


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 14 19:15:00 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1199

Verified Email

I think she genuinely believed that a large number of the other young lawyers at the firm felt likewise but were afraid to say anything, that the whole thing was a coordination problem, and that if she got the ball rolling others would follow suit and that while losing one associate is no big deal losing double digit percentages would be. And who knows, 10 years ago when SJWism was riding high maybe the company would have dithered for a few days instead of firing her immediately and during that time others would have been emboldened to join.

I think the lower appetite of others to join is obviously a big deal, but the main issue is the decreased willingness of companies to bend the knee. They fired her quickly giving no time for others to join and no sign of weakness or uncertainty that would encourage them to do so. Mozilla buckled like a belt under employee pressure and that really kicked off the SJW movement of corporate pressure. This is a signal, though a small one, that those days are over. Mozilla booting Eich was a signal to others, they will capitulate to young employees throwing a temper tantrum so go throw one. This will hopefully be taken as the opposite signal, if you throw a tantrum you will get fired and put a big "Don't Hire Me" sign around your neck.

Just because I am able to entertain the plausibility of a scheme of gender which includes trans women among women does not mean I am required to treat as a reasonable position if, after entertaining it, I find it to still be ridiculous. I am able to entertain the notion that the world is ruled by lizardmen as well, fairly consider the evidence on offer, and then conclude that everyone who thinks that is a loon.

I agree that being unable or unwilling to consider if ideas have merit is slop, but no one said the refused to consider if it might be wrong, they just stated it clearly was wrong, just as the lizardman theory clearly is. Declaring that anyone who thinks you are wrong, quite wrong indeed, must just be to stupid or mendacious to even have considered the issue is assuming the conclusion. Take THAT somewhere esle.

In that case though wouldn't the "something wrong" that Europe did be violating their status as vassals? From refusing to stand with the coalition of the willing in the Bush administration to their frosty/hostile reactions to Trump to their overall attitude towards America they have been increasingly acting like independent states with their own priorities and not as vassals. And to be clear, I think that is a good thing. They are not vassals, they should not act like it. But if they do act like vassals then US aid is part of a deal and that's fine, if they don't then US aid is charity. And you are entitled to your side of a deal but not to charity.

I don't have any expertise on this myself, but a movie analysis channel I really like (and which I think would appeal to most Motizens) did a few videos on oratory you may find helpful.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=2Ed5mFHaMkQ&pp=ygURbW92aWV3aXNlIG9yYXRvcnk%3D

https://youtube.com/watch?v=yxw5U_0HaHM&pp=ygURbW92aWV3aXNlIG9yYXRvcnk%3D

My intuition is that 'shit this didn't work' is more common, but also that 'shit this didn't work' happens a lot earlier in the development life cycle and thus the total losses are less per drug in the category, where as the costs for 'excess regulatory burden' happen at the end of the life cycle and thus are more onerous overall.

What I REALLY want to see is the percentage of drugs that make it to FDA testing and THEN fail. As in if we only did the required 'does it work' testing and not the amount required by the FDA how much time/money would it save and what would the false positive rate actually be. My first guess is that the savings would be significant, the false positive rate would be very low, and the only real loss would be fewer side effects listed on the bottle.

Would you even need to do that? Would a pre-paid card bought with cash not be able to do the trick?