magnax1
1yr ago
Would you trust data from Peru or Hungary? I sure wouldn't. I suspect even US data is quite fuzzy.
magnax1
1yr ago
I think its good to make a fuss. I just think this is all a bit exaggerated. There are specifics which are more or less problematic.
magnax1
1yr ago
This assumes there is no such thing as a free market. Sure, a single company can suicide by keeping a significant dead weight in its workforce, but they'll just be outcompeted by companies who don't, or maybe even countries who don't. Markets are just entropy, and entropy always wins out.
magnax1
1yr ago
They used copies of them, so basically. Not sure about Ukraine but Russia and Belarus did.
magnax1
1yr ago
That's not an argument against what I'm saying. You can't predict exactly how future growth will work, but betting it will be there is pretty obvious.
magnax1
1yr ago
There's a pretty gaping chasm between "You will have to hire x% women and x% minorities or you'll be blacklisted" and "The payment companies won't let kiwi farms use their services." I don't think payment systems should be weaponized, but blacklisting kiwi farms was not about wokeness, diversity quotas, etc.
magnax1
1yr ago
That double blind trial data is a lot better and very clear that this isn't the case. We don't have to do guessing games with outside factors (such as risk taking when you know you're vaccinated), so why would we?
magnax1
1yr ago
It's required to tell what excess mortality means, which is the whole point of this discussion.
magnax1
1yr ago
I don't expect that either are outliers. I suspect boards pretty closely match upper middle class demographics of whatever region predominates their recruiting pool. Go google Microsoft's board. I bet it's mostly white people because Seattle is very white. Likewise, I bet Ford is very white because midwestern upper middle class people are almost all white.
magnax1
1yr ago
Being boosters, they are inherently looking at the effect vs the previous dose.
Its a bit ridiculous to ask for something so easily accessible on google as moderna vaccine trials.
magnax1
1yr ago
My bad. I'm just working off memory of Russia making a big deal over it years ago.
I'm not criticizing anything. You don't have to be a 3rd world hell basket to have poor data. It's a pretty common problem. Detroit has poor data tracking and is not anything approaching a 3rd world hell basket, even if it's crime is pretty close. There are pretty big swathes of most countries which don't track data well. For example, its pretty well established that China probably isn't quite sure what it's exact population or GDP are. The specific problems in China are likely different (incentives for people collecting data to lie) but the problem as a whole is pretty universal.
EDIT:I'm not sure why you wouldn't just compare US vaccinated vs unvaccinated. That's basically what the trials did, and the data is public.
https://eua.modernatx.com/covid19vaccine-eua/providers/clinical-trial-data
magnax1
1yr ago
I would bet there is no reliable data in unvaccinated countries. Every country developed enough for a vaccine campaign (except for China) has used the Western mrna vaccines. Also, if there was good data it wouldn't be comparable. Africa's mortality is not comparable to countries where half the country is over 50 (or whatever it is). Especially when you factor in all the excess mortality in Africa from other things (AIDS, untreated diseases that wouldn't matter in the developed world, etc)
magnax1
1yr ago
Someone should tell Musk that since he sure doesn't seem to care and is the richest man alive.
The nasdaq and banking sector are themselves part of the free market. I also suspect you overestimate the rigidity of these guidelines anyways (someone look up Walmarts board real quick and tell me when they're going to be blacklisted), Either way, the banking sector itself has a lot of competition internationally and internally. Most startups don't finance themselves off bank loans.
magnax1
1yr ago
If we accept that NIMBY policies lead to lower density, then sure. I don't think that's the case. Very few places have an incentive to build up and not out, but regulations increases costs for both.
magnax1
1yr ago
Fantasy and reality often have a sheer chasm between them. There definitely is some truth to the fact that some girls enjoy some level of non-consensual encounters, but there is also a wide range from "I said no, but if he ignores that it gives me cover to not feel bad about cheating" to "Some random stranger held a gun to my head and forced me to blow him."
I don't think many, even those who have non-consensual fantasies, would enjoy the latter.
Obviously the parent is still alive, the question is if they are contributing to child care in any meaningful way. Just splitting the time between households is probably not meaningfully different than having 1 parent. The benefit of nuclear family is probably mostly in having more child rearing labor at any time. You actually see the same effect in Japan, except with traditional multi generational families having better outcomes vs nuclear families.
Parents don't live together probably because one, or maybe both parents are assholes. These traits are passed to children.
This may have some effect, but given that even significantly heritable factors like height and intelligence aren't that inheritable (I think IQ is roughly 30%?), it really doesn't fit.
Remember, pre Civil-rights era such horrible share of single parent household didn't exist and the crime gap was about the same.
Pre ~1950 data isn't that good in the first place, (EDIT: actually even now I don't think the data is excellent) but there is a pretty huge uptick in crime that fits very well with the adolescence of the first generation of single parent children.
magnax1
1yr ago
You massively over estimate the uniformity of American beliefs. If you travel from NYC, to Salt Lake, to Phoenix, the rural Midwest, the values indeed differ massively and always have. The only reason it might seem otherwise is because people self segregate. Most people succeed in seeking out their ingroup where ever they go. If they can't succeed (Like culturally black people in Salt Lake) they generally avoid those spaces.
There is an underpinning of enlightenment (far more than "post enlightenment") values among most of the non hyper urban settings, but I don't think that is built all that much by the schools, but by basic American tradition. Myths are powerful, and the American myth is an exceptionally powerful myth, up there with the Christian and Muslim myths. The American mythos leaves a lot of space for disagreement though.
You seem to believe institutions like schools are far more effective than I do. They're very effective for a certain type of person--mainly the quiet kids who get good grades and follow orders. Those kids are basically selected for by their predecessors in government backed institution. After they are selected they have an outsized voice, but probably not an outsized functional impact. If they had an outsized impact the leftist institutions would likely not have to rely on immigrant votes to eek out a 50% win rate in elections.
magnax1
1yr ago
Concept is useful but there is no reason not to add solid writing to a concept. It's very hard to care about "crushing historical trends" when you just don't care about any individuals. That's just how people work. Even history is much more interesting through the lense of a Hannibal, Thutmoses III, or Joan of Arc.
Since COVID-19 vaccinations have become available in December 2020, an estimated 182 million people in the United States were fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by September 21, 2021. However, since April 2021, the number of people starting to get COVID-19 vaccines has decreased. People have cited vaccine safety concerns as deterrents to getting a COVID-19 vaccine, concerns that include deaths following COVID-19 vaccination. Although deaths after COVID-19 vaccination have been reported to VAERS, there have been few studies done to evaluate the mortality not associated with COVID-19 among vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. To analyze this, researchers conducted a study using the Vaccine Safety Datalink, comparing those who received COVID-19 vaccines and those who did not between December 2020 through July 2021. This study included data from 11 million people; 6.4 million received either Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna or Janssen COVID-19 vaccine and 4.6 were unvaccinated. The analysis showed that those who received COVID-19 vaccinations had lower rates of mortality for non-COVID-19 causes than those unvaccinated. These findings provide evidence that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and support current vaccination recommendations.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/research/publications/index.html
There is another study in there as well with the same conclusion. This is just non-covid mortality risk, obviously the risk for COVID itself is much lower for people who took the vaccine, and that data is in there as well IIRC.
Have you considered that your position in this matter may not depend on what's true at all?
I think you should consider that your worldview is contrarian to try to make yourself feel that you're smarter than others but actually tarnishes your ability to view these things objectively. We're also approaching a tertiary problem not very related to covid here--there's enough information on the internet that you can find some information somewhere to support any contrarian claim. As a contrarian I fall into this trap sometimes, but the data on this subject is quite clear. Just to be nice, I typed in "Covid vaccine safety" into google, and copy and pasted the first link. I shouldn't really need to copy and paste links from simple google searches. If this was more niche not easily accessible data you might have a point.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/research/publications/index.html
There are only a gajillion studies in there, some of them the original double blind IIRC, and most concerns related to the vaccine have multiple studies posted under them.
There are outlier events for lots of vaccines, usually allergic/autoimmune reactions, but there is pretty clear that, no, there is not a higher mortality rate among the vaccinated. There is the opposite.
magnax1
1yr ago
Some are easier than others. Mass shootings are a very easy problem to dismiss. If you are less likely or roughly equally as likely to be harmed by something as a lightning strike, then it is a non issue in my view. Mass shootings are within the rough range of lightning strikes. Children drowning in pools is a much bigger issue, albeit also a total non issue in relative terms.
Other problems are indeed more complex. I don't really want to go into detail on global warming right now (I've spent way too much time on here today, I need to get work done), but I think it's quite easy to see that if you do a very pessimistic estimate of economic and technological growth on the timescales where global warming might be devastating (100+ years) and then include the opportunity cost of the measures taken to deal with it (which are all basically growth dampening) then I think it's quite clear that its at best a non-issue and at worst the policies are significant cost to society with little to no benefit. It seems to me very similar to the panic in the early late 19th and early 20th century about malthusian population collapse. It probably would not have taken much of a leap in 1890 to take an extremely pessimistic economic model, look at it, and say "This is fucking dumb, we're going to be too rich for this to matter."
The cause of death and data surrounding it would be more what I'm worried about.
More options
Context Copy link