@nopie's banner p

nopie


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 16 07:44:09 UTC
Verified Email

				

User ID: 1228

nopie


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 16 07:44:09 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1228

Verified Email

It doesn't get worse.

Before invasion in February 2022 certain western leaders offered Zelensky a ride. Basically they told him not to resist to save human lives. The reality was that Ukrainians would have resisted anyway but most probably would have lost. It would have led to terrible retributions from Russia. Think about Bucha multiplied hundreds of times.

Obviously, we cannot with 100% confidence say what would have happened but the idea is that Zelensky saved a lot of lives. Now pacifists are angry with him that he didn't save all lives. A lot of Ukrainians still perished and still dying on the battlefield.

It is a very hard concept for many to accept.

P.S. Unrelated to the war, but the same unwillingness to accept that some deaths will happen anyway let to higher mortality during covid pandemic. Still majority haven't accepted that despite clear data that Sweden fared best of all. They had about the same mortality from covid that the UK or any other western country and yet their excess mortality was practically zero whereas it was very high in the US. Why? The secret was to tolerate some deaths from covid as inevitable. There was no need to call Tegnel a nazi like some politicians did it hastily.

I think it is obvious now that he has a mild form of dementia.

Scott Alexander wouldn't accept that Biden was senile but it was clear to me early on. It is not professional to diagnose people online, but from the other hand it has to be done for political persons who could cause a lot of harm.

Biden could function because he was surrounded by reasonable people. It does not appear to be the case with Trump. Trump should be removed from the office for reasons of mental incapacity.

  • -15

Biden should have been removed. I am just saying that even though he wasn't, it didn't seem to be so bad because people who actually made the policy on his behalf were reasonable. Not great but competent.

Maybe the same expectation was with Trump. It doesn't matter how crazy he is if the administration is reasonable. No one believed that absurd tariffs will get implemented etc. In a way, the problem is not with Trump but that he is surrounded by people who are not competent.

Sorry, I don't engage in obvious falsehoods.

I have so many Kremlin apologists doubting that MH17 happened. I don't have time and energy to respond to all this. It is not very productive use of my time.

Doubting Bucha when we have so much confirmed evidence is pointless. It is what before we used to call FUD at the start of internet. I am that old.

  • -12

As I said, I rest my case. You will probably ask next why no neutral party investigates ivermectin?

  • -19

Ivermectin is a good test how serious the person is. Obviously we all might have different beliefs, some of them will be wrong and others will be correct. I wouldn't disqualify anyone on that. But ivermectin issue is such a low bar that I use it as a filter whether a person takes time to verify his own opinions. I am sorry if it offends some.

  • -12

Believing ivermectin to be a cure for covid is intellectually lazy. Thanks for helping me to formulate what I meant with that.

But what does it mean to be intellectually dishonest? How is it different from just not being honest?

It is mostly done with tribal mentality. It is common for people to have an idea, then search on pubmed scientific articles that support their idea.

I have to explain and again why this doesn't work. Mostly because you even start searching with keywords to support your idea. If you tried to search with keywords that would reject the idea, you would get articles that reject theses ideas.

The correct way is to start with neutral assumption and do real meta study. It is hard, very hard, take a lot of time. In most cases you are not able to do that. You have to admit that at some point that you don't have that much time, energy and probably even understanding to properly read even one study. Then you have to learn how to use secondary sources that summarizes meta studies, evaluate those sources, assign how much you trust them.

“Do your own research” is a good thing, but the problem with that is that you need to do your own research, correctly and not some half-assed version of it. Maybe laziness it is not the correct word. To me it is like building a house, you need to work hard, do it properly. Some people might just stick some wood in the ground, put a cover on top and call it a house. He just build a hut and even that was not good. You need an honesty to admit that you didn't do a good job. I don't know how to teach that. For me first it took 2 weeks to read one simple study. Even when it seems I understand it all, it wasn't the case. The scientific studies are written in a peculiar language and not a way that can be easily understood.

At university I started with simple assignments, like is polymorphism of beta-2 adrenoreceptors relevant for differentiating asthma treatments. Read a lot of studies, many positive. But the final conclusion, at current level of knowledge it cannot be done. You have to get used that most such searches will have negative result. It is easier if you start with null hypothesis. It is a hard work to find something. Scott Alexander is doing fantastic work with such reviews but I am afraid that even he doesn't have enough time and substitutes quality with quantity. I trusted his review of mask studies but it was incomplete. Cochrane review overturned his conclusions. But it wasn't possible for him to do in a few days what a group of dedicated and paid experts did during several months.

Contrarians sometimes challenge – how can you prove that earth is flat? It is actually a very good question in epistemology. You have limited resources to do actual experiments, travel to space and look at earth from outside. You only have access to the library. What are the methods to judge which information you can trust and why and which is not trustable. It opens whole philosophy of science, all about scientific paradigms and so on. Even scientists and engineers studying the actual things very deeply, like those who create and manage GPS system, haven't thought about these things. They are inside the paradigm but cannot describe it outsiders. Just like a native speaker often is unable to explain even simple phonetics of their own language. They have internalized them so deeply that they are unable to under realize that. Once I asked a native Japanese speaker, a linguist in fact, why I hear that in certain words they omit one sound. And his reaction was what? They never realized this omission.

People have been expecting Trump comebacks all the time and somehow he always did. At least with elections, he still had his genius. But ultimately everyone succumbs to old age and loses everything. It is very hard to accept the ultimate demise but with Trump it is now. With Biden most people including Scott Alexander managed to live in denial until the end of his term. Could happen the same with Trump.

How would you differentiate “lost a step” and “suffering from dementia”? Dementia is exactly like that, initially mildly losing a step, with some better days and some worse days. Trump has always been very erratic and that's why many people don't notice. But if you are able to separate his rhetoric, you could see that now he has lost a plot.

Less intelligent decisions are one thing but doing senseless things are completely another.

Trump's dealings with tariffs make no sense. Some people continue to refer to hidden motives but by now we are aware that this is not the case. He is not capable to fulfil the duties and is greatly harming the US. It's only going to be worse with every day. A lot of loyal people will be in denial. Just like many still believe in Havana syndrome as real or something like that. And his election was mostly luck. Democrats hid Biden's dementia and people felt cheated and decided to punish them for this. It just happened that Trump was the candidate. Could have been any other guy. Now people will be even more angry when they realize they have been cheated again.

I can understand that some say nothing against Trump because of loyalty. But allowing tariffs destroying economy? That is borderline to treason against the USA. Most likely they are not competent and don't even understand that.

that seems to be shaping up, as reported, of essentially forcing countries to choose between the US and China does make sense.

Yes, it forces other countries to choose China instead of the US. How does it make sense?

To me it seems that if you have to pay 10% on interest payments for the debt, you could easily reduce spending by 10% and not to pay this interest payment and be in the same situation. Obviously, that would cause short term pain but long term benefits.

I personally can easily spend 4-5 years at college and/or training and live frugally to get better job or whatever. Everybody can.

I mentioned philosophy of science and the fact that most scientists haven't read it.

The question here is why would you believe the Flat earth society that has done studies to prove their point and not that the earth is round without any systematic proof?

I haven't done my own meta study about ivermectin. That would take too much time and energy. I just read expert group rationale, in this case NICE (https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/NG191/chapter/4-therapeutics-for-covid-19#ivermectin) guidelines. It seems that they are accessible only from UK IP address however, therefore you might not be able to access them. But sure you have your own country guidelines.

Science works in paradigms, it also works in groups. The real question is not about your particular beliefs about ivermectin but understanding what is the current paradigm and which scientists work within that paradigm. Then many things will become easier. Those groups will have disagreements, that's how science progresses. But if you those disagreements are outside the parameters of the current paradigm, then that is either not science, or some revolution is going to happen that will change our understanding substantially.

As for ivermectin, I don't see anyone breaking the paradigm.

As for intellectual laziness, I work in healthcare sector and try to absorb current consensus that I use to form my beliefs.

Covid pandemic made many people scared. I do not blame if someone overreacted but gradually we have to come to common understanding what it all was instead of holding our biases forever.

My beliefs are as follows:

  1. Pandemic started either due to escaping from lab in Wuhan (50%) or naturally from somewhere (50%). If escaped from lab, it is more of a politic issue (lab security and scientific practices) than scientific because it doesn't change how we should have reacted to it.
  2. Masks have no evidence of effectiveness. Even real life mechanical models don't indicate effectiveness. Don't confuse with lab studies. Probably because, in real life means people don't put them on properly, simply it is not possible. People engage in wish-thinking and ignore this just like native speakers are unaware that they omit certain sounds.
  3. Lockdowns, school closures were bad policies and should not have been introduced. Sweden was the proper way how the world should have reacted. Australia had a moderate success but the cost was too high anyway.
  4. Covid vaccines were only moderately effective in elderly and risk groups. Were mostly useless for young people and children.
  5. We learned that covid vaccines don't stop infections in May 2021, full studies published on August, 2021. Most vaccine mandates introduced in October, 2021. It was a big unenforced policy error that didn't improve uptake in elderly and only caused resentment, unnecessary controversy and reduction of child vaccination rates.
  6. Politicians and public equally are very unwilling to admit all above.
  7. WHO does a good job in poor countries but they have to suck up to dictators. It is a big moral problem.
  8. The same in developed countries. Experts in public health are smart but they have to suck up to democratically elected politicians. It is a big moral problem. When Tegnell told the truth, he was called a nazi by politicians. Jayanta Bhattacharya was demonized etc. Most other experts yielded to the pressure of non-expert politicians and told them what they wanted to hear. Now people can laugh at those experts and distrust them but basically they themselves (via their elected officials) demanded experts tell the lies about masks and lockdowns etc.

I don't know why people are so upset. Trump was awful, Elon tried to use him for his purposes, it failed, so he is now against him. There is no point for Elon not to be against Trump now. It all seems totally normal to me, that's how I would act in his place.

If you go to countries and say "we are going to slap you with a massive tariff if you choose China, or a teensy-tiny one if you choose us" it...makes total sense?

It doesn't.

Any tariff increase is an incentive to sell more to China and/or other countries and not to the US.

Because tariff towards said country is meant to reduce imports from said country. It is not meant to increase trade with the US.

Basically, Trump is bullying countries. He is saying, I am going to punish you for no reason, but I will punish you less if you do this another nonsensical thing for me about which I will change my mind two days later.

Now all countries need to find other export markets to replace lost exports to the US. The US role in going to diminish, China is going to become stronger which is a threat to the world stability and peace.

How can anyone find sense seeing Trump doing this?

P.S. Notice that China has increased tarifs towards the US as well. Which means that Chinese people will buy less from the US. All the other countries have a perfect opportunity to reroute lost exports to China instead. The US imports will decrease, but its exports will also decrease. The US will become isolated.

The paradigm is in the link I provided with clear and detailed evidence – exactly which studies and how they showed that both groups (ivermectin and placebo) had no statistical differences. It is your homework now to see that other group is outside this paradigm.

Yes, a lot of people supported my idea that lockdowns are wrong and that vaccine mandates are wrong etc.

But if those people start repeating stories that are not based on facts, without any critical thinking, for example, that covid vaccines are poison, will shorten your life, cause turbo cancers (take your pick), I will not agree with them. Some even go as far as declaring this about all vaccines, good or bad.

In fact, the viewpoint that vaccines mandates are bad are almost universally interpreted as viewpoint that vaccines are bad. I don't know how to deal with that. People are not perceptive to details. But details are very important here.

The narrative is that in a certain sense CrowdStrike fiasco was caused by regulators who promoted its use on the basis that it ensures full security with a single tick in the box. If true, this is an example of regulator failure more than CrowdStrike failure.

Regulators have a duty to ensure that their recommendations are fit for purpose. It also includes evaluation of risks from the accepted solution. When Boeing 737 Max planes were falling from the sky, it was the fault of Boeing because they self-certified any changes. You could argue that the regulators should not have allowed that without proper overview but I would not directly blame the FAA yet because Boeing lied.

However, in case of CrowdStrike it is different because they relied on 3rd party software and that puts more responsibility on the regulators to ensure that CrowdStrike service really works and the remedies are in place when it fails.

Another case of improper regulation is covid vaccine mandates in many countries. In certain conditions vaccine mandates could be justified, for example, in case of a very deadly, fast spreading disease and very good vaccine which is not the case with covid. The regulator failure here is even more apparent because vaccine mandates were introduced after the data about vaccine inefficiency to prevent infection and spread of covid was already published in peer-reviewed journals.

I am not arguing for stronger or more regulations, I am demanding better regulations which fulfil their purpose instead of ticking boxes.

I think nothing is more important than economy. People talk about different values and in that sense we need more than economy, for example, democracy and pure air (ecology). But economy is a central thing that allows the country to thrive because everything is based on it. It is just that historically the growth was non-existent (0.01% per year) therefore not many past thinkers have mentioned it in the list of good values. We need to add this to the constitution of every country that achieving growth is very important.

I understand that Trump and Vance may not be high on niceties. They are right that Europe is too stifling, too much limiting freedom of speech. I give them that.

And yet when Zelensky allowed himself to express freely, suddenly it was all outrage and he was quickly thrown out of the White House. We don't see that in Europe where people may be shocked about Trump and Vance and yet remain civilized. And for Zelensky it might even be just a problem of English as a second language which he hasn't mastered well.

So, I don't buy these excuses that it is just the US culture to be more open and direct that European have problem with the US leaders right now. I think that yesterday showed that they were liek petulant children and trying to enforce their pettiness on others. I don't know if it qualifies as cultural revolution but it is revengeful and classless act nevertheless.

  • -12

We are totally dependent on global trade. That is a good thing, makes us all better off. People who worry about that don't understand this point and also don't have an alternative except start producing everything locally, which means that we become poor again.

The world is worried about China exerting its military power, therefore China needs to be restricted somehow. The good idea would be to make a block against China, remove any tariffs between countries except China and put sanctions and tariffs on China.

But punishing countries for trading with the US makes no sense. It strengthens China's position. Trump's policy was so absurd that currently many countries have already given up and believe that this will be China's century. We hope the US will change its mind but we never know.

In medicine the evidence is assessed by quality. I don't often do it myself because it takes a lot of time. We work in groups and we have to rely on groups that do good job assessing the quality of the evidence.

If you read the link and go deep, you will find that a lot of evidence about ivermectin is discarded because it was of very low quality.

Now, if some other group wants to change and say that it was actually better than we think, I need to see their reason. I need to see how they arrived to that conclusion, I need to be sure that they did a good job.

Unfortunately in most of the cases they didn't. Even Scott Alexander or Zvi, Hananiah and others do poor job many times. Sometimes they provide reasoning that would even get a poor mark at a university. And I did sometimes get low marks at uni and learned a lot from my mistakes.

My advice is – do your own research but learn to do it properly. Internet is not a good classroom. But some people can be very good with independent study so I don't want to exclude anyone beforehand.

Medical profession is a wide term. Most doctors are not scientists, not even engineers, they are more auto mechanics who fix your car. If the manufacturer provides false information, they cannot independently check this. Think about diesel exhaust scandal where biggest Germany companies were involved.

The part that would be responsible for lockdowns is called public health. That is a small part of all medical field. And most of them actually knew that lockdowns and masks were ineffective. Somehow they were ostracized due the initial panic and had suck up to the politicians or be fired just as happened with Jay Bhattacharya.