I think torture is always wrong and calling for it is always wrong. Your comment, as responded to, has no place here and is hateful and vile, no matter how justified and entitled to violence you feel you are. Go soak your head.
You're harmless, and would never deserve such punishment. You don't understand this, but some people aren't like you and require hard boundaries. Hard boundaries as in pain.
You have to understand: not everyone is like you. Not everyone is harmless.
Cars were like this when they were the conspicious consumption item of choice. Every year, new designs. Not always better, but forever permutation so old parts don't fit and so that the 2 year old models already looked 'dated'. Now we have phones as our way to show our buying power.
There are actual policies (the easiest one is stopping mandates for huge amounts of free/discounted parking at all new homes & businesses) that make it possible for people who would rather not drive to not drive, and many 'pro-car' people come out to oppose their implementation.
Pools kill many people a year, mostly children, but we don't close them because the risk is severly outweighed by their utility. I think your argument is overall sound, but you need to find some better examples that apply. If we really were so outraged about auto deatus we would be clamoring for anti-screen enforcement, which has a larger effect on deaths than drunk driving, street racing, and all gun crime combined.
To be fair, states are starting to ban using non-hands-free phones.
One curious point is that, in a neighboring state, the fine is extremely small. However, insurance companies are treating such citations as a similar risk to having a DWI/DUI citation; construction workers and other drivers are already having a hard time getting hired because their record of having been pulled over for usinga phone makes them too expensive for employers to insure for company vehicles.
> However, insurance companies are treating such citations as a similar risk to having a DWI/DUI citation;
Insurers have a strong financial incentive to have "mass market" infractions that don't really tell you anything about someone's risk in the highest category in any state that uses a points system because the points system provides a "we're all gonna charge these people more" pact with the other insurers and they can get the actual violation data they use for risk assessment in other ways (usually straight from the DMV's api).
I'm not defending phone usage but I think anyone with an IQ above freezing can see that the average instance of it (which around here is people texting at red lights) is not as big of a risk indicator as a DUI citation.
in this case I am just relaying what I heard from some owners of construction / remodelling companies; drivers / workers with a citation for phone use had to pay either 50 or $125 or something along those lines, but were finding out that employers could not or would not hire them due to the insurance costs as a result. Just an anecdote, but I have not known my source to make such stories up (and it would have been strange to do so in the context of the conversation anyway).
This is bar none the saddest comment I have read on HN in recent memory. Do that many of us feel that helpless and useless? Almost every tech we use was started by a single talented and/or dedicated person with the support of a small group of similar people.
This is that small group of similar people, and you may be that person.
To what degree is that a comprehensively accurate representation of the ideas floating around in the conspiracy world?
And if you feel the urge to click on the downward pointing diamond to the left of my comment rather than replying, please pause for a moment and consider that action in the context of your comment, as well as the grandparent comment "But we're now faced with a rise in post-rationalism...".
"Don't solicit upvotes, comments, or submissions. Users should vote and comment when they run across something they find interesting—not for promotion."
This seems to be another example of how you and I have very different ways of thinking, in this case as it relates to precision in speech and comprehension. More specifically: I didn't solicit upvotes. Rather, I made a suggestion/request (politely): "please pause for a moment and consider that action in the context of..."
As an aside, of the two of us, you are by far the worse violator of HN guidelines, at least as it relates to conversations between you and I. I am able (and willing) to demonstrate this with numerous examples from prior conversations. If you'd be interested in considering these ideas, I'd be happy to lay some out for you. As well, I would be happy to share some techniques that I have found to be very effective in improving my behavior in this general area, let me know if you are interested in hearing some of those ideas.
Another interesting (and I believe important) cultural phenomenon on display in this exchange, is an initial ~projection of supreme confidence in one's beliefs (my perception):
> Facts you say? The world is all ears!
I estimate that this person believes that they deal (think) only in highly skilled thinking & facts, and that anyone with any concerns about 5G deals only in poor thinking & baseless conspiracy theories. And once again, when such a person is challenged, they will rarely respond rationally, using facts, but rather resort to silence (typically accompanied with a downvote), or blatantly obvious diversionary tactics (reframing & redirecting the topic, dishonesty, insults, a wide variety of logical fallacies, etc).
It seems this phenomenon is very hard to see, even when it is pointed out. But if one can manage to find a way to coerce one's mind into actually seeing it, it can be seen everywhere, and in turn gives one a much broader, higher resolution, nuanced view on reality. But, such things are obviously not for everyone. But to know for sure, I recommend one at least give it a try.
I would find a better authority than 'youtube doctors' for the health of anyone you love. Some are great, but all are in it for attention. The ultimate motives of many online attenion seekers, no matter their profession are, lets say, unclear.
I don't think anyone's denied that respiratory diseases can be linked to heart problems. The question is whether they're linked through the normal mechanism of systemic failure, or if the coronavirus specifically targets heart tissue as the doctor in the article suggests.
I would not describe teachers or those who post on HN as "in it for attention".
Though I have not posted on youtube, I see no reason to describe those who
have as attention seekers.
agree on the overall point, but the ultimate motve seems plainly clear to me: stature and esteem. it's an underlying motive too widely shared among the animal kingdom to assume otherwise.
whether any given youtuber deserves that stature and esteem is certainly unclear, as that takes direct observation of the person over time to ascertain.
Lonliness is not struggle in the same way we struggled to survive for thousands of years not knowing what next week would bring. Your examples kind of bear out his point.
Then again, the thousands of years mentioned here are kind of imagined history.
The acute life threat of war times and famine was not constant. While 21 century west have higher life expectancy then the past, the "don't know what next week brings" is not how majority of history works. There are such unstable periods (world wars etc) that get changed for stable periods.
Second, parent said that we don't face any struggle which leads to depression. That is not true on any point. People struggle, they are poor or in pain.
Third, unstable periods make mental health issues go worst. Including depression. They also make consequences of those mental health issues worst - meaning depressed person is more likely to die, get hurt or hurt others.
