Maybe if they dose with some hydroxycholorquine, ivermectin, and shoot some UV up their bum, they will get AMAZING protection??
Readit NewsBFatts commented on Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine sciencemag.org/news/2021/... · Posted by u/peteradio
BFatts commented on Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine sciencemag.org/news/2021/... · Posted by u/peteradio
I think the worry with natural infection is if the timing is such to provide durable immunity. But it’s not like the vaccines have had 5 years of trials to determine the best wait between the 2 and 3 doses so kind of a moot point.
Why 5 years? Why not 1? Why not 50? What's so special to people about 5 years? I keep hearing people say "it hasn't been tested long enough" followed by "I'd take it in about 5 to 10 years" which is a HUGE difference. Is it just that "time has passed", because a year has passed since the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was first given to test subjects. But I guess it's up to people - their body, their choice.
Even though we live in what is commonly referred to as a "society". We agree to live by certain rules and norms that allow us to coexist. There is a faction of fools out there who resist being a part of society, but claim all of its privileges. These are sub-human individuals who just seek some form of control over others. That has to stop.
> None of that really makes clear what Andrew Lee is actually doing that is so objectionable.
I second this sentiment. Can anyone summarize objectional actions that Andrew has either taken or committed to taking in the future?
As far as I can tell, he found a way to purchase legal rights to Freenode. And, he's communicated this control in a way that pissed off existing mods.
But, as a Freenode user, what I really care about is how this will impact me as a user. If the only potential impact this will have on me as a user is a smaller user base, there's a clear solution: don't leave?
There are reports of Lee, or one of his contacts, offering admin roles for money basically to allow for paid harassment. Whether that is true or not isn't clear to me, but that would be a big issue if true.
BFatts commented on My Resignation from Freenode blog.bofh.it/debian/id_46... · Posted by u/riffraff
Yea when you start like that we don’t read past the first line. So sad the next post on this was actually written well and focused on the issues. The way you started makes me glade your out because I can really see you stand for freedom of thought.
Some people really don't like Trump, myself included. Some people find opportunity to stick it to him - so what? I find it funny that a man who so values his notoriety is then defended for his notoriety by those same people who value that man. There are so many walking contradictions in folks who "admire" Trump.
BFatts commented on Justice Thomas suggests regulating tech platforms like utilities cnbc.com/2021/04/05/justi... · Posted by u/adventured
Free Speech isn't the direct issue here.
YouTube and other social media platforms are engaged in an exploitive bait and switch, which happens to collide with the speech issues. However, the core issue is one where speech is just the game ball.
Social Media platforms tell creators and their fans that they will act as "platforms" for the creator's free expression -- provided it's in line with the "Terms of Service." However, it the "Terms of Service" is a bugaboo. Social Media platforms are effectively manipulating the speech of their creators to tell their own ideological message, using censorship, the threat of demonetization, the threat of de-platforming, and the manipulative denial of viral spread -- in uncountable cases, with no reasonable connection to their terms of service. It would be one thing, if this were always actually to "preserve the value of their platform for advertisers" or some such, but the record bears out in innumerable instances that many of their actions are the grinding of an ideological axe by lower level company functionaries.
This is a bait and switch. With one hand, the platforms are saying, "We will serve as your conduit," then with the other hand, they are saying, "You will send the ideological message that we want you to say, or else!" Many will say that this is their right as a private company. No private company has the right to say they will do one thing, but then dishonestly do the opposite through murky deception and threats.
The record of illogical, nonsensical, and weird contortions "platforms" go through to hide ideological manipulation is legion. If a full accounting were entered into the record in a court of law, and if discovery to uncover collusion in such activities were carried out, I predict that it wouldn't go well for Big Tech. They know this, are afraid of this, and this explains their behavior to a T.
Censorship, by a company? On their own platform? How is that possible? As far as I know, only government cannot abridge your right to speech. A platform, like a store, has the right to remove those that use their platform to promote speech counter to the owner of the platform.
Dead Comment
Dead Comment
BFatts commented on Show HN: Beeper – All Your Chats in One App beeperhq.com/?hn... · Posted by u/erohead
Trillian!
The far-right panders to extreme fear while the far-left panders to extreme progress. I'd much rather work with the far-left than the far-right.
BFatts commented on Airbus hit as new US tariffs come into force simpleflying.com/airbus-u... · Posted by u/billfruit
Tariffs don't hurt the producer as much as the consumer. But stupid politicians will tell you otherwise because they think they are smart!