Jump to content

Satans Little Helper

Supporting Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    865

  • Joined

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Satans Little Helper

    Coronavirus COVID-19

    in General Banter

    Posted · Edited by Satans Little Helper

    1 hour ago, Claudius t Ansuulim said:

    hey thanks for the honest reply!  No troll here, I realize the potential pitfalls of asking a music making community about medical science, but if anything I’m venting frustration over a few things:

    1) No long term science is performed on drugs that make it past the phase iii clinical trials and licensure by the fda. this is a HUGE mistake.  After the clinical trials for vaccines the drug companies offer every participant the drug and don’t follow up on any of the participants that refuse (most do not).

    2) these are drugs in phase iii clinical trials (where theoretically you start to gather long term data).  We’re already mandating it in some instances for travel, school, and work. Too soon?

    3) The science and politics have become intertwined as both you and I have stated already, and I would add that the major media outlets are all acting as corporate mouthpieces for the drug manufacturing companies.  I’m not going full Zeff and saying that making money is bad, what I’m saying is that I don’t trust any of them for dissemination of factual information anymore.  CNN’s technical director was recently caught undercover talking about how they are actively engaged in propaganda, falsifying information, selectively reporting stories that support their agenda, etc.  Think it an isolated incident?

    So when I petition an unlikely source as this place for good information (some has been provided already, so not a fully futile gesture), I’m really just trying to get good information.  The algorithms have changed, censorship of ideas has begun, and anybody that questions the “mainstream narrative” gets demonized, demonetized, deplatformed, or outright banned and their content scrubbed.  People have been backing up content provided by seemingly good faith actors just trying to reach their own objective conclusion about What the Hell is Going on in This World.  If this isn’t concerning to you then ?

    Let me start with saying you shouldn't point the finger towards others (dcom) and their "assumptions" as you so obviously have lots of them yourself. As you should be able to notice in that post you've written.

    ad 1: You say it's a "HUGE" mistake. How so? Why "HUGE"?

    I mean, ideally you'd like to know long term effects. But the reality is, researching long term effects are incredibly difficult, if possible, to do. Apart from being very expensive, it's extremely hard to keep confounding aspects out of the equation. And another issue I have with your argument is that given the amount of treatments that have gotten market access this way, and the amount of issues that have come from there being not enough knowledge about potential longterm effects, you'd expect these policies would have changed if there had been serious issues on a regular basis. 

    Also note that all manufacturers have to structurally monitor for side-effects in the population. And continuously monitor the quality of the treatments that get put on the market.

    edit: and most negative effects will show up shortly or even immediately. (how long term is long term btw? you'd want society to wait a couple of decades for a new cancer treatment?)

    ad 2: Yeah, the reasoning being that government *really* want to open their societies up as soon as possible. So any excuse helps.

    ad 3: In a situation like this - global pandemic - it's inevitable that politics and science get real close to one another. Not saying they're intertwined. Although, during Trump's presidency, things got intertwined in the worst way possible (eg. a president pretending to know science and using his platform to advise using chlorosomething). Currently, I'd argue things have normalised to the extent that scientists (with authority, like Fauci) can actually speak scientific facts, to the best of their ability. Without repercussion (from a guy with an orange head). 

    Also "I would add that the major media outlets are all acting as corporate mouthpieces for the drug manufacturing companies" is an assumption. Mostly baseless I would argue. At least, do media outlets all over the world say different things? And if not, would you seriously argue that all media outlets all over the world just happen to act as corporate mouthpieces for the industry? That's a big tinfoil hat to fill!

    "The algorithms have changed, censorship of ideas has begun,"

    Have you noticed the amount of misinformation? Have you noticed the impact of misinformation in social media? If that isn't concerning you.. dude, whatever.

    As far as I can tell, most of the stuff that's been taken off line was garbage anyways. And there's still plenty garbage left (opposing viewpoints included), so I don't see a big issue here. Please give examples of massive censorship. If you want to have a blast, you could go full Zeff and give a minute description of the censorship situation in China.

     

    Coronavirus COVID-19

    in General Banter

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Claudius t Ansuulim said:

    Over ... So plz watmm, try harder

    Plz try harder yourself.

    What are you arguing? People are right to be reluctant? MRNA vaccines are bad?

    Thing is, apart from a scientific discussion, this is also a political issue. Besides scientific uncertainties, there's also the societal impact of not taking a vaccine which should be taken into account. What's the impact of that? And how does that risk relate to these scientific uncertainties (like long term effects of MRNA - or rather the odds of there even being long term effects)? If you want to assume the worst, lets do it in all directions. What's the worst that could happen if people do not get vaccinated? How many maligne mutations can we expect in that scenario? What are the long term effects of societies not being vaccinated?

    Also note that for most new treatments (say biologicals) in general there are no long term effects being researched. Is that an issue as well? And do you also have issues with kids taking ADHD medication, for instance? Or kids taking biologicals of sorts? Medicines for kids is not a well researched subject in general, right? 

    Going into whataboutism territory here. But for good reason, imo. Just to check how sceptical you are wrt health sciences in general. And where this general scepticism is wrt to your scepticism towards these vaccines. As a science-savy person like yourself, you'd also appreciate this comparison to have some idea of a baseline. I mean, if you're very sceptical wrt health sciences in general this discussion is basically over, isn't it? In that case these new MRNA vaccines are just another example of many, many others. And the discussion becomes an entirely different beast.

    Also, LOL for expecting a scientific discussion on a forum about music making. You're such a troll. ;D

     

    • Like 4

    Coronavirus COVID-19

    in General Banter

    Posted

    I'm a professional typist. So anything I type, has been typed really fast! Like REALLY fast!

    And btw, I know how to copy paste using the "plain text" option. As a typist, that's the least I could do, I believe. I have studied plenty so I should be able to do so. Right? RIGHT?

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

    Coronavirus COVID-19

    in General Banter

    Posted

    Have been following Bret for a while. And although he has a lot to bring to the table, my impression is he thinks too much like a scientist and not enough like a politician to make the political statements he sometimes does. Or rather, I'd be weary to blindly follow his cue when it comes to the political dimension. 

    And I also get the impression, generally speaking, that people don't take his comments for what they are. He positions himself as scientist, but sometimes it's just opinion. Which is fair and all. But the two shouldn't be confused. And other times, people just take from it what they want. Especially when things are complex and nuanced. Which is often the case.

    Often, when things get more into the alarmist side of things, I tend to log out. This is where things get sketchy. And it won't be the first time he gets things simply wrong anyways.

    Take this as a general rule, I guess. Critical thinking is good. But at the point where people, or perhaps yourself, become alarmist, that's when you have to be extra critical (about yourself). As these are the points where emotions take over, and rationality fly out of the window.

    I think the same holds for that wall of text with the bigger font-size back a couple posts. I appreciate the effort. But please take a step back and re-evaluate what you're saying. Dial back the alarmist nature and just have some rational conversation. Being alarmist never helps. This has nothing to do with being right or wrong, btw. It's about how to have some kind of dialogue where we can all have some kind of benefit. Instead of turning things into a shouting match. Not saying it has. But the risk is there, whenever things get alarmist, in my experience.

    • Like 2

    Marxist thought

    in General Banter

    Posted

    On 4/25/2021 at 6:00 PM, usagi said:

    I wish there was a way to make this thread and the unintellectual thread crash into each other resulting in posts from both mixed together out of order.

    Cern Hadron Collider GIF by Motherboard

     

    also, from now on this thread is about marx memes

    2gks3g.jpg

    • Like 1
    • Haha 3

    Can digitals @ Mute Bandcamp

    in Music Discussion

    Posted

    I have been sleeping on CAN. Excellent stuff!

    If you've never heard of them and happen to dig Radiohead, you should give CAN a try. It's basically where Radiohead got their inspiration from. Cannot stress how good this is. Massively underrated. But that's mostly because I've got my own head stuck in the sand.

    How does the World view America these days?

    in General Banter

    Posted

    13 hours ago, auxien said:

    that's the thing...all comers here think they're bringing a 'natural balance' to things....they just see the 'natural' in differing ways

    Exactly! We're all wired that way. Our view on things and our ideals tend to be the best, or else we wouldn't have them. Putting those ideals and beliefs in the proper perspective however... Well, I've hit my head against that wall quite regularly. You learn as you go, so to speak. And the learning never stops. I suffer my own limited perspective. But in a good way...hopefully :fail:

    • Like 1

    How does the World view America these days?

    in General Banter

    Posted

    2 minutes ago, cichlisuite said:

    That's not only a problem on this forum but everywhere capitalism vs. socialism debates happen. And I dare to say that failing to recognize the legitimacy of others' narrative can more often be attributed to people advocating (free, liberal) capitalism than it is to the people advocating socialism. Or maybe instead of socialists I should say people who want to bring some sort of natural balance. Capitalism has this inertia that doesn't like to take anything else into their accounts but checks and balances. Hence there must be some sort of regulation. Unfortunately, because the capitalists own the initiative and wield more immediate power, more often than not, their will is imposed onto labor, with the latter coming up with regulations with a distinct time lag, and with an obvious struggle to be heard and taken seriously.

    Now the capitalist wants to separate himself from this struggle by investing into robotics and AI.

    Fair. Although I do like to add there is no "the capitalist". Or "the socialist", for that matter. Western Europe tends to have different ideas about capitalism than, say, the US. Or Britain even. So I think these generalisations distort discussions like these. Or in other words, the different narratives become unmovable stereotypes and discussions become pointless. Because without any movement, what's the point of having a discussion? In my experience, I get the impression these discussions mostly reflect the frustrations about US politics and the apparent inability to act on its social issues. And while those problems are real, the capitalism vs. socialism actually seem to obfuscate the actual issues and its solutions. It becomes some sort of half philosophical, half religious discussion on moral values with no end. Or worse, with an end where the other side of the argument is deemed immoral. 

    sigh... rant out.. :whistling:

    Also, that crash course vid was pretty dense. Even if it's supposed to be made for kids.

    • Like 1

    New countdown, new release? [Aphex Twin Warp Store]

    in Aphex Twin

    Posted

    anyone seen a blimp anywhere?

    Syro-Blimp.jpg

    2 minutes ago, chronical said:

     

    both are AFX, one is a live rip and the other a seemingly paulstretched track off the fuji tape.. ?

    thx. although live rip doesn't mean much for me. there's plenty of stuff in there from others. tracks get mistaken to be from him quite regularly, if my memory serves me well. either way, i like those tracks. regardless of who made them.

    Richard D James SoundCloud - A Gift To The Fans

    in Aphex Twin

    Posted

    7 hours ago, cern said:

     

     

    Cool track! Thx.

    In case people are looking for a digital: Petter has a bandcamp page, but this is not on there. (Haven't heard is other tracks, but will check.) It is available at beatport, however. Other track is also good. Both tracks would fit well somewhere in an AFX dj set, imo.

    Don't know about other services. After checking bandcamp, I went to beatport. Which I haven't been to in years. And from the looks of it, nothing has changed around there. Beatport is still pretty much the same as 5 years ago. Much prefer bandcamp, tbh.

    • Like 1

    Coronavirus COVID-19

    in General Banter

    Posted

    5 minutes ago, randomsummer said:

    I had a choice in that I could look around to different places and start the appointment process to see which vaccines they were giving out.

    It seems that all of the people who experienced the clotting adverse events with the JnJ vaccine were female, ages 18-48.  Could possibly be hormone related?  I'm hoping that in the FDA meeting tomorrow they will decide to continue to allow males to get the JnJ vaccine.

    Indeed. Also think it's rather funny how hormonal anti-conception has similar risks for clotting, but no-one cares. Now when it's a vaccine and the world is watching, peoples pants are on fire. Might as well be cases of women still using anti-conception and a vaccine.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.