www.news.ycombinator.com

zmgsabst #wingnut #conspiracy news.ycombinator.com

That’s because DIE is just apologetics for modern racism and colonialism:

Poor Whites, Jews, and Asians are acceptable sacrifices to the racists behind that movement — which resembles modern colonialism, eg, dividing a population by providing special privileges to an ethnic minority to ease your rule. Increasing rape and murder against natives in European countries is fine, as long as it disrupts their cultural coherence and makes them subjugated to groups like the WEF.

That’s why DIE was promoted by Wall St, WEF, et al: they wanted to end the class conscious discussion of their behavior, so they rebuilt the KKK, fostered grievance narratives, etc — as a way to bring the population to heel.

That’s frequently discussed in populist circles (eg, Jimmy Dore, Russell Brand, Vivek Ramaswathy) and why the working class is defecting from establishment politics (and particularly, the racist, neo-colonial Left).

cbeach #wingnut news.ycombinator.com

Fediblock is a co-ordinated scheme for ostracising people from the Fediverse if they hold certain views. Generally it works by announcing blocks via the hashtag #fediblock, but there are also catalogues of instances to be blocked en masse, and automation available. One example of a list: https://joinfediverse.wiki/FediBlock

Some examples of reasons stated for blocking individual instances from the Fediverse:

* “libertarianism”

* “TERFism” (feminists that oppose modern trans ideology)

* “Trumpism” (blocking nearly half the American electorate based on their political views?)

* “free speech”

* “federate with evil instances”

Sounds sketchy, right?

At least Twitter 1.0 had concrete guidelines that it could use to justify its censorship.

As can be seen from the list above, Fediblock is highly partisan and arbitrary. An ideal tool for political weaponisation of the Fediverse.

@JohnFen

Surely, you don't want to be associated with those instances anyway, right? I'm not seeing the problem here. You aren't being excluded from the fediverse, just from that group of instances.

So if I express a liking for “free speech,” for example, my entire instance might be de-federated by Fediblock activists.

And if I join another instance and discuss “free speech” I will be swiftly booted out, lest Fediblock comes for their instance, too.

Can you see the issue with that?

Do I represent a subversive niche group when I advocate for dangerous ideas like “free speech”?

Am I the asshole?

@JohnFen

Not really, no … Just associate with instances where you're welcomed instead.

The issue here, as I see it, is orchestrated blocking of viewpoints. Not just on one instance, but across many instances. Fediblock is systematic and partisan.

Nadya #sexist news.ycombinator.com

The answer of why [social media has a greater negative mental health effect on teenage girls than it does on boys] is quite obvious to many people but no longer politically acceptable.

There is a large external pressure for studies to show that there are no differences between men and women while there is also demand for studies that show negative outcomes of women in comparison to men. The same problem happens again and again with these studies in that nothing explains the negative outcomes of women. Except one explanation that is instantly discarded for being socially untenable.

The intersectionalist looks at the studies and declares, "It must be something - let's keep looking!" while the sexist takes a look and nods.

Nobody is going to risk their careers or their funding when they can continue being paid to investigate other avenues of explanation. The suffering of people will continue until a more acceptable explanation is found.

And because I don't wish to speak between the lines: There are psychological and emotional differences between men and women. And, from all the humans I've known at least, women tend to give more of a shit about the opinions of other people than men give a shit about the opinions of other people. While the toxic negativity of social media impacts both genders I would honestly be shocked if it didn't impact women more if for no reason other than because they care more.

literallyaduck #conspiracy news.ycombinator.com

They can use this as a way to get the people who don't vaccinate to self identify by luring them into "you don't have to come back to the office, you can work from home".

Once people have been identified they will have the list of people to let go.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/1938-nazi-law-forced-jews-register-their-wealthmaking-it-easier-steal-180968894/

Read this and substitute Jew for Antivaxer:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Jewish_legislation_in_pre-war_Nazi_Germany

Using the term antivaxer is the first step to dehumanizing people.

Next, comes "the antivaxers have a choice" conversations and some of them do, some have a mental block (could be called mental illness), some may have what they perceive as a healthy fear of the government, which is justified as the government has done some pretty shady things like giving people Syphilis under the guise of medical care.

narrator #conspiracy news.ycombinator.com

I think the way things are headed, our governments have decided that freedom is obsolete. It is incompatible with preventing climate change. In the next couple of years, I predict a system will be brought in where all consumption will be need based regardless of income in order to prevent excess carbon emissions.

This requires that there is no ownership of property and each person's consumption is carefully metered. "In the future you will own nothing and you will be happy", as the WEF has been saying. Adjustments can be made based on compliance (e.g social credit score). The first stage of this is lockdown until consumption is reduced to targeted levels via the ruse of insanely disproportionate coronavirus restrictions. After the vaccine passports are fully implemented, the system and its AI god can go to work rationing just enough to you to live.

This is all pretty out in the open, they are just lying about how excited the world is to unconditionally embrace sustainability and equality of consumption as a guiding principle for all human activity.

techietim #fundie news.ycombinator.com

As a side thread, regarding Jeanne Calment, here’s a more in depth article about whether she was actually the oldest person in the world: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/02/17/was-jeanne-cal…

I do not believe her age is correct; the Bible states that man's maximum lifespan is now 120:

> Genesis 6:3

> And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

aficiomaquinas #quack news.ycombinator.com

There is a very interesting book around the metabolic route for treating cancer. It's called "Starving cancer" by Jane McLelland. It talks about using over the counter drugs and supplements that have been studied for their metabolic blocking properties for cancer, as well as changing the diet to reduce as much as possible the nutrients that cancer craves the most according to their metabolic phenotype. Most of the times it's glucose or glutamine, but the trick is to block as many metabolic pathways using the drugs so that mutation is prevented. Most of these drugs have their patents expired and are quite cheap. The author had a very aggressive form of cancer with less than 5% statistic survival rate and were able to survive and go back to NED (no evidence of disease). It's not exactly a substitute for standard therapy such as chemo, but there's many people who also went to NED just with her protocol. I tried this back when I had cancer, and even though my survival rate was very high just on standard care, my tumor markers went way down almost to normal on the first cycle combined with Jane's protocol. Unfortunately, the cancer industry and pharmaceutical industry won't really invest much money on clinical trials for expired patent, or even existing drugs in their portfolio. There are a couple of independent clinical trials going on, so far, with good results AFAIC. Another very controversial, but interesting treatment for cancer that will probably never see the light is Chlorine Dioxide. And don't you dare write that on Facebook or YouTube because it'll be outright banned or deleted for "spreading misinformation". I have friends and persons I know that went to NED just on chlorine dioxide and diet. Having used it myself for many months with no negative effects, and, after chemo, I can't help but cringe every time someone tells me that it's "very toxic". Oh lord, you should have seen what chemo was like. Now, that was toxic.