2
lawfag 2 points ago +2 / -0

USPS website says they're giving away disposable rapid tests, which display results within minutes on the spot. No need or way to send to a lab for confirmation.

2
lawfag 2 points ago +2 / -0

There are bots that use Markov chains to automatically write and publish "books". Search for anything topical on Amazon and you'll see loads of them.

3
lawfag 3 points ago +3 / -0

Most social media sites' algorithms disproportionately push stupid and inflammatory content into newsfeeds. Ragebait, idiocy, and misinformation generate much more engagement than agreeable content does. More engagement translates into more profits for the social media company, as it means users are more likely to click on ads, etc. while arguing in comments.

For example, Facebook admitted that its content promotion algorithm "weighs" angry reactions more heavily than all others, since controversial posts keep users on the site longer than more agreeable ones do. Engineers pointed out that weighing angry reactions more could inadvertently make Facebook a vector for misinformation, conspiracy theories, and antisocial bullshit, and executives basically replied that they didn't care as long as it buffed the company's bottom line.

Society isn't nearly as divided as it seems to be online. Likewise, people aren't as stupid or extreme as social media makes it seem. Companies are systematically distorting the truth, pushing divisive and anger-inducing content while suppressing reasonable positions and gestures of solidarity, so they can manipulate you into believing that ideology is bought, not thought.

15
lawfag 15 points ago +15 / -0

Basically just a place where you can walk in and pay to get an IV. Once the bag is drained, you get up and leave. Supposedly great for hangovers (I don't drink, so wouldn't know). There are different IV "cocktails" you can get, from plain saline to vitamin solutions.

2
lawfag 2 points ago +2 / -0

I would describe my experiences similarly. Seeing that depravity and constant tragedy made me realize just how much more difficult it is to be righteous and selfless than it is to be wicked and selfish.

1
lawfag 1 point ago +1 / -0

Not everyone there was vaxed, I don't think. You could get in with a negative covid test. That said, I agree that side effects from the vaccine probably compounded the issue! I was going to put that in my original response but didn't know how to phrase it.

The push from the back came from people rushing the gates and breaking in, so I heard. There were also kids trying to push their way up to the stage.

22
lawfag 22 points ago +22 / -0

I worked security for big venues for a while and also had a gig as an RA in college. Nightly occurrence, no lie. I saw a 14 year-old overdose on pills at a concert while several other teenagers were asphyxiating due to alcohol poisoning a few feet over. A girl in my dorm died from date rape drugs, and a couple of her friends wound up in intensive care that same night. I avoid crowded, chaotic events. I've seen too much shit.

3
lawfag 3 points ago +3 / -0

I guess it would have been more powerful if he offered a contemporary example of the same phenomenon instead of just rehashing last year's content with the timestamps cropped out. If the latest example he could find is from last year, that doesn't really suggest this is a worthy concern in the present day.

I don't even see this as proof that these liberal elites are bots/NPCs or whatever. Just seems like a cringe-inducing failed attempt to "oh captain my captain" an uninspired and verbose platitude into a social justice slogan.

29
lawfag 29 points ago +33 / -4

I agree. Occam's razor. Fatal overcrowding disasters aren't unprecedented or even particularly rare, especially in environments where hard drugs, alcohol, exhaustion and dehydration are also at play. Stuff like this happens at a smaller scale at EDM events all the time.

4
lawfag 4 points ago +4 / -0

For sure, I agree with you fully. I understand that he's sharing it now because the trial is ongoing, and I agree that it's disingenuous for him to omit and obfuscate the context to make the situation seem more sinister than it actually is.

I'm just wondering what he was up to when he stumbled across those tweets in the first place, and why he decided to present the content in the sketchy way that he did. It almost seems like he was intentionally trying to circulate misleading information, but why? Is he compromised, or just misguided?

4
lawfag 4 points ago +4 / -0

For sure, I understand why he posted it, but I'm just curious about what he was looking into when he unearthed those tweets. Hopefully he was doing a deep dive into something interesting.

5
lawfag 5 points ago +9 / -4

Your observation made me confused about that too, so I looked up the actual tweets only to discover that they are, in fact, retweets with the message just copied and pasted into the reply: link for example. I guess they just repeated the message for emphasis, or because the person they were retweeting did so and they weren't sure whether that was a necessary attribute of the virtue signal. Dinesh just cropped the retweets out.

Also, Dinesh conveniently omitted the fact that all these tweets are over a year old. Wonder why he was digging that far back.

2
lawfag 2 points ago +3 / -1

Copy and paste?

by BQnita
5
lawfag 5 points ago +5 / -0

As awful as this whole situation is, I can't really think of anything the journalists could have done that wouldn't have either put their own lives in jeopardy or risked getting American journalists shuttered out of the community or country, preventing horrors like this from being documented altogether.

I guess CNN could have ponied up $2000 for the family so they didn't have to sell their daughter in the first place, but then they'd probably have to deal with an angry, probably Taliban-affiliated pedophile as well as the chance that other families will take inspiration from the situation and either fabricate or deliberately place themselves in similarly horrible scenarios in hopes of getting money from the network too.

Fine ethical line here...

4
lawfag 4 points ago +4 / -0

I unfortunately had to be tested several times due to multiple hospitalizations. The test is DEFINITELY not "always" at the edge of your nose. The swab normally goes aaaaaalll the way back into the nasal cavity. It stings really bad and made my eyes water every time. I was shocked at how invasive the process was despite what the media was saying about the ease and convenience of getting tested.

2
lawfag 2 points ago +2 / -0

What a wonderful story. Wishing you a speedy recovery!

1
lawfag 1 point ago +1 / -0

That'd be a logical response if we were only trying to protect AIDS patients from airborne diseases, but that's not the case. The meds prevent illness from fomites, water contamination, etc, so they're the better intervention. Plus you can take multiple effective precautions against the same thing, and that's totally reasonable because nothing works perfectly. Like, if you want to avoid pregnancy, it's safer to use multiple forms of birth control than just condoms alone.

I frankly don't give a fuck about the masks. The people who are afraid of catching pneumonia from wearing a mask are just as retarded as the people who are afraid of catching COVID from not wearing one, in my opinion. The government traffics and murders innocent civilians in plain sight. The masks are irrelevant to that at best, and a distraction from it at worst.

1
lawfag 1 point ago +1 / -0

The reason is because since the mid-1980s, antimicrobial prophylaxis has been a core element of HIV/AIDS clinical treatment. We prevent AIDS-related opportunistic infections via medications, so wearing masks to limit exposure to pathogens isn't really necessary.

There's no established antimicrobial prophylaxis for COVID, so limiting exposure is the best we can do to avoid the disease, at least according to the CDC. Personally, I've seen enough stories on here to understand that Ivermectin can be used as a prophylactic, so I have some on standby in case I'm ever exposed to the virus.

5
lawfag 5 points ago +5 / -0

The post isn't asking why we didn't use masks to stop HIV transmission. The question is if HIV/AIDS patients are severely immunocompromised, why aren't visitors/healthcare providers required to mask up when in their presence?

1
lawfag 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm literally a lawyer. I do legal research all day and get paid for it. I promise you I've looked into this at length. Everything about "redemption theory" is pure bullshit, and it's frankly disconcerting that self-described "patriots" have so little faith in the American constitution that they believe it cannot abrogate common law.

view more: Next ›