You see this even on much smaller scales, like trying having an honest conversation about veganism and it's benefits on the internet, people get so mad and absolutely refuse to acknowledge reality.
It feels like a lot of people don't even want to think about the argument of the person on the other side. Its almost like they are afraid of trying to understand.
This is a spot on observation. There's a guy on TikTok that talks about healthy masculinity that really resonates with me and talks about this exact phenomenon and how it harms us all. The video I link here really nails it. He puts into words what I've always felt. His examples are based in politics, and his expansion is based on interpersonal relationships.
Huge caveat, though: this only works when speaking to people in good faith. And it isn't always easy to spot when someone is speaking in good faith or in bad faith, especially when we're talking about subjects that effect us directly. The quote about anti-Semites not being unaware of the absurdity of their comments comes to mind.
What they think and what they’ll admit publicly are two different things. Look at Fox News, when this data started to come out in 2021 they started begging their viewers to get vaccinated because they realized it could cost elections.
I'm someone that would be Republican if the GOP hadn't lost their fucking minds. You could call me a conservative.
Presumably you can already tell what I think. Those fucking idiots, I hope the contingent of that party dies off quickly enough that reasonable conservatives can salvage what's left.
You're not wrong. And it's worse for the people who think like I do. We've been labeled "neoliberals", a term I'm not exactly a fan of and labeled centrists. In fact we're quite the opposite. We're so conservative it starts to look liberal again, bordering on anarchocapitalism (which is more where I find myself).
“See? I told you that doctors don’t care about you: look at how they do everything they can for vaxxers but the SECOND they hear you’re questioning, they don’t give a shit about you. Fucking sick.”
They’ll claim its because doctors weren’t treating people if they weren’t vaxxed. They were making claims like this during the height of the pandemic so now they just have evidence to prove it, obviously.
Remember when doctors/hospitals were getting paid if they claimed covid as the cause of death even for people who died in an accident? I member.
When I work at military facilities in the US, they use wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) which adds the heating effect of direct sunlight.
We use it to prevent heat stroke. DoD has a system of colored flags that index to the WBGT. Red and black flags indicate that folks working outside need to take breaks at some increased frequency.
Finally! The generations are so sloppily and arbitrarily defined anyway. Yeah, there’s a difference between me at almost 40 and someone in college. There are some things I had more in common with “Gen-X” and some that I had more in common with “millennials,” but then they’d try to define my group as if they were a separate thing on the cusp between the two. Misses the point entirely, there may be tendencies based on age group but everyone’s somewhere on a spectrum of all that stuff.
There are people same age as me that I feel like I share more in common with toddlers (or alternately, geriatrics) than them despite that age similarity.
I agree with you. Flailing around to find some kind of value in generational definitions, the best I can come to is more about eras— times defined by significant events, cultural touchstones, or technologies that influenced, in whatever way, directly or indirectly, the people alive at the time, or perhaps the people coming of age at the time.
Even then, how much does it tell us to think of people in those contexts?
Neat. I've suffered from this since I was single-digits-old; just thought everyone's ears rang. Been a lot of "treatments" over the years, but nothing seems to stick. Will be interested to see how this plays out.
My "favorite" part was when he read from the (now deleted) Oceangate blog post that effectively said "we don't bother with the mechanical certification process, since very few of the failures that occur in the world are due to mechanical faults".
Really? Could that be because the mechanical certification process actually works?
I feel the need to step in here. Certification != regulation. Regulation means there is a body that can enforce the requirements with monetary or other damaging repercussions. What Oceangate faced were certifications and their decision to side-step them were met with no repercussions except their reputation with those who wouldn't ever want to step inside their sub anyways.
Point is - regulations would have prevented this, but there are none.
I get you’re point, absolutely. I didn’t mean to conflate them as the same thing.
However, at least what I thought - regulations would require certification before use (ie aeroplanes are regulated, and require certification)
In Oceangates specific case, they sidestepped regulations requiring certification by diving only in international waters? Their boat which took the sub out there would have been certified because of regulations?
You're both right, but I'm pretty sure that you're having two separate but related discussions.
Certification by itself does absolutely nothing. It's a piece of paper.
However, it's a piece of paper that you can not get unless you've done a bunch of other stuff.
Regulations would have prevented this, because they would have required the certifications, which would have required the other stuff.
In this case, they didn't do the other stuff.
They didn't test the hull to see if it could take the pressure.
They explicitly decided not to bother testing the hull to see if it could actually take the pressure.
They certainly didn't do any fatigue testing to see how repeated pressure cycles impacted the material. The material that is extremely complex, and which nobody has done this with.
Because they didn't do that testing, they had no way to reliably know if other steps were required, like only using it X number of times, or establishing processes to do specific inspections to look for whatever kinds of damage might happen as a result of repeated stress.
So yes, if they had actually followed the process, this wouldn't have happened. They explicitly arranged to use the vessel in locations where they could not be held to the process.
But they didn't want to follow the process. Which means more than 'they didn't do the certification', it means that they also didn't do many of the other things that would have been required to get that certification.
And the lack of regulation meant that nobody could shut them down for those decisions.
Also? Just a side note, it’s very likely that people who were willing to cut corners around safety certifications… also probably didn’t have a proper maintenance schedule going on it.
Yeah well put. It should be said that regulations OFTEN cite certifications from non-regulatory bodies. Regulators are often legislators and executors, not scientists that understand the rationales behind good practice. Certification bodies (like UL, as one example, or SAE for automotive) have the scientists to do the requirements.
I posted this elsewhere but think it’s relevant here:
For the past couple of years it’s been a lot of news of “Hottest Day Ever” to which my favorite response has always been a slightly cheeky “So far!”, but I’ve realized with the recent coverage of large swaths of the US reaching deadly wet bulb temps that that’s going to change. The headlines won’t be for the hottest day, they’ll be for the highest death count, and nobody will say the second part but we’ll all be thinking it.
My wife has tinnitus and it's so strange to me that there's so little research into this topic and absolutely no answers or relief for people that suffer from it.
I'm assuming (ha!) that like the rest, this is an estimated average. Of course every person and car will vary, it's not like it'd make sense to break out every car, every factory and their individual emission costs, etc either.
Most new things are not at all accessible to impoverished people (we saw this with covid vaccine inequality) and they are the ones most likely to have tooth loss due to lack of access to dental care.
This is true in the short term, but drugs and treatments can get cheaper over time, whereas implant dentistry is intrinsically expensive in a way that's unlikely to ever improve.
Both PLA and PET are food safe but I wouldn't use them for long-term food related stuff.
The surface of a print contains thousands of valleys, nooks and crannies and other hard to reach spots that serve as ideal breeding grounds for bacteria.
They do also talk about the potential to activate a latent third set of tooth buds in humans who have lost their adult teeth. They seem to have already done this in animals.
I was shocked to learn that dental sealant exists. This simple procedure is very effective in preventing cavities, so once a kid has adult teeth they'll be protected into their 20s.
Yet, many people don't know to ask for this and can't afford the upfront cost (about $40 per tooth). Yet, unless your kid has fewer than 3 cavities as a teen it is the most cost effective and wellness promoting option.
It's wild to me this isn't a heavily subsidized and promoted procedure, but I guess dental care =/= healthcare...
I know what you mean. I'm always amazed no one ever told me about preventive dentistry, and some people I tell seem to view it with suspicion.
Worse, where I live the dentists you see as a poor person usually push extraction as a cost-effective option when something goes wrong. But it can cause issues with chewing (the other teeth can move), and bone loss in the jaw.
Science
Top