🐱TheCat @ WheeGeetheCat @sh.itjust.works

Posts

14

Comments

391

Joined

2 yr. ago

same, I assume you have heard of / watched the train wreck that was Action Park?

If I add in the 85+ to the disney calculations it only makes your case worse (drives the # higher). I left it out to be nice.

Would you seriously take your family to disney as long as less than 10 people a day died there? Like get your head out of the #s for a second think with your common sense.

Lets do another really simple one. Imagine a playground near you serving kids 5-14. Are you taking your kids as long as less than 13 kids died there last year? Or are you maybe thinking its unsafe after 1 death? WHY?

You seriously are not understanding the importance of comparing representative groups and this 'compare any slice of the country to the entire country 1:1' method is ludicrous, nothing to do with burning man

edit: hmm the park example is complicated by the fact we don't know how many citizens the park servers. Im finding numbers ranging all over, from 2k to 10k to much higher in cities. For this example we can use a city park with 10k annual visitors, so we would expect 1-2 deaths a year at this park and not bat an eye yes? Either way I think you get my point. Good luck

fucking hell mate, do you think selection bias is a fictional concept inapplicable to your calculations or are you going to continue to pretend that taking an entire countries population and comparing it to any sliver of the country 1:1 doesn't fail basic representativeness analysis?

I like how you chose casino, establishments known to especially attract the 85+ cohort, which I didn't even include in my 10 a day disney # to be nice. How many 85+ you think they got at burning man?

Do you think 10 people a day die at a single disney park behind the scenes? You're dying on this hill?

tragedy of the commons. People impacted arent in position to change it, people in the position to change it aren't impacted.

One day we will realize individual actions wont cut it and we need to unite against those burning our world instead of quibbling about who recycles more.

Haha I don't care so much about burning man as much as this method you have.

So by your math, Somewhere like disney with 50k visitors a day is still remarkably safe as long as less than 10 people a day die there?

go on take it, it won't cost you much

Do you have any hospitalized people there? Because the USA has 919,649 hospital beds. Anyone needing assisted living? Because the US has 810,000 people in assisted living. Now the 70,000 number doesn't seem so big eh?

My point is that 'people capable of going to an event' is already a helluva selection, especially when you compare it to the population that includes all those sick people.

Something 'middle class' Americans may want to notice:

When people are living in abject poverty, you are comparatively 'rich'.

Anger at the 'rich' is at an all time high.

The 'true rich' are out of reach of the poor.

As income inequality grows, this will get worse.

check again it was up to $575 this year

Ive never been to burning man. I went to Coachella a LLOOONNGG time ago when it was hippies rolling around in the dust. Coachella ain't that anymore, it's instagram rich kids and tech bros. I assume the same thing has happened to burning man.

LOL you're really running with this line of thinking. Might people who plan to go to a week-long strenuous event in the desert lead to a sample that has some selection bias? For instance, selecting out the entirety of the demographic that is currently hospitalized, currently debilitatingly ill?

In which cause you should compare mortality rates with another group like that. Not the entire rest of the age demographic (which has all those sick people you selected out).

I don't really care either way, just found this argument kind of hilarious.

A lot of disposal vapes CAN be charged, they just can't be refilled!

As a left-leaning person that would be nice to believe, but I have seen young teenagers who get a taste of shitty capitalism just run to the other side of the spectrum and become 'communists who know nothing about communism except that it's better than capitalism'.

I think actually building a working system of governance that doesn't concentrate corruptible levels of power in a few hands is hard, and many people lack the patience and intelligence to work out the problem. So they run to 'easy answers' that make them feel morally superior and offer the chance of something different (even if worse), especially when they are young and reactionary.

Its the same way some Bernie fans ran to Trump because they lacked the patience to dismantle the duopoly for real, so they hoped he'd do it somehow. We're all feeling worse off, but at least they got to 'show the democrats, right?

bad take, we are voting right now in agora about this. Are you ignorant of it or just shit stirring?

seems like we will be defederated again soon judging by the vote in agora

That tracks.

People were saying that about cryogenics.

Humans have a vast body of knowledge about how things work. It's a shame its dwarfed by the vast body of knowledge we are completely ignorant of.

Much as scientists managed to be surprised that life had evolved to eat garbage in the pacific garbage patch, it seems some will manage to be surprised that when humans eliminate one source of mortality, another inevitably evolves to take advantage of the ever-growing supply of humans.

Tbf you guys do the r/conservative thing of banning dissenting opinions in your own spaces while making dissenting opinions/attacks 100% of your personality in others spaces. It's hypocrisy.

Also calling everyone a bigot doesn't help fight nazis, it helps nazis blend in with normal people by creating a huge club of people branded 'bigots' by your movement

I voted against defederation fwiw but my opinion is rapidly changing as I see how you conduct yourselves

paradox does not mean 'has two definitions'. It means the ONE definition contains a contraction, i.e. 'tolerance needs to be intolerant towards intolerance in order for a tolerant society to exist' contains a contradiction.

Really can't agree that qyron is right, doesn't seem to know what the paradox of tolerance is

'people posting stuff you consider harmful' is not a simple, black and white issue. Anyone who pretends that allowing all opinions has no consequences is full of shit, anyone who claims that tightly policing opinions has no consequences is full of shit.

Like almost everything in life, you will have to navigate a tenuous balance between these two things and you will never know if you got the balance right. You are just a sack of meat doomed to die.