BF2S Forums DAST Chat

I don't know, maybe?

I'm sure this is a blip and Musk will soon announce his plan for transporting us all to Mars.

muahahaha, and he can't even log on to retort.

musk went through a costly court battle to try and put off buying twitter. his reason? it had a problem with bots apparently.

his first major action as owner created an unholy meltdown. forget bots. now people are impersonating corporations for $8 and tanking their share prices.

fucking lmaoooooo.

Dilbert_X wrote:

I could literally build twitter in a weekend.

No, you couldn't. Not literally, certainly not on your own.

But so like an engineer, "I could just do this by myself," and then a montage of inexperience and fail.

Do you know how Wikipedia has those banners asking for donations? A teacher said he saw a teen open up the Wikipedia page, take their credit card out, and make a donation. When asked why he did that, the student said they thought the donation was mandatory.

😂 Kind of funny thinking about it how many teens saw Wikipedia asking for $5 and instead of just ignoring it they closed the window to actually do the class work.


My mom took away the emergency credit card.

elon musk getting fact-checked by his own website whilst shilling for big pharma. lmao. you love to see it.



dilbert says mean and childish things about jews and their relationship to money but here’s his engineering idol defending insulin prices. something that literally has life and death effects for many people.

it’s priceless. the last few weeks on twitter have been absolutely brilliant. the whole world can see how toxic and pointless this batch of engineering leaders of men are.

uziq wrote:

elon musk getting fact-checked by his own website whilst shilling for big pharma. lmao. you love to see it.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FhVn7zuXkAE … ame=medium

dilbert says mean and childish things about jews and their relationship to money but here’s his engineering idol defending insulin prices. something that literally has life and death effects for many people.

it’s priceless. the last few weeks on twitter have been absolutely brilliant. the whole world can see how toxic and pointless this batch of engineering leaders of men are.

I'd like to also point out that Bernie said the patent for insulin was sold in 1923. Musk rushes to correct him that in fact, insulin was "invented" in 1921, not 1923.



Musk, everyone, humanity's chosen genius.

i think david nutt has a realistic appraisal of drug harms. much more realistic than you do. we consent to consume things that have risks and harms every day.

there are many more people working in this field than david nutt. i am really not interested in his projects or hobby horses. i’m interested in the research and scientific outcomes. it’s absurd to claim that the entire field of drug research is david nutt. again: run a database search of the journals. it’s possible to dismiss your caricatures in 0.25 seconds. as soon as a search result can be returned. derp derp.

imagine claiming to be a scientist and thinking that you can disprove or dismiss an entire corpus of scientific literature … by attacking one scientist personally. yeah, that’s not how research works dilbert. you really are risibly stupid on this topic.

musk is arguing for insulin being sold at vastly inflated prices. the fact check below his tweet stated that the new analogs are drastically cheaper outside of the US market than within it. there’s no justifiable reason for those profit markups. it’s justifiable, i guess, if you’re a billionaire who thinks money is more important than human life.

right? david nutt’s whole schtick is for drug laws to be scientifically or medically based. he’s not a peace and love advocate of everyone taking crack cocaine as if it’s fun and harmless. he was commissioned one time to deliver a report on drug laws and returned with the quite uncontroversial conclusion that existing drugs legislation are a hodge-podge mess of moral panics, knee jerk reaction, and counter-productive bans with no basis in utilitarian thinking or protecting people.

many more scientists in this field have expressed frustration with state bans in place on drugs. it hampers medical research, for one.

making out that it’s just the obsession of one quirky guy, who may or may not have some fruity opinions and silly grifts on the side, is totally asinine. there are 1000s of studies in this field today. identifying a scientific argument with one author personally is so fucking stupid. it’s like trying to disprove gravity because newton was into alchemy and had some strange hobbies.

Last edited by uziq (2022-11-12 20:03:04)

uziq wrote:

imagine claiming to be a scientist and thinking that you can disprove or dismiss an entire corpus of scientific literature … by attacking one scientist personally. yeah, that’s not how research works dilbert. you really are risibly stupid on this topic.

But he's literally the only 'scientist' you quote on this subject, and his argument is apparently "people should choose drugs over alcohol, except I choose alcohol over drugs" hilarious.

musk is arguing for insulin being sold at vastly inflated prices.

Where?

he's literally not the only scientist i quote on this topic? how many times now have i linked you to active research groups at harvard, JHU, UCL, etc? you really are just making stuff up.

look up dr. ravi das, he has published widely in this field and is measured, objective, and by no means evangelical or with a special interest in the topic. he frequently contributes to meta-studies on the subject which do not hesitate to highlight flaws in methods, shortcomings of data, etc.

this is a highly active research area nowadays and yet you continually try to make out that it's david nutt.

i know exactly why you think this way, and it again highlights your own ineptitudes, not the actual state of affairs: it's because you get all of your information on just about any topic from the news cycle, your 'research' is never much deeper than a wikipedia list or something you read on bbc news that day. you don't actually read research. is david nutt quoted a lot in news articles? yes, sure, journalists like a go-to quote man and david nutt is almost invariably available for comment. he fills out any news article on the topic with a good paragraph.

but that's not the same thing as saying that the scientific literature is composed of one man. again, do a fucking journals search. you are illiterate and it's really not my problem.

except I choose alcohol over drugs" hilarious.

the only thing here that is genuinely hilarious is that you, who continually presents himself as a scientist and invests huge amounts of your ego's energy into your identity as a 'science guy', apparently think it's good to dismiss scientific evidence by going after one researcher's personal proclivities. i honestly could not care any less if david nutt or anyone else likes a drink on the weekends. i am interested in their scientific findings, not their kooky hobbies.

any scientist who has a side gig has to declare it in a conflicts of interest statement. every single published study has this component. it's really not hard to read a paper's conclusions and follow the science. but you're engaged in character smears against one man. that's hilarious. dilbert the scientist being really not very scientific.

Last edited by uziq (2022-11-12 20:50:13)