«why do I need privacy, I have nothing do hide»

>Uber Accused of Charging People More If Their Phone Battery Is Low (becos they are in need to get a taxi fast)

https://www.vice.com/en/article/uber-surge-pricing-phone-battery/

it really is like that :(

#conspiracy https://nostrcheck.me/media/5c8a576582b8aba3793f2abc5f2a52c1325a900a0a94be0f1cbcc70f4fc5edee/7bf053fbe234a0ad5554f1133543172c7c00be95847c484fd48d62832f87da3e.webp

hmmmmmmmmmmm.... ok, let's give it a shot

lol

would you mind telling shortly in advance if it's more politicy, conspiracy or actually science out there?

and all sourced by strong scientific data.

cry about it.

https://video.nostr.build/97377ce85a7ccefbdc34aeff8bff7eccdf3edb9ae2821d0c0970ec21dd527665.mp4

1. according to the link you sent, the treatment stops the spread... once again, call it whatever you want — a vaccine, treatment, panacea or poison — if it reduces the risk, severity, and rapidness [1][2] (and thus reducing the number of people who get sick, get sick at the same time, and die), it's neat

2. I don't care if you take it — nor I even would, if it would be a "real vaccine" — I care that you discourage people from taking it. analogy: I don't care that you drive without seatbelt, but if you discourage people using it, saying that science is wrong about its safety, I'll argue with you.

3. Efficacy wanes over time indeed, but can be maintained with boosters [3]. Still, ain't that important if you use 'em, because you still drop your chances to die 11x just with the "treatment", and booster does not make a huge difference [4]

4. This is the first serious argument so far — without insisting fake data about vaccines, you ask, is it worthy to be healthy by depending on drugs or (big) capitalism. I shall think about it.

P.S. By the way, did you know that authoritarian governments manipulated with the COVID data? Yet, not in the way you would think... They actually *downplayed* the significance of the problem for the sake of economic advantages: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2007.09566

[1] https://www.britannica.com/science/COVID-19-vaccine

[2] https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fd41586-021-03686-x

[3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9974155

[4] https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/10/health/us-coronavirus-friday/index.html

are we fighting about terms now?

vaccine is something what provides you so called "adaptive immunity" towards something. depending on how good is the vaccine, it may reduce, treat or cure. there are no reasons for denying vaccines just by saying that «they are actually not 100% good but only 80% good».

also, the word vaccine comes from Latin vaccīnus (“of or derived from a cow”), so a "vaccine" can be whatever reduce/cure/treatment/lilhelp shit it is. it's not a «panacea» (from Ancient Greek "all-healing")

your words in previous messate: "I will give you a source proving that vaccines do not stop the transmission"

citing FIRST paragraph in YOUR link: "[vaccine] helps reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2"

please read yourself the sources you send, lol.

I don't know, what are you trying to disprove by saying "vaccines does not actually stop a person from getting sick, it reduces the chances and consequences of getting sick". I wonder, if anything in this world would 100% stop you from something, lmao. nobody (including me) ever argued, that vaccines make you a superman.

if I told, that legalizing guns actually WON'T stop crimes (it will just dramatically reduce them) — will you agree on governments banning the guns? :D

factcheck articles are good for summarizing the scientific sources — I can also send you them as a bunch of links on separated studies and publications criticizing McCullough as well.

if you provide your sources about vaccines and they won't be poor or straight-out fake, I'll agree fact check was wrong. I can also send you lots of sources (strong as meta-analyses without government or bank funding) of vaccines lowering the transmission myself, if you wanna.

send him zaps, lads

socialism asks releasing it to "help fight with the left"? something ain't working here ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

DON'T MIX 'EM https://nostrcheck.me/media/5c8a576582b8aba3793f2abc5f2a52c1325a900a0a94be0f1cbcc70f4fc5edee/2c758c8ce73d46b9dc0c452d6ea3690a8de2c27fad2e8cf24fdb7311d3983a1b.webp https://nostrcheck.me/media/5c8a576582b8aba3793f2abc5f2a52c1325a900a0a94be0f1cbcc70f4fc5edee/abb22e6d2e0399a2bb8523864f91aa808bdbac8919d409416a838bad50ff4efa.webp

dumbass, asshole, fucker

козел =/= f*ggot.

ты бы ещё перевел "дурак" как "n*gger" (;¬_¬)

McCullough actively promotes misinformation about COVID-19, its treatments, and mRNA vaccines:

1) https://www.factcheck.org/2021/07/vaccines-remain-largely-effective-against-delta-variant-counter-to-claims-from-fox-news-guest/

2) https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/93936

3) https://factcheck.afp.com/http%253A%252F%252Fdoc.afp.com%252F9QW7UP-1

4) https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/vaccines-are-a-safer-alternative-for-acquiring-immunity-compared-to-natural-infection-and-covid-19-survivors-benefit-from-getting-vaccinated-contrary-to-claims-by-peter-mccullough/

right-wing media is an echo-chamber of anti-vaccine fakes: https://www.mediamatters.org/coronavirus-covid-19/right-wing-media-echo-chamber-anti-vaccine-messaging

step out of the bubble — like you've already did with the banks, governments and big businesses. ask me, if you need more debunks of fake news.

you get me wrong assuming that I trust the government: I trust only strong facts. for example, majority of governments try to control the guns, while multiple scientific meta-analyses show us that guns are never raising crimes, but actually protecting the people:

1) https://crimeandjusticeresearchalliance.org/rsrch/impact-of-gun-ownership-on-crime-rates/

2) https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/essays/firearm-prevalence-violent-crime.html

this

I think there are more solutions — specially outside capitalism — but sadly in my humble opinion we are most likely not going to succeed in saving the climate after all. There's a great essay on the anarchist libraries called "Desert" about that.

According to studies, even though many will die, many other will stay alive and adapt, so climate change most likely won't lead to extinction of humanity. If it's really inevitable (actually it has started already in poorest places), perhaps it's not worth discussions — we'll see how real climate change was on practice. ヽ(´ー｀)ノ

>when reading individual counter-studies, you need to be able to distinguish between proud lone wolves carrying the Truth, and madmen screaming that «breathing is harmful for health, we just don't understand it yet, and science is silent because it's corrupt»

You're ignoring my arguments, continuing pushing single links, some of which I don't even need to check myself, because *they've already proved as erroneous or even consciously faked data (netsearch about eg. AFLDS on any neutral website).

Usually you're fighting bravely against fakes and manipulations — eg. critisizing big tech or us politics hypocrisy — but you're experiencing denialism with some strongly scientifically proven data. I think, that being libertarian/ancap ain't necessarily requiring supporting all right-wing stuff, including weird conspiracy theories which were proved wrong long time ago yet still having a tiny amount of lunatic followers.

I will read the other links you've sent. In return, I warmly recommend you stepping out of the bubble and checking what any NEUTRAL doctor or study says — not necessarily pro-vaccine, but not anti-vaccine either.

p.s. I am arguing only againt something that has strong, neutral, various, independent proofs — denial of vaccines/masks/covid, pf genocides, of global warming. I don't argue about something like 9/11, because there is NO strong scientific data that it wasn't staged, so I can only tell my humble opinion, not argue