• 3 Posts
  • 569 Comments
Joined 10 months ago
cake
Cake day: April 4th, 2025

help-circle

  • markovs_gun@lemmy.worldtoAtheism@lemmy.worldTechnicality!
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    13 hours ago

    This is kind of more complicated than you’d think. Mostly because after the industrial revolution the population of the world exploded and there are far more people now than there used to be. For example, the world population today is ~8 billion, while in 1930 it was only around 2 billion. If you go back to the ancient world, the population was only about 300 million people in 1 AD. Now of course trying to estimate a theoretical antediluvian population is kind of impossible since the Bible doesn’t contain any census data until the next book, but if we take the date usually given by Creationists of ~2000 BC then the population would have been between 20 and 70 million. So still higher than Hitler* but not by as much as you might think.

    *This is if you only attribute Holocaust deaths to Hitler. Hitler killed many more people than just the victims of the Holocaust and you could make the argument that most of the people who died in the European theater in died as a result of Hitler, and by that metric Noah actually loses to Hitler here.


  • I don’t want to defend AbbVie, the evil corporation that makes Humira, but that drug is a miracle of modern medicine. It’s not “your back pain could be better,” it’s for severe autoimmune inflammatory diseases, mostly arthritis, psoriasis, and Chron’s. You can actually die from Chron’s if it’s untreated. Anyway, I started developing pretty severe arthritis at the age of 10 and the medications at the time didn’t work and had horrible side effects- the main one at the time was a drug called methotrexate which is literally a chemotherapy drug at higher doses and it has chemo-like side effects. Eventually I got prescribed Humira and it was so much better. The worst side effect was pain during injection and it basically cured my symptoms completely. I’ve been on it ever since (well now I’m on the generic version that came out a few years ago) and I would legitimately not be able to walk or live a normal life without it.

    The side effects listed on the commercial are far more severe than what is normal for most medications, because they have to report anything that showed up in the clinical trials even if it is very rare or could have been caused by another factor. A lot of these overlap with symptoms of diseases that are treated with the drug or are symptoms that are often comorbid with the diseases treated by the drug. The ones associated with infectious diseases are very real in the case of Humira, but that is because it’s designed to treat diseases caused by an overactive immune system and it’s basically impossible to intentionally reduce the autoimmune response without also reducing the regular immune response as well. The drugs that Humira replaced were even worse in this regard, and basically just supressed the entire immune system without specificity.

    I know pharma ads are obnoxious and indicative of an extremely awful system that preys upon sick people, but if you’re seeing an ad for a new drug these days that drug is probably life changing for anyone who gets prescribed it and that’s why they can charge thousands of dollars for it. Humira is one of the most profitable drugs of all time because it’s basically a miracle in a vial compared to anything that came before it, and it’s ridiculously expensive, over $6000 for a month’s supply. The crazy thing is, I’d probably actually pay that if I didn’t have insurance and there weren’t alternatives available like there are today. I’d have to take less of it to afford it, but that’s how necessary it is for me.








  • While it is true that Bitcoin is bad at being a currency, it was definitely intended to be one from the beginning. The people who created it and early adopters had weird libertarian beliefs about currency and intrinsic value. Bitcoin was supposed to be like a digital version of the gold standard rather than a modern fiat currency. Of course, this has a lot of problems and there is a reason nobody uses the gold standard anymore, but these people did actually intend for it to be a currency. The whole thing is designed around the ideological belief that scarcity and work are what create value, and that value derived from these is intrinsic. It’s kind of hard to grasp if you’re not immersed in the weird online libertarian culture that created and adopted Bitcoin early on but these are things that people very sincerely believe, although these days most crypto people aren’t into that idea anymore and you see it among people who buy gold and silver


  • markovs_gun@lemmy.worldtoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldthank you fb
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    These guys are so far out from mainstream that you can’t really know what the hell they’re thinking. That said, Leviathan isn’t actually an end times figure. It’s a sea monster mentioned in the Old Testament in various points. The most famous passage is Psalm 74, a song of praise to God, which contains a reference to Him saying Leviathan, which appears to be a metaphor for taming the waters of the Earth

    Yet God my King is from of old, working salvation in the midst of the earth.

    You divided the sea by your might; you broke the heads of the sea monsters[d] on the waters.

    You crushed the heads of Leviathan; you gave him as food for the creatures of the wilderness.

    You split open springs and brooks; you dried up ever-flowing streams.

    Yours is the day, yours also the night; you have established the heavenly lights and the sun.

    You have fixed all the boundaries of the earth; you have made summer and winter.

    Some people believe that there is a reference to Leviathan in Revelation but it’s not direct. Anyway, these people aren’t following established Biblical lore, they’re totally brain melted from 24/7 conspiracy content on Facebook and YouTube.




  • I explain that isn’t really what socialism is about and actually engage. Most people don’t actually know what socialism is in practice and especially in the US their ideas are from actual propaganda they had in schools. Even self described socialists in the US often fall into the “socialism is when the government does things” trap and most people believe the lie they were told in school that socialism is necessarily the complete abolition of private property and money without questioning how that would even work in practice. I would say fewer than 10-20% of the US population even has a functional knowledge of what socialism even is in practice despite having extremely strong opinions about it.

    Things like the quote in the OP are “thought terminating cliches” that serve to stop thought and dialogue before alternate ideas actually get discussed rather then form the basis of actual ideas themselves. For this one in particular I ask if they have ever actually read what Karl Marx believed and if they know that even Marx agreed with the premise that capitalism breeds innovation and economic growth, at least at the start. That this is true is not a problem for socialism intrinsically. You’re never going to change someone’s worldview or undo a lifetime of propaganda in one conversation, but you can crack the door a little and maybe spark some doubt or get someone curious enough to read on their own.


  • This is why I am just going to pay networks of my favorite youtubers directly when YouTube finally gets too bad to use. I’m never paying for RedTube or whatever the fuck porny ass name their premium service has so that Google gets most of my money and Mr beast gets a cut while the people I actually watch get nothing. I pay for Dropout already and that shit is so much better than Netflix and other services. Sure it’s low budget but it’s still better than the slop all the big companies are shoveling out of their troughs.




  • Are you familiar with how common law systems in the US and other former English colonies work? Essentially the way it works is

    1. Party A does something they believe is within their rights under the law. In this case, trying to destroy evidence. Now, the crucial part here is that Party A can be wrong about their claim, but our legal system determines that courts are the ones that have to decide whether that is true.

    2. Party B sues in court claiming that Party A did something illegal. In this case, the state of Minnesota is claiming that Ice is trying to do something illegal by trying to destroy evidence

    3. The judge looks at the facts of the case and determines if Party A did in fact do something illegal, taking things like precedent into account.

    4. If the judge believes that Party B is right and Party A’s actions were indeed illegal, like they did in this case, they issue a judgement that both parties must abide by.

    In this case, it is blatantly obvious that the actions are actually illegal but our legal system is set up in a such a way that this must be proven in court.