keyboardpithecus

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago

Nah let us back in

Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

The media and a lot of social media painted the killing of the CEO as a kind of revenge by a victim of the health care system. But to be honest carefully looking at how it was planned and execute I got a very different impression. It looked like a contract killing executed by a professional.

I don't think that this event can be seen as a signal of the status of the system. If that interpretation were true we should see a lot more executives in the health care sectors being killed.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

We don’t know the conditions that life arose in on Earth.

Yes, but, given that most of the fossils of archaic life was found where the primordial soup might have been present, that for the moment is the hypothesis with better support.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

There isn’t an assumption that if it had liquid water it may have had life

Trouble is that between science and what we get from the media there is a big difference. In science the assumption is not there. But when you see the media reports about Mars or the future planned missions to Europa the assumption is there, blunt and with no attempts to justify it.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 3 days ago (8 children)

The problem with the modern media is that they frame everything in the context of money. Thus they ignore that the Britons joined just for the economy. They are a staunchly capitalist country that never managed to fit within the EU spirit. They kept resisting the integration and asking opt-outs for every initiative. During the exit process they acted as spoilt children, they absorbed all the attention and time of the European council and brought all the other activities nearly to a standstill. All of that tedious process ended up with a partial exit, the UK is still standing on the edge with one foot in and another out.

At this point I think that the best thing to do to stop crying over the spilled milk and do not even dare to think to come back, it would be just a pain for everybody.

 

An often repeated statement about any extraterrestrial object is: "if it has liquid water it might suport life". On this assumption a lot of space probes, robots and rovers include the sensors and the instruments the search for traces of past life. This has had high priority in many missions to Mars and it will have high priority also in future missions to the satellites of Jupiter.

Now the thought came to my mind that the ability to support life might not be enough. Life on Earth exists in the most inhospitable places, even in lakes that formed below the polar caps. But the theory is that life evolved in the primordial soup, which was a very favourable environment, only later it spread to inhospitable environments.

To repeat myself, what I am saying is that the ability to support life and the ability to support the birth of life might be two different things. How much different is the question. If the answer is that the difference is strong and life needs a cosy environment in order to arise the assumption it had liquid water therefore it might have had life is moot.

So, how strong is the difference? Is just some liquid water in unknown conditions enough to let life arise, even if it might support existing life?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A real AI would have explained you that with great probability a room temperature (and atmospheric pressure) superconductor is not possible.

Few experiments were successful with small grains tested under enormous pressures. But apart from that a room temperature superconductor is unlikely due to the high entropy.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Antivaxxers are cartoonish characters created by the media to discredit those who opposed people in power. People like Trump or Bolsonaro said a lot of stupid and wrong things on purpose to discredit all the arguments. All the antivaxxers who appeared on the media are no better, actors playing the role of the idiots.

The opinion of the real opposition is:

COVID19 vaccines were available when the overwhelming majority of people already developed the antibodies on their own, therefore they were useless.

Viruses of that family mutate so frequently and are so contagious that there is no way to develop a vaccine on time. They will always arrive after people already came into contact with the virus and fought it off on their own.

Also the lock downs started after people already had their course with the virus and fought it off on their own. Lock downs were politically motivated, they saved absolutely nobody.

The story of the heart conditions looks like another false alarm to distract the attention from the real problem. Until now we used vaccines for a limited number of serious diseases and the vaccines were carefully tested over a long period. That was a sensible way to use vaccines because the mechanism is still not fully understood by science. Imposing by force two vaccinations every year with untested vaccines means playing too much with a mechanism we do not fully understand and nobody knows what the long term consequences could be.