Please, QAnon is overhyped and promoted by centralized media. On presidential debates corruption was not even mentioned (biggest scandal since watergate), but some crazy fringe group gets 15 minutes.
It is 2016 election all over again, media chooses their favorite "evil" and promote it to death.
Decentralization stops radicalisation, because it allows free discussion.
Free discussion does not axiomatically stop radicalization. There is a reasonable argument to be made that as we've seen communication get easier, it's made radicalization more possible rather than less.
That said, I'd invite you to continue your line of reasoning: decentralization leads to free discussion. Free discussion leads to X. X leads to the reduction in radicalization. What is the X you see?
There are studies, just google "free speech". Your way does not work, unless you go full China. Then it sort of works fpr couple of decades.
For example I converted several hard antivaxers by explaining importance of each vaccine one by one. They agreed that at least some of them are important. They went to less radical position.
Another example was Brexit referendum. Populists had stupid arguments like 350 million/week for NHS, or about stoping immigration (UK was not in Schengen). It would be very easy for media to discus it, and debung those arguments. But instead of discussion and deescalating situation, they called oposition racist.
The idea that you can just debate every point with every person is frankly absurd. It doesn't scale, it's always easier to produce more garbage that will appeal to folks on the fringe than to meticulously debunk it all point by point.
And even if you could keep up, not everyone will even engage. Folks don't want their beliefs challenged point by point -- it feels bad. It takes energy and commitment to be willing to hear challenges to ones own beliefs and not everyone has that ability.
And there's clearly positions that effectively reduce radicalization between fully open and "full China". There are also studies that say deplatforming is effective.
QAnon has made it into the halls of congress, literally in the form of the now infamous 'Q Shaman' but also in the form of elected representatives[1], it's made it to Harvard educated now socially isolated loners who are part of groups that encompass hundreds of thousands[2], and it has even made it to my homecountry[3], where it is co-mingling with anti-vaxers and covid-deniers. It is not a joke at all. That's how far crazy ideas go if they can spread unopposed.
I should clarify, neither I nor Dr. Rasmussen are claiming that we know what the true origin is, or that zoonotic spillover is definitely what happened. There is not enough evidence to make such a definitive conclusion. I can see how people might read my comment as implicitly asserting that if people did understand the empirical facts they would come to the conclusion of zoonotic origin.
That said, there are facts, and they are relevant: the fact that COV RaTG13 has 96.2% similarity to SARS-COV-2. The incredible diversity of bat coronaviruses, and the fact that only fraction are studied and understood, despite serious study by the WIV.
Here's another good quote from another good thread: And investigating zoonotic origins can take decades, and you may NEVER find the "smoking bat" or whatever other intermediate species that may be involved. It's like looking for a needle in a planet-sized haystack. --
https://twitter.com/angie_rasmussen/status/13497545972759142...
The main point that I was trying to make, which I stand by, is that most people are going to base their beliefs about this question on essentially political considerations: do you trust the CCP or the US State Dept more? Unfortunately, both of those institutions have done terrible damage to objective scientific inquiry, and in my opinion neither one is really deserving of trust. Better to follow the science where it leads, but this is an often frustrating and time consuming process.
Human share 98.5 percent of DNA with shimpanzee. Percentage is just a pop science. Find the missing link and you have a proof.
But for start we could explain how south china wild bat got into wuhan meat market, 500 km from its origin.
I am not from US or China. From my view Wuhan lab was sponsored by US. My concern is how often will current crisis repeat, every 10 years? Nobody is answering this question.
And we do not need "lab origin" to pin blame on China. Wuhan meat market is open again, more bats sold...
I don’t know, there’s really not much concrete information to go off of at this point. I think any reasonable person would naturally side with the people asking for more evidence and/or transparency. In this case that appears to be the State Dept. I’m not sure if you could call that a political consideration, though the question of origin has garnered plenty of attention in our political theater.
Maybe you’re right and most people today will base their beliefs on politics. I’d still hesitate to label anybody when the facts haven’t landed yet, if only to deescalate the present day’s partisanship.
》At a daily cycle usage rate of 1.4 per block, accumulation of 3,000 P/E cycles would take only 5 to 6 years, the agency said.
Designed lifetime of Tesla cars is about 6 years. After that parts like batteries start failing and need expensive replacement. There is no after market for parts and no second hand market.
Normal car with basic maintenance lasts about 15-20 years.
They're not necessarily wrong, though. That battery will fail some day, and I can guarantee that it will lose its charge before the normal life expectancy of a car (15-20 years) is over.
If they still make batteries in 10 years then perhaps Tesla will prove to be the more ecological of the bunch. However, when I look for the price of a new battery for the Roadster, all I can find is discussions about how there are no batteries available, and if they are, the batteries are the price of a new, normal car. For the Model S, the price is much lower (about $13k + labour) but according to news posts I've found from the beginning of 2019, Tesla has already discontinued the batteries for that model.
For any car to be ecological, replacement parts need to be available for years after the original sales date. For most petrol-based cars, this has not been a problem, but for silicon valley company cars, this can be a dangerous pitfall. Batteries can suddenly fail, making the entire car worthless if there's no replacement available for a decent price.
It's a cool, high-tech car for rich people, which is a perfectly valid reason to get one, but if it really is that ecological only remains to be seen. Of course, it's still far more ecological to buy a used gasoline car and drive that around for another ten years than it is to buy a new EV purely because of the pollution that comes with producing a new car.
I bought my Tesla used. They still make the battery.
Longer term, I don't think that the economics of ICE cars will beat battery cars any more than the economics of horses beat cars. It is no more difficult to continue to make batteries available than transmissions.
We're still in the first decade of practical electric cars, and the 11th decade of ICE cars. It won't happen for a while.
Domains are really close to 0 support. Can you email support questions when Dropbox starts acting weird? For $10-$20 a year, one support ticket makes the customer unprofitable for the entire year.
Real thin margins, seems gross to try and build a business on the $1-$2 a month thing. I wouldn’t.
Works for a Titans like apple and google because they are making money in other ways..
It is 2016 election all over again, media chooses their favorite "evil" and promote it to death.
Decentralization stops radicalisation, because it allows free discussion.