> This is what happens when NPCs try to become scientific experts based on random podcasts.
Attacking others will get you banned here, regardless of how right you are or feel you are.
It's also in your interest to edit swipes out of your comments here, quite apart from not getting banned on HN, because they discredit your position in the eye of the fair-minded reader (see https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor... for lots of past explanations of that, if you care).
I had to sign a waiver absolving the government and vaccine makers of liability to get the vaccine that was required to keep my job. The vaccine I chose ended up getting pulled from the market due to the risk of blood clots. We now have the benefit of hindsight, but the authoritarian bent many governments gained during Covid should not be forgotten.
I did source it, I just didn't provide links this time. Go dig out the old UK or danish reports or discussions of them from the time.
No links this time because I've posted on this topic dozens of times in the past over the years and was away from my bookmarks list at the time anyway. It didn't stop people flagging posts. They just pick fights with the sources or start making arguments long since resolved. There are whole websites devoted to explaining various aspects of what happened, look for Prof Norman Fenton's blog for an example if you want to get started.
Not going to go and try to unearth it right now but everything he is saying about the figures coming out of England & Scotland is absolutely true, I saw it laid out on Twitter with links to the primary sources in real time.
I think my favorite trick here was categorizing people less than four weeks out from their second dose, or anyone who didn't get a second dose (likely as a result of a nasty reaction to the first shot, itself a good indicator of high susceptibility to COVID spike pathology), or anyone whose vaccine status was "unknown," as "unvaccinated."
> Correction: there was a significantly reduced chance of transmission as even a basic revision of the scientific literature will show.
Please just stop with this. Something like 95% of the Bay Area took it and they had a massive rolling COVID wave once the virus predictably achieved immune escape, as every coronavirus we had ever attempted to vaccinate against had always done before. Certainly a vanishingly small number of people were prevented from ever getting a first infection.
How many rides are there every day in developed countries?
Their internal business case probably has them targeting not 50 million rides per year, but per week… at an absolute minimum
Regardless; at some point specialised vehicles will be developed which are ultra small and lightweight - less than $1,000 to produce - to take care of short downtown rides, for example.
> Per a January 9 email, the Greyglers, an affinity group for people over 40, is changing its name because not all people over 40 have gray hair, thus constituting lack of “inclusivity” (Google has hired an external consultant to rename the group)
I can't imagine having to rename a mundane employee interest/social group, much less hiring an external consultant to come up with the new name. It seems beyond anything.
There is a certain demographic that commonly dye their hair. It isn't fair to them to be lumped in with unkempt people who do not dye their hair and probably don't even wear matching socks, let alone undergarments.
This is what happens when NPCs try to become scientific experts based on random podcasts.
Massive studies in Spain and Australia:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36724697/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38357393/