Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Finally (Score 2) 1174


Now you are trying to turn something that's political disagreement into something that resembles a mental illness.

That's straight out of the Soviet oppression playbook.

Nonsense like yours is precisely why even political affiliation should be a protected class in terms of discrimination.

Comment Re:Finally and ignorant aggrieved white person! (Score 2) 1174

> This while one party lobbies for social services, civil rights, gay rights, health care, immigration reform, etc., and the other stridently resists it at all turns.

So your side is virtuous and the other side is evil and the only reason you can't be more virtuous.

This is exactly the sort of unhinged nonsense that turns off the moderate liberals and independents.

Also, not everyone that's liberal is also a socialist. So lumping that kind of crap in with the liberty issues is kind of a non starter for some of us.

Comment Re:Awesome (Score 1) 509

>> He's a trans SJW who often writes about the trials of being a female in IT. To this person ANYONE who doesn't celebrate their flavor of crazy is "far-right" and full of "hate".
> So it complains about working in IT - did I read that correctly?

I wonder if it thinks that working in IT would be all utopian and shit if only it was normal. Kind of makes me wonder why I've been wasting my life in all these crappy companies. I can pass for normal (in this one area). I wonder what I've been doing wrong all my life. =p

Comment Re:Awesome (Score 1) 509

> Quite a lot of people react badly if you misgender them.
> If you don't believe me,

You want to comment on this nonsense and you haven't even experienced this yourself. How cute. How much of mundane little Herbert do you have to be to have managed to avoid something like that your ENTIRE life.

Get out of here you sad little breeder.

Comment Re:Awesome (Score 1) 509

> You mean the same kind of hate that conservatives used to demonize and dehumanize liberals for the past 30 years? The same kind of hate that launched a concerted effort to turn the word "liberal" into a slur? That kind of hate?

Now who's peddling a "false equivalence". Calling you an idiot is not remotely the same thing as saying we should beat you up for your views. Calling you an idiot is also not the same as shouting you down, rioting when you speak, and seeking to prevent you from speaking.

You remind me of the 80s Xian fundies that tried to cry oppression.

As if.

Comment Re:Awesome (Score 1) 509

> "hate and violence" is on the Left but then only on the "far, far right", Way to advocate for political neutrality while being completely non-neutral.
> Extremism is what defines political violence. Me telling you that probably won't change anything though.

No. Commonality is what defines extremism of any sort.

How popular and accepted is the idea "You can hit someone just because you hang some arbitrary label on them". This idea is shockingly popular amongst modern liberals.

You're trying to redefine terms to suit yourself and that's precisely the problem here. The left likes to distort terms to suit their political agenda. This includes YOU redefining the term "extremism".

Comment Re:Sensationalism headline strike again! (Score 2) 145

Someone managed to display a statistical correlation between alcohol consumption and a limited number of particular cancers.

That's the rub with most of these "carcinogen" declarations.

They are typically only relevant to particular cancers. Those particular cancers may be more or less common or easier or harder to treat.

Alcohol fits into the "less common and easy to treat" section.

Although your own personal genetics are much more relevant. Torturing yourself for the rest of your life won't help anything.

Comment Re:Capitalism gond wrong... (Score 1) 218

While you are fixating on "fairness" you are neglecting the fact that nobody is a charity. You don't work for free. Why do you expect anyone else to.

ANY activity needs to yield a good return on investment or no one will bother. Ventures that are high risk or require a large up front investment will require a better potential upside.

While you're whining about "fairness" you're undercutting the incentives that will cause useful work to get done. That means YOU are putting lives at risk. You are undermining all future progress in medicine.

Comment Re:While I generally hate Medical Insurance Compan (Score 1) 218

Which government is that exactly? Name ONE drug or gene therapy treatment that can be had for peanuts in another "socialist" country because the government actually did all the work.

Things don't work like that even in Europe.

It turns out that people don't work for free.

Also, governments are notoriously stingy and taxpayers everywhere complain that they pay too much.

Comment Re:Why call it a medicine? (Score 3, Insightful) 218

> Good thing nobody asked you for the definition of "medicine", because it doesn't mean "a chemical".

Calling this thing a medicine really contradicts the vernacular understanding of what a medicine is. This leads to a lot of butt hurt about how expensive this procedure is when people don't fully understand that it's bespoke manufacturing for a single patient.

So yeah, calling this thing a "drug" or a "medicine" is really pretty stupid.

The point of language is communication, not getting your rocks off "sounding fancy" or being a grammar nazi.

Comment Re:Let me guess (Score 1) 218

> They may but that doesn't mean they can afford it.

So you have no idea how health care actually works.

NO ONE can afford most of the expensive stuff. That's what insurance is for. If you're unlucky, that's also what socialized medicine is for.

Nobody pays the cash price for procedures like this. Procedures with official price tags like this are pretty common too actually.

Freaking out about Epipens is so amateur hour...

Comment Re:Only if that's true (Score 1) 218

> I see this come up a lot but I've had a hard time verifying that this is actually the case.

Of course you did. It's just bullshit "media narrative". These people are like old women passing chain letters amongst themselves.

As much as they whine, you would think that these people had all been denied coverage for very expensive treatments for rare conditions.

When it's actually your butt on the line, it's much more important that these things exist at all. Frankly, I am amazed that the economic incentives actually work out for people with rare diseases.

Comment Re:Let me guess (Score 3, Informative) 218

> Not so much

Yes. Pretty much. Even the NIHs own paper on this subject indicates that the bulk of money spend on drug development comes from the private sector.

The money that the public spends only gets the ball rolling. It doesn't finish the process.

Plus this isn't your typical "one size fits" all pill kind of treatment. These kinds of treatments have to be custom made for each patient. The cost of that isn't trivial. It requires the employment of a large state of the art facility and staff that goes with.

Actual production costs are non-trivial here.

Slashdot Top Deals

You can tell the ideals of a nation by its advertisements. -- Norman Douglas