No lie … if they could make a chip that like … Shuts off cognition while I’m at the gym so I don’t have to experience it … I’d consider it.
I really hate working out.
vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de
on 08 May 2024 03:29
collapse
have you seen the show Severance? This is exactly the premise of that show.
autotldr@lemmings.world
on 07 May 2024 19:45
nextcollapse
This is the best summary I could come up with:
But anyone who’s ready to raise their hands for brain surgery might want to hear what one of the Neuralink co-founders recently said during an interview with the Wall Street Journal.
The Wall Street Journal podcast The Future of Everything recently sat down with Dr. Benjamin Rapoport, a neurosurgeon who co-founded Neuralink with Musk and a team of scientists back in 2016.
Rapoport left Neuralink to start his own company called Precision Neuroscience and one specific part of the interview really stood out to us.
Brain-computer interfaces have made tremendous strides in the past decade, allowing people to literally control machines with their thoughts.
Companies like Musk’s Neuralink tend to get all the headlines, but there are a number of firms, including Synchron, Paradromics, and Precision Neuroscience.
Neuralink has received plenty of criticism over the years, with MIT Technology Review calling it “neuroscience theater” back in 2020, and horrifying allegations of monkey torture were revealed in 2022.
The original article contains 608 words, the summary contains 157 words. Saved 74%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world
on 07 May 2024 20:03
nextcollapse
What a pic.
KingOfSleep@lemmy.ca
on 07 May 2024 22:35
collapse
Are you trying to suggest that the guy who thought driving Teslas in tunnels underground was the most efficient method of transportation shouldn’t be trusted with inserting chips into people’s brains?
mynachmadarch@kbin.social
on 07 May 2024 20:44
collapse
He didn't actually think it was the most efficient. It's way worse. He knew he could get a proposed high speed rail line killed so it wouldn't cut into his car sales. He did not care one bit what happened after it died. Everything else was his PR team.
Oh for sure. He was absolutely sabotaging the proposed train network and it unfortunately worked…
olympicyes@lemmy.world
on 07 May 2024 23:41
collapse
The train from LA to Vegas is under construction. The problem in Vegas is that the casinos don’t want you leaving their property unless you’re headed to another property they also own. Musk’s tunnel just goes to the convention center and is obviously not a serious solution.
aBundleOfFerrets@sh.itjust.works
on 08 May 2024 01:54
collapse
This comment chain is you defending PETA having high euthanasia statistics due to euthanizing animals they had taken from families yards and from homeless individuals. You had suggested that these euthanasias were mercy killings, and when another commenter pointed out that pets can’t be considered suffering even under the loosest definition of the word, you posed a rhetorical question in bad faith. If you actually wanted to argue that PETA’s euthanasias are only done in situations of suffering animals, you would have just said that and perhaps included a source for that claim like the initial commenter did for theirs.
Have you always felt the Socratic method is bad faith, or just when you already have a strong opinion?
pivot_root@lemmy.world
on 08 May 2024 01:47
nextcollapse
The Socratic method involves asking questions to lead on discussion and participation. You’re trying to discourage discussion by putting contributors on the defensive with an ad hominem disguised as a (loaded) question.
Nobody is forcing you to be in this conversation, or be on the defensive.
If you can’t answer questions that make you uncomfortable to answer, that’s something you should reflect on.
I am willing to answer any questions you may have of me.
pivot_root@lemmy.world
on 08 May 2024 01:59
nextcollapse
,If you can’t answer questions that make you uncomfortable to answer, that’s something you should reflect on.
Again, you’re attacking the other person instead of their argument.
It doesn’t make your point any stronger. It makes people unfamiliar with debates defensive from being personally attacked, and it makes those familiar with debates realize that they’re wasting their time.
Lol, I think you forgot to sign into the other account because this chain is me talking to your pivot account.
But, no, I am not attacking you. i am merely pointing out that you have a formed opinion without being able to answer incredibly simple questions about your stance.
pivot_root@lemmy.world
on 08 May 2024 02:19
collapse
You know that “the other person” can be used in a general sense, right?
Aside, why would I engage in an ernest discussion with someone who doesn’t appear willing to accept that the other person in the discussion holds any stance different than the one they are perceived as having.
It would be a waste of my time to take this seriously, and I’m already having fun playing fallacy bingo.
You commonly refer to yourself as “the other person”? Weird, but okay. I will take that at face value.
It only makes logical sense to be against the killing done by others if you yourself have no involvement in killing.
We wouldn’t want you to be the pot who called the kettle black.
TrickDacy@lemmy.world
on 08 May 2024 02:43
collapse
This is called gish galloping and it’s very obnoxious
WamGams@lemmy.ca
on 08 May 2024 02:47
nextcollapse
I think you might need to look up what a Gish gallop is, because you will almost certainly find you have applied it to a situation in which it doesn’t belong.
pivot_root@lemmy.world
on 08 May 2024 04:18
collapse
TIL. Thank you
TexasDrunk@lemmy.world
on 08 May 2024 08:00
collapse
You haven’t answered any questions though. How many pets taken and euthanized the same day would be acceptable to you? How many animals that are adoptable, not ill, don’t have behavioral problems, and aren’t elderly should they be allowed to euthanize? Should they have to retract their ad campaign that ran for years claiming a link between autism and milk or should they be able to quietly redirect it and not confront it because the “science” was almost as laughable as the link between vaccines and autism?
You’ll willingly answer, so I am eagerly awaiting answers rather than redirecting or trying to be the Glen Beck of PETA by JAQing off (I’m just asking questions!).
Is this something they are regularly doing, or is there one or two cases?
TexasDrunk@lemmy.world
on 08 May 2024 15:11
collapse
Ah, so you’re not willing to answer questions. I don’t engage with lying pieces of shit. If you had, you could have changed hearts and minds. Instead you’re as worthless as PETA.
I think you’re just being obtuse and pedantic for your own sake, if you’re really curious you could very easily look this information up. Please stop being like this, you don’t have to be this way. Touch grass for fucks sake, good luck out there, must be tough being an insufferable git.
Except you’re not causing anyone to question their beliefs, you’re just being intentionally obnoxious. If you wanted to provide some counter evidence to their point that would be a solid way to cause people to reconsider. As is I doubt you are being honest with your intention, even if to yourself. Maybe talk about it in therapy?
No, it’s actually more your general tone and lack of desire to actually put forth any stance of your own that I find obnoxious, but go off bud. Hope you’re enjoying yourself, what a way to spend an afternoon, just responding to dozens of people being as annoying as you possibly can. You can deny it obviously, but I do genuinely hope you find better ways of spending your time.
I think my stance is clear: you guys are using meat industry propaganda to push forth a narrative and are unable to defend that narrative from the simplest of questions.
I could also say that you are obnoxious and could spend your time better, but I wouldn’t do that to somebody I am making the choice to engage with. Maybe I’m just a nicer person.
Default_Defect@midwest.social
on 09 May 2024 05:08
collapse
Aww shit, we got one of those master debaters.
TexasDrunk@lemmy.world
on 08 May 2024 01:31
collapse
Euthanasia as in animals, no matter the quality of life, adoptability, and years left, are put down by the thousands because they’re inconvenient to keep alive and get adopted while PETA preaches that killing animals is wrong. Also, did you read the bit about them kidnapping animals from kids and old people?
Plus they’re cowards without the courage of their convictions. When I was growing up their protests included throwing red paint on people in fur but they wouldn’t do it to someone in biker leathers. One got them shunned and laughed at, the other would get them killed like the animals they stole.
TL;DR their whole schtick is to either destroy others’ property or steal loved members of families who have fur while killing many more animals than they save.
TL;DR: Domesticated animals deserve death. More specifically, because they letting them live is “inhumane” because they won’t thrive without human influence—which they’re strictly against.
IMO: These people are fucking psychopaths.
Edit: Yes, that specific site is sponsored by the meat industry. I didn’t think it needed to be said, but don’t take sensational topics at face value and read any receipts provided (which they did). Or, use Google and find other sources (that are also probably backed by corporate or political interests). In either case, PETA has made it pretty clear that they’re hypocrites who are euthanizing healthy animals.
WamGams@lemmy.ca
on 08 May 2024 01:16
nextcollapse
Have you stopped eating cows, chickens and pigs? If not, you, like PETA, believes they deserve death.
But do you have a non biased source not funded by the meat industry?
pivot_root@lemmy.world
on 08 May 2024 01:28
collapse
The website has receipts. Feel free to actually read them.
And like PETA, you also believe certain animals are deserving of death.
I don’t know, man, I think you might be a future member.
pivot_root@lemmy.world
on 08 May 2024 01:39
collapse
If you had not plugged your metaphorical ears and doubled down on an ad hominem, you would have seen that some of those receipts are self-reported filings from PETA themselves to the government.
I would link the definition of “ad hominem” for you, but let’s be real: you’re not going to read that either.
WamGams@lemmy.ca
on 08 May 2024 01:50
nextcollapse
It is an ad hominem to point out that like PETA, you are responsible for the death of animals?
pivot_root@lemmy.world
on 08 May 2024 02:07
collapse
It’s an ad hominem to assert that I hold an unethical belief and then use said assertion to bolster your point.
I said PETA are psychopaths for needlessly killing animals, yet you assume that I’m not equally against killing animals for personal pleasure and consumerism.
If so, that means you give money to animal murderers and that animals die for your benefit.
I apologize if you are vegetarian or vegan, but if so, when did you begin defending animal AG propaganda websites from being questioned?
pivot_root@lemmy.world
on 08 May 2024 02:27
collapse
No offense intended to vegetarians, but it’s a half measure if they’re doing it for ethical or climate reasons.
I genuinely do not care about that website; all that matters is their receipts. I care that PETA are hypocrites who needlessly kill living creatures while preaching about the ethics or lack thereof of needlessly killing living creatures.
I’m saying that they don’t bring in enough money to truly be a no kill org. Essentially they are saying one thing and not doing it themselves.
As far as the org, it’s my belief that it started out with people who genuinely cared for animal welfare and wanted to do something about it. Over time the psychos edged out the good folk and now we get idiots breaking into university primate labs and releasing monkeys on the street.
I think it’s 'cause we know more about him. I think if we knew he was a whimsical dude and legitimately trying to help people instead of enriching himself, we’d see these pics and give him a bit more of a pass.
OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
on 08 May 2024 03:39
nextcollapse
Because you have violent tendencies that cloud your clarity of thought
Oh you thought that was for damage prevention? No it’s actually to make sure it gets wet. I heard the Cybertruck’s trunk department QC’d it.
OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
on 08 May 2024 03:42
nextcollapse
On one hand, yea I don’t want brain damage. On the other hand, if it means I can move robotic limbs after being paralyzed, maybe it’s still worth it?
Like the idea of having neural interfaces that don’t penetrate the brain is obviously great, but if that tech doesn’t come for another 50 years, what are the current people going to do instead?
I’m not on the waiting list for Neuralink, but if I’m gonna be honest, the hate for it is over amplified.
NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
on 08 May 2024 05:21
nextcollapse
if it means I can move robotic limbs after being paralyzed, maybe it’s still worth it?
I don’t mind the progress in science and technology.
I don’t mind sacrificing some animals for that goal.
The really terrible thought is that Elon is allowed to decide these things.
OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
on 08 May 2024 15:33
collapse
Is it terrible that Elon can decide these things? Because no one else is as close to succeeding, and Elon’s not forcing me to do it
NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
on 08 May 2024 16:03
collapse
Yes. He is famous for childish & narcissistic & choleric behaviour and nobody should trust him with any serious stuff.
OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
on 08 May 2024 22:24
collapse
Ok but you haven’t addressed the point that no one else is as close to doing it…
NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
on 09 May 2024 04:48
collapse
No need to ‘address’ thin air.
Experts are doing things. Elon isn’t doing things (except boasting his ego and manipulate people’s feelings etc)
assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
on 08 May 2024 17:38
collapse
I don’t think the concept is bad. I take a medicine that may give me cognition problems when I’m very old, but it’s remarkably effective for me right now and provides a significant quality of life improvement. So, I’ve chosen to stay on it.
That’s different I think though from Neuralink as it is today. There need to be stringent safety measures in place and controls on testing. We’ve come a long way on neurology, but we still have a lot we don’t understand.
If you saw the build quality of Teslas, and his handling of Twitter, and him calling a diver a paedo, and you still thought “I should let that man perform medical experiments on me”, then you probably fucking deserve it tbh.
Just go for it. What’s the worst that can happen? You get double brain damage?
dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de
on 08 May 2024 19:18
collapse
Eh. He’s an asshole of the highest order but I imagine some people are willing to take the risk, given the impact it could have on their lives.
I’m talking people who just exist at the moment and something like this might be beneficial to them.
To be 100% clear, because yall some bitches at times. I find Elon an abhorrent person. Twitter is wank, Tesla is dead in the water and the boring company is just that.
threaded - newest
When is Elon releasing the Neuralink chip with Full Self Driving Autopilot?
When he lands on Mars or gets a vacuum train running.
He’s gone from suck to blow.
I get that reference!
~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~
Great. Now I have an image of Elmo in a maid outfit with a vacuum.
I wouldn’t mind him dusting my house if you get what I’m saying.
You wanna Fuck Elmo?
Don’t be so crass, it’s be more making love or hiding my two inch sausage.
Thanos style?
I don’t need an implant to go into a fugue state. Just drugs.
Not much can’t be solved with right drugs.
Heck, even "I did too much of the drugs" can usually be solved with drugs.
You heard it here folks. Eat your drugs. Say no to school. Stay in vegetables.
For doing chores, going to work, school, listening to your SO complain about something. The applications are limitless!
I spend all day oiling up supermodel’s bodies and I would love a way to escape from that.
Sounds just like the Rick and Morty episode “Night Family”.
Went great for them!
No lie … if they could make a chip that like … Shuts off cognition while I’m at the gym so I don’t have to experience it … I’d consider it.
I really hate working out.
have you seen the show Severance? This is exactly the premise of that show.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
But anyone who’s ready to raise their hands for brain surgery might want to hear what one of the Neuralink co-founders recently said during an interview with the Wall Street Journal.
The Wall Street Journal podcast The Future of Everything recently sat down with Dr. Benjamin Rapoport, a neurosurgeon who co-founded Neuralink with Musk and a team of scientists back in 2016.
Rapoport left Neuralink to start his own company called Precision Neuroscience and one specific part of the interview really stood out to us.
Brain-computer interfaces have made tremendous strides in the past decade, allowing people to literally control machines with their thoughts.
Companies like Musk’s Neuralink tend to get all the headlines, but there are a number of firms, including Synchron, Paradromics, and Precision Neuroscience.
Neuralink has received plenty of criticism over the years, with MIT Technology Review calling it “neuroscience theater” back in 2020, and horrifying allegations of monkey torture were revealed in 2022.
The original article contains 608 words, the summary contains 157 words. Saved 74%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
What a pic.
*dick
Are you trying to suggest that the guy who thought driving Teslas in tunnels underground was the most efficient method of transportation shouldn’t be trusted with inserting chips into people’s brains?
He didn't actually think it was the most efficient. It's way worse. He knew he could get a proposed high speed rail line killed so it wouldn't cut into his car sales. He did not care one bit what happened after it died. Everything else was his PR team.
Oh for sure. He was absolutely sabotaging the proposed train network and it unfortunately worked…
The train from LA to Vegas is under construction. The problem in Vegas is that the casinos don’t want you leaving their property unless you’re headed to another property they also own. Musk’s tunnel just goes to the convention center and is obviously not a serious solution.
And also all our monkey cousins died. :(
I’ve been doubting all the claims about the guy that had the chip installed too
This is older news. The company is competing with PETA in most animals killed.
reuters.com/…/musks-neuralink-faces-federal-probe…
What’s the story on PETA killing animals?
They have shelters that euthanized a high number of animals. They have also stolen animals from owners including homeless people and children.
www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/…/254130/
Euthanasia as in mercy killing?
Your beef with PETA is that they euthanize sick animals when shelters can’t afford to?
It’s not mercy killing when the animals weren’t suffering and weren’t voluntarily given up. It’s murder for the sake of their agenda.
So PETA doesn’t euthanize sick animals?
You are arguing in bad faith
Asking for clarification is bad faith?
This comment chain is you defending PETA having high euthanasia statistics due to euthanizing animals they had taken from families yards and from homeless individuals. You had suggested that these euthanasias were mercy killings, and when another commenter pointed out that pets can’t be considered suffering even under the loosest definition of the word, you posed a rhetorical question in bad faith. If you actually wanted to argue that PETA’s euthanasias are only done in situations of suffering animals, you would have just said that and perhaps included a source for that claim like the initial commenter did for theirs.
What percentage of euthanasia is from kidnapped pets and not sick and dying animals?
If you want to make the claim that PETA’s behavior to people’s pets is insignificant in the grand scheme of things, the burden of proof is on you.
I haven’t made any claims, i am just asking for the factual information regarding other people’s claims.
You are the only one who has said anything related to sick animals.
What does the term euthanize mean? What are the numbers of euthanasia reported by PETA and what percentage of those are not sick and dying animals?
>you think euthanizing sick animals is bad?
>PETA euthanizes more than sick animals
>you think PETA doesn’t euthanize sick animals?
There isn’t a single thing I can say to convince someone who isn’t arguing in good faith.
Am I arguing or using the Socratic method?
Have you always felt the Socratic method is bad faith, or just when you already have a strong opinion?
The Socratic method involves asking questions to lead on discussion and participation. You’re trying to discourage discussion by putting contributors on the defensive with an ad hominem disguised as a (loaded) question.
So, in fact, you’re doing neither.
Nobody is forcing you to be in this conversation, or be on the defensive.
If you can’t answer questions that make you uncomfortable to answer, that’s something you should reflect on.
I am willing to answer any questions you may have of me.
Again, you’re attacking the other person instead of their argument.
It doesn’t make your point any stronger. It makes people unfamiliar with debates defensive from being personally attacked, and it makes those familiar with debates realize that they’re wasting their time.
Attacking the other person?
Lol, I think you forgot to sign into the other account because this chain is me talking to your pivot account.
But, no, I am not attacking you. i am merely pointing out that you have a formed opinion without being able to answer incredibly simple questions about your stance.
You know that “the other person” can be used in a general sense, right?
Aside, why would I engage in an ernest discussion with someone who doesn’t appear willing to accept that the other person in the discussion holds any stance different than the one they are perceived as having.
It would be a waste of my time to take this seriously, and I’m already having fun playing fallacy bingo.
You commonly refer to yourself as “the other person”? Weird, but okay. I will take that at face value.
It only makes logical sense to be against the killing done by others if you yourself have no involvement in killing.
We wouldn’t want you to be the pot who called the kettle black.
This is called gish galloping and it’s very obnoxious
I think you might need to look up what a Gish gallop is, because you will almost certainly find you have applied it to a situation in which it doesn’t belong.
TIL. Thank you
You haven’t answered any questions though. How many pets taken and euthanized the same day would be acceptable to you? How many animals that are adoptable, not ill, don’t have behavioral problems, and aren’t elderly should they be allowed to euthanize? Should they have to retract their ad campaign that ran for years claiming a link between autism and milk or should they be able to quietly redirect it and not confront it because the “science” was almost as laughable as the link between vaccines and autism?
You’ll willingly answer, so I am eagerly awaiting answers rather than redirecting or trying to be the Glen Beck of PETA by JAQing off (I’m just asking questions!).
How many healthy pets do they actually euthanize?
Is this something they are regularly doing, or is there one or two cases?
Ah, so you’re not willing to answer questions. I don’t engage with lying pieces of shit. If you had, you could have changed hearts and minds. Instead you’re as worthless as PETA.
Have I told a lie?
quit JAQing off bro
So I haven’t told a lie in this conversation?
I think you’re just being obtuse and pedantic for your own sake, if you’re really curious you could very easily look this information up. Please stop being like this, you don’t have to be this way. Touch grass for fucks sake, good luck out there, must be tough being an insufferable git.
Maybe it is pedantic. But people should have examined beliefs. I’m sorry you are against that.
Except you’re not causing anyone to question their beliefs, you’re just being intentionally obnoxious. If you wanted to provide some counter evidence to their point that would be a solid way to cause people to reconsider. As is I doubt you are being honest with your intention, even if to yourself. Maybe talk about it in therapy?
Asking for clarification is obnoxious?
Do you always believe that, or just when the meat industry and the information found on their websites is being questioned?
No, it’s actually more your general tone and lack of desire to actually put forth any stance of your own that I find obnoxious, but go off bud. Hope you’re enjoying yourself, what a way to spend an afternoon, just responding to dozens of people being as annoying as you possibly can. You can deny it obviously, but I do genuinely hope you find better ways of spending your time.
I think my stance is clear: you guys are using meat industry propaganda to push forth a narrative and are unable to defend that narrative from the simplest of questions.
I could also say that you are obnoxious and could spend your time better, but I wouldn’t do that to somebody I am making the choice to engage with. Maybe I’m just a nicer person.
Aww shit, we got one of those master debaters.
Euthanasia as in animals, no matter the quality of life, adoptability, and years left, are put down by the thousands because they’re inconvenient to keep alive and get adopted while PETA preaches that killing animals is wrong. Also, did you read the bit about them kidnapping animals from kids and old people?
Plus they’re cowards without the courage of their convictions. When I was growing up their protests included throwing red paint on people in fur but they wouldn’t do it to someone in biker leathers. One got them shunned and laughed at, the other would get them killed like the animals they stole.
TL;DR their whole schtick is to either destroy others’ property or steal loved members of families who have fur while killing many more animals than they save.
How many family pets have they kidnapped in total?
Consider that any number more than “zero” pets kidnapped and killed by a private entity is too many.
So is the number 1 time, 5 times? What is the situation?
.
How many are you comfortable with?
I am just asking the total number that you are aware of?
Is it just 1? Is it 5? Is it 8 million?
Not sure why you’re being downvoted for just asking an honest question 🤷♂️
One of the people accidentally responded to me with the wrong account, so I am assuming bit is a lot less people downvoting than it appears.
I have one account. It’s not my fault you can’t interpret impersonal language correctly.
Sure thing, other person!
Oh, look, now you get it!
I’m down with it, other guy!
12 year old article, here’s newsweeks factcheck from a few years ago.
https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-peta-responsible-deaths-thousands-animals-1565532
petakillsanimals.com
TL;DR: Domesticated animals deserve death. More specifically, because they letting them live is “inhumane” because they won’t thrive without human influence—which they’re strictly against.
IMO: These people are fucking psychopaths.
Edit: Yes, that specific site is sponsored by the meat industry. I didn’t think it needed to be said, but don’t take sensational topics at face value and read any receipts provided (which they did). Or, use Google and find other sources (that are also probably backed by corporate or political interests). In either case, PETA has made it pretty clear that they’re hypocrites who are euthanizing healthy animals.
Have you stopped eating cows, chickens and pigs? If not, you, like PETA, believes they deserve death.
But do you have a non biased source not funded by the meat industry?
The website has receipts. Feel free to actually read them.
So… No, you don’t.
And like PETA, you also believe certain animals are deserving of death.
I don’t know, man, I think you might be a future member.
If you had not plugged your metaphorical ears and doubled down on an ad hominem, you would have seen that some of those receipts are self-reported filings from PETA themselves to the government.
I would link the definition of “ad hominem” for you, but let’s be real: you’re not going to read that either.
It is an ad hominem to point out that like PETA, you are responsible for the death of animals?
It’s an ad hominem to assert that I hold an unethical belief and then use said assertion to bolster your point.
I said PETA are psychopaths for needlessly killing animals, yet you assume that I’m not equally against killing animals for personal pleasure and consumerism.
Do you eat animals?
If so, that means you give money to animal murderers and that animals die for your benefit.
I apologize if you are vegetarian or vegan, but if so, when did you begin defending animal AG propaganda websites from being questioned?
No offense intended to vegetarians, but it’s a half measure if they’re doing it for ethical or climate reasons.
I genuinely do not care about that website; all that matters is their receipts. I care that PETA are hypocrites who needlessly kill living creatures while preaching about the ethics or lack thereof of needlessly killing living creatures.
Killing for sensory pleasure isn’t needless in your book?
Surely euthanasia is less needless than your personal reasons for involvement in animal murder, wouldn’t you say?
.
Great job falling for animal industry propaganda
www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/PETA_Kills_Animals
High ideals but no means. They become hoarders and run out of money. Also it’s an org that long ago stopped being healthy.
They are out of money?
How did they stop bring healthy, in your opinion?
I’m saying that they don’t bring in enough money to truly be a no kill org. Essentially they are saying one thing and not doing it themselves.
As far as the org, it’s my belief that it started out with people who genuinely cared for animal welfare and wanted to do something about it. Over time the psychos edged out the good folk and now we get idiots breaking into university primate labs and releasing monkeys on the street.
Are they still doing that? I haven’t heard about anything recently.
My understanding is they have been following the laws while other more extreme groups are now doing the extreme work.
My understanding could very well be wrong though.
Frankly I’ve not paid attention over recent years so we may both be wrong here.
Why is his face so punch-able?
I think it’s 'cause we know more about him. I think if we knew he was a whimsical dude and legitimately trying to help people instead of enriching himself, we’d see these pics and give him a bit more of a pass.
Because you have violent tendencies that cloud your clarity of thought
Because he looks like a smug bastard
Little advice for those getting this procedure. Do not forget to put your Neuralink in shower mode when you take a shower. You have been warned.
Oh you thought that was for damage prevention? No it’s actually to make sure it gets wet. I heard the Cybertruck’s trunk department QC’d it.
On one hand, yea I don’t want brain damage. On the other hand, if it means I can move robotic limbs after being paralyzed, maybe it’s still worth it?
Like the idea of having neural interfaces that don’t penetrate the brain is obviously great, but if that tech doesn’t come for another 50 years, what are the current people going to do instead?
I’m not on the waiting list for Neuralink, but if I’m gonna be honest, the hate for it is over amplified.
I don’t mind the progress in science and technology.
I don’t mind sacrificing some animals for that goal.
The really terrible thought is that Elon is allowed to decide these things.
Is it terrible that Elon can decide these things? Because no one else is as close to succeeding, and Elon’s not forcing me to do it
Yes. He is famous for childish & narcissistic & choleric behaviour and nobody should trust him with any serious stuff.
Ok but you haven’t addressed the point that no one else is as close to doing it…
No need to ‘address’ thin air.
Experts are doing things. Elon isn’t doing things (except boasting his ego and manipulate people’s feelings etc)
I don’t think the concept is bad. I take a medicine that may give me cognition problems when I’m very old, but it’s remarkably effective for me right now and provides a significant quality of life improvement. So, I’ve chosen to stay on it.
That’s different I think though from Neuralink as it is today. There need to be stringent safety measures in place and controls on testing. We’ve come a long way on neurology, but we still have a lot we don’t understand.
If you saw the build quality of Teslas, and his handling of Twitter, and him calling a diver a paedo, and you still thought “I should let that man perform medical experiments on me”, then you probably fucking deserve it tbh.
Just go for it. What’s the worst that can happen? You get double brain damage?
Eh. He’s an asshole of the highest order but I imagine some people are willing to take the risk, given the impact it could have on their lives.
I’m talking people who just exist at the moment and something like this might be beneficial to them.
To be 100% clear, because yall some bitches at times. I find Elon an abhorrent person. Twitter is wank, Tesla is dead in the water and the boring company is just that.