Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Too many people take too many pills

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–166 of 166 posts

Re: Too many people take too many pills

#161

Post by dang »

birdyrooster wrote: post #114
quintushoratius wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why not live eccentrically and take risks? Maybe because there are dependents that needed that money for school, shelter, clothing, or food. There was a story in the news recently about a guy who spontaneously gave away $200k by throwing bills out of his car window. Seemed like a feel-good story, at first. It turns out that he gave away his family's life-savings and they're now destitute.[1] Money can absolutely be…

[flagged]

You've been breaking the site guidelines repeatedly and badly. We ban accounts that do that, so please stop.

If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.

Re: Too many people take too many pills

#162

Post by taskforcegemini »

usernew wrote: post #118
manuel_w wrote: post #37

Slightly related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16252372 I noticed that taking pain-killers is a very common thing in american TV shows. The main protagonist (male hero) gets hurt, goes to the bathroom, hastily pours a handful of pills into his hand and pops them into the mouth. Not one, but a hand full of pills, cleary too many. I've seen it so much, I'm starting to wonder if it's a TV trope. I'm wondering if…

This does not logically make sense. It's TV. On TV, a guy can shoot an automatic and not reload for a full ten minutes. He can get shot at by 20 people with rifles and they all miss, while he kllls them all with a handgun that holds 10 bullets. That is not sponsorship by gun companies. It is TV.

it's still advertisment though

Re: Too many people take too many pills

#163

Post by birdyrooster »

dang wrote: post #161
birdyrooster wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You've been breaking the site guidelines repeatedly and badly. We ban accounts that do that, so please stop. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.

You can't just hand wave "you've been breaking the rules badly". I haven't done anything of the sort, you know me I can break the rules as I have in the past and stopped doing.

I am expressing myself and sometimes I use sarcasm or reductio ad absurdum and people don't understand. By time they have flagged and downvoted it is too late to edit and give context.

The end result is... they downvote me and no one reads it. The system works. I really don't know what you are talking about, but this wouldn't be my first misunderstanding. Thanks for listening but thread has turned into a waste of people meta-analyzing the comments and it's not worth our time. Life is too short.

My suggetion to you: whoever flagged my comment is wasting your time and should be punished for pearl clutching.

Re: Too many people take too many pills

#164

Post by birdyrooster »

birdyrooster wrote: post #114
quintushoratius wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why not live eccentrically and take risks? Maybe because there are dependents that needed that money for school, shelter, clothing, or food. There was a story in the news recently about a guy who spontaneously gave away $200k by throwing bills out of his car window. Seemed like a feel-good story, at first. It turns out that he gave away his family's life-savings and they're now destitute.[1] Money can absolutely be…

[flagged]

For the record, this isn't an attack or accusation, it is a thought experiment via reductio ad absurdum.

Re: Too many people take too many pills

#165

Post by dang »

birdyrooster wrote: post #163
dang wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've been breaking the site guidelines repeatedly and badly. We ban accounts that do that, so please stop. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.

You can't just hand wave "you've been breaking the rules badly". I haven't done anything of the sort, you know me I can break the rules as I have in the past and stopped doing. I am expressing myself and sometimes I use sarcasm or reductio ad absurdum and people don't understand. By time they have flagged and downvoted it is too late to edit and give context. The end result is... they downvote me and no one reads it.…

When you post "You are a fascist control freak", there's no need to explain how that's breaking the rules—it should be obvious to anyone who has read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. You could hardly have broken them more blatantly—for example, the one against name-calling.

If you say you meant something else by it, I believe you, but that sort of intent unfortunately doesn't communicate itself—you have to encode it explicitly in your comment or else it will land with most readers as a garden-variety attack. I realize it sucks to have to do that—it's a constraint on expression—but there are constraints we have to live with in order to have a large, open internet forum that doesn't destroy itself.

If you'd just calibrate your comments to be more substantive and thoughtful, things should be fine.

Re: Too many people take too many pills

#166

Post by usernew »

taskforcegemini wrote: post #162
usernew wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This does not logically make sense. It's TV. On TV, a guy can shoot an automatic and not reload for a full ten minutes. He can get shot at by 20 people with rifles and they all miss, while he kllls them all with a handgun that holds 10 bullets. That is not sponsorship by gun companies. It is TV.

it's still advertisment though

I'm sorry - you actually think the movies with a lot of shooting is an advertisement for guns, and when someone chugs pills out of the bottle is an ad for big pharma?

if I may ask - and this is very much on topic - who won the 2020 election, and do covid vaccines contain nanobots?

Post reply on HN