• froztbyte@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Guess it must’ve slipped his mind to mention that when he wrote about it. Whoops.

      Easy mistake I guess, when one is only human. We’ll have to wait for computerbrains to have better memories, no other solution presents itself.

      • froztbyte@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        the dodgily bad-faith stuff doesn’t end there: click to the posting account for more choice panic

          • jonhendry@awful.systems
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            It’s probably more true if you include disabilities that you may not be considering. Acquired hearing loss, blindness due to retinitis pigmentosa, chronic back pain, etc. I find it very hard to believe that a person who lost their vision in an industrial accident wouldn’t leap at a chance to have their vision back. And obviously not all policies to reduce the incidence of disabilities are about eugenics. OSHA isn’t a eugenics program. Vitamin K shots and eye ointment for newborns reduce disability without being eugenics. I assume even blind disability activists don’t think babies should be put at risk of easily avoidable blindness.