• 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.