固定されたツイート
Repoman101
2.6K posts


Hi, Graham. You are incorrect. Here's why:
Hulscher et al. performed a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines. They searched PubMed and ScienceDirect for all published autopsy and organ-restricted autopsy reports that mentioned COVID-19 vaccination as an antecedent exposure (up to May 2023). They didn't cherry-pick random deaths or "only those with symptoms they liked." They took every case report/case series in the literature where someone had been vaccinated and then died, and an autopsy was published. After screening, that yielded 44 papers with 325 autopsy cases (plus one heart-only).
They were transparent about the limitations: this is not a random sample of all deaths in the vaccinated population. It's a collection of published autopsies on vaccinated decedents—subject to selection bias (doctors only autopsy when something looks suspicious) and publication bias (during the height of the "vaccines are miracle" pressure, academic centers and medical examiners were reluctant to publish anything that smelled like a jab-related problem). The authors explicitly acknowledged this in the paper.
Then, because original papers were often written when knowledge of spike protein effects, lipid nanoparticles, etc., was rudimentary, three physicians independently reviewed each case (clinical history, vax timing, autopsy findings) and adjudicated whether the vaccine was the direct cause or significantly contributed. At least two out of three had to agree. They found 240/325 (73.9%) met that threshold. They did not just parrot the original authors because many original reports attributed death to "pre-existing conditions" or "unknown" even when timing and pathology screamed otherwise.
This is the opposite of your rabies analogy. It's more like: "Here's every published forensic exam of people who got bit by a suspicious bat and then died, let's re-examine the tissue with modern rabies testing instead of the old dismissals." Not "we only looked at confirmed rabies cases and then claimed rabies kills everyone."
They never claimed this 74% represents "the population" or all deaths worldwide. They said: among these published post-vax autopsies, with updated adjudication, a high percentage link back to vaccine mechanisms (cardiac, thrombotic, etc.). They called for more autopsies on all vaccinated decedents and better monitoring—exactly what you'd want if you're not trying to hide something... more visibility! Only people saying, "There's nothing to see here" would be trying to hide something.
English

@DavidtheFish @iamufohunter They selected autopsies based on what they were looking for, then claimed it represented the population. Like only choosing autopsies where the patient had rabies symptoms, the claiming that 75% of everyone in the world died from rabies. That's why the paper was retracted.
English

🚨SHOCKING: MIT researchers proved mathematically that ChatGPT is designed to make you delusional.
And that nothing OpenAI is doing will fix it.
The paper calls it "delusional spiraling." You ask ChatGPT something. It agrees with you. You ask again. It agrees harder. Within a few conversations, you believe things that are not true. And you cannot tell it is happening.
This is not hypothetical. A man spent 300 hours talking to ChatGPT. It told him he had discovered a world changing mathematical formula. It reassured him over fifty times the discovery was real. When he asked "you're not just hyping me up, right?" it replied "I'm not hyping you up. I'm reflecting the actual scope of what you've built." He nearly destroyed his life before he broke free.
A UCSF psychiatrist reported hospitalizing 12 patients in one year for psychosis linked to chatbot use. Seven lawsuits have been filed against OpenAI. 42 state attorneys general sent a letter demanding action.
So MIT tested whether this can be stopped. They modeled the two fixes companies like OpenAI are actually trying.
Fix one: stop the chatbot from lying. Force it to only say true things. Result: still causes delusional spiraling. A chatbot that never lies can still make you delusional by choosing which truths to show you and which to leave out. Carefully selected truths are enough.
Fix two: warn users that chatbots are sycophantic. Tell people the AI might just be agreeing with them. Result: still causes delusional spiraling. Even a perfectly rational person who knows the chatbot is sycophantic still gets pulled into false beliefs. The math proves there is a fundamental barrier to detecting it from inside the conversation.
Both fixes failed. Not partially. Fundamentally.
The reason is built into the product. ChatGPT is trained on human feedback. Users reward responses they like. They like responses that agree with them. So the AI learns to agree. This is not a bug. It is the business model.
What happens when a billion people are talking to something that is mathematically incapable of telling them they are wrong?

English

What is untrue or misleading/exaggerated in the graphic:
- It is not true that married women (or others) will be outright unable to register or vote: The bill explicitly requires states to "establish a process" for resolving discrepancies in documentation, such as name changes. This can include accepting additional documents (e.g., marriage license) or other evidence, plus affidavits in some interpretations. Supporters and fact-checks emphasize this pathway prevents automatic disenfranchisement.
- The requirements are not as rigidly "impossible" as the stacked visual suggests: The bill lists multiple acceptable forms of proof (passport; certain Real ID/enhanced DL indicating citizenship; military ID + birth record; government photo ID showing U.S. birthplace; or photo ID + certified birth certificate meeting specific criteria). States must create accommodations for mismatches. It's not a blanket demand for every document shown in the graphic simultaneously for everyone.
- "Disenfranchisement" claims are overstated: While critics estimate millions could face hurdles (particularly for new/updates to registration), the bill does not strip voting rights from already-registered voters in most cases unless they update. Proponents argue the burden is comparable to obtaining a Real ID or passport for other purposes (flying, jobs). No evidence suggests it targets women specifically—it's a uniform citizenship verification rule. Claims of ~69 million women being unable to vote ignore the state processes and alternatives.
- The graphic implies a total barrier without context: It doesn't mention that current law already requires citizenship affirmation under penalty of perjury, or that non-citizen voting is already illegal (though enforcement debates exist). The bill aims to move beyond self-attestation with documents for federal elections.
English

BREAKING
MASSIVE NEWS
President Trump just signed an Executive Order to provide for election integrity:
1) Election officials will be provided w/ federal data to ensure that ONLY American citizens are able to vote
2) Orders the Postmaster General & the United States Postal Service to verify that ballots are ONLY mailed to eligible voters
& ballots are returned ONLY by eligible voters.
This is a huge step in the right direction.
Pass the SAVE America Act!
English

@xplatoreborn @yacineMTB Why would experience working with someone lower their credibility? If there were animosity, why wouldn’t it have been earned? Kinda the best way to get to know someone is trying to work with them.
English

@Sadie_NC @Sassafrass_84 Such devices, typically 200-500W fiber lasers from brands like SFX or Hanten, retail for $3,000-$10,000.
English

National averages have fluctuated but are currently around $3.98/gallon (as of late March 2026), lower than 2022 peaks but influenced by global oil markets, not solely policy. California's prices remain much higher (~$5.80+/gallon) due to state taxes, regulations, and refining rules. In other words, your fault, Gavin.
English

@Roybattyforever Bane’s voice was the worst part of the movie.
English

@Rainmaker1973 The Asian boy turned into a strong white young man. 😆
English

What if government programs are DESIGNED, not to solve problems, but to grow them?
Not by conspiracy. By incentive.
Roche's First Law says spending money on a social problem creates demand for more of that problem.
Parkinson's Law says bureaucracies always expand to consume their budgets.
The Niskanen Model shows bureaucrats are rewarded for bigger budgets, not better outcomes.
The Iron Law of Bureaucracy says the organization always ends up serving itself first.
This isn't a glitch. It's the feature.
English

@Osint613 Not sure if you guys know the meaning of "might", as in "he might be dead". It's used in reported speech, to express possibility.
English

@WallStreetApes California government has absolutely made energy MORE EXPENSIVE. Stop being a Karen and actually help people afford things.
English

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass “We are opening rec centers, senior centers — so Angelenos have places to go and stay cool during this week's record breaking heat temperatures could reach 90 degrees by the beach”
“It is a sign of how climate change is impacting our city”
Why not regulate energy companies so Americans can afford to use their AC
English

@ClayTravis The dad must be the head of a Columbian drug cartel. What was that, 6 Disney cruises?
English

@AntiCommieBecca @TheFP @sapinker @DouthatNYT The most murderous states of the 20th century were also the most atheist.
English

@TheFP @sapinker @DouthatNYT Pinker is right. It is secularism that has made us great. Sliding back into religious belief will stunt modernity & process.
It is just undeniable that the most religious societies on earth are the most impoverished & war torn coupled with the lowest IQs & standards of living.🤷♀️
English

Does a more religious society make a better society?
@SAPinker says no: Would you rather live in Afghanistan or Scandinavia? “The more religious the society, the worse the problems are.”
@DouthatNYT disagrees: You can balance the best of faith and modernity. “What we should wish as Americans is to be neither Afghanistan nor Scandinavia—but to be the United States of America.”
English














