I thought living in the future meant we would all be super smart and know shit, not whatever the fuck this is.
this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2025
216 points (97.4% liked)
science
22560 readers
549 users here now
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
rule #1: be kind
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Idiocracy wasn't a movie, it was a documentary sent here from the future.
Thank you for your daily contribution to capitalist society. Unfortunately, your woke-style awareness of social dilemma is counter to the goals of:
- Increased profit
- Decreased labor costs
- More regressive taxes
- Less progressive taxes
- Military domination
- Economical domination
- Cultural division
- Decreased regulation
- Decreased education
You’ll have 15 social credits deducted and may participate in free speech once again starting at 12:00pm tomorrow. Be aware that your score is nearing levels that will prevent job occupation, social program participation, social media participation, sunlight exposure, and time spent with family. Should your score decrease further, you may be required to shop exclusively from Grade D consumption centers. Have a good day.
I thought living in the future meant people would understand how to use computers.
I was, uh, wrong.
Or printers.
They gave the wrong people access to a keyboard
Life will, uh, apparently not find a way after all.
Life is finding a way. Its about to be party time for the diseases that these vaccines would have prevented
People use phones just fine all the time.
It’s probally the most popular computer ever.
Probally is.
Do they, though? Yeah they can scroll, but that wasn’t really what I was thinking of.
it's politics.
politics makes people dumb and delusional
I don't think so, Tube Titties. There has been a lot of smart fucking politicians, and lots of solid fucking political movements.
I think it's money. Money has superseded democracy and rule of law. It's literally the only thing that matters. That is the problem.
money is politics.
Well, see, there's your problem right there. There is a distinction between what politics means and how it gets corrupted.
Like, in ancient Rome they made a decree that anyone hitting someone has to pay a $50 fine on the spot (or the fucking correlate amount of Sestertians), and one rich fuck went around in his sedan slapping people in the streets and have his posse pay the victim and then move on to the next one.
That's hardly "politics"- that's abuse and loopholing the law.
There is such a thing as just law, just politics, democracy and basic fucking human decency, and we can have it.
But rich fucks decided, what if we use our money to corrupt politics, so we can slap people in the face with impunity?
That's the problem. Money. Not politics itself.
The claim "vaccines do not cause autism" is not an evidence-based claim because studies have not ruled out the possibility that infant vaccines cause autism.
Oh look, the bizzaro scientific method.
Unfortunately they are starting to exploit the biggest “weakness” in science. That theories are valid only because they have yet to be disproven. And that theories will change if new evidence is introduced to the contrary.
They are now basically saying “well since you can’t prove it, there’s a chance” which is fundamentally correct at its base but it’s in extremely bad faith.
They’re now basically forcing people to prove a negative, which is impossible as a means of forcing their views.
That theories are valid only because they have yet to be disproven.
No, scientific theories are valid because they are overwhelmingly supported by evidence.
While it is true that they can be changed or replaced by evidence that dos not fit the theory, they are not just speculation waiting to be disproven. The 'biggest weakness' you are describing is a complete misunderstanding of science.
Your last sentence is correct, but also contradicts your first paragraph.
The claim that "vaccines do not make you actually super hot and cool" is not an evidenced-based claim because no one has actually ruled out that vaccinated people are cooler and actually better hangs.
Equally valid statement
Prove me "crazy thing" wrong! No I don't have to show evidence you have to show evidence against it.
It's so stupid. You can't prove a negative. The people claiming vaccines cause autism need to show evidence for their claim, not the other way around.
It's crazy that the CDC can no longer be trusted as an information source now. 😖
Corruption is a cancer that destroys everything it touches.
Also normalized fascism but that's kind of redundant
Was this page helpful?
Can anyone find the “fuck no” button?
Is it this one?
This is government we’re talking about. Not an American high school.