As Peter Griffin would say: "Who....the hell....cares?"

Our faults are not the topic at hand here......also if you wanna essentially keep shilling for china you're barking up the wrong tree.

The issue at hand, btw, is GOG's delisting of Devotion and the group likely at least partially responsible for such....not the "sins" of the countries of those critical of the decision.

We could argue whether the US was actualyl doing that or not, but that's irrelevant: in the same way the CCP's dictatorial past is irrelevant to their "embargo." The actions are independent of one another. Did Cuba actually make an argument (and a reasonably convincing case) that they "nationalized" the companies "because of US interference," or did it have other reasons? Meanwhile, the US directly imposed the embargo for the stated reason, which it had an objective case for. That's fine, but the UN has no business in this affair. 100% of countries 2000 year ago practiced slavery. Did that mean it was ok back 2000 years ago, or does it not count 'cause they didn't have a UN to vote on it from? Since when has anyone recognized the UN as a moral authority on anything? The UN's purpose is to prevent WW3, but for some reason it wants to pretend it has something else going on. The UN also ignores the science that says CO2 followrs, not preceeds, rise in global temperatures. On one hand, the UN says we're going into an ice age, on the other hand the UN agrees that the world is getting hotter. The UN also says that everyone should move to cities to be more easily managed by their governments. Who takes the UN seriously? I'm sure we have some, but you picked a bad example. I'm told that Japan in particular has actually been very worried about some joint operations between China and Russia as of late. Something about building a large navy. You would be right, devotion is small taters in the grand scheme of thing. However, GOG was the one whom capitulated to China's orders on devotion. GOG has no jurisdiction over China and Russia's Navy (honestly not sure how credible the threat is, but it's worth noting it doesn't look good, to the degree that people in Japan are telling me they suspect an offensive operation as early as January). So, since GOG's influence is limited to something we don't like but it does have influence over, perhaps we should be holding GOG's feet to the flames over that thing it does have control over.

Yeah, I'm done with the thread. As fascinating as those discussions are, I only have a finite amount of time.

Once in a while, its nice to go on a forum and debate with strangers, if it remains civil and you don't overdo it.

Yeah, truth be told, any country in the world is pretty much one or two crisises away from going down the drain. Unfortunately, we got caveman DNA.

Realising it is the first step in preventing it (and also resisting insidious the tribal mindset of assuming you are part of a superior group when others stray). Nobody is above it all.

If it can remain civil, there's a lot to be gained by debating with people who disagree with you.

For the thread you mentioned, I read quickly. If you refer to the whole DNA analysis claim, it is indeed the direction modern medicine is taking.

I think giving people who are resistant diseases is taking it too far, but for sure they'll be taking DNA samples to help determine what treatment is the best fit when people get sick.

Currently in medicine, you have situations where a treatment will make some people better and have no effect or kill others. A lot of answers as to why that is can be found in our genes.

Lots of exciting work in the field right now setting up systems to do all that DNA crunching though its also a privacy nightmare (if you think a leak of people's credit cards or social security numbers is bad, wait until you get leaks of their DNA profile).

Unfortunately, we've gotten to the point where we think we are above it. Or, at least, some people believe they, exclusively, are above it, especially when they're acting in the purest form of it (authority). The smae people that incessently tell you that you're X 'cause you're doing Y, thus clearly you're misinformed, simply because you disagree. Well, we can see plenty of examples here and the medias as a whole. The thing is, i think we're to the point where sophistry and "virtue signalling" (good luck figuring out which of the two you're dealing with) has become more important than the imapct of certain things. We could complain all day about the problems of "race science," but these same people then talk about how it's genetics more than environment and choices, but then the idea of these genetic differences to a certain accumulation being defined by the term "race" is somehow blasphemy. I think a more realistic approch would be to notice the correlations and, instead of avoiding the obvious, finding out both why there is a correlation as well as how to identify when the correlation does not imply causation.

There also seems to be some ethical concerns in the field, though, and unrelated to "race." If someone's predisposed to getting a particular disease, they often times will refuse to tell you even if you explicitly ask for it. What if these end up in your medical records and affects how you get treatment (and, remember, we're still looking at mere correlations)? And what about people's right to know? Why should certain priviledged scientists be allowed private information about us than we ourselves are not permitted to know? I understand there's a "suicide risk," but since when was that anyone's choice but our own to make?