Elon Musk: Always A Douche

[grumbler]

Research animal died during research?  Stop the presses!

Neuralink does need to start using lawyers instead of monkeys as test subjects, though, to avoid unnecessary bad press.

[DGuller]

That was my thought as well, isn't the whole point of animal testing is to see whether the subjects would die a painful premature death?  Obviously you shouldn't be doing something guaranteed to kill the animals just to get a boner, but testing something that may be dangerous is the job of these animals.  It's not like the animals that make it through a study get to enjoy an early retirement somewhere on the tropical island.

[Syt]

Research animal died during research?  Stop the presses!

Neuralink does need to start using lawyers instead of monkeys as test subjects, though, to avoid unnecessary bad press.

Not sure if lawyer brains are similar enough to human ones, though.

[Jacob]

That was my thought as well, isn't the whole point of animal testing is to see whether the subjects would die a painful premature death?  Obviously you shouldn't be doing something guaranteed to kill the animals just to get a boner, but testing something that may be dangerous is the job of these animals.  It's not like the animals that make it through a study get to enjoy an early retirement somewhere on the tropical island.

I think the idea is that you only use animals - especially higher order species like monkeys - when you're very confident you won't inflict unnecessary suffering on them; as opposed to "let's just fuck around and see what happens, and if they suffer and die oh well that's what they're for."

That said, I'm not personally prepared to judge where the line is - and thus neither am I ready to say whether this case is on the right or wrong side of it - but hopefully there are ethics bodies and law that determines that.

[DGuller]

That was my thought as well, isn't the whole point of animal testing is to see whether the subjects would die a painful premature death?  Obviously you shouldn't be doing something guaranteed to kill the animals just to get a boner, but testing something that may be dangerous is the job of these animals.  It's not like the animals that make it through a study get to enjoy an early retirement somewhere on the tropical island.

I think the idea is that you only use animals - especially higher order species like monkeys - when you're very confident you won't inflict unnecessary suffering on them; as opposed to "let's just fuck around and see what happens, and if they suffer and die oh well that's what they're for."

That said, I'm not personally prepared to judge where the line is - and thus neither am I ready to say whether this case is on the right or wrong side of it - but hopefully there are ethics bodies and law that determines that.

I see.  I can definitely imagine the disruption bros at Tesla completely disregarding established protocols, if not stopped by external forces, as the whole process of medical research seems like the very opposite of their MO.

[Syt]

A couple of not very flattering piece of news related to Musk have appeared today:

I feel this makes a nice contrast to the first article about racist work environments:

[DGuller]

Serve them to whom?

[Josquius]

Yes. To have such a high fuck up rate really suggests they shouldn't have been at the stage of testing on monkeys.

[grumbler]

Serve them to whom?

Soylent Green is people!

[grumbler]

One should keep in mind that PCRM is an advocacy group opposed to all animal medical research, so take their findings with a grain of salt.

[Syt]

Serve them to whom?

In the case of billionaire entrepreneurs:

[The Larch]

So apparently Musk has made an official bid to buy Twitter for more than 40 billion dollars.

[Eddie Teach]

Hopefully just to delete it.

[Tamas]

The levels of trolling he does to manipulate share prices is insane. I kinda' wish the bluff offer gets accepted so he burns 40 billion.

[Darth Wagtaros]

Serve them to whom?

Soylent Green is people!

It's a cookbook!