Probably never, the point is that they aren't getting around paywalls, it's users that they aren't necessarily aware of or responsible for. Plausible deniability goes a long way.
Maybe because a tech industry forum routinely circumventing copyright protection paywalls in a "grassroots" way is in questionable taste, and making it official would arguably be worse?
(Incidentally, someday a piracy site like that could serve up a browser zero-day, and pwn a large percentage of US tech companies. Without ever having needed to go to the trouble to develop their own content that would attract such a large audience of tech workers on work machines.)
Are you saying that web archive services are breaking copyright law? I would say it's fair use seeing how ephemeral the content is. It's a myth that Internet content last forever.
AFAIK, archive.org is mainly used as a legitimate archive service.
These other archive.* services seem to be used mainly for piracy. I don't know whether that's the intent, but that's the only use of them I recall seeing.
I think conflating the two categories of services might put archive.org at risk.
"About 178,000 people died in 2021 from excessive drinking, compared with 138,000 in 2016. During that period, the deaths rose by 27 percent among men and 35 percent among women."
Could you share any evidence-based arguments against the evidence-based statements and recommendations summarized in the article? What fatal flaws undermine the research in the linked CDC page[1] establishing a causal link between alcohol consumption and DNA damage and increased risk of cancers of the mouth and throat, larynx, esophagus, liver, colon and rectum, and breast in women?
No moralizing required. The pandemic measures in some states made liquor and drink delivery easier or legal and frankly glorified alcohol consumption. My friends in New York who own a liquor store 5x their sales and moved into an old big box storefront.
Returning to 2019 regulatory framework is not prohibition nor blue laws. It would likely reduce alot of human suffering without impacting moderate drinkers.
I think its worth studying - but I suspect that's nipping around the edges again - if you're dying of alcohol related illnesses, its from buying sizable quantities of booze at the place that sells booze - not a beer with lunch.
? Really? Neuroticism about health is one of the most common vectors for modern secular americans to moralize at all. Just look how worked up people get about obesity and smoking, both of which are very high risk factors for (among many other health risks) cancer. Alcohol is actually uniquely celebrated by people who are otherwise very concerned about health from my perspective.
OP was the one to mention scientific research, not me. They effectively wrote "science? Policy? Ha! Prohibition was bad." Am I wrong to want to continue the discussion?
I don't think anyone here seriously doubts whether alcohol consumption carries health risks or whether increasing excise tax decreases consumption (although they might quibble on the degree for each). the question is more around how much the government should intervene to limit poor personal choices. there aren't enough peer reviewed studies in the world to answer that.
Or whether it's right to see it as just a "personal choice". How we should view alcohol (and alcohol profits) is a choice we take together as a society, whether through institutions or not.
Prohibition cut alcoholism rates nearly in half in the states and also greatly reduced domestic violence rates, especially among poorer people. I'm not advocating for a return to this particular approach to societal management but the idea that it was some kind of obvious catastrophe is nothing short of ridiculous.
No, that's just not true. And besides, that seems like a small concern compared to the enormously destructive effects alcohol has far from any organized crime. A wildly entertaining effect to be sure, but not one that touches the lives of every day people like alcohol does.
I'm not going on an academic deep dive to prove that the mob in America was catapulted to power by prohibition. It's self-evident, and continues to be so as you go deeper.
This is simply untrue. The mafia started outside the US long before prohibition came along. It may have given the mafia an opportunity to accelerate and expand but it certainly did not “literally create” the mafia.
I’m also wondering what is considered “dying of alcohol”. Is it only when you drink so much that you die directly from the drinking? Or is it including drunk driving and the like?
Which is why hospitals are stocked with "medical vodka" (actually just regular vodka) to administer to patients suffering from severe withdrawals. It can take a few days to get down to surviving on 0 BAC, though of course unpleasant (but not fatal) withdrawal symptoms will persist for awhile longer.
- Two thirds of the deaths (about 117,000 deaths) are due to chronic conditions that develop from long-term alcohol use, including various types of cancer, heart disease, liver disease, and alcohol use disorder.
- One third of these deaths (about 61,000 deaths) happen from drinking too much on one occasion, such as from motor vehicle crashes, poisonings involving substances in addition to alcohol, and suicides.
I think people are missing your reference to the cases of people who had covid as the cause of death on their birth certificate and things like "headshot wound " as a contributing factor...
Do you really believe that happened? Or rather, putting aside the small number of coroners who might be criminally fraudulent, do you really think that was a thing?
I think it is probably straightforward for a trained professional to document the circumstances of a person's death. I suspect it is a lot harder to conclusively say "but for X, they would have survived". widespread fraud by coroners does not seem likely, but apathy and prioritization of resources is believable.
I believe that some people will do things surprising to me when it means money for them or their organization.
A recent case in point are the people in charge of the Harvard medical School cadavers who sold the organs on the sly, but you could probably find other examples of cases where monetary incentives distort what we were consider commonplace values
Anyone else give up drinking?
I only do it for work events to fit in with the bosses but that's about it. Might have a glass of really good red wine once or twice a year.
I also just sort of stopped drinking. I don't consider myself a non-drinker, it's just, well, whenever the opportunity arises I consider it and decide I prefer not to mess up my sleep and feel lousy the next day for an experience that, frankly, is less enjoyable than reading a book or playing a game or something else that I enjoy.
As for the dietary calories, well, you can hack that one. I don't recommend it for obvious reasons, but a diet of nothing but extremely lean protein, fiber (not strictly necessary, but it's nice to have some flavors other than meat, fish, or egg white), and ethanol (with virtually no dietary fat or carbohydrates) cannot, and I mean it is a proven metabolic impossibility, cause the gain of bodyfat. There is no storage form of ethanol, and the storage form of protein is various lean tissues.
Now you might ask, but what about glycogenesis? Won't the body metabolize that protein into glucose and then store that glucose as body fat? That's a perfectly reasonable thing to suppose, but it's proven, in strictly controlled metabolic ward studies, that it does not happen. Instead the kidneys just eliminate the excess protein. Glycogenesis is only used for immediate energy needs, and of course the body will preferentially use ethanol for immediate energy before protein.
It’s sometimes tough, socially. But I’ve never (well, rarely) felt pressured, just “left out” sort of. But most people in my family are non-drinkers, so there’s that.
I’ll probably die never having been drunk. No real desire, other than fitting in socially, but that’s not really enough of a motivation for me.
But I do feel like it’s overall better for my health and mortality. Not that something like cancer or dementia won’t still get me, though.
I used to have one or two pints most nights. During a yearly checkup, my doctor grabbed my belly and said, “You need to make this smaller” (as he jiggled it in demonstration)
I decided the easiest 3-400 Calories I could cut were those beers, and stopped right then.
I still drink on occasion, but it’s like twice a month. Sometimes more, sometimes less. Those were the easiest calories to cut.
No. Alcohol can't work independently of its downsides. The next-best but also-bad thing is probably GHB or ketamine or something like that. Basically any CNS depressant is going to have some significant dangers, short or long term.
I'm only speculating, but I assume it's a lot easier to consume in excess with this method before you'd feel sick. I feel nausea if I drink too much too quickly, not sure if I'd get that with inhaling it.
Alcohol enemas would be another ingestion alternative - though my understanding is that there's a lot of risk there. Apparently when you drink to much there's a chance you'll throw up - on the other end that won't happen so over consumption is pretty risky.
If you want the effects of alcohol without the downside, this is a much healthier way to get stronger effects. That's pretty reasonable, no? I'm not suggesting this as treatment for an alcoholic.
Probably some mental health damage from Covid lockdowns as well.
To the downvotes - I’m not saying lockdowns were a bad thing, but they did take a toll on many mentally. I’m personally still struggling to recover to my pre-Covid levels of mental health. It was very tough personally on me, and I took the lockdowns very seriously.
Lockdown was the first time I'd ever drunk heavily in my life. Still have some weird hangups from being treated like a criminal for wanting to do normal human things.
I moved to a state where lockdown never happened, and people here just don't understand how bad it actually was. What am I gonna do, talk to a therapist?
I am not a normal human. I have a disturbing combination of high aggression, low empathy, high intelligence, and high agreeableness. I don't make sense to me.
I'm not talking about social anxiety hangups, either. I'm talking about hyper-specific weird interactions that I just can't do now.
I stopped all alcohol intake 86 days ago for several reasons including several friends from college dying from cirrhosis complications. Covid/lockdowns definitely accelerated the alcohol related deaths that I have seen in my job as a gastroenterologist.
84 comments
[ 0.14 ms ] story [ 138 ms ] thread(Incidentally, someday a piracy site like that could serve up a browser zero-day, and pwn a large percentage of US tech companies. Without ever having needed to go to the trouble to develop their own content that would attract such a large audience of tech workers on work machines.)
These other archive.* services seem to be used mainly for piracy. I don't know whether that's the intent, but that's the only use of them I recall seeing.
I think conflating the two categories of services might put archive.org at risk.
Cheers to pandemic hobbies?
Raise prices? Limit access? Research shows that even a little bit can mutate DNA..?
Drinking 100 years ago was way worse and that's how we got prohibition. Hope we don't go back in that direction.
[1] https://blogs.cdc.gov/cancer/2018/04/02/3-weird-things-about...
Returning to 2019 regulatory framework is not prohibition nor blue laws. It would likely reduce alot of human suffering without impacting moderate drinkers.
The only thing I can recall was to-go liquor sales with takeout - which I strongly suspect is not a big mover of change here.
It facilitates alot of work day drinking and bad outcomes for people with problems.
Also, he's not your monkey.
I don't think anyone here seriously doubts whether alcohol consumption carries health risks or whether increasing excise tax decreases consumption (although they might quibble on the degree for each). the question is more around how much the government should intervene to limit poor personal choices. there aren't enough peer reviewed studies in the world to answer that.
https://www.history.com/topics/roaring-twenties/how-prohibit...
And another from the literal mafia museum:
https://prohibition.themobmuseum.org/the-history/the-rise-of...
Don't move the goalposts.
> the idea that it was some kind of obvious catastrophe is nothing short of ridiculous
It was literally an unmitigated catastrophe, which is why it was the only constitutional amendment to be overturned.
It also led to government agents spiking ethanol with methanol, leading to blindness. Pure evil.
- One third of these deaths (about 61,000 deaths) happen from drinking too much on one occasion, such as from motor vehicle crashes, poisonings involving substances in addition to alcohol, and suicides.
A recent case in point are the people in charge of the Harvard medical School cadavers who sold the organs on the sly, but you could probably find other examples of cases where monetary incentives distort what we were consider commonplace values
Deaths from Excessive Alcohol Use — United States, 2016–2021 from CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Vol. 73, No. 8, Feb 29, 2024
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/73/wr/pdfs/mm7308a1-H.pdf
Ages the hell out of you.
As for the dietary calories, well, you can hack that one. I don't recommend it for obvious reasons, but a diet of nothing but extremely lean protein, fiber (not strictly necessary, but it's nice to have some flavors other than meat, fish, or egg white), and ethanol (with virtually no dietary fat or carbohydrates) cannot, and I mean it is a proven metabolic impossibility, cause the gain of bodyfat. There is no storage form of ethanol, and the storage form of protein is various lean tissues.
Now you might ask, but what about glycogenesis? Won't the body metabolize that protein into glucose and then store that glucose as body fat? That's a perfectly reasonable thing to suppose, but it's proven, in strictly controlled metabolic ward studies, that it does not happen. Instead the kidneys just eliminate the excess protein. Glycogenesis is only used for immediate energy needs, and of course the body will preferentially use ethanol for immediate energy before protein.
It’s sometimes tough, socially. But I’ve never (well, rarely) felt pressured, just “left out” sort of. But most people in my family are non-drinkers, so there’s that.
I’ll probably die never having been drunk. No real desire, other than fitting in socially, but that’s not really enough of a motivation for me.
But I do feel like it’s overall better for my health and mortality. Not that something like cancer or dementia won’t still get me, though.
I decided the easiest 3-400 Calories I could cut were those beers, and stopped right then.
I still drink on occasion, but it’s like twice a month. Sometimes more, sometimes less. Those were the easiest calories to cut.
I do want to give it a try some time though.
To the downvotes - I’m not saying lockdowns were a bad thing, but they did take a toll on many mentally. I’m personally still struggling to recover to my pre-Covid levels of mental health. It was very tough personally on me, and I took the lockdowns very seriously.
More unusual all the time, though.
I'm not talking about social anxiety hangups, either. I'm talking about hyper-specific weird interactions that I just can't do now.