> Cars kill over a million people each year and while terrible, they really aren't "all that bad"
I struggle to comprehend the mindset that allows anyone to think killing a million people "isn't all that bad".
> I was asking if by developing such broad vaccines (as opposed to those that we have developed in the past) if we ran the risk of selecting for worse viruses.
Whilst you were responding I edited that remark from my comment, since it does not lead to a worthwhile discussion. Nonetheless I'll stand by it as an appropriate characterization.
Things really can be good and bad. Cars I think by most accounts are good (do you disagree?), but they do lead to the deaths of a million+ every year, that is bad.
Junk foods like ice cream, pizza, soda etc. I think can be good but they also lead to the deaths of millions a year (albeit more indirectly). The world just isn't black and white. It is complex and there is nuance.
> I think can be good but they also lead to the deaths of millions a year
This discussion may as well end here, because I can have no meeting of minds with someone whose moral compass spins so freely as to wave away millions of human lives on frippery. The only other entity I've had a dialogue with willing to express a similar worldview was GPT-3. That AI was trained on a wide spectrum of human expression, so evidently someone out there agrees with such sentiment, but to me it's downright repugnant.
I struggle to comprehend the mindset that allows anyone to think killing a million people "isn't all that bad".
> I was asking if by developing such broad vaccines (as opposed to those that we have developed in the past) if we ran the risk of selecting for worse viruses.
Whilst you were responding I edited that remark from my comment, since it does not lead to a worthwhile discussion. Nonetheless I'll stand by it as an appropriate characterization.