BirAdam

95 ms·

1. 1441.▲
   by BirAdam 5y ago

   In general, no. If we blindly trusted our brains, we would not require things like “another set of eyes,” or the rigors of reproducibility, or business processes/protocols, or a million other things. Further more, this lack of trust in
2. 1442.▲
   by BirAdam 5y ago

   So, like, this is the primitive version of Deep Thought building the Earth because 42 was not a satisfactory answer?
3. 1443.▲
   by BirAdam 5y ago

   In fairness to all of us humans, no. We do not blindly trust our brains. This explicitly how science came about, and this is also how entire branches of philosophy came about.
4. 1444.▲
   Distributed Computing with Mac OS X Tiger [pdf](apple.com)

   3 points by BirAdam 5y ago|0 comments
5. 1445.▲
   by BirAdam 5y ago

   An addict can become not an addict. A person killed by police cannot become anything other than a corpse. The severity of the harm has a temporal component due to time preference. EDIT: Also, dying of overdose is both a symptom of illegalit
6. 1446.▲
   by BirAdam 5y ago

   All drugs should be decriminalized. Shooting people in drug raids is far worse for those people than are the drugs. Likewise, locking people in cages with other misfits, criminals, malcontents, and addicts isn’t smart (especially considerin
7. 1447.▲
   by BirAdam 5y ago

   I have had similar feelings, and these were made worse when I realized that my XT is actually still perfectly fit for most things people need to do (read some text or send some text on the web, word processing, spreadsheets, email). It can