Falling3

22 ms·

241.
by Falling3 7y ago
> Taking facial recognition tools away from law enforcement prevents crime victims from bringing their victimizers to justice. That's demonstrably false. Additionally, law enforcement in the US has far too much power and has shown
242.
by Falling3 7y ago
One of my favorite parts is it grabs the cookie as well.
243.
by Falling3 7y ago
>I honestly don't care about the justifications. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Do you not see the irony in that statement in the context of discussing whether further infringements on our civil liberties are worth
244.
by Falling3 7y ago
That's a fair point. And we should rectify that by fixing our healthcare system, not by making it harder for assault survivors.
245.
by Falling3 7y ago
> innocent until proven guilty is still the fairest justice system Justice system administered by a state where the repercussions include imprisonment and death - absolutely. But HR is not a judicial system and should not be viewed as on
246.
by Falling3 7y ago
I've been bitten by a lot of mosquitoes and never once been aware of it happening. I don't think anyone I know has ever claimed to know when it was happening either.
247.
by Falling3 7y ago
> Once you start preaching that certain lifestyles are better at stopping climate change than others, I feel you're effectively judging which life styles are good or bad for the world. Certain lifestyles are better than others. You
248.
by Falling3 7y ago
Shrimping is so bad for the environment and other marine life. The amount of bycatch involved is disturbing. He made a pretty lousy argument.
249.
by Falling3 7y ago
> Interesting how you assume you can dismiss thousands of years of human law / natural law in one sentence. Human law is relevant to the whether we grant humans rights, the idea that which you took issue with. "Natural law&quot
250.
by Falling3 7y ago
As a practical matter, of course we grant humans rights. If you're speaking philosophically, you would have to make the case that there is some morally relevant difference between humans and non-humans. I have yet to see anyone make a
251.
by Falling3 7y ago
> There's nothing a single individual can do to stop global warming. We need radical technological innovation to get out of this mess. Everyone needs to be encouraged to participate. Dividing ourselves into good and bad group over d
252.
by Falling3 7y ago
> If you want to give rights to things with life give it to everything. That's another straw man. I could reply in the exact same way to you wanting to give rights to humans. Your argument for granting rights to humans is not based
253.
by Falling3 7y ago
It can't be the only change, but diet is one of the biggest individual contributors to our C02 output. It should absolutely be part of the conversation.
254.
by Falling3 7y ago
That's absolute nonsense. We don't have a population problem. We have a resource use problem where the wealthiest humans use incredibly disproportionate amounts of resources. Fewer children will not fix this problem.
255.
by Falling3 7y ago
> Animal rights groups tend to elevate my food to having similar rights as humans. I find this to be a minimum facetious at maximum a threat to my life. It's certainly not facetious (not sure if you're looking for another word
256.
by Falling3 7y ago
>Hunting and deriving enjoyment from it does not mean you can't have respect for the individual animal. I'll ask you the same thing I've been asking the other commenter. What is your definition of respect that includes the
257.
by Falling3 7y ago
You can keep calling me condescending, but that's not an argument. If you have a definition of "respect" that includes unnecessary killing, great. Provide that definition and then tell me that you use the same definition for
258.
by Falling3 7y ago
We're not talking about differences in opinion here. We're talking about abuse of language. You cannot respect an individual and kill them for entertainment. If you think otherwise, you're using a completely different definit
259.
by Falling3 7y ago
>I think conservationsist is meant in a sense that they respect and appreciate nature. These kinds of conversations inevitably involve either special pleading or completely distorted definitions of words like "respect" that we
260.
by Falling3 7y ago
Are you asking if I think, for example, lions respect deer as individuals?
261.
by Falling3 7y ago
It's not arbitrary; it's based on our best guess of the minimum requirements for sentience.
262.
by Falling3 7y ago
Sure hunters can be conservationists; losing nature means losing their source of entertainment. But that doesn't mean they appreciate nature and it certainly doesn't mean they respect individuals, which they obviously do not.
263.
by Falling3 7y ago
Since many of us have vastly different jobs in practice (no matter similar in principle), your continued insistence that people being burnt out by their jobs means that software is too hard for them is obnoxious and blatantly untrue.
264.
by Falling3 7y ago
That just sounds like a deliberately obtuse misreading of the parent's comment.
265.
by Falling3 7y ago
I've always been very incredulous that there would be any possibility of taking something sufficiently complex to be considered an AGI and hard-coding anything like the 3 rules into it.
266.
by Falling3 7y ago
Non-citizens are afforded some Constitutional protections. As far as I know, there is a precedent for due process being one of them.
267.
by Falling3 7y ago
That's really helpful; thank you! I'm going to borrow a few phrases and ideas from your post. Your "two questions" approach is a really good insight for the kind of information that needs to be present and obvious in wha
268.
What do other developers look for in a job posting?
4 points by Falling3 7y ago|5 comments
269.
by Falling3 7y ago
Of course. Would you not?
270.
by Falling3 7y ago
No, Slack was initially released in 2013. AIM was shut down at the end of 2017.

More ›