GavinMcG

25 ms·

271.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
You've continued well after you prompted a CPSC report. I'd hope that one purpose of further discussion is benefit to the rest of the community , rather than being solely for your enjoyment. I'm sorry that's disappoin
272.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
I'm talking about your rhetorical strategy. You've got a reasonable view, and you're being ineffective in advancing it.
273.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
> this shouldn't be a big deal for Bose if this is a one-off freak accident. And if it's a systemic issue, it better become a big deal. You're spamming the thread with dramatic comments that are premised on this not
274.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
> To stop at Who said anything about stopping? Building a better, healthier society is a massive undertaking, and people are engaged in doing that. In the meantime, we're also making the world a bit safer.
275.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
Well you've solved the immediate problem of having zero further opportunity to solve the underlying problem (because they're dead). One point made in the linked article is that identifying risk in individuals isn't something
276.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
I'm not really sure what you're trying to say. You seem to be hinting at something, rather than being direct, but it's not clear what you're hinting at.
277.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
Well, it turns out your intuitions on this one are wrong. Means restriction is one of the most empirically supported suicide-prevention strategies. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6191653/
278.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
> there's always going to be some level of wealth that's difficult to achieve Sure, but if that number is such that a significant proportion of society is born with it and pass it along to their children while everyone else ca
279.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
Would it have been better if you hadn't done so?
280.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
It shouldn't have been that much of a surprise. As of Thursday morning, the Storm Prediction Center had identified the threat: > Severe thunderstorms capable of producing several tornadoes and scattered to numerous damaging wind
281.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
You're being quite sloppy with categories. You've shifted from saying "if an action is good, it is good regardless of your lot in life" to talking about people being more or less good, based on wealth. Nothing else in
282.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
No one said followers have no moral responsibility. It's fine if it's one morality for everyone. It's just that as an individual with little power, the pursuit of that morality will involve very different actions than for ind
283.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
How do we measure "should" or "shouldn't" there? Answering whether you're right or wrong requires looking at the alternatives and seeing whether political programs that go beyond infrastructure and policing cre
284.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
So call it an ethics for society's leaders . They do have moral agency, but we expect them to channel their individual subjectivity in a certain way.
285.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
Which the article doesn't argue against. Instead, it assumes for the sake of argument that you've made a utility calculation whereby favoring the disabled son is the worse choice.
286.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
I didn't say you were against it, either! It's also worth criticizing the things you're for.
287.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
Saying that something has a side effect (here: unfairness) is a really shallow criticism. The real question is whether the side effect can be productively/efficiently dealt with.
288.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
Odd that it describes a slowdown in growth of labor productivity as a "productivity slowdown." As though we should be able to sustain growth infinitely. Seems like the low-hanging technological fruit has been picked, though.
289.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
"Weaponized" is an interesting choice of framing. What if the article is just run-of-the-mill wrong to generalize?
290.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
No, I'm attacking the logical implication of your statement. It's a reductio ad absurdum. You said for a market to work "at all" as a market, it must have voluntary transactions, and people must be able to engage in the
291.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
That's just not borne out in looking at the many markets already functioning under various regulatory schemes for decades now. Lots and lots of markets work as markets, and have fundamentally voluntary transactions, even though certain
292.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
It might not be deep and profoundly insightful, but if it sets things up in such a way that it can credibly utter the phrase "properly designed regulation" then it's moving in the right direction. In other words, properly d
293.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
What are you actually saying? You seem to be gesturing at something, but it's not clear what that thing is.
294.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
I think the article would argue you're making the mistake it criticizes: you're ignoring the role of regulation. > If a central monetary agency can go about unconventional monetary policy such as purchasing equities... If that&
295.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
I'm not giving in to the UK's bastardization of the en dash! The em dash was correct, it's just the spaces are wrong.
296.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
Those are both fine because they're proper names. Using "&" in place of the word "and" does depart from common usage (though there's no "law") and does so in such an overt way that it appears pr
297.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
Better-written sources: Smithsonian Magazine (start at "Within a few years of the warrior’s burial" for the Minoan-Mycenaean link): https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/golden-warrior-greek-... Archaeology.
298.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
Yep.
299.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
Also hoping to do it with Nim! Last year I'd asked for some getting started advice here: https://www.reddit.com/r/nim/comments/k22h74/advent_of_nim_2...
300.
by GavinMcG 5y ago
Plenty of other people do not love their depression, and find it painful and limiting. Dismissing that experience as rooted in "toxic positivity" isn't fair: it's perfectly legitimate to desire a feeling of well-being.

More ›