GavinMcG

23 ms·

181.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
It didn’t say it was caused by. It said it couldn’t be solved within.
182.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
That’s a non sequitur. So what if bad things have happened outside of a market? The question is whether a solution can be found outside one.
183.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
This presupposes that fire suppression is an important goal. Obviously carbon storage is only possible if it isn’t all routinely released as smoke, but it’s not obvious to me that fire reduces carbon capture so much that other alternatives
184.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
Got it. I had thought you were responding to the part you quoted.
185.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
...but you can't choose to use it for full-screen content . The distinction the comment was drawing was about the notch interfering in that manner.
186.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
I think the comment is pointing out that if your child is kidnapped and raised elsewhere, there will not be a reason to fingerprint them then for comparison unless there's already a reason to think they may have been kidnapped. That
187.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
I too read "Roman" to refer to empire. Maybe because of the Latin-sounding single name, or maybe because I'm used to identifying people by their nationality rather than their city.
188.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
You're focusing on ease of getting a job with a particular employer to the exclusion of all else. If you want to make an argument that one thing is better or worse than another, go ahead, but do it by comparing the positives to the n
189.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
They didn't change it to a runner up—they changed it to an upgrade pick, that is, still the best, but without enough marginal benefit for the substantial marginal cost. Not sure what pricing was like back then, of course, but at this
190.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
Eight years ago, right? Are they refusing now? (Genuinely curious if you've got up-to-date info. If they are terribly biased I want to know it, so I can downgrade my trust, which is why I upvoted the OP about the air purifier.) Also, i
191.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
Sure, and I'm not saying there's no possible influence in any direction. At the same time, I suspect things are more separate than in 2014, and I don't see that claim on their pages from back then [0][1]. In fact they seeme
192.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
I've used the Wirecutter, so I'm not going to claim to be totally unbiased. But I'm just not seeing any nastiness there: the reason they gave for switching their recommendation (while retaining their original recommendation a
193.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
Poker isn't played as a group. The "overall concept" is whether an individual player can profit over the long run, and in poker but not (say) roulette, the answer is yes. Your approach reminded me of a joke: Three statisticia
194.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
I'm an American who has lived in Germany, and it didn't seem like a personal attack to me. It's a reasonable thing to wonder when someone espouses a profits-first view in response to a social program.
195.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
Obamacare.
196.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
That's historically not true, and especially in that light, such extreme pessimism seems irresponsible—by convincing people they're disempowered, you're just encouraging the result you hope to avoid.
197.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
> The only moral way to do it What makes you say that morality demands accepting the premise that states are the fundamental unit, here? That is, even acknowledging that the people who signed the constitution imagined themselves to be ac
198.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
> it isn't even a know it when you see it thing, and in practice it's a Russell conjugation: they gerrymander, and we redistrict so that people get proper representation There are absolutely situations where it is obvious, most
199.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
Find in a nearby library here: https://www.worldcat.org/title/essays-in-the-economics-of-cr...
200.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
https://www.propublica.org/article/inside-turbotax-20-year-f...
201.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
What do you make of the research concluding that MRI can identify ADHD and distinguish among subtypes? https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/10.1148/radiol.2017170226
202.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
In a lot of areas, thriving has nothing to do with society's reaction. Leaving kitchen cupboards open and then ramming your head into them isn't something that society blames or stigmatizes someone for, it just hurts. Having a dif
203.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
That's a convenient explanation, but it doesn't account for the emotional dysregulation that accompanies ADHD. And it's historically dead wrong: symptom clusters associated with ADHD were described as early as 1798, and were
204.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
> their NBA career No. Again: the diagnostic criteria are not this simple, and it's a strawman to argue against something that isn't happening. Diagnosis requires disruption across multiple areas of one's life—not just a
205.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
No, he isn't: he supposes that "any deviation from the standard" is called a disorder. That's false: we call something a disorder when it disrupts people's lives, not just when there's diversity. "Disord
206.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
That viewpoint makes the same strawman argument: > <X> is part of the natural variation in how human brains work, and ... it's a category error to think of it as a malfunction to be repaired No! No one is saying that everyone
207.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
The author really does not do a great job, here, at least in saying something sensible as a response to DeBoer's piece. The core premise seems to be that: > I find it so very irritating that there is no term for my so-called ⸢attent
208.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
> "didn't ever do anything wrong on purpose" The fact that there are two ways to read this comes up in the criminal law context, where there's a question as to someone's mental state. You read "on purpose&qu
209.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
That revision is probably expressed in Lakatos's view on "research programmes" that may have core non-falsifiable theories and that continue being useful even when scientists know something is off about the model as a whole
210.
by GavinMcG 4y ago
It's more about deductive vs. inductive reasoning, rather than whether past results matter. Popper distinguished science from non-science by falsifiability: if a prediction could theoretically be disproved, it's a scientific one.

More ›