Kamq

26 ms·

271.
by Kamq 3y ago
I assume you're referring to Vicellinus. There's a big difference here, that he was given a trial and executed within the bounds of the system, as corrupt as that system may have been. The extra-legal violence with Gracchus was qu
272.
by Kamq 3y ago
My understanding is that political violence was really only an issue that crept up after the killing of Tiberius Gracchus, so you're really only looking at the last century or so of the roman republic.
273.
by Kamq 3y ago
Minor quibble. The industries generally need to only be "socially-owned" rather than state-owned. Though I will admit that state-ownership is the most common in practice. More of an academic point though, as Europe, as a whole, is
274.
by Kamq 3y ago
> There are important differences between Denmark and the US though. On the human level, sure. On the level of "fundamental economic system" (which is, I believe, the line of discussion), there really aren't. They're
275.
by Kamq 3y ago
> Though I have to say, I don't really see what Go buys you over something like OCaml, which is still very explicit (in many ways more so than Go) while still providing powerful abstraction facilities. I mean, the thing it provides
276.
by Kamq 3y ago
Since we're talking about implementing it in usercode, as opposed to adding it to the language, we fortunately have the option to rework it (or have a couple completing implementations to see what works in practice). If you're loo
277.
by Kamq 3y ago
I would probably just do the following: type Iterator[T any] interface { HasNext() bool GetNext() T } And then use it like: for i.HasNext() { current := i.GetNext() // do things h
278.
by Kamq 3y ago
I've always conceptualized them as competing governments personally (or, possibly, potential governments), not subgovernments myself.
279.
by Kamq 3y ago
Yeah, they misquoted the original phrase. It's supposed to be monopoly on _legitimate_ violence. Which is why organized crime and vigilantism are generally so much higher up on a government's priority list than single acts of viol
280.
by Kamq 3y ago
Presumably the liquidated assets would go to the shareholders.
281.
by Kamq 3y ago
That's... disappointing. But, I guess values drift is a thing. My country hasn't been part of theirs for quite a long time, and I guess it has just diverged to that point.
282.
by Kamq 3y ago
> Apple has to review our apps before they’re released and they certainly have capability to review a trusted pasteboard copying predicate as I am suggesting. Are you willing to provide signed proof that the user consented to this action
283.
by Kamq 3y ago
> Yeah, they do, because they have to trust the certificates and entitlements that my app is signed with. That's a 401 vs 403 distinction. They know who you are, they don't know that you're authorized to do this.
284.
by Kamq 3y ago
Is this satire? Between being pro child-arrest, and using the phrase "anxiety and distress", which seems to be rather uncommon, and is the exact same phrasing as your 3rd link, I'm starting to feel like parody is the most li
285.
by Kamq 3y ago
> If an error is thrown from Lombok code, you’re misusing Lombok. I mean, that's fair, but if you're using it in a team based environment, eventually someone's going to misuse it and you'll have to figure out what hap
286.
by Kamq 3y ago
You are aware that, between the unix wars, the spats with microsoft, and the general people who grew up ripping music/games off of random places, you're probably in one of the most hostile places to IP... pretty much anywhere, rig
287.
by Kamq 3y ago
It should be noted, that they're explicitly taking this position because they think it will result in more capabilities. Not because of a respect of intellectual property.
288.
by Kamq 3y ago
> Flashback to one of my favorite debugging stories where an entire java code-base was meta-programmed into existance at runtime and would constantly throw errors to lines of files that didn't exist. Lombok?
289.
by Kamq 3y ago
On some level, sure. But there's a difference between trusting two rival institutions that come to the same conclusion, and trusting a single research team that stands to advance quite significantly from a particular publishing.
290.
by Kamq 3y ago
> For example, you’d just have labs doing extremely expensive replications of extremely simple or well-established experiments. Why not? You're making grants sound like a cost-plus contract. I don't think grants currently work
291.
by Kamq 3y ago
That's part of the joke. "The X Files" is also a thing. So is DirectX.
292.
by Kamq 3y ago
> How are scientists supposed to share results in a way that doesn’t run the risk of someone else taking it as gospel Could not care less, but federal funding should be shifted to institutions that spend >X% (politically negotiable) o
293.
by Kamq 3y ago
> So if I’m understanding correctly: no structured sharing of scientific ideas until they’re replicated? No, you don't. I'm actually struggling to think of a more extreme interpretation of my words. Trying something novel is fi
294.
by Kamq 3y ago
I think you misread my comment. I'm not anti-science. I'm saying we screwed up bigtime trusting people within the institutions we put up to manage science. Especially in the soft sciences. We let things go without serious peer rev
295.
by Kamq 3y ago
> The downstream effects of a post-truth post-trust era. All this era has shown us, is that we should never have been relying on trust in anything even close to science. Trusting people to put the truth their own career advancement is ho
296.
by Kamq 3y ago
> So what you're asking for is very not radical. Shame. Radical seems to be all the rage these days. Maybe I can brand it as radically conventional.
297.
by Kamq 3y ago
> He is not a simple person. I'm gonna be honest here. I don't think anyone is.
298.
by Kamq 3y ago
Fair enough. Einstein definitely pre-dates what I'm talking about, so if he's included, then this guy definitely is.
299.
by Kamq 3y ago
> I wonder what people like Peter Thiel have to say about it The people I know who look down on modern academics, tend to dislike a set of changes that started happening in the mid-late sixties and ramped up through at least the 2010s. I
300.
by Kamq 3y ago
I still think they need another category than what they have now. My understanding of the current categories of drugs are you have "banned" and "has this specific therapeutic effect that costs billions of dollars to prove&quo

More ›