Retra

9 ms·

31.
by Retra 7y ago
You don't have to talk about integrating higher degree polynomials, because a polynomial is just a sum of monomials, and you just end up integrating monomials over and over again. If you can integrate a single monomial, you can integra
32.
by Retra 7y ago
If you are offering your employees a paycheck, that is all they will work for. If you give them your companies assets, capital, and control over the org structure, then that is what they will work for. If you're offering them the oppor
33.
by Retra 7y ago
This cage metaphor really doesn't work when the 'cage' is big enough to allow international travel completely within its confines.
34.
by Retra 7y ago
Well I suppose "Hahahahahah hahhaha ahhah hah. Lol" is a better example of the kind thought-provoking serious writing one should aspire to consume.
35.
by Retra 7y ago
Learning the meanings of things without learning how to do them leaves you powerless to do anything with that knowledge. It's very easy to walk around saying "we could solve problem X with technique Y", but if you don't
36.
by Retra 7y ago
Then they're not free to operate as they please.
37.
by Retra 7y ago
Photons are by definition quantized energy packets. If the energy weren't quantized, it wouldn't be a photon. What you're probably referring to is quantization of the electron energy, but I believe that only happens for bound
38.
by Retra 7y ago
Then it is in our rational self-interest to be angry at them, so what is the relevance of your point?
39.
by Retra 7y ago
That's called a lightning rod.
40.
by Retra 7y ago
If they knew the costs before being charged, you could make a stronger argument. As it is, they are not being charged for expertise, but for being ignorant of the costs.
41.
by Retra 7y ago
It's not that simple to equate the two. Modern western ideals are modern western ideals. If living under an authoritarian monarchy were just another way of living, there wouldn't have been a history of revolt against it in the w
42.
by Retra 7y ago
For now. But what if it stops working? What if someone else wants the benefit but can't do the same things? What if there are other undesirable consequences that you'd like to avoid? Knowing how something works is generally much
43.
by Retra 7y ago
"An apple a day keeps the doctor away" is a saying too, but it doesn't mean people are eating apples regularly. If anything, it means people are not doing it as much as someone thinks they should. It could easily be the case
44.
by Retra 7y ago
Mauna Kea is important to astronomers, hence their desire to build there. Would you feel their decision would be more acceptable if that belief were grounded in superstition, historical circumstance, or contemporary practicality?
45.
by Retra 7y ago
Informing people about your product is not the same as manipulating them into buying it.
46.
by Retra 7y ago
On the 4th, it wasn't random. The days following? I can't predict when fireworks are going to go off. (That's irrelevant anyway, as the dog needs to go out regardless of the date.)
47.
by Retra 7y ago
As far as I understand it, the general scientific consensus is that linguistic relativity does not hold true. More anecdotally, I don't often find myself constructing sentences before having an intuitive (non-linguistic) understanding
48.
by Retra 7y ago
My dog is a 1 year old animal. Of course he is a problem. But he isn't the one exploding shit to amuse himself.
49.
by Retra 7y ago
If you know of any, let me know. The problem is that any harness you buy will get more loose as it is warn, and panicked dogs can get out of a harness the same way you can get out of a t-shirt: line your head and arms up along the same axis
50.
by Retra 7y ago
My dog almost pulled out of his harness and took off a few weeks ago because of some random evening fireworks. It's not a harmless thing.
51.
by Retra 7y ago
Beamed energy always has attenuation problems that make it inefficient.
52.
by Retra 7y ago
Points made through the application of logic can't be nullified by a failure to appeal to emotion. The writing style may not be optimal for building consensus, but that won't make it invalid.
53.
by Retra 7y ago
I can imagine if such a person actually treated everyone like they were talking to a 2-year-old, you would actually find it disrespectful.
54.
by Retra 7y ago
you pro. Used to refer to an indefinitely specified person; one. The word is ambiguous, but don't ask me to "assume good faith" when you're choosing the more offensive or questionable interpretation of my wo
55.
by Retra 7y ago
Like deriding irrelevant things on the internet?
56.
by Retra 7y ago
It's probably a sensible choice for other reasons too: if that had been the explanation, it would have introduced a Chekhov's gun that would probably have to bear plot relevance later, but the battery idea is too mundane for that.
57.
by Retra 7y ago
There are no phenomena that are only perceptible through internal experience. (A term that you've basically introduced in a True Scotsman fashion.) Consider a radio antenna. A radio operates by responding to electrons sloshing around i
58.
by Retra 7y ago
I was being succinct. It is not the quantity of reactions that is important, but the type and nature. The quantity is simply what makes it a reliable measure.
59.
by Retra 7y ago
Consciousness has been observed externally many times using a very well known method: a vast number of analogous reactions to a large variety of stimuli. This is the very reason we aren't all solipsists and believe in human consciousne
60.
by Retra 7y ago
The same in what sense? Sameness is not an objective property of organisms.

More ›