Retra

61 ms·

571.
by Retra 8y ago
Universal should mean that virtually every human in history used it. Just because something is pervasive in modern societies does not mean is a fundamental feature of human nature. Language is universal. Fear and anger are universal.
572.
by Retra 8y ago
This is literally the only comment in this entire thread to use the word "impossible."
573.
by Retra 8y ago
In other words: you can hand someone a proof, but you can't force them to read it. If the tortoise is unwilling to tell you what exactly a proof must entail, then he's effectively not interested in being a rational agent who is co
574.
by Retra 8y ago
Well, since you have that imagination, I'm sure you'll produce a workable theory any day now...
575.
by Retra 8y ago
I've reread your comments and stand by what I said. Perhaps you should confer with someone else.
576.
by Retra 8y ago
You don't need to focus on these kinds of semantic quibbles if you want to miss the point. You can do that directly. Albert Einstein was 21 when he published his first paper, and 26 when he published his best. Please tell me that he di
577.
by Retra 8y ago
I disagree with your assessment of what the main point is. I don't think anyone else is interpreting it that way, and can confidently assert that the error is entirely on your end. Moreover, Hofstadter's study of physics isn'
578.
by Retra 8y ago
That is essentially what I'm saying. The complication is that you can't reliably measure EV for certain acts. (E.g., What is the dollar-value loss for murder? How much should you fine someone for doing it?) In this case, to calcul
579.
by Retra 8y ago
>I don't think a large bank that does $50mm in illegal transactions did any more harm than a small one that did the same volume. The large bank can continue to do damage if they are caught, while the small one cannot. Thus they defi
580.
by Retra 8y ago
The point is to communicate clearly and unambiguously, rather than satisfying some sort of pedantic aversion to harmless redundancy. Redundancy in communication can be very valuable.
581.
by Retra 8y ago
But neither of those contexts are an article on the internet or casual conversation, which could very well be about ballpoint pens, little flags, or anything else.
582.
by Retra 8y ago
What is your point? When Hofstadter was 35, he had spent his adult life studying a subject which culminated in the publication of a book about it. He wasn't passively throwing words on pages to get anything published, he was publishing
583.
by Retra 8y ago
He did spark a different conversation. So many of them, in fact, that you know his name as a consequence of people having those very conversations. >Being famous doesn't really indicate on its own that you've sparked any part
584.
by Retra 8y ago
It's not shocking that content providers want money. It's shocking that pushing ads and selling data are the only ways they can conceive of doing it.
585.
by Retra 8y ago
That doesn't refute the fact that he spent his life researching the content in GEB.
586.
by Retra 8y ago
I didn't use the term "allowed" to imply there is a free speech argument, but to imply that there is an unreasonable expectation on people's behavior. Expecting that customers should "just" stop using service w
587.
by Retra 8y ago
So if a company X is offering something I would like but on different terms, you think it would be entitled and selfish of me to make it known publicly that I would prefer different terms?
588.
by Retra 8y ago
You mean they're not allowed to complain about it on the internet?
589.
by Retra 8y ago
Um... Because I don't believe "other peoples' assessment of your life is irrelevant to you."
590.
by Retra 8y ago
If you were 1000x the size of a cow, you probably could (and would) eat it whole, as your teeth would mash through bone and skin without a problem.
591.
by Retra 8y ago
If it takes decades to notice the effects of a toxin, it's not very potent and there certainly isn't going to be much of an evolutionary drive against it.
592.
by Retra 8y ago
One wonders why you have those morals if they mean so little to you. And if you don't need to justify your behaviors to others, why are you trying to justify them to me?
593.
by Retra 8y ago
Well, my point was really more that the orignal claim was explicitly talking about "at the end" of the timeframe, so we're talking about near death -- where putting weight on immediate gratification is harder to justify. But
594.
by Retra 8y ago
Personal satisfaction doesn't matter once you're dead. Those other things do. And your entire assessment of your life at that point will be put onto other people. With that said, optimizing for after you're dead might be se
595.
by Retra 8y ago
If my car has a broken headlight, my car is still broken and I still fix it, even if it has been providing value and even if it still does so. The implication is only that it isn't living up to its promises, not that it is not worth ke
596.
by Retra 8y ago
Are Mac revenues so largely dependent on developer habits, or are they maybe more a function of consumer habits?
597.
by Retra 8y ago
English used to have blue and indigo being distinct. Still is in the rainbow.
598.
by Retra 8y ago
Do you remember where you learn the things you do? If you see something and think it is wise, do you always remember who you learned it from? Ideas survive only because they're shared. Bad ideas are those that survive in spite of reaso
599.
by Retra 8y ago
If you disseminate the message, it is your message.
600.
by Retra 8y ago
Most of the variables here have standard names that show up in most makefiles.

More ›