Retra

145 ms·

721.
by Retra 8y ago
Still not seeing what's scary there. If you don't want other people to see your photos, you shouldn't be sending (or uploading) them anywhere. If you don't want to see ads, don't use services that show ads. Sure, im
722.
by Retra 8y ago
Scary how? If you send a photo to Google's computers, expect someone to look at it and classify it. If the expectation is that one can drown that possibility away using volume , then one would need to reassess their understanding of t
723.
by Retra 8y ago
If you live under a rock, you might also think the sun is nothing more than just a crack in the Earth.
724.
by Retra 8y ago
If all humans can be misguided, any principle which accounts for it will be universal. If someone else could know better than you, you can also account for that in a way that other people could be equally well served by. So there isn't
725.
by Retra 8y ago
Vim is pretty easy to learn, you just have to be willing to read tutorials and guides. Most complex subjects are learned that way, after all.
726.
by Retra 8y ago
A manual can be part of the UI. If the manual is well-written, why fault a program for using it?
727.
by Retra 8y ago
I would object to the name on the basis of it influencing a misleading association. A person's brain will jump from one idea to the next based on familiar recall, and when people can't 'jump' to the correct association b
728.
by Retra 8y ago
>If we are warping our algorithms and coding so much around it, isn't this a sign that the memory abstraction with the current caching scheme is an overly leaky abstraction? No, because we don't code our programs in the 'l
729.
by Retra 8y ago
You can make any proof as short as you want. Length of proof means almost nothing; it is a function of the language you choose to use.
730.
by Retra 8y ago
I believe the landers were looking for historical traces of liquid water. Mars has a significant amount of frozen water around the poles, as has been known for a while, and this is just one example of some of it.
731.
by Retra 8y ago
Being "generally against regulation" doesn't imply any specific mitigating rational as you would suggest. Being against poor, mishandled, or unnecessary regulation... yes. But if that was stated, there'd be nothing to ar
732.
by Retra 8y ago
By offering money to leave, we're not actually negotiating what the FaceBook usage value is to the user, but what it is worth to the payee to get that user to quit. (If you're willing to offer me $1M to stop using facebook, that
733.
by Retra 8y ago
Insane is an overstatement, don't you think? Let's not nitpick vocabulary and miss the point. If Clinton won the election using Facebook's data, Republicans (who see democrats as deceitful) would be outraged at that deception
734.
by Retra 8y ago
There are valueless insights. Especially if you don't communicate them. If you're on an imploding submarine on the bottom of the ocean and you get a flash of insight about how to do cold fusion... there's no value there. Yo
735.
by Retra 8y ago
FFS. If you're prescribed a medicine and it doesn't work, then if it was a placebo, it didn't work. Not hard to verify at all. A drug that doesn't work isn't going to be any less effective than a placebo. Placebos a
736.
by Retra 8y ago
It is not my understanding of the mechanism that makes a drug work. It is my understanding of the mechanism that I use to justify giving money to a company that offers a product to me. If a product is being sold to treat motion sickness, it
737.
by Retra 8y ago
Any statement other than "all parties are identical" is partisan. It's not a problem to say that they stand for different things. That's the whole point of them. Deceit is the Republican Brand for the same reason the col
738.
by Retra 8y ago
I was never "taught" the Bohr model... there was a passing mention of it and a statement that it is obsolete, followed by an "electron cloud" model with an explanation that quantum theory is needed to explain it. (I&#x27
739.
by Retra 8y ago
If you're taking them and the symptoms don't go away, then obviously they don't work. I don't understand why that's a question?
740.
by Retra 8y ago
The "correct" side is defined by the principles espoused. It's impossible to honestly not conflate the two. This is not about political fairness as though every political party is entitled to rule equally independent of what
741.
by Retra 8y ago
And next time your son has a headache, you'll give him the sea-band. The placebo effect is a miracle cure that treats all kinds of things, right?
742.
by Retra 8y ago
You just say "I feel better" if any scientists or doctors ask you if anything changed. You'll be a placebo-effect supporting data point in no time.
743.
by Retra 8y ago
>Insights aren't some scientifically testable hypothesis, they are utilitarian. "Utilitatian" in the sense of demonstrating value , which requires the utility of said insight to be communicated. I didn't imply any ri
744.
by Retra 8y ago
Placebo has never worked for me. So as someone who gets sea-sick, it's pretty damn important to me that a product which intends to operate based on the placebo effect be identified as such. Not everybody is healed by lies, after all.
745.
by Retra 8y ago
I think a dictionary could answer that question for you fairly easily.
746.
by Retra 8y ago
I'm not your son. That you've found an explanation to convince a child to stop asking questions isn't exactly relevant to me.
747.
by Retra 8y ago
People care for all kinds of nonsense.
748.
by Retra 8y ago
>I (and many others I presume) also value the kind of insight people do get with psychedelics (and several other means, including philosophy). Even if it doesn't arrive in a readily communicable form. I hear what you're saying,
749.
by Retra 8y ago
I don't understand the question.
750.
by Retra 8y ago
Why would those work?

More ›