ThomPete

40 ms·

481.
by ThomPete 6y ago
there is a third possibility. Sometime people reach different but correct conclusions based on the same information but a different valueset
482.
Behavioral nudges reduce failure to appear for court(science.sciencemag.org)
2 points by ThomPete 6y ago|0 comments
483.
by ThomPete 6y ago
One of the biggest challenges with fusion is to be able to contain plasma as far as I understand. Magnets seem to be the way they want to do it but I am a layman so take what I say with a grain of salt.
484.
by ThomPete 6y ago
I am pretty sure a lot of those was just taking the opportunity that presented itself. But yes it's a success if you want to run a company that really shouldn't be taking sides.
485.
by ThomPete 6y ago
Unless you only want to work for ICE but not for an emigration lawyer thats not a political choice thats an agnostic choice. When Google employees decided who google should work for THATS political.
486.
by ThomPete 6y ago
Politics not software is eating the world. I will never turn my company into a political cause. I don't care what the cost is and my guess is that in February next year companies will realize that this is a bad move as their sworn enem
487.
by ThomPete 6y ago
Ah Roblox... the reddit of games. My kids would be playing non-stop if I allowed it.
488.
by ThomPete 6y ago
It is but with 70% being non-reproducible we should be careful what we conclude. Humans are not robots. Lots and lots of factors in play. I have worn mask since march and have no problem with doing so, I believe they help curve some, but sc
489.
by ThomPete 6y ago
he didnt develop it he already had it
490.
by ThomPete 6y ago
is the opposite the case too?
491.
Browser for exploring temporal, population-wide disease progression patterns(nature.com)
2 points by ThomPete 6y ago|0 comments
492.
by ThomPete 6y ago
because it will make a difference to you and you will play better.
493.
by ThomPete 6y ago
It easy to search but it doesn't have many of Trumps voters which makes it a useless platform to decide or measure whether Obama was divisive.
494.
by ThomPete 6y ago
Why do you think Twitter is the right platform to measure that by?
495.
by ThomPete 6y ago
You din't find it divisive becauee you agree with a lot of what he says. A lot of people found it divisive and the result was Trump.
496.
by ThomPete 6y ago
No my argument has a context, the context here is mostly Facebook employees and their likes at twitter, spotify etc which are mostly well educated young white people.
497.
by ThomPete 6y ago
We aren't talking about +50 we are talking about people who work at facebook which is mostly young white well educated.
498.
by ThomPete 6y ago
since when have lefthandedness been a problem? You are also confusing two different discussions.
499.
by ThomPete 6y ago
the article is literally about people in tech, on top of that spotify, youtube, twitter google all having their issues with handling dissenting opinions.
500.
by ThomPete 6y ago
The context of this is the employees at Facebook, I don't think there are many NFL executives employed at Facebook.
501.
by ThomPete 6y ago
Yeah don't think there are many of those. But here is one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beate_Schmidt#:~:text=Beate%20... . Not sure what the point is though. The discussion I tried to start was about all the norm
502.
by ThomPete 6y ago
You are talking about two very different things. I am talking about our upbringing I am fairly sure most parents aren't prejudice against their children and I am pretty sure most kids aren't trans although it's certainly in v
503.
by ThomPete 6y ago
Given that there aren't "a lot" of transpeople I am not sure I understand your point is, care to elaborate?
504.
by ThomPete 6y ago
I talk about all forms of cancel culture and don't care which side of the political ail it comes from.
505.
by ThomPete 6y ago
I will never understand the extreme intellectual fragility of cancel culture. A lot of kids must have grown up never facing and learning to to deal with disagreement or what is it that have created such a thin skinned generation of seemingl
506.
by ThomPete 6y ago
Nothing scary about it you are confusing two things. In 2100 we will be able to suck out CO2 even if that was a problem which isn't even established yet. The math is the math, it's the premise that's wrong.
507.
by ThomPete 6y ago
Yes it's from 1985 and no it doesn't actually give a number either. The fact that you can't find it and have to go to 1 article which isn't even giving you that number, should tell you that maybe you haven't gotten
508.
by ThomPete 6y ago
ask yourself why they cant be precise
509.
by ThomPete 6y ago
So in other words. You can't give me a number, not even a ballpark number. Why do you think that is? Why isn't it important to you if it's 10% or 51% or 99%?
510.
by ThomPete 6y ago
You are missing the point. You are assuming all their assumptions are correct and apparently as the only person in the world you know how much human made emissions contribute to the total CO2 levels. As I wrote in another post. Write the No

More ›