Timon3

8 ms·

91.
by Timon3 1mo ago
Again, when you receive multiple comments disagreeing with yours and feel harassed, the likely reason is not a conspiracy to harass you until you change your mind. Of course everyone should be respectful, but as long as they're not d
92.
by Timon3 1mo ago
Yes, very good, words can mean different things in different contexts! Now consider: the public still slowly but surely follows along with changes to the classification of species, so when e.g. a species is divided into two or more specie
93.
by Timon3 1mo ago
> If you read Plato, you will see that defining words that already exist in some universal way is pretty much impossible. This is a humanities question, not a scientific one. Nope. Just like it is okay for scientists in the field of biol
94.
by Timon3 1mo ago
Yes, perhaps people follow their own thoughts and opinions, so perhaps they understand and accept the IAU's explanation. Just like people less than 100 years ago perhaps accepted the explanation why scientists are suddenly adding a new
95.
by Timon3 1mo ago
> One of the parts that makes people emotional is that they’re plainly being lied to about the premise of needing a universal definition. This makes no sense to me, can you explain WHY a universal definition is not needed? > Scientist
96.
by Timon3 1mo ago
Because (going by scheme271's numbers) I might not want to waste lots of expensive RAM on something or mess around with offline deduplication, when a less resource-intensive alternative is entirely sufficient for whatever my use case i
97.
by Timon3 1mo ago
How is the IAU trying to exert control or asserting any authority to govern your speech? I'm really having trouble seeing how the IAUs actions are in any way unusual for this kind of scientific organization, so please be specific about
98.
by Timon3 1mo ago
Why would the deduplication need to be hidden from the user? Why would everything need to become a blackbox? Hardlinks have long been a well-documented feature of many file systems. I don't see how their use in a context users largely
99.
by Timon3 1mo ago
There are many, many, many examples of exactly that happening: they run experiments, the experiments prove them wrong, and they instantly declare the experiment to be wrong. You can easily find them on YouTube, IIRC a flat earth documentary
100.
by Timon3 1mo ago
It is emotional reasoning to want Pluto to be an exception to an otherwise universal definition, because the reason for the exception are the emotions of some people . Picking any arbitrary generic definition and applying it universally is
101.
by Timon3 1mo ago
There are still many environments with <=250GB, below that I wouldn't call it negligible. And let's not forget that the price per GB has appreciated a LOT!
102.
by Timon3 1mo ago
Why would a change today be such a violation of a sacred concept, when Pluto was added not even a century ago? If anything, it seems like the scientists back then had a god complex, and this would be rectifying their mistake.
103.
by Timon3 1mo ago
Do you specific issues with uv that makes you distrust the implementation? Otherwise that reasoning is pretty weird - it's possible to write good software, even when the existing options aren't good. Why would we ask them to limit
104.
by Timon3 1mo ago
IMO mise tasks are fairly close to the ideal polyglot task runner, because features like argument definitions can be used as progressive enhancements. That means I can write the task logic in shell scripts that can be called without mise, a
105.
by Timon3 1mo ago
Ah yes, it's obviously acceptable that the richest people on this planet are deliberately and explicitly trying to pull us into fascism, because every single alternative must be even worse, because SOCIALISM! Good thing you reminded us
106.
by Timon3 1mo ago
But for Brexit the pro-EU side obviously didn't have the heft of the Establishment behind them either, or why was there no confirmatory Brexit vote? Either way, of course you won't find counter-examples if you conveniently define
107.
by Timon3 1mo ago
This is fairly off-topic, but: > tne broke my brain for a second. Still does, to be honest. I don't think I remember seeing this typo before!
108.
by Timon3 1mo ago
> If Remain had won 52% to 48%, you can bet that no second confirmatory vote would have been suggested. You can bet that it would have: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/14/dominic-cum...
109.
by Timon3 1mo ago
It would be if it were true, but it obviously isn't (see Brexit etc).
110.
by Timon3 1mo ago
IMO this discussion must not leave out the fact that the comprehensive surveillance of the public movements of all citizens only became possible over the last few years. While there already was a ton of effort spent in this direction, gover
111.
by Timon3 1mo ago
> That may be true but there aren't enough wealthy people to just attack their consumption. Not sure I understand, the goal isn't to attack anyone's consumption? The whole idea is to stop costs from being externalized. The
112.
by Timon3 1mo ago
Carbon taxes can be implemented such that average folks benefit from them, e.g. by paying everyone back the average tax amount. Wealth generally correlates with carbon emissions, so wealthy people would pay more than they get back. This w
113.
by Timon3 1mo ago
But what will be the safe places people could migrate to? I'm not sure we can really predict this, especially since the least affected locations are going to be the ones everybody will be interested in. And given the ramping-up xenop
114.
by Timon3 1mo ago
Unfortunately this will keep happening in capitalist systems without hard wealth caps, because capitalists would rather risk the extermination of entire groups of people than risking their wealth, so they will inevitably keep spreading &amp
115.
by Timon3 1mo ago
I'd argue that it actually did one good thing regarding ad tech: I've seen many people - who generally aren't interested in privacy, or politics in general - being very surprised by the number of companies their data is being
116.
by Timon3 1mo ago
> Nope. That is what's called a rhetorical question and a pretty good one because obviously it stirred some emotion in you. I guess if your goal is just to get any reaction, it was good, since it definitely stirred up annoyance in m
117.
by Timon3 1mo ago
When people negotiate, the terms of the deal are affected by many factors. Imagine Greenland "cashes in" IOUs/goodwill to get better terms, only for the referendum to fail. Then they change their mind a couple years later, ma
118.
by Timon3 1mo ago
Is that question supposed to be profound? Because surely someone has explained the formation of our celestial bodies to you.
119.
by Timon3 1mo ago
> "regular and peaceful change of government" This has already been broken, and they've become so much more bold since then.
120.
by Timon3 1mo ago
Unfortunately they have to shut down their nuclear reactors when it gets too warm in the summer, which is only going to get worse. Since nuclear isn't capable of generating baseload, we should instead invest into solar & batteries.

More ›