Windchaser

6 ms·

61.
by Windchaser 3mo ago
I mean, aren't diplomats immune to US laws? Literal "diplomatic immunity". It makes sense to me to say that they do not fall under US laws and US jurisdiction, and their children likewise.
62.
by Windchaser 3mo ago
> And you think that is not insane? I think there would be a real problem with creating a class of people who live here their entire lives and aren't citizens. And then their children also live here and aren't citizens, and the
63.
by Windchaser 3mo ago
> Trump and his cronies were never going to win that battle. He got dang close. He's only one justice replacement away from making it doable. Gods, we are not as far from ripping up the Constitution as we'd like to think.
64.
by Windchaser 3mo ago
I mean, it tracks with "no taxation without representation". Getting rid of birthright citizenship has the chance to create a separate *multi-generational* class of people that aren't given the same rights in society.
65.
by Windchaser 3mo ago
I'm personally happy to welcome anyone who's willing to come, work hard, pay taxes, and support democratic ideals. This is how most of our ancestors got here, and it seems fair to me that we continue to extend that offer to other
66.
by Windchaser 3mo ago
Not getting wrecked in major land wars during the 1800s and 1900s also helped
67.
by Windchaser 3mo ago
Well, no, but almost everyone inside US borders is subject to US laws. The exceptions are rare: people in foreign embassies (which is "foreign soil"), invading armies, and indigenous tribes on tribal land.
68.
by Windchaser 3mo ago
It makes sense to me. When women have more choices, they tend to put off having kids or they raise their standards - for their economic situation before kids, for partners, etc. I think this is good; insofar as women have children, it shoul
69.
by Windchaser 3mo ago
Kavanaugh ruled that Trump's EO wasn't unconstitutional, just contrary to federal law, and Congress could change the law there if they wanted. So, this makes it only 5-4 upholding the 14th amendment. Which is gods-damned crazy. We
70.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
Water usage goes up with data centers because more cooling is needed when you run the hardware harder. So: if you're running the models on your own machine, presumably you're not running them as often, and air cooling is sufficien
71.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
I don't follow. If weights are open, can't competing providers pop up? Including, e.g., coalitions of anarchists who collectively share compute and collaborate on modifications to the weights. Even if it's too expensive to ru
72.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
I thought Moore's Law came to an end in the last decade? Certainly the transistors/chip or transistors/$ or flops/$ have not been progressing at the same exponential rate as during 1970-2010. There is still progress, but
73.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
> Practically no one is against hard science research, properly conducted Eh, I grew up conservative evangelical, and they were pretty much always going to have a problem with research in evolution and astronomy. Same goes for the fossil
74.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
> this is wildly incorrect in an academic context. If I'm using ResNets, I should cite the original ResNet paper, even if I haven't read it. Eh, I think the correct answer is: read it, then cite it. You're not really sup
75.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
trees over roads, parking lots, etc. But then, as you scale towards higher density (e.g., replacing parking lots with garages), you end up with less space for trees. Unless you put them on top of buildings, ofc.
76.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
I’d have thought that ‘the free market doesnt make subways’ is a market coordination problem, not an externality one? Meaning, I think that ticket sales can a good job of capturing the costs and benefits of transportation - the benefits to
77.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
Yeah, but I do think you need to count nukes, veteran's health, space launches for the Air Force, etc, also under "military spending". Better not to ignore them just because they're not properly under DoD.
78.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
> you need to ensure that you cultivate the support of both parties I'm not sure that that's possible. If someone is motivated by religion or finance to believe something that's simply not true, and your scientific evidenc
79.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
Alternatively, they've already decided that everyone who works in the field is biased, or close enough, that it's better to just burn it all down. And, yes, this overlooks the times when conservative scientists like Richard Muller
80.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
Well, yes, they should be not-backwards. If you cut funding for helpful science on the basis of ignorant claims, you're acting backwards. If you act backwards, you may get called backwards. You should still change, become not-backwards
81.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
Yeah, I recall that average Irish citizens and Irish immigrants were measured to have pretty bad IQs around a century ago. This changed with improvements to nutrition, health, less alcoholism, and education. So the research shows that IQ is
82.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
...I don't think Watson was kicked out for "uncomfortable truths", but because his conclusions kept overstepping the evidence he presented, and in particularly sexist or racist ways. Again, to be explicit: he did not establi
83.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
Yep, it's at least partly this. I watched a lot of "moderate" academics become "liberal" after Trump's first election. If you're a scientist by principles and a moderate by political views, and the right-w
84.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
No, cutting R&D is the same as eating our seed corn. These programs pay off a lot in the long run, because they're a core and unavoidable part of technological progress. They also tend to pay off big in societal progress. As an e
85.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
tbf, it's unclear to me at this point how much of that is going to represent $$ out of the American pocket. A lot of it is "guarantees of financing and investment" by other gulf states. Probably we're subsidizing Iran re
86.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
guess you also listed some non-rounding-errors
87.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
[citation needed] Defense (DoD) budget is $900 billion now. When you also account for veterans' health, expenditures on nukes (goes to the DoEnergy), military stuff in space (goes to NASA), border protection, etc., the total national s
88.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
Heard from some friends & accomplished scientists at a national lab: "if we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research"
89.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
Eh? I've got a relative who moved there after years of working there on a visa under a mid-6-figures job. Did you know: some people like Canada?
90.
by Windchaser 4mo ago
This is really vague. Are you saying that some of the commonly-accepted science is significantly incorrect? If so, which parts?

More ›