bakhy

16 ms·

91.
by bakhy 11y ago
although i would personally consider all of the above unethical to some degree, i think i could understand someone thinking differently about Facebook Free Basics, Stingray, and Red Star. someone might put more weight to giving the poor any
92.
by bakhy 11y ago
good point. although this actually crosses the line from "just unethical" to straight up "illegal", which makes the question perhaps less interesting. developers who wrote that code are accessories in crime. and the defe
93.
by bakhy 11y ago
60%? wow. people really don't put a high price on themselves.
94.
by bakhy 11y ago
totally unethical, i agree. the part about the investment really surprised me. do investors have a responsibility to study the legality of that which they are supporting with their capital?
95.
by bakhy 11y ago
has anyone checked out the relativistic probes claim? what potential speeds are we talking about? and, i presume, there are no brakes? :D
96.
by bakhy 11y ago
i don't think we're talking about the same phone. -> http://www.gsmarena.com/sony_xperia_z5_compact-7535.php
97.
by bakhy 11y ago
the case with a keyboard is an interesting suggestion, thank you!
98.
by bakhy 11y ago
ad 2 - Sony's Compacts are pretty good. tho, no Gorilla glass (Sony has it's own, scratch-friendly thing), and they issue new models at such a stupidly quick pace, that the Z1 Compact which i have is already not getting updates an
99.
by bakhy 11y ago
the smartphone market is crap. it seems almost like the economy of a communist country - everything is the same. recently my husband and me were buying new phones. i had trouble finding a decent smartphone (decent = good specs) which is &lt
100.
by bakhy 11y ago
are you sure it's Signal? cause i have this problem with my husband too, but it happens with Hangouts as well as with Signal. my best guess is that his android phone, a cheaper LG model, has limited resources and puts some services to
101.
by bakhy 11y ago
what if, for example, Netflix did something like this, and charged a higher subscription fee to, e.g., Comcast customers? though i don't believe this would solve the problem, it might bring the issue of net neutrality closer to home fo
102.
by bakhy 11y ago
there's a kinda funny part in the Daodejing (or, Tao Te Ching, by the old Giles-Wade latinization of Chinese): (3) Not to value and employ men of superior ability is the way to keep the people from rivalry among themselves; not to priz
103.
by bakhy 11y ago
Maybe that's the point. I feel sometimes like the world today is so complex, that it's hard to be sure of any politics whether it will work, or produce more misery than good. So, perhaps on a subconscious level, it's easier t
104.
by bakhy 11y ago
well said. i just feel it is something people easily say, but hardly put into practice. i am being unfair, perhaps, as the other comment here states. i may be identifying some negative aspects in some people with a whole group that did not
105.
by bakhy 11y ago
i'm suggesting "purely rational" prohibits the existence of emotion, otherwise we're dealing with a contradiction. sorry, i already replied to the peer comment to yours, maybe you can reply there?..
106.
by bakhy 11y ago
well, i'm definitely not educated on the terminology, particularly when it comes to economics. i guess we could clear out a lot of the misunderstanding here as soon as we sort the terms out ;) so, just IMO, a perfectly rational actor s
107.
by bakhy 11y ago
your perception of society's "decadence", whatever the hell that's supposed to mean, is your problem. i was trying to have a discussion here, but you're apparently deliberately misreading everything i write becaus
108.
by bakhy 11y ago
no, it's just you keep putting words in my mouth. as i already said above, which you fail to read for the second time - i did not offer it as THE black-and-white explanation. i merely pointed out that going for the retard explanation i
109.
by bakhy 11y ago
not to attack your position, but just to further illustrate where i'm going with all this. > ...rational Bayesians sharing information... setting aside the inherent humor of economics (which is sadly completely lost on economists),
110.
by bakhy 11y ago
do you realize that you're now going for a very emotional attack on my comment? do you see the problem? :) you also seem to be putting words into my mouth. i was merely offering an additional explanation for that behavior, to indicate
111.
by bakhy 11y ago
i think you missed my point, which was that these so called "cognitive failures" are really integral to what we are. rationalism is not generally wrong. improving your cognitive abilities should be a goal for everyone. but it tend
112.
by bakhy 11y ago
i absolutely agree that learning more is still better! in fact, meeting a gray area like this one is to me a heuristic indicator that something really worth learning is lurking behind. i think i took it from Zen - path to enlightenment thro
113.
by bakhy 11y ago
OK, but let's take again the political example - there is a confounding social factor there. i think it is common to regard a concession, in the eyes of the public, as defeat. this drives many people to shout their positions, and disre
114.
by bakhy 11y ago
really interesting read. the only thing that bugs me, with this text, and the whole rationalist world-view, is how human emotion sometimes becomes a thing to be ashamed of. something beneath a hypothesized "true", "correct&qu
115.
by bakhy 11y ago
you could say we "evolved" medicine. it's too simple to regard evolution as something that happens merely on an individual level. e.g. it was always possible that the strongest and smartest human will get killed by a group of
116.
by bakhy 11y ago
first thought: why would this be interesting? of course we are. but then i remembered all the radically religious nutjobs. :S
117.
by bakhy 11y ago
i understand, and agree. i would personally, though, avoid adding it, and add attributes for the same purpose instead. just as the article suggests... it achieves the same without introducing a new class, thus also remaining backwards compa
118.
by bakhy 11y ago
just like the author claims that we do not appreciate the good consequences of surveillance because, when it works well, it's invisible, i can claim the same about it's negative consequences. e.g., if congressmen and -women are ch
119.
by bakhy 11y ago
then this abstraction has sprung a serious leak. the article seems to be fully right.
120.
by bakhy 11y ago
that makes sense. i think an important question here is - what does "return null" in a method which returns Optional<T> do? will it return a null Optional<T>, or will it return a non-null Optional<T> which is emp

More ›