cahooon

6 ms·

1.
by cahooon 2y ago
This seems like a pretty strong claim. What do you mean by physical sensors? How does the body "up there" manage itself without being able to sense and interact with the physical (and chemical) world?
2.
by cahooon 3y ago
Do you have an alternate theory as to what the various pots were made for? The techniques and resources needed to gather "a little fat/oil" and use them to make pottery seem, to me, to have a good bit of overlap with cooking.
3.
by cahooon 4y ago
Anything that happens only inside peoples’ minds is in a pretty tough realm to study. It’s okay to be afraid of it or to assume it doesn’t mean anything, but it would be really stretching “skepticism” to say that people don’t have visions&#
4.
by cahooon 4y ago
Wow, yep. I’d heard of it, and due to the name I never even bothered to look at it til seeing this post. Looks like amazing software.
5.
by cahooon 5y ago
My guess is that they don’t mean audio.
6.
by cahooon 6y ago
I didn't get the impression that the author was suggesting to throw out the old APIs. It seems to me like the article is a proof of concept of new approaches that could be added as new APIs, only expected to be used by people who need
7.
by cahooon 8y ago
Modern usage of “evolution” sometimes conflates “change of the organism over time or a lineage between generations” with “Darwinian selection”. Sexual selection is an easy example of evolution that’s not due to Darwinian “natural” selection
8.
by cahooon 16y ago
Their previous argument—"yes, it's open, but it sucks"—was less effective than this. It also said pretty much the same thing.