cauch

22 ms·

211.
by cauch 1y ago
> Fair, but tbh, I'd categorize fascism mostly by the combination of Syndicalism and the nationalist approach to overthrowing capitalism. Oh, so your two first points are 1. people don't like to work, 2. not adopting the radica
212.
by cauch 1y ago
But what the list gives are the particularities of fascism. Your first list is way too broad and does not capture the particularities that makes fascism different from other kinds of dictatorship. The second list is obviously a ridiculous t
213.
by cauch 2y ago
But you are the one both defending the argument and judging if they understood the argument. If it is your argument, it means you believe in it, it means you think it is a good argument and not a bad argument. So maybe in fact they are righ
214.
by cauch 2y ago
Hm, not sure it's a convincing argument, though. For example, how do you correct for the sample bias? You are saying in your article that "moderate" (aka, people aligned with your current evaluation of what is sensible) are t
215.
by cauch 2y ago
Thanks. Would you say that it indeed means that if ads are banned, the money to support news, tv, youtube, ... will still be there? I would think that in fact, there would be even more money for news, tv, youtube, ... as the ad company will
216.
by cauch 2y ago
I think the problem is that everyone is claiming they don't remain in the bubble, including you. Why should I trust you when you say you don't remain in your bubble or that you are motivated in finding the truth, especially when y
217.
by cauch 2y ago
Advertisement get the source money from the viewers, it does not create any money in itself. So, if advertisement is banned, people will have more money, and this money can be used to finance what they want to consume. This is something tha
218.
by cauch 2y ago
It is a problem that so many people thinks that a presidential election is to vote for the guy they relate to and not a competent manager. I guess they are so used to vote for the prom king and the reality tv show candidate that they don&#x
219.
by cauch 2y ago
The footnote is basically saying "I can tell when it's the case or not", which is in fact exactly my problem. That is not the answer that I'm expecting from someone who has self-reflection. For example: "understand
220.
by cauch 2y ago
For me, "avoid being dogmatic yourself" is failing to bring home one very important point to avoid being dogmatic: understand that you are equally susceptible from the mistakes/misunderstandings that you blame others for. An
221.
by cauch 2y ago
The definition of democracy according to Ricœur is: > Est démocratique, une société qui se reconnaît divisée, c’est-à-dire traversée par des contradictions d’intérêt et qui se fixe comme modalité, d’associer à parts égales, chaque citoye
222.
by cauch 2y ago
I understand this entry will not stay in the front page long, but this makes me think. If it would have been any company or org firing IT people who just exercised good security practices, it would have been discussed here. It feels like th
223.
by cauch 2y ago
I think the point of GP is not that media control is new, it is that a big part of media control is right-wing and yet right-wing people keep saying that media are owned by left-wing. And of course, facts and reality are left-wing fake news
224.
by cauch 2y ago
> you have changed the statement Please don't be so aggressive. I did not take your statement, I was just saying that in the situation where there is a need of a correction, not applying the correction is also a justification for di
225.
by cauch 2y ago
The problem is that "let's not apply the correction" is also just another justification for discrimination. Let's approach the problem theoretically. Let's imagine a distant planet where, by construction of our thou
226.
by cauch 2y ago
In your scenario, if they indeed have convincing and independent studies proving this, then, yes, they should not remove this policy. It is also worth mentioning that in real life, we apply such policies. If I remember correctly, black peop
227.
by cauch 2y ago
> i’m very familiar with the arguments around DEI/AA. as i said in a different comment, i’m in favor of limited AA. You were saying "maybe that’s okay, but that is absolutely what it means". Now you are saying that DEI&#x2
228.
by cauch 2y ago
I think the point is that a big bunch of studies really point to the fact that if you have two persons with a real merit score of 8/10 (for example), the one from a minority will be considered, due to unconscious biases, as having a sc
229.
by cauch 2y ago
Ok, so the problem is not that the UK representatives in EU was in minority. This was your argument, that you are now admitting is not a good one. You change your argument now, in your previous message, you say nowhere that one condition fo
230.
by cauch 2y ago
But similarly, for a voter in Kansas, there is no way for them to meaningfully affect US regulation: Kansas people and representatives are a minority when taken at the level of the US, and they will not be enough to pass or block legislatio
231.
by cauch 2y ago
I'm not sure how the 3 points you mentioned could have not ended like this. For example, for point 2, what do you expect? That somehow EU states will provide to UK all the advantages of being in the union even if it is a bad strategy f
232.
by cauch 2y ago
you can write it as long as you want. Funk WAS a free market proponent and WAS nazi. That's a fact. If you cannot understand that, it's not my fault. The rest of your "analysis" seems to be written by a 12 year old kid.
233.
by cauch 2y ago
You keep pretending you know what you are talking about, and yet, you are strongly downvoted. Your description of the nazi Germany is caricatural, and does not correspond to the reality. Funk was strongly pro-market, and was in disagreement
234.
by cauch 2y ago
I personally think it's a bad example: they censored this story while there were wild speculations. But at the end, it had negligible impact on the news. As soon as it appeared that the story was not a political mis/disinformation
235.
by cauch 2y ago
I had this kind of discussions before but unfortunately it is usually a waste of time, as any consensus amongst experts is waved away. > He has shown support for free markets, reducing regulations, reducing taxes/gov. spending (with
236.
by cauch 2y ago
You have the opinion that Musk's gesture was perfectly innocent. Others don't think so. It's your opinion, and it's a valid hypothesis. But the other opinions are as valid as yours. They are implying that Musk is not nic
237.
by cauch 2y ago
The CEO in this example is an idiot, but it does not mean that magically the other side is able to be impartial when judging the situation. The fact that one is bad at their job does not imply that someone else is good at their job. Why is
238.
by cauch 2y ago
That's an interesting experience and a valuable info. But I wonder what would be the CEO's side of the story. I'm sure his behavior was bad, I'm not pretending the opposite. But maybe he also had reasons (misguided reaso
239.
by cauch 2y ago
But the proposed MAB system does not even propose a method to know when this system needs to be stopped (and remove all the choices except the best one). With the A/B testing, you can do power analysis whenever you want, including in t
240.
by cauch 2y ago
Another way of seeing the situation: let run your MAB solution for a while. Orange has been tested 17 times and blue has been tested 12 times. This is exactly equivalent of doing a A/B testing where you display 1 time the orange button

More ›