cortic

27 ms·

271.
by cortic 7y ago
I'll tell you the difference since you asked; If you wanted to eat a hamburger, and i handed it to you with my hand.. you would eat it... I really hope i don't need to finish that thought for you. I swear this is where the saying
272.
by cortic 7y ago
Sure, but how much of that is down to the socialist things i listed, and how much is down to Wall street? Even if you believe mostly the latter; The success of the financial services of Wall St and private enterprise in the US is a direct
273.
by cortic 7y ago
People come to the US for its socialist school system, or the security of its socialist policing and fire services. Or the benefits of a socialist military industrial complex that prop up half the country and invest huge amounts into social
274.
by cortic 7y ago
Doing okay so far -Bill Gates
275.
by cortic 8y ago
>No company or platform owes them anything. This is discrimination of opinion , strange as that sounds. There is a reason we don't see signs up like; 'No Blacks', 'No Gays', 'No Jews' in private establ
276.
by cortic 8y ago
Just because you wanted to do something in the past, doesn't remove your right to change you mind, that's taking woman's rights back to the 'no rape law within the holy sacrament of marriage' days.
277.
by cortic 8y ago
That muddies the water a bit; my boss threatened to fire me if i didn't do my job is blackmail under your definition.
278.
by cortic 8y ago
The presupposition of everything we do in life may be essentially wrong. >if you believe that there is absolutely no free will, then of course this conversation is essentially pointless If you are absolutely devoted to defining yourself
279.
by cortic 8y ago
Nothing is a problem if we are willing to stick our fingers in our ears and quietly hum la la la . But anyone who wants to square and explain how the common definition of free will works in this universe, still has a problem.
280.
by cortic 8y ago
>Compatibilism(from Wikipedia); They define free will as freedom to act according to one's motives without arbitrary hindrance from other individuals or institutions. This only works if we radically redefine the term "one'
281.
by cortic 8y ago
It wouldn't, free will has to be a product of Newtonian cause and effect or quantum randomness, neither of these things i define as 'me'. Even adding a soul wouldn't help, i imagined a soul existing in another universe a
282.
by cortic 8y ago
How? Admittedly my knowledge of CSS is dated, but without scripting enabled you can't set cookies, make auto server request, or even auto set an external CSS file (that could be served and counted).. Its not something I've conside
283.
by cortic 8y ago
There are plenty animals that have all but eliminated sleep; giraffes, elephants, dolphins to name a few, can get away with very short bouts of sleep. Others perfect the Unihemispheric slow-wave sleep, I've even seen studies that human
284.
by cortic 8y ago
I hate UI redesigns, absolutely hate them; From the end user point of view, and from 15+ years of webdesign, if its working why the hell are we fixing it? Well I'll tell you why, since i asked; And its neither for the end user or desi
285.
by cortic 8y ago
>Utilitarianism doesn't change the fact that it would be immoral to randomly kill a bunch of people for questionable gain, in a pharmaceutical setting. Actually loeg made the Utilitarianism argument 'well known downside[let sic
286.
by cortic 8y ago
Not sure this is a valid argument; An unknown number of deaths[a] caused by possibly not developing a treatment, vs an unknown number of deaths[b] caused by possibly developing a treatment. Where as deaths[b] could be, in theory, a contro
287.
by cortic 8y ago
We've likely missed cures or treatments with this method to, there are lots of nutritious foods that are effectively poison to some animals. New (unnatural) compounds and chemicals would very likely be even more varied in their effects
288.
by cortic 8y ago
Threatening, abusive, harassment even alarm are all superfluous words to make insulting and distressed look better, really, to answer my own question; why can't we have freedom of speech? Cause we are a society distressingly terrif
289.
by cortic 8y ago
Its not swearing though. You want people locked up for saying "please officer stop bothering us" cause its analogous with 'piss off'? We have to decide whether expressing a (legal but unfriendly) sentiment is illegal, or
290.
by cortic 8y ago
Admittedly i didn't read all the article, the flashing gifs were giving me a headache. However; I wonder if this could be manipulated by a bot? Wouldn't be too hard to set up one that posted moral fiber and BS in a timely fashion
291.
by cortic 8y ago
I sometimes blank on words that sound the same, like typing through when i mean threw, and of course google won't correct it unless its in context, so i type something like 'i through a bomb' which corrects to threw, i know I
292.
by cortic 8y ago
>Let's be clear: the best targeted ads I will ever see are the ones I get from a search engine when it serves an ad for exactly the thing I was searching for....I don't know anybody who complains about this sort of ad. This has
293.
by cortic 8y ago
how ironic.
294.
by cortic 8y ago
my instinct tells me arguing this is pointless, because its vague enough that whatever the mods like they can keep and what they don't like can disappear... But just as an example i will break down your last post; >It's not th
295.
by cortic 8y ago
what is 'snarky' about 'cute'? I mean its not a very good rule, the general definition [snide and sharply critical.] could apply to most comments; but what specifically is you objection with 'cute', seems it c
296.
by cortic 8y ago
Don't look now but you just made a decision. The result of your choice, to brake or 'just stop' means there will be situations where passengers die to save real or theoretical pedestrians, as soon as this is established in th
297.
by cortic 8y ago
If this is your motivation then you will want the car to always default to saving the driver over pedestrian. To do otherwise would discourage adoption. Not sure i'm so comfortable with this; it will result in a number of people kille
298.
by cortic 8y ago
its not false, you get to choose, or a choice will be made on your behalf.
299.
by cortic 8y ago
We spend a hell of a lot of time in court deciding what was right and wrong, and when we should brake or swerve. But we have the category of 'mistake' that the program will not be able to hide behind.
300.
by cortic 8y ago
so, ' surprise me ' then, i'm sure it will.

More ›