esarbe

71 ms·

781.
by esarbe 5y ago
Holy cow! It's kinda scary how many people fall for the "we have too many people and we need to reduce birth rates" fallacy. Folks, reducing the birth rate will do nothing for (or; against) the population. Almost all nations
782.
by esarbe 5y ago
Indeed. And there's a good argument to be made that industrialized countries have an obligation to help building that infrastructure.
783.
by esarbe 5y ago
Good news everyone! > We need to reduce the number of humans on Earth. I'm happy to point out that this is not the case. We're already peak child and the next two billion will not come from population growth but from population
784.
by esarbe 5y ago
I gave you the benefit of the doubt and had a closer look at the first paper. I wasted about 15 minutes of my life. > Actually, one of the aims of the paper is to show that polarization stems from political, rather than scientific, roots
785.
by esarbe 5y ago
Ah, I was mislead by the wording. Ah, thanks for the clarification!
786.
by esarbe 5y ago
> I feel the inconsistency in your (circular) argument is not getting through. I guess it's not, since I'm not convinced that mine is a circular argument. My argument - to put is simply - is that we are all part of the same sy
787.
by esarbe 5y ago
I'm not drawing a hard line at all; yes, imagination is part of the same system. And of course it has the capacity to affect the world. I'm just pointing that without arbitrarily dividing the world into separate parts, numbers don
788.
by esarbe 5y ago
This presumes the existence of a category like 'cow' or 'finger'. I'm pretty sure there's nothing intrinsic about 'cows' and 'fingers'; these are artifacts of human cognition. I base reality
789.
by esarbe 5y ago
I'm not sure if that is a good defense of the actions. "I didn't beat all of them, just the ones that I thought showed /real/ disrespect?" It's a abuse of trust. That's it. Any (other) commercial comp
790.
by esarbe 5y ago
I think you might be correct. I wonder what makes so many people - even here on HN - so furiously jam their fingers in their ears and go "Lalalala" whenever you get realistic about the impact of our predatory ecosystem exploitatio
791.
by esarbe 5y ago
It is still not the kind of genetic diversity you need for a resilient ecosystem.
792.
by esarbe 5y ago
How do you come to the idea that evolution would ever come up with something more psychologically suited for long-term survival? Nothing is going to optimize for long-term survival. Any species that is not using all its capacity to extract
793.
by esarbe 5y ago
It is pretty obvious that nobody cares. Most of the people are doing an amazing job of just filtering the fact of mankind's destructive impact out of their daily lives. And others -- like many on HN -- have an almost religious believe
794.
by esarbe 5y ago
I think you might be underestimating the sheer amount of genetic diversity required to have a healthy base population. 100'000 pigs cloned from 100 originals would be susceptible to any number of pathogens. And because pathogens evolve
795.
by esarbe 5y ago
I'm not so much worried about the biodiversity as such - earth will recover, and rather quickly I think. Humans may be a very peculiar extinction event, but just one among many. But I do think that the loss of biodiversity is also tele
796.
by esarbe 5y ago
I think there's a new filter for that[0]. [0] https://media.inkscape.org/media/doc/release_notes/1.1/Inksc...
797.
by esarbe 5y ago
It's totally racist and should probably not be in there. We should not proliferate racist ideas. That said; we should also not to take ourselves to serious and give our interlocutors the benefit of the doubt whenever they say stupid sh
798.
by esarbe 5y ago
> but the idea that one can simply ignore racism that exists in 2021 is beyond ludicurous. I agree. We could also stop acting like 'race' was a serious concept.
799.
by esarbe 5y ago
I often wonder how forcing people to self-identify with one (and only one!) of these imaginary groups is supposed to help to overcome that. Why even ask about 'race' in the census form and why is 'Ñoldor' not an option?
800.
by esarbe 5y ago
Indeed. These are all completely arbitrary, made-up and imaginary. None of them have any scientific basis. We should stop using these concepts altogether.
801.
by esarbe 5y ago
I assume that you are asking this question in good faith, although the mental gymnastics one has to make to come to the question you ask seems quite extraordinary. But I'll bite. No, of course not. Racism - that is; discriminatory beha
802.
by esarbe 5y ago
Can we finally get over the concepts of 'race' and 'ethnicity'? These are both neither helpful in understanding society nor do they have a footing in reality. I mean - what the heck - it's 2021 and we are still taki
803.
by esarbe 5y ago
> This makes intuitive sense too — an early Great Filter simply has to stop life from occurring, I'm not so sure why this supposed to make intuitive sense. Life is a gradient, so any metabolic process that happens on a energy gradie
804.
by esarbe 5y ago
There are lots of Scala jobs in finance and its weird sibling cryptocurrencies. These pay very well, although I myself wouldn't touch those (anymore). There are also lots of agencies using Scala, some machine learning and security stuf
805.
by esarbe 5y ago
Have a look at the typelevel ecosystem of libraries. [0] [0] https://typelevel.org/
806.
by esarbe 5y ago
No. [0] [0] https://www.scala-js.org/
807.
by esarbe 5y ago
The Scala/vscode story is pretty good now. [0] [0] https://scalameta.org/metals/
808.
by esarbe 5y ago
Hrm. Scala has had dependent types for quite some time.
809.
by esarbe 5y ago
I don't know about in Swift, but in programming languages in general, existential types are usually a concept different from dependent types.[0] [0] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/292274/what-is-an-existe
810.
by esarbe 5y ago
Didn't know that Scala was so easily offended. :D

More ›