genwin

187 ms·

931.
by genwin 14y ago
Everything I've read says it's indeed a tremendous challenge, mainly for religious/cultural reasons. (They don't want to use birth control, and/or they want lots of kids even if they can't support them.) That's why the solution must include
932.
by genwin 14y ago
No, that would be more misery. The least amount of misery is the fewest deaths.
933.
by genwin 14y ago
> Because these people are starving? Is that not a good reason? Certainly not, if/when it's true that giving the free food causes more people to starve in the long run. Less misery is better than more misery, as sad as any misery is.
934.
by genwin 14y ago
It's not wrong. Yet if the handouts and food stamps weren't available you can bet your education would cost less. Free stuff enables you and others to pay more, which promotes inflation. In the same vein, easily procurable student loans hav
935.
by genwin 14y ago
Such stories shouldn't be flagged according to the submission guidelines.
936.
by genwin 14y ago
Great points! Yes the problems are complicated. I'm against giving aid that isn't part of a super holistic temporary (even if decades) solution that could conceivably work. Today's solutions have mostly failed; they've made the problems wor
937.
by genwin 14y ago
As part of a super holistic solution, aid could work, especially when a big chunk is birth control and gov't corruption / dictators are addressed. But today's solutions lead to even greater problems. Search for: Former World Bank economist,
938.
by genwin 14y ago
> Being enablers of dysfunctional behavior is an acceptable solution? It seems for most people the answer is a firm yes. They can't think beyond the short run positive (e.g. free food keeps child alive) to see the overwhelming long run
939.
by genwin 14y ago
When the first world gives the third world free food, it enables them to see their children as units of labor, which leads to even greater numbers of deaths to famine when (inevitably) not enough free food can be given.
940.
by genwin 14y ago
If that poor Indian woman sits in prison as a consequence for having kids just to make herself a living, she may not end up with as many children and others may be deterred from following her example. A food shortage needn't mean more babie
941.
by genwin 14y ago
This assumes there are no consequences for such parents. Add strong enough consequences (e.g. loss of freedom) to deter others. A "well-meaning but stretched family" is more likely a set of parents who didn't responsibly plan their family.
942.
by genwin 14y ago
The real story is, I'd rather less people starve to death than more people starve to death. Mass starvation is the inevitable result of giving the masses free food. If you feed ducks you get more ducks, until eventually you can't feed them
943.
by genwin 14y ago
I don't buy that argument. I think the consequences of having kids one can't feed can be strong enough even in poor countries, to prevent the conception of those kids. Basic forms of birth control should be free (that's way better than prov
944.
by genwin 14y ago
Or, the parents wouldn't have had kids they couldn't feed. The parents wouldn't have starved because, without too many kids, they weren't overly dividing the available food. I think a civilized society should hold parents responsible for th
945.
by genwin 14y ago
I think there's plenty of evidence that free food does more harm than good in the long run, outside of emergency situations that couldn't reasonably be planned for. In the long run millions of beggars wouldn't have been born in the first pl
946.
by genwin 14y ago
They go public and then "BTW, that x% of the shares we promised was diluted to .001x%".
947.
by genwin 14y ago
I think people get confused by the ".org", when it's really a typical corporation doing whatever it takes to maximize profit.
948.
by genwin 14y ago
If you didn't have to attend the classes in person, why did it matter that they were taught during the same 2 blocks of time?
949.
by genwin 14y ago
It would take more than half the people changing. I'd love to buy a lot in my city and put a yurt on it, but the city / voters won't let me live in a yurt.
950.
by genwin 14y ago
I agree in general, but I think most people are genuinely more at peace and happier when they have a permanent roof over their head at night, in which case it comes down to renting vs. buying. They can still have few material possessions at
951.
by genwin 14y ago
What's the alternative? I think it comes down to renting or buying. In the long run I'd say that owning leads to more happiness, since rent can be a lot more expensive in the long run (excluding buying during occasional housing bubbles).
952.
by genwin 14y ago
Love the logo and the name! At the windowsphone link, I think the first thing people should see is a brief paragraph about what the app does, rather than have bullet points first. (I don't use Twitter so can't speak to that.)
953.
by genwin 14y ago
You should have gotten heysuper.com by now! That's a great name.
954.
by genwin 14y ago
I concur with Robin. Best bet is a working website with publicly viewable code. You could show others online the code first, to get ideas on how to improve it. Every good developer continuously learns, to improve.
955.
by genwin 14y ago
"Supply and demand" is the obvious answer, but it doesn't answer the follow-up questions: what's fueling the demand, or lowering the supply? The answer to those is: easy borrowing, and foreclosure stickiness. Actually, easy borrowing fuele
956.
by genwin 14y ago
Seemed to me that the Bush administration beat the drums hard for an invasion of Iran, but with war already on 2 fronts it wasn't politically feasible.
957.
by genwin 14y ago
Perhaps many hosts have the same security issue, but they haven't been targeted due to having less bitcoins. I suspect instead the Linode incident was an inside job, in which case it could happen anywhere regardless of security. Still, Lino
958.
by genwin 14y ago
I bought a lifetime gym membership long ago. The gym is (amazingly) still in business and still serves me.
959.
by genwin 14y ago
Perhaps a better method for less trustworthy heirs is to give them half of a worded password. Say the password is "pond elephant evergreen tennis skyscraper electric". You give them "pond elephant evergreen" now (in searchable e-mail), and
960.
by genwin 14y ago
It (now) says 0%, not 100% secure/durable. I find it funny.

More ›