indrax

8 ms·

31.
by indrax 6y ago
>There is zero chance that we can communicate anything at those timespans. That is a ridiculously strong statement.
32.
by indrax 6y ago
Someone living 1000 or even 100 years ago did not have the information we have.(eta: to design a society) Technology also lets us afford things that past societies simply couldn't do. We sometime learn from evolved biology to make mach
33.
by indrax 6y ago
Is there a less distorted news feed that shows lots of U.S. cops standing up against police brutality now? I agree that killing would cross a line for many, but last year was a pretty good indicator of how US cops treat protesters. Where ar
34.
by indrax 6y ago
If the info we have is proof that no species in history could do any of the things that would let us notice them, then it can't also be strong evidence that they must exist.
35.
by indrax 6y ago
I think this comes down to some brilliant twitter marketing. They pushed the idea that to cover tweets you need to convey the look of tweets, which at a minimum pushes their brand, but also lets them embed trackers all over the web. For any
36.
by indrax 6y ago
One difference is that nonviolent protestors were being gassed and arrested. I see nothing strange in an American politician saying that nonviolent civil rights protests should not stop.
37.
by indrax 6y ago
Good evidence pointing towards ~infinite energy or some other 'exotic physics' that invalidate my assumptions for the need for space colonization. Otherwise They should be trying to grab as much energy as possible, for whatever is
38.
by indrax 6y ago
>I mean, on one's own time, this seems like rather a good thing to do. This is an interesting example of Conway's Law. If I hire a contractor for something, I'll want them to just import something that works, not try to ex
39.
by indrax 6y ago
Most companies don't hire a second supervisor to watch their drivers. I don't think that's a reasonable standard for criminal negligence. I do think civil liability is appropriate, and uber Settled for $9.7 Million. (it loo
40.
by indrax 6y ago
>I’m no longer convinced OT - and all the work I’ve done on it - will still be around. I feel really sad about that. Don't be sad. What you did was a huge inspiration to me and I think a lot of people. It showed the possibilities ev
41.
by indrax 6y ago
I think it's worth considering the hypothesis that neurons work because they have been evolving towards memristor like behavior.
42.
by indrax 6y ago
I did not downvote, but this is a low quality comment. There is a distinction in journalism between protecting a source and revealing the object of a story. I still disapprove of NYT doxing him.
43.
by indrax 6y ago
>It's really hard IMO to get communicable science out of talk therapy because there are so many variables and it is extremely subjective and personal. The whole point is to help a patient navigate their own issues. Eliza did this fo
44.
by indrax 6y ago
Why is it more bold than the other way around?
45.
by indrax 6y ago
I'm starting to lean more towards a consciousness-first idealism. I don't think it's less mechanistic to say that the second copy creates a second entity. Why do you think that the thinking and feeling is tied to the original
46.
by indrax 6y ago
Possibly this: https://www.vox.com/2017/8/20/16167870/aclu-hate-speech-nazi...
47.
by indrax 6y ago
An entity might have a reaction to the destruction of their original body, but if the transport is done as a single step there is only 1 conscious entity, and they survive.
48.
by indrax 6y ago
>You're really talking about (at best) a new instantiation of the identical consciousness in a new body. That's not the original consciousness moving, that's a new (identical) consciousness coming to life. This is making a
49.
by indrax 6y ago
Do you have a reason to believe that the consciousness would stay in one place and be destroyed rather than be in both places, and then just one place again? I don't think that consciousness has momentum.
50.
by indrax 6y ago
We don't need evolution and death to redesign our future selves. Evolution is massively inefficient as a design process, and gives no guarantees about what you get. Personal immortality is the goal.
51.
by indrax 6y ago
What's JavaScript? What's a browser?
52.
by indrax 6y ago
Back up a moment, this is suggesting emailing a zip bomb[to yourself or an account you know will not open it.] I believe showing intent is a separate issue.
53.
by indrax 6y ago
fyi [7] gave me a ? and floppy disk at first and I had to reload it.
54.
by indrax 6y ago
>just magically get more expensive. It would take magic. The markets for most basic necessities are reasonably efficient. There's no major monopoly on them and it's not that hard for anyone to enter the market.
55.
by indrax 6y ago
Demo CD's would often feature shareware versions of software.
56.
by indrax 6y ago
What parts of the chip do they burn off for the consumer version?
57.
by indrax 6y ago
Find a big thrift store near a big university. Slightly old and decades old textbooks for $3.50 . Plus interesting books.
58.
by indrax 6y ago
I'm trying to find the pattern in your bad examples. It's not morality, they're all luxuries? Would a gaming computer be bad? UBI should incentivise other income and would still be available even to the wealthy. Some of the e
59.
by indrax 7y ago
New York state recommends masks for those age 70+ and those with compromised immune systems. https://coronavirus.health.ny.gov/home
60.
by indrax 7y ago
Some furnace filters claim to filter viruses(e.g. filtrete 1500 and higher from 3M) and seem to still be available in stores/amazon. These should be repurposed for higher priority users. (Preferably with a better seal than this.)

More ›