jgwil2

53 ms·

571.
by jgwil2 5y ago
So any burdensome regulation may be imposed on any sector because, "If their products are good they will gain popularity on their own merit." Got it.
572.
by jgwil2 5y ago
I mean, if you accept that the laws of physics are deterministic, don't you sort of have to accept materialism? I would think the onus would be on you to show a mechanism for the interaction between the physical and the "spiritual
573.
by jgwil2 5y ago
> if the companies already have good brand recognition, then a label change shouldn't affect their current sales. People recognize a brand by the label. A label change is precisely the kind of thing that would negatively impact b
574.
by jgwil2 5y ago
But there are companies that have already built up brand recognition using these names. This regulation places an unfair burden on them. In any case, if your premise that people are not silly is correct, surely they don't need to be pr
575.
by jgwil2 5y ago
Correct, but also beside the point. OP was saying that it doesn't make a lot of sense to invest one's time and money into new works when there are so many older, vetted works that remain to be read.
576.
by jgwil2 5y ago
> pretty much dwarfs the skill sets of people in other well paid professions such as lawyers or doctors I don't know how you could possibly measure this except by years of training, which would put both doctors and lawyers ahead of
577.
by jgwil2 5y ago
This isn't an argument, it's merely contradiction!
578.
by jgwil2 5y ago
It's a convenient floor for the time being. At some point inflation will probably render it useless and we'll come up with a new phrase.
579.
by jgwil2 5y ago
I'm not defending uber at all - just saying that in my experience, people were more willing to go to bars/restaurants after cheap rides became available.
580.
by jgwil2 5y ago
Presumably the subsidized rides are a boon to the hospitality industry as well.
581.
by jgwil2 5y ago
You can still divide your salary by how many hours you work in an average year.
582.
by jgwil2 5y ago
As I stated above, there was (a) a massive public outcry against repeal and (b) a strong possibility that it would be put back in place in ~4 years if a Democratic administration came in. These both surely must have been taken under conside
583.
by jgwil2 5y ago
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that maybe, dire things could have happened, and the only thing that prevented them from happening is the massive amount of attention that was given to the possibility of dire
584.
by jgwil2 5y ago
There are a bunch of subscripts/superscripts that describe the exact place of articulation but are omitted in most contexts. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_dental_and_alveolar_...
585.
by jgwil2 5y ago
That's specious reasoning: perhaps the dire predictions didn't come to pass precisely because of the amount of controversy that was generated. The telecoms didn't want to rock the boat; they knew that it was only a matter o
586.
by jgwil2 5y ago
> ...white people were uniquely tainted by the slave trade that some of their ancestors engaged in. Is that a quote? It sounds like you are paraphrasing your perception of someone's point in the least favorable possible way. If the
587.
by jgwil2 5y ago
I think you have an agenda and you're shading the story to fit your narrative. I would bet that other people would describe it differently. I notice you didn't reply about the name-calling.
588.
by jgwil2 5y ago
> My favorite moment was sitting there, and having a coworker (US born, but of Arab descent) who grew up in an extremely wealthy neighborhood with immense privilege, lecturing a blind white male employee about how much privilege he had,
589.
by jgwil2 5y ago
I think it's more complicated than that.
590.
by jgwil2 5y ago
Also, for quick formatting a blob of JSON you've copied: pbpaste | json_pp | pbcopy
591.
by jgwil2 5y ago
Not sure why you're being downvoted; this is exactly the mentality of many people. I don't even think it's subconscious necessarily: many people think this is a conspiracy to ensure profits for Big Pharma. EDIT: to be clear,
592.
by jgwil2 5y ago
I think a big part of it is how genuinely fucked up the US healthcare system is. This sows a lot of distrust towards all related industries, including the pharmaceutical industry. Not at all saying this is a true or justified belief, but fr
593.
by jgwil2 5y ago
I think the OP was asking if it's an education problem as in, do people just not understand what a vaccine is or how it works? But that's not the issue really. The information is out there; people are just choosing to ignore it or
594.
by jgwil2 5y ago
It's an opinion piece, it doesn't need to present evidence for everything it says. Take the thirty seconds to look it up on Wikipedia if you want to see all the details.
595.
by jgwil2 5y ago
Pale means stake and by extension any kind of border (see Russia's Pale of Settlement for example). It is not uniquely tied to Irish history.
596.
by jgwil2 5y ago
Just that "tigger" actually is how the word tiger was once pronounced, and there's a character in Pooh named Tigger. The connection to the children's rhyme is that we now say "catch a tiger by the tail," and in
597.
How the N-Word Became Unsayable(nytimes.com)
4 points by jgwil2 5y ago|0 comments
598.
by jgwil2 5y ago
I think dumping is only illegal in the context of international trade. Not sure of the nuances but operating at a loss certainly isn't illegal in most contexts.
599.
by jgwil2 5y ago
Follow the guidelines and use the original title unless there's good reason not to. I don't consider vagueness to be a good reason. The problem with the title that I was commenting on (it has since changed) is that almost everyone
600.
by jgwil2 5y ago
> The environment would be in much worse shape if industrialization had been fueled with wood rather than coal. No, there would have been no industrialization without fossil fuels. The carbon density of wood is insufficient.

More ›