jlawson

49 ms·

451.
by jlawson 7y ago
Her colleagues think she was the leader, star, and visionary of the whole project?
452.
by jlawson 7y ago
Discussion about heavier weapons is interesting and worthwhile; there is a line there. But we're not talking about that, we're talking about guns right now. If the line of policy ever gets past guns we can all have a debate about
453.
by jlawson 7y ago
I'm saying the root cause is not organized labor. It is technology. For thousands of years those bad conditions reigned. For thousands of years, 'organized labor' changed nothing. Then technology changed, and suddenly 'o
454.
by jlawson 7y ago
"you may be free to bring a gun into your home for defence, but the tradeoff is that you and your family are 3x freer to die from gunshot wounds as a result." Do I need to say this? Correlation does not equal causation. "rest
455.
by jlawson 7y ago
She was deserving of credit. She did great work, and so did dozens (hundreds?) of others on that project. She wasn't deserving of the level of credit that the media gave her when they cast her as the star, visionary, and quasi-leader
456.
by jlawson 7y ago
A million people 'believing' QAnon sounds like faulty extrapolation from Lizardman's Constant. https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and...
457.
by jlawson 7y ago
You talked a lot about why you think guns are not necessary in a peaceful society. Of course, this isn't why people think that citizens should be allowed to have them. The reason is to resist organized violence, which can arise over ti
458.
by jlawson 7y ago
Nothing you said argues against me point at all. You're shouting pre-written talking points which are complete non sequiturs. Please engage in the actual discussion.
459.
by jlawson 7y ago
It would be good if you actually looked at the study because it talks about dozens and dozens of countries. There is no cherry-picking and it is not a one-to-one comparison with one other country.
460.
by jlawson 7y ago
Three massive pieces of wrongness in this post. First, people in America can't own guns that fire '10 rounds a second' without a class 3 firearms license, which is very rare. Such guns are basically never used in mass shootin
461.
by jlawson 7y ago
Under what definition of freedom does having less right to defend yourself make you more free? I understand how you might see the tradeoff as worth it - some safety purchased at a cost of freedom. But expanding the list of things that you&#
462.
by jlawson 7y ago
The case you cited isn't just a civilian killing a cop at a traffic stop or during a random crime. It's a targeted assassination of two police officers for politicial reasons. It's more terrorism than crime. This makes it
463.
by jlawson 7y ago
Your premise is wrong. Mass shootings and killings happen across the globe at rates comparable to America. America is exceptional only in its population, which obviously increases the number of events without increasing their prevalence, an
464.
by jlawson 7y ago
No, they were implemented as a result of labor-saving improvements in technology. Activists always want to take credit, but it's the engineers and scientists who actually did the thing that changed the pattern that had lasted for 10,00
465.
by jlawson 7y ago
If you're one of a handful of megacorps collecting phone location data, contact data, purchase data, etc, this seems like it would already be trivial. They don't need a camera physically looking at you (and they often have those t
466.
by jlawson 7y ago
They ate off trenchers, hard pieces of bread which you could also eat. No dishes to worry about (and ceramic glazes plus metal utensils are tough to come by anyway).
467.
by jlawson 7y ago
Next just set it up to read out the message header to you in Morse code vibrations.
468.
by jlawson 7y ago
Rather odd to list Cuba and Vietnam, places where the US directly lost major conflicts, and places where the US is 'clearly' dominant. Kind of odd to group places there the US 'was' dominant with places where it is, in a
469.
by jlawson 7y ago
That's... Not how any of this works.
470.
by jlawson 7y ago
That's not how selective breeding works. There's no rule where it takes one generation per gene. With a large population you can find individuals who gain many generic improvements in one generation. With sexual reproduction you c
471.
by jlawson 7y ago
>"my point is that intelligence being heritable in individuals does not directlt imply that we can now use genetic techniques to improve the average IQ" Depending on what you mean by 'genetic techniques', it sure does
472.
by jlawson 7y ago
I was just responding to this: "intelligence is a good thing, but the question is about whether there is a set of genes that are “best” for producing it. At the moment it’s unclear which genes those are" Basically just noting that
473.
by jlawson 7y ago
If we understand 'fictitious person' in the limited legal sense, you're right. It becomes wrong when laypeople start to think that this means a lot more than it does, because they take the literal words out of context and att
474.
by jlawson 7y ago
Well, to add some data: Intelligence genes discovered by scientists The Telegraph, Dec 21 2015 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/120617... Many similar articles, not all about the same dis
475.
by jlawson 7y ago
This is only true is you assume that higher IQ necessarily improves reproductive volume in ancestral scenarios. There's no reason to assume that. IQ just wasn't that useful until very recently in history and would have been detrim
476.
by jlawson 7y ago
ZhuanXia never refers to countries having higher intelligence, but to them gaining higher intelligence through engineering.
477.
by jlawson 7y ago
This is like a parody of every content-free guilt-by-association argument I've ever seen. Zero attempt to engage issues, obviously incoherent comparison with half-real historical bogeymen backed up by no attempt at argumentation... And
478.
by jlawson 7y ago
It seems like your two sentences don't really fit together. "Best" pretty clearly means higher IQ in this context. The fact that the practical engineering required to accomplish that will involve setbacks, failures, costs, an
479.
by jlawson 7y ago
A corporation is not a fictitious person. You can't get a corporation a passport, or a welfare cheque, or enroll it in school. You can own and freely erase a corporation, you can't own or erase a person. A corporation is a legal e
480.
by jlawson 7y ago
You can remember music like that too. Take any song you've listened to many times - I'm pretty sure if someone changed one note, or one word, you'd notice immediately. Of course, actually playing those notes while you remem

More ›