jlawson

64 ms·

661.
by jlawson 8y ago
"That's just eugenics" isn't even true in this case (my point is mostly about culture). And even if it was true, is not an argument, it's a label.
662.
by jlawson 8y ago
The point is that it doesn't scale. This community can only exist because it's a tiny minority surrounded by a much larger, depersonalized, "dirty" society which handles all the big problems for them. Problems including:
663.
by jlawson 8y ago
Children should not be on this list. The first reason is baby/bathwater: The reason we care about climate change is for the sake of children; simply denying them existence isn't much of a solution. E.g. You could equally solve hom
664.
by jlawson 8y ago
>these days it should be possible to build up a pattern of when you use your computer and do the update when it's never being used This'll work for 99% of cases. The remaining 1% is millions and millions of people. I wonder if
665.
by jlawson 8y ago
More absurd false equivalence. Simply treating a customer the same as other customers is not equivalent to actively providing resources to a political cause. And yes, payment processors do owe it to customers to treat them equally with rega
666.
by jlawson 8y ago
I think it's worth separating out different tasks in terms of how g-loaded they are (that is to say how much they require intelligence). General life success is g-loaded but not to an extreme degree. As many have noted, it's certa
667.
by jlawson 8y ago
You don't need to "define" it in some philosophical sense to use it. Compare "mass". What is mass? Can you really define it? You can say what it does, but what "is" it? Well, nobody can define it, except i
668.
by jlawson 8y ago
There's an obvious difference between actively supporting ideas with which you disagree (e.g by donating money), and simply not using power to silence those ideas. You seem to think that your response to any possible political idea MUS
669.
by jlawson 8y ago
Absolutely. It's not that complicated. Usain Bolt obviously has incredible sprinting talent. But if he sat around at home playing video games and eating potato chips all day, nobody would expect him to be an amazing sprinter. Everyone
670.
by jlawson 8y ago
Talent without effort will get you nowhere. Effort without talent will get you somewhere. Effort with talent will get you anywhere.
671.
by jlawson 8y ago
Of course it is, if you've got a monopoly or duopoly and that someone has no realistic alternatives. You're right it's not silencing if there are many alternatives, e.g. if someone wanted to buy a wedding cake.
672.
by jlawson 8y ago
It doesn't imply A), but it does imply B) to some degree. To believe a right exists means to believe it should be upheld, which means you should uphold it.
673.
by jlawson 8y ago
"Freedom to speak" Does not imply: "Freedom to use power to silence other people arbitrarily". In fact it implies the opposite: "Responsibility to uphold speech even if you disagree with it."
674.
by jlawson 8y ago
I don't think it has to be the end goal. In fact I think idleness should not be foisted on anyone. It's awful. There are demonstrably many people who don't need to work (e.g. anyone with over a few millions dollars), who choo
675.
by jlawson 8y ago
I think it's good to separate the problems. 1. Lack of rigor. This just means poor quality papers get published. 2. Ideological pre-conclusion. This means the field is dominated by a moralistic ideology, instead of being about neutral
676.
by jlawson 8y ago
It's not just that they were published with "implausible "results. It's three things: 1. That they were published with obviously impossible results (inspecting the genitals of 10,000 dogs while asking owners about thei
677.
by jlawson 8y ago
No, this is what they mean when they say "everything is political". It's a way to justify the use of power to silence criticism. Always, always, always that is the purpose of the phrase, and this is a perfect example.
678.
by jlawson 8y ago
Just read the Damore memo. The response inside Google was "I will keep hounding you until one of us is fired. Fuck you." And Damore was fired for the memo; the person who wrote those words stayed on.
679.
by jlawson 8y ago
>Whatever your moral point, someone has the opposite moral point. People have many more than just the opposite moral point - they also have moral points that interact with any discussion in countless different ways, from different points
680.
by jlawson 8y ago
So whatever community can be the most "vocal" and generate the most "fierce backlash" gets to control the expression of everyone else. No principles, only power. This does seem to describe Internet culture, all right. It
681.
by jlawson 8y ago
I'd love to read more about what you've seen with power rotation, with any specifics or stories you could give. It's not something I've heard before.
682.
by jlawson 8y ago
Lots of people don't have the cognitive ability to hit the perfect mixture of expressing every necessary criticism with sufficient force, without hurting any feelings more than absolutely necessary, without taking energy away from co
683.
by jlawson 8y ago
Maybe it's human nature to only be able to focus on one moral conflict at a time. Now that Google's culture is focused on collective racial/gender justice, there's no oxygen left to put towards individual rights like pri
684.
by jlawson 8y ago
Build a set of robotic hands with human nervous system-like control inaccuracies and delays. Put it on a mouse and keyboard. Point a camera at the screen (tuned to match human visual acuity and eye movement speed and focal area), put headph
685.
by jlawson 8y ago
Depends on what the EULA for the product said and what happened to the company. Companies of any value tend not to just disappear; they get bought by other companies who thus inherit their IP rights. Sometimes after a while it can be hard t
686.
by jlawson 8y ago
This is a dangerous general-purpose justification which allows mega-corporations to manipulate global information flow in any way they like. Now Google leadership doesn't just get to be wealthy, they get to manipulate how everyone else
687.
by jlawson 8y ago
In one system, water is apportioned according to ability and willingness to spend, and the supply goes up as sellers arrive to take advantage of high prices. People also don't waste water they don't need (e.g. for washing) even if
688.
by jlawson 8y ago
Use of the word "bully" here is concept creep. Bullying is a sustained pattern of targeted verbal or physical aggression. A person insulting your work is not "bullying" unless they're doing it in a targeted, con
689.
by jlawson 8y ago
I agree with you but I think in the meetings coffeemug is describing, the first quote above would also be considered beyond the pale. You'd have to change it to something like, "I wonder if this patch could be improved somehow.&qu
690.
by jlawson 8y ago
Heinlein wrote "honorifics and formal politeness". I interpret this as things like saying "please", "thank you", and other straightforward ritualistic decorative words - not as actually changing what you'r

More ›