philh

77 ms·

691.
by philh 12y ago
How does ngettext handle "Your query matched %g files in %g directories"?
692.
by philh 12y ago
Evolution isn't that slow. Homo sapiens is only about 250,000 years old.
693.
by philh 12y ago
Nobody's forcing me to use trigger warnings. I choose to use them for some things. I don't choose to enumerate all the possible ways that anyone might be upset by my writing, and nobody's asking me to do that. There is a pote
694.
by philh 12y ago
Trite response: if trigger warnings offend you, you can choose to stop reading when you encounter them. Or just skip them, they take up one line in any given article. Problem solved! Longer response: I accept that you, and others like you,
695.
by philh 12y ago
> What people tasked to cure PTSD will tell you, is that you want constant exposure to the stimuli until your brain starts to ignore it, and not constant evasion. From http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/05/30/t
696.
by philh 12y ago
Extremists have an extreme response, but that doesn't mean they're the only ones who get offended.
697.
by philh 12y ago
I care about people's feelings. I agree that there's probably a qualitative difference between offending someone and causing them to have a seizure. But I'd still prefer not to offend them, all else being equal, and this woul
698.
by philh 12y ago
> I find such warnings an insult to my intelligence and a trivialization of people's personal responsibility How so? If an article says "trigger warning: (rape/Mohammed/spiders/flashing lights)", then people
699.
by philh 12y ago
That mostly just passes the buck to why do merge and revert use the imperative? Simply being consistent with them doesn't seem like a very strong argument.
700.
by philh 12y ago
The article does say that you shouldn't apply it to yourself. It permits you to accept the label when others apply it to you.
701.
by philh 12y ago
Note that ESR uses a stricter definition of hacker than is usually accepted on HN. On HN, anyone who can write code is free to call themselves a hacker. But that doesn't mean you have the mindset. And to the extent that the hacker co
702.
by philh 12y ago
I feel like there's a pattern of people who say "I have no tolerance for <bad group, vaguely defined>", and use that as an excuse to be as mean as they like to whomever they like. I don't get that impression from t
703.
by philh 12y ago
wolfgke was talking about people who are awkward, not people who label themselves awkward.
704.
by philh 12y ago
> It probably won't even want to take over. That's a very human trait, and Strong AI wouldn't be human. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_convergence
705.
by philh 12y ago
That's a really bizarre analogy. Pigs aren't as intelligent as humans. I wouldn't expect pigs with guns to be a serious threat to humankind unless they've also developed military strategy, for example.
706.
by philh 12y ago
If I'm reading correctly, the offspring's chromosome pairs are identical, so they'd never get ZW.
707.
by philh 12y ago
I think what surprises me most about this is that the Boa produced only female offspring. Per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZW_sex-determination_system - humans have XY chromosomes, with XX female and XY male. Boas have
708.
by philh 12y ago
> They have no understanding for the inherent and insurmountable limitations of science. Suppose that science can never explain consciousness. Can you (or anyone) explain why science can never explain consciousness? If not, in what sen
709.
by philh 12y ago
What I'd really like to see is new syntax for item access. Transform a::b into a['b']. Items and attributes are different, and failing to distinguish can make your code fragile - for example, it looks like Dict().get will ret
710.
by philh 12y ago
Are you worried that they might be lying, or that they might be asexual?
711.
by philh 12y ago
See also: Why our kind can't cooperate. http://lesswrong.com/lw/3h/why_our_kind_cant_cooperate/
712.
by philh 12y ago
Sounds to me like he's speaking descriptively, not normatively. He doesn't say that Nunn shouldn't have gone down the path that he did; just that Nunn could have been world champion, if that had been all he'd focused
713.
by philh 12y ago
> drivers that actually know the city (in e.g. London) Does any other city have such a strict knowledge test as London? Certainly it's not common. With that in mind, if you support the Knowledge requirement in London: do you think t
714.
by philh 12y ago
It's somewhat incongruous, not completely incongruous but not "not at all" incongruous. You've presented a plausible argument why unfair competition is bad for consumers. But if consumer protection is the real focus, it
715.
by philh 12y ago
> the primary focus of the legal system is to protect citizens/consumers, not companies ... You can't escape this [by lobbying] This is somewhat incongruous with the Spanish court talking about "unfair competition"; a
716.
by philh 12y ago
Are other human languages significantly less ambiguous than English? (Conlangs like lojban, sure, but anything used by more than a handful of people?) Genuine question, I haven't studied any other languages since I was sixteen. Fully a
717.
by philh 12y ago
Counterexample: no_future has a lot of downvoted comments, and vis total karma is (slightly) negative. (I would guess that it was slightly positive until yesterday, and then ve received a lot of downvotes on a single comment and got autoban
718.
by philh 12y ago
Pretty sure that "right about now" meant "about as far through the 20th century as we are currently through the 21st", i.e. December 1914, about 5 months into WW1.
719.
by philh 12y ago
> On a related note, when are we getting genderless pronouns for English? When enough people start using them despite occasionally annoying other people. :) (I'm a fan of ve/ver/vis for someone of unknown/nonbinary ge
720.
by philh 12y ago
That's not quite what it says. It says that there was a time (1200 years ago, in a different language) when he existed with heo , which was female; and then heo morphed to he ; and then she was introduced. It doesn't speci

More ›