phonypc

30 ms·

331.
by phonypc 6y ago
If you look at these things and see the inevitable result of fallible humans, not the willful abuse of power, I'd argue you're not really paying attention.
332.
by phonypc 6y ago
I'm probably not capable of arguing for the idea of free speech any better than has been done before, no.
333.
by phonypc 6y ago
Depends what you mean by "we" "obligated" and "tolerate". Users certainly aren't legally or morally obligated to engage with content they find objectionable. HN, reddit, youtube etc. can legally remove wha
334.
by phonypc 6y ago
Trolls can be ignored. Bad ideas can be expressed in good faith.
335.
by phonypc 6y ago
I would/do have a problem with that idea being supressed. The path to defeating a truly bad idea is to publicly flog it, not pretend it doesn't exist.
336.
by phonypc 6y ago
Utter nonsense. The Catholic church was heavily involved in the German resistance, and thousands of Catholic priests were sent to Dachau for it.
337.
by phonypc 6y ago
The spam and trolling is racist, but it's flagged and downvoted to hell immediately. I was responding to someone saying the opposite voting trends exist for racist content.
338.
by phonypc 6y ago
> By the way, it's not free speech. The government isn't banning them. Free speech is a principle outside of the 1st amendment.
339.
by phonypc 6y ago
I don't think I've even seen an explicitly racist post here, despite having dead comments turned on, maybe excepting obvious trolling or spam. Implicitly racist posts are usually downvoted. I have seen downvoted replies that nonse
340.
by phonypc 6y ago
I sympathize with this problem, but characterizing it as unique to CS is myopic IMO. Far from every "mature profession" is 9-5 in an office.
341.
by phonypc 6y ago
Well, all the vitamins and minerals, which are also in real meat, for starters.
342.
by phonypc 6y ago
IIRC, oxygen concentration is theorized to be a factor in the large size of carboniferous insects only. Not relevant to e.g. large reptiles in later periods.
343.
by phonypc 6y ago
> the concept of having an absolutely applicable in all circumstances free speech right is not a concept used everywhere. It is as a moral concept. I'd argue (as a Canadian) the Canadian legal concept of "free speech" doe
344.
by phonypc 6y ago
I think using the word "sensation" is even downplaying things. Their skin is burning. People are drowning. It just (usually) stops before permanent injury or death.
345.
by phonypc 6y ago
Different systems. LRAD is acoustic, ADS is radio frequency heating.
346.
by phonypc 6y ago
I imagine everyone who drinks coffee does so because they like it... else they wouldn't drink it. Some enjoy the flavor of straight coffee more than others, sure. I don't really understand how getting into coffee as a hobby makes
347.
by phonypc 6y ago
I think we're talking prehistory, pre-agriculture here.
348.
by phonypc 6y ago
From what I remember, it was more like if you made it past adolescence, making it to 50 was about normal. All kind of beside the point; you seemingly rejected the relevance of the primitive human diet based on their life expectancy. I don&#
349.
by phonypc 6y ago
Life expectancy may have been that low, but overwhelmingly due to infant mortality. It's not like primitive humans were dying of old age in their 20s.
350.
by phonypc 6y ago
Ya it's an odd phrase. It's obviously just indicating the location of the find, but why does that need to be in the title?
351.
by phonypc 6y ago
It's just speculation on my part, assuming the idea put forward by the study is true. Like if humans were to start living underwater, I don't think there would be evolutionary pressure on us to lose our intelligence. More speculat
352.
by phonypc 6y ago
Hypothetically, some level of intelligence could still be useful in the ocean despite the ocean not providing sufficient pressure for that intelligence to develop.
353.
by phonypc 6y ago
No. The argument being made in the article is that living on land provides stimulus for developing intelligence that living in the ocean doesn't. Dolphins and humans have a history of land-living. "Sea creatures," in context,
354.
by phonypc 6y ago
Only if you ignore context. The point is they have an evolutionary history of land-living. Fish don't. Nobody is trying to say they secretly sprout legs and spend most of their time on land.
355.
by phonypc 6y ago
Evolutionarily speaking, as was qualified, not really. They're more closely related to deer, pigs, camels and the like than anything else in the sea.
356.
by phonypc 6y ago
There's an idea out there, no idea how true, that what most first-worlders call hunger isn't even really hunger. More like withdrawal symptoms from food addiction. The hunger that comes back when you're really malnourished is
357.
by phonypc 6y ago
That's either some strangely fatty cereal, or it's already factoring in some milk. 45g of pure sugar is only 180 kcal.
358.
by phonypc 6y ago
Fish and reptile aren't comparable terms to dinosaur. They started as colloquial terms and (as colloquially used) refer to groups based on traits, not phylogeny. Humans actually are not evolved from the phylogenetic group closest in
359.
by phonypc 6y ago
I don't think that works. The lay persons definition is necessarily derived from the scientific one. "Dinosaur" wouldn't exist as a word or concept without scientific study. Sorry to keep bringing up the same analogy, bu
360.
by phonypc 6y ago
I don't think "birds evolved from dinosaurs" is incorrect per se, but it evokes a common misconception of what dinosaurs are, so you get people responding "birds are dinosaurs." Consider by analogy "humans ev

More ›