richmarr

39 ms·

331.
by richmarr 10y ago
> ...but there's some truth. But what truth though, can you be specific? Talking about technology is necessary to attract people to our own work and find new ideas ourselves. Open source, vendor, Saas. All get value out of confere
332.
by richmarr 10y ago
Thank goodness for that one specific grouchy curmudgeon, otherwise there would be no grouchy curmudgeons and we'd all live like Eloi and waste the days away braiding each others hair :)
333.
Investors and startup founders think tech’s diversity problem will solve itself(linkedin.com)
2 points by richmarr 10y ago|0 comments
334.
White men to women and minorities in tech: We just DGAF(pando.com)
10 points by richmarr 10y ago|30 comments
335.
by richmarr 10y ago
> I think the point they were trying to make is that all JS is almost always used with a run loop. Sure, but criticising a rant about the propogation of misconceptions by propogating a misconception seems like a self-undermining position
336.
by richmarr 10y ago
Ta
337.
by richmarr 10y ago
> The same mechanism - if real - should apply in China as well. Yeah, I think it's realistic to expect growing wealth to affect the political landscape. I guess my point is that self-imposed political reform is a choice few governme
338.
by richmarr 10y ago
I don't think they'd want to make significant changes to their political system. The Chinese middle class is already larger than the US middle class (and growing), so they're already going to be the culturally dominant force
339.
by richmarr 10y ago
> What makes dogs breeds so different is that the dog genome is extremely plastic Is there evidence that dogs genome is more plastic than humans? To my (very limited) knowledge we've not tried selectively breeding humans within bl
340.
by richmarr 10y ago
What do you mean by neonatal in this instance? My use of that word would be 'relating to newborn babies'... so "can we breed neonatal humans" seems to imply a different usage?
341.
by richmarr 10y ago
Perhaps this has already been done, but I'd be fascinated to see randomised controlled trials to test peoples enjoyment of art under different priming conditions, e.g. true/fictitious/absent information around description&#x2
342.
by richmarr 10y ago
> For example, how do you reconcile Christians eating non-kosher meat, since it is also forbidden in the OT? Because they don't want to follow that rule, and they see other Christians not following that rule. Under your interpreta
343.
by richmarr 10y ago
> Not only is this ironic... People holding the opposing side in politics to a different standard isn't irony. To be irony it has to be exepectedly reversed somehow. This is called confirmation bias, and you're doing it too. &g
344.
by richmarr 10y ago
> The wedding photographer believes, because of their religion, that it would be unethical to participate in the wedding. The "because of their religion" part is demonstrably nonsense. People don't foster anti-gay feelings
345.
by richmarr 10y ago
How is that ironic?
346.
by richmarr 10y ago
> I'm not stretching anything. I've just explained how your comment stretched the truth to breaking point. You're welcome to continue denying it, instead of actually defending your position. > There is nothing "
347.
by richmarr 10y ago
> There is nothing racist about wanting nation states and controlled immigration. Well no, it depends why you want it, doesn't it. There are racist reasons to want increased immigration controls and non-racist reasons to want it.
348.
by richmarr 10y ago
> The institutions most definitely are not democratically elected... You're stretching the truth past breaking point here. Firstly, Oletros, said "elected or formed", so you're misrepresenting what was said and then
349.
by richmarr 10y ago
> Brussels have too much power and byrocracy. Well, it may be about immigration but your bureaucracy point is precisely about bananas. The EU has been positioned by the UK media as being a pointless bureaucracy that obsesses about how
350.
by richmarr 10y ago
> Europeans don't want liberal democracy anymore, that is the problem. A little hyperbolic, but true if you add a ton of caveats. In the UK people have been subjected to a 25-year barrage of anti-EU sentiment from the tabloid press,
351.
by richmarr 10y ago
I'm pro-EU but there's plenty to be unhappy about. For example the European Parliament can't introduce legislation... that power is reserved for the European Commission, which seems to use it in a particularly pro-lobbyist ma
352.
by richmarr 10y ago
Well, scientists already seem about 1000% more motivated to innovate with new ways of publishing & sharing data.
353.
by richmarr 10y ago
> Often for non-gun related threats. People carry guns because they're afraid of all the dangerous people out there not carrying guns? Uh huh
354.
by richmarr 10y ago
> I normally see the irrational fear (crypto-racism) argument from people who want to limit refugees I question your probability argument that concerns around guns are irrational. Just because heart disease is the most common cause of de
355.
by richmarr 10y ago
> Even if you were right, you'd save a hundred times more people by advocating for better road safety. Just curious, what's that assertion based on?
356.
by richmarr 10y ago
> Look, if you stray from initial point and keep moving goal posts, don't expect me to be kind. I'm not asking you to be kind. I expect you to either read what I write, or be polite enough to discuss the misunderstandings witho
357.
by richmarr 10y ago
> Edit: BTW, my point was that your previous point is nonsensical. The fact that the State can suspend one right doesn't mean that right is less important. You're analysing my point backwards. Fundamental right aren't more
358.
by richmarr 10y ago
> None of them have been attacked... Calling people's fear of guns "unscientific" based on them not having been personally a victim of gun violence is nonsense.
359.
by richmarr 10y ago
> Most of their reason for hating guns fall on "they're scary". That's not scientific. Well, only if the fear was unfounded. Your analysis seems a little shallow there.
360.
by richmarr 10y ago
Are you suggesting that use (or otherwise) of statistical significance tests in a scientific field would have an affect on your performance as an elected representative?

More ›