simondw

7 ms·

91.
by simondw 6y ago
On the other hand, the fact that we're talking about subjective experience means that one of these must be true: 1) it doesn't exist, but our brains are thinking and talking about it 2) it exists, but it's overdetermined: it
92.
by simondw 6y ago
> The office involved should be charged or arrested based on the circumstances and evidence Obviously. But they weren't, and given precedent, probably never would have been. That's why this is happening.
93.
by simondw 6y ago
The context you seem to be missing is that, unlike death itself, COVID-19 has been with the human race for only a few months. Its introduction into our population was an event that we observed more or less directly. We can learn from that,
94.
by simondw 6y ago
> The measures we are taking will kill far more than the disease itself You're comparing (cost of measures) to (cost of disease after taking those measures), which is a nonsensical comparison. It's like saying "parachutes
95.
by simondw 6y ago
Sure, but maybe a reasonable default context would be "a human currently living on Earth is asking the question."
96.
by simondw 6y ago
How many more people would have to have died for you to feel the response was appropriate? Surely the number of lives saved is the correct thing to measure against the economic cost. It's hard to compare against a counterfactual, of
97.
by simondw 7y ago
I don't think your scenario is as different as you think. Depending on what we mean by "back to life", a trick is in fact much more likely than something thought to be biologically impossible. If we eliminated the possibility
98.
by simondw 7y ago
Yes. It's called ECMO: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extracorporeal_membrane_oxygen...
99.
by simondw 7y ago
Grouping related things together isn't necessarily conflating. I don't think the article is trying to say "18% of workers have basically lost their jobs!!!", but rather to give a sense of how many people's incomes a
100.
by simondw 7y ago
I think the problem is twofold. 1) Our brains are bad at acting on information that contradicts our gut feelings, which are usually based on things we perceive directly. If we don't see direct evidence of a threat, we might take some m
101.
by simondw 7y ago
I'm guessing that in this context, "useful" is intended to mean "useful in conveying information" rather than "useful in accomplishing some goal." It sounds a bit like saying "you're only human&q
102.
by simondw 7y ago
What does an IPO have to do with whether a platform is social? From your analysis, it almost sounds like HN is more social than the behavior-hacking money machines. The big companies might own the most commonly used social media, but that
103.
by simondw 7y ago
> Similarities don't mean anything ...beyond the similarities themselves, that is. > It's the differences that count to distinguish things By definition. But then again, if I'm comparing the impact of two dictators, it&
104.
by simondw 7y ago
I can't help but find it vaguely amusing that you seem to find "toilet" (literally, "small cloth") and "lavatory" ("washing place") somehow more correct than "bathroom." Also, people us
105.
by simondw 7y ago
Depends on the situation in which we encounter the aliens. If wolves were building interplanetary spacecraft, we'd have a hard time saying they weren't intelligent.
106.
by simondw 7y ago
But now there are two ways to do assignment. That's not very pythonic, is it?
107.
by simondw 7y ago
Right, and then they'll point you at an equally poignant story about a kid who was vaccinated and then was diagnosed with autism. If the hypothetical anti-vaxxer didn't already know that life-threatening diseases exist and can be
108.
by simondw 7y ago
It's not meaningless; you just don't know the meaning. If I were on a website where a good fraction of the people were Francophones, and someone slipped in the word "beaucoup", I wouldn't complain that it's utt
109.
by simondw 9y ago
> I don't mean to be offensive Reading this immediately makes me read the rest of your comment as much more negative and critical than I would otherwise. That's not necessary. If you want to ask a question about stop signs in t
110.
by simondw 10y ago
More like, if someone steals $6 out of your pocket, would you trust them to keep walking behind you?
111.
by simondw 10y ago
I take it you stand behind the "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" argument?