skhunted

36 ms·

571.
by skhunted 3y ago
The market, both illegal and legal, has gotten very at taking advantage of us during our moments of non hyper vigilance. No one can be vigilant at all times. Eventually you will be taken advantage by someone.
572.
by skhunted 3y ago
There is an explosion of novel chemicals that we have introduced into the environment, and they will no doubt change things. Humans evolved in a world that is not the world we are creating, and we very well might not be fit for the future
573.
by skhunted 3y ago
Climate change will eventually cause us great problems but only if we survive long enough for that to happen. We are creating a toxic world. Chemicals, plastic, pollution, etc. will eventually do us great harm. There is no chance of miti
574.
by skhunted 3y ago
Way to incorrectly quote me. My preface was: … because I'm not saying that my conclusion: And originalism is one way of interpreting the Constitution. There are other methods that other legal experts employ. Which is my only point
575.
by skhunted 3y ago
I didn’t claim this. My claim (later clarified) is that the government doesn’t have a right to force me to use my body to save another person’s life.
576.
by skhunted 3y ago
What’s disheartening is how ingrained car prioritization has become in the U.S. Our communities are largely un walkable and consist of large underused concrete parking lots. Everything is spread out. It is abnormal to see kids playing in
577.
by skhunted 3y ago
I don't think this should be legal. They should be forced to buy back the device of anyone who does not agree to the new terms. I do wonder what it is that is causing Roku to take this step. Are they afraid of someone suing over the
578.
by skhunted 3y ago
A dollop of epistemic humility would be in order. Likewise. Appealing to rayiner's expertise is extremely strange when it is done to support their belief that appealing to authority is logically invalid.
579.
by skhunted 3y ago
I think you don't understand the points I made. They could be wrong but not for the reasons anyone here has yet advanced. This is what I wrote: Highly intelligent legal experts in the form of Supreme Court justices determined that st
580.
by skhunted 3y ago
Rayiner's argument: > You have not shown that no one with equal or more knowledge and expertise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority Your response in suppoort of rayiner is to appeal to Rayin
581.
by skhunted 3y ago
Serving in the military in time of war is not the same thing as "forcing someone to risk their life for another" as I meant it. I'll be more precise. The government does not have a right to force me to directly use my body o
582.
by skhunted 3y ago
Mentioning that he is a brilliant lawyer is, in Rayiner's opinion, a logical fallacy. You are engaging in what he thinks is bad reasoning in support of him. I think it is a fact that courts do sometimes use expert testimony. If that i
583.
by skhunted 3y ago
Your reasoning skills are quite lacking. Your response to my so called argument from authority is to...wait for it....appeal to an authority. That is quite ironic! I did not argue form authority but because I was not advancing the idea tha
584.
by skhunted 3y ago
Hardly anyone defend’s Roe’s original reasoning anymore, because it makes no sense. The government doesn't have the right to force one person to risk their life for another. In this sense one can reasonably argue that one has a cons
585.
by skhunted 3y ago
It is ironic that you don’t understand the point made given what the topic is about. Your logic is badly flawed. You have not shown that no one with equal or more knowledge and expertise than you can give a well reasoned opinion contrary
586.
by skhunted 3y ago
And people much more versed on the law than you and I (I know you are a lawyer) believe it wasn’t made “up out of thin air”. You didn’t understand the point I made. Your opinion and whether or not abortion in the U.S. is a constitutional
587.
by skhunted 3y ago
Highly intelligent legal experts in the form of Supreme Court justices determined that states can’t ban abortions. Other equally intelligent legal experts in the form of Supreme Court justices determined otherwise. Both sets of people wro
588.
by skhunted 3y ago
You’ve pointed out one instance of this occurring in the past. This doesn’t dispel the essence of the point you are responding to. You need to show that it was widespread and occurred in most media outlets.
589.
by skhunted 3y ago
At the local level newspapers weren’t beholden to business interests to the extent they are now since there were much fewer ways to advertise to potential customers. At the national level there was sufficient competition in media ownership
590.
by skhunted 3y ago
Yes. Usually, though, when someone complains about the teaching of mathematics they say we focus too much on how to do the operations and not enough on why they work the way they do. I agree it is much easier to understand why after knowi
591.
by skhunted 3y ago
Your comment is interesting to me. A few days ago someone asked why math classes don’t the how and why and rather tend to just present the formulas for the operations and tell people to compute. Here you are focusing on what the operation
592.
by skhunted 3y ago
Differentiation is a mechanical process. You follow the steps and you get the right answer. Performing differentiation is mostly an exercise in following rules. Understanding the proofs of the rules does not help in knowing how to apply
593.
by skhunted 3y ago
What is it about DEI that causes you to be obsessed about it? From my perspective DEI is mostly about not glossing over the negative aspects of the history of race relations. It's not something I'm particularly invested in emoti
594.
by skhunted 3y ago
I think in the race for AI dominance that human generated data is extremely valuable. The community is valuable only to the extent that is contains lots of human generated responses on specific topics. I’m not in AI research so I know I co
595.
by skhunted 3y ago
In the U.S. it is quite common for people to drive long distances for equally trivial reasons. It’s not that she alone is significantly impacting the environment it’s that this story is indicative of a nation that has normalized such behav
596.
by skhunted 3y ago
So Spamouflage is at once pivoting to focus on the election and mostly talking about issues that aren't election-specific; and it's at once trying to improperly influence the election outcome and doing so in a way 'without a
597.
by skhunted 3y ago
At some point the U.S. will have to either do away with the fiction that corporations are people or just say normalize the notion that the people serve corporations. We should change JFK’s statement a bit. Ask not what corporations can do
598.
by skhunted 3y ago
You and OP are using the word continuous in two different contexts. Generally one would not say that the integers with the trivial topology is continuous. It’s a discrete space with a topology. But when someone says a space is continuous
599.
by skhunted 3y ago
In the 1980s support for Israel was absolute. This despite Israel sinking a U.S. Navy vessel and being engaged in high level espionage against the U.S. Now that support is not absolute. This change has occurred slowly and at least in par
600.
by skhunted 3y ago
Did Indians have a (moral) right to disrupt peoples’ lives with their protests against the British? Did Martin Luther King have a (moral) right to disrupt peoples’ lives with his protests? Most people think it’s ok to have disruptive prot

More ›