svnt

32 ms·

691.
by svnt 3y ago
I didn’t insinuate anything about sexism never existing. I also didn’t cherry-pick anything, I used the exact phrase you said you’d heard all over women’s spaces. The data you show are based on broad terms that would be difficult to ascribe
692.
by svnt 3y ago
Personally I was skimming so hard by that point that the single disconnected sentence that disclosed the buried lede was easy to overshoot.
693.
by svnt 3y ago
They aren’t, that was value-laden unscientific nonsense.
694.
by svnt 3y ago
This requires a layer of gold below it, and a layer of graphene above it. If you’re worried about shorting things out, this isn’t your solution.
695.
by svnt 3y ago
I am getting tired of this default perspective that “it’s about time men got around to this.” Anecdotally I’ve never read or heard the male term IRL so I decided to check the phrases on Google trends. Direct comparison of both full phrases
696.
by svnt 3y ago
They are probably relating lived experience and we should listen. The phrase isn’t “happy partners, happy life” and there is no “happy husband, happy life” equivalent that I’m aware of. It’s unbalanced, and if you have a partner that recipr
697.
by svnt 3y ago
I went and read the article but have not tracked down the original paper. It is at least 26%, because that was the percentage of studies that provided access to their data that proved faked or fatally flawed. It may be substantially higher.
698.
by svnt 3y ago
I didn’t go look up the quote but based on your version here it sounds like roughly half (44%) had some kind of suboptimality, and of those roughly a quarter (26%) had serious problems preventing them from being relied on. That means 11% of
699.
by svnt 3y ago
These are a few very different things you are relating. As you’ve said, perception has been demonstrated to be subjective, even controllable by others. There are layers of this including individual (introspection and observation) and collec
700.
by svnt 3y ago
It was a very different educational reality back then. High school education was not at all common until the 20th century. That means most of Einstein’s contemporaries, the masses, would have had between a 50-80% chance of a haphazard middl
701.
by svnt 3y ago
I don’t think I get a map and territory with solipsism. It is all my mind, or it isn’t. If I introduce map and territory with any integrity to the terms now there must be an ontological truth that I can’t access but must have an idea of. If
702.
by svnt 3y ago
I don’t understand how you can say you think everything is your own mind and yet you can’t know it. Why not? One reason why not would be for some necessary avoidance of disclosure to you, which would have had to have been architected by som
703.
by svnt 3y ago
The reason you use Alexa to set a timer is because Amazon as a company wanted a presence in your house, and they internally understand and regularly use the term operant conditioning. Otherwise you’d be using a timer. You are overestimating
704.
by svnt 3y ago
I would say the difference is the level of awareness and context for the two viewpoints. The author is more aware of what the other authors were really saying. The billionaires couldn’t do what they are doing if they were that aware, so ins
705.
by svnt 3y ago
It seems it could be trivially disproven functionally. Putting aside ethics we could assign a population to go around behaving as though everything exists for their own experience and see how well that population propagates.
706.
by svnt 3y ago
If the society exists and persists and is incompatible with said metaphysical theory, I think it is a great argument against it.
707.
by svnt 3y ago
> The burden of proof is yours , not mine. That’s not how this works — you have to say that before you say it’s incorrect otherwise it becomes your burden. But I’ll answer anyway. If I am the one mind, then how could anyone make an argum
708.
by svnt 3y ago
I’m not seeing what me being downvoted has to do with anything. My response is exactly what Aldous Huxley was saying. The viewpoint has the potential to trend toward the insane if it is the unconsidered default, for sure. You can’t go aroun
709.
by svnt 3y ago
How is it technically incorrect to say that solipsism discards or devalues the perspectives of everyone else? You think your mind is capable of containing billions of identical sole-minds? Discarding is discarding. If that triggers affect f
710.
by svnt 3y ago
It’s only not an empirical question if you presume solipsism. If I presume we are all in here together then it is empirical, and then we can continue. If empirical is defined as applying only to a thing an individual can assess then science
711.
by svnt 3y ago
> It would seem that a solipsistic view is trivially consistent. Any phenomenon you experience has a simple explanation : that's how it was designed for you. Designed for you by whom? And when? That is the problem.
712.
by svnt 3y ago
I understand the conversation you’re having. Here is the definition of solipsism: Solipsism (/ˈsɒlɪpsɪzəm/ ⓘ SOLL-ip-siz-əm; from Latin solus 'alone', and ipse 'self')[1] is the philosophical idea that only one
713.
by svnt 3y ago
He apparently made the fatal error of being both a terrible person and not wealthy enough at the same time.
714.
by svnt 3y ago
You opened with “everything is arbitrary” and now the only thing you’ve said isn’t is that we should procreate? > The sooner we reconcile our differences and realize that society is only possible through tethered connections biologically
715.
by svnt 3y ago
The best controlled population (arguably the only controlled population) is the one that doesn’t realize it is being controlled.
716.
by svnt 3y ago
Prompt: Tell me you’ve never read Brave New World without telling me you’ve never read Brave New World.
717.
by svnt 3y ago
It hasn’t been disproven. That doesn’t mean it can’t.
718.
by svnt 3y ago
If I find the remains of another person who has been killed and eaten by an animal, should I assume that this can never happen to me because this world was created for me and this person was only a simulation? Because if all that exists is
719.
by svnt 3y ago
You don’t seem to have taken the time to understand my comment. I acknowledged subjective realities earlier in my statement. You are arguing a strawman. The solipsism is the second half of parent’s comment where they state that everything e
720.
by svnt 3y ago
If you are moving this much money regularly using these means you will be using a private bank which is a completely different experience. Maybe some people get caught in the transition to wealth before private banking but having moved sign

More ›