tedks

61 ms·

481.
by tedks 12y ago
>By the rules of your game, a driven executive who makes hundreds of millions of dollars but can't find real satisfaction is more "objectively winning" than a guy who's straddling the poverty line but has everything h
482.
by tedks 12y ago
>Of course we are naturally violent, ...did you read my comment? Do you think warfighter PTSD is caused by social conditioning? It's possible to be fundamentalist towards mediocrity, which it appears you are if anyone in this conver
483.
by tedks 12y ago
Quite not, but as it's written on less wrong, absence of evidence is evidence of absence, and I don't think the comment parent has ever seen a hyperlinked phrase on HN.
484.
by tedks 12y ago
>Further, there's no particular reason to think it was a huge evolutionary driver for us. http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=bV9yeFV6_ckC&oi=f... >People are naturally violent, but we mostly s
485.
by tedks 12y ago
It's beyond me to pick apart another person's relationships, but at the end of the day, there are very few things humans like and seek out in relationships that are not related to power. We find attractive the things that convey s
486.
by tedks 12y ago
It's hilarious to me that someone linking to less wrong isn't rational enough to know that reddit markup doesn't work on hacker news. Somehow, the rationality never much further than discussing fictional AI scenarios.
487.
by tedks 12y ago
>The basic evolutionary drive behind our species, and all others, is to reproduce and spread your genes. Everything else stems, however circuitously, from redirected or misdirected reproductive drive. Actually, it's you who's m
488.
by tedks 12y ago
Such an arrogant attitude. As if you'd be working on what you're working on if it didn't get you money or power. One is the other, really. No human alive doesn't want power. That's the basic evolutionary fuel of our
489.
by tedks 12y ago
>I tried to reach the redditor to find out how things are going, but I got no reply. Maybe they've left that wasteland behind for greener pastures on another planet. With Beyond Earth. What horrible reporting. I expect better from s
490.
by tedks 12y ago
> I'm not playing any game when I make an informed decision to vote for what I think is, well, less bad Sure you are. You're playing the voting game. Your team tries to mass agreement for some candidates, the other team tries t
491.
by tedks 12y ago
I think knowing that the NSA has some influence on NIST means you have to treat all actions by NIST as possibly the result of NSA pressure, and thus treat everything NIST does as suspect.
492.
by tedks 12y ago
...that's Kohlber's moral development, which is in every introductory psychology textbook and has been central to developmental psychology since its publication in 1958. Do all the things you think of as "pop" come from
493.
by tedks 12y ago
Who cares if it's NIST-approved? The NSA owns NIST entirely; if something is NIST approved it's probably a good reason to not use it.
494.
by tedks 12y ago
>Namely their storage of plaintext passwords in your ~/ Personally, I don't see this as terribly bad. An attacker with physical access can do a lot more damage than just discovering your XMPP credentials, and if that's all
495.
by tedks 12y ago
Voting is the very definition of indirect action. Actions within representative democracy are not direct ever, but either agreeing, or begging. To vote with a politician is to say you agree; to "email your congressperson" is to
496.
by tedks 12y ago
>I don't understand this. There are six stages of moral development. The first, which you'll see in small children, is to act merely to avoid punishment. This is a small wrapper around classical conditioning. Acts associated wi
497.
by tedks 12y ago
Um, how is this relevant? IANAL, but the DMCA seems to protect you from liability only if you don't examine and modify traffic. If they're looking at the protocol to see if it's HTTP and therefore modifiable, they could look
498.
by tedks 12y ago
Are you kidding? Who has time for that? 30 minutes to sit around staring at trees? This rendered like crap in my browser, but I'd probably take a 2.5-5 minute break once a day to look at leaves. That'd probably be about all I coul
499.
by tedks 12y ago
Doesn't examining/modifying data exempt you from the DMCA safe harbor protections?
500.
by tedks 12y ago
>My big problem with forcing homeless into these safe areas by making things outside them illegal, is that you end up with "out of sight, out of mind". These programs already don't receive enough attention and support. Thi
501.
by tedks 12y ago
Man it's annoying that HN doesn't let you see context when replying. 1. Sally bought Anne a heifer, but not a dog. 3. Sally bought Anne a heifer, but it didn't produce any milk. The other two adhere mostly to convention (I&#x
502.
by tedks 12y ago
I suppose on reflection this could be a journalistic convention rather than a grammatical rule -- while each of those is seemingly a correct sentence they certainly don't match the conventions I'm used to.
503.
by tedks 12y ago
Abuse is about power and control, not "desire."
504.
by tedks 12y ago
> Requests require committees. Committees require meetings. Meetings take time. This is totally false. Plenty of research material is "distributed on request" where the request is just an email and the validation is just checki
505.
by tedks 12y ago
It takes a serious amount of resources to search for a cure or vaccine; they could just have easily made it available on request without limiting the amount of people who could work on it. The real threat is in 10/20/100 years in
506.
by tedks 12y ago
Patriarchy means womens' lives are worth less than mens' lives. White supremacy means a black person's life is worth less than a white person's life. Homophobia means a queer person's life is worth less than a strai
507.
by tedks 12y ago
>If you doubt this, I invite you to do the same. It really opened my eyes. Calling GG about misogyny or even about feminism has never been anything more than a form of well poisoning. In any case that well is poisoned now. You can either
508.
by tedks 12y ago
I don't think that's a pun. It's not civil to say "Please stop spamming." That's like saying "Please stop beating your wife." It contains an accusation, which is never a civil thing to say. There is n
509.
by tedks 12y ago
As a native English speaker I agree with the comment parent. "Please x" is just passive-aggressive. You see it a lot on hacker news because people want to be "civil" without actually being so.
510.
by tedks 12y ago
Generally you can control for this statistically; the study yields information of the sort you need, but you're correct that it's not totally causal. But there aren't experiments for most things we'd like to know anyway.

More ›