the_omegist

16 ms·

151.
by the_omegist 6y ago
Can they? Diamonds are a practically useless product (except in science and the industry) based only on the social signalling [0] they give to their owner. And this signalling is due to their high price.[1] De Beers created the demand artif
152.
by the_omegist 6y ago
'Farm' animals are the ultimate victims because they have no voice. Too many social activists start from the top-level (humans) but I think starting from the bottom-level (nature and animals) will give the most efficient change be
153.
by the_omegist 6y ago
There is no good reason why any part of humanity should be under-represented in these undertakings. So for you culture has no impact on an individual? Why should a particular field of human activities represent equally all the subsets
154.
by the_omegist 6y ago
Your convenient explanation doesn't explain why more and more black people are accessing to the middle-class and above. Neither does it explain why, in Europe for example, where there was no slavery, you probably see as few black peopl
155.
by the_omegist 6y ago
I am not Asian and don't live in the US but i think you're forcing it a little on the drama. Sure the first Asians immigrants didn't have it easy. But since the 70s, Asian people benefit from a positive stereotype overall. In
156.
by the_omegist 6y ago
Exactly. The cognitive dissonance must be painful, for some people. Poverty explains part of it but there is a cultural and familial part too. Society isn't responsible for everything.
157.
by the_omegist 6y ago
So that means there are less poor people in STEM, no? Poor blacks are a subset of poor people regardless of race. If the average black family were wealthier than the average white family AND we would keep seeing such difference, it would be
158.
by the_omegist 6y ago
Well I agree but I see it like a pyramid. You don't have to worry about people at the bottom of the knowledge pyramid getting access to the last breakthrough in some field if they don't already know the basics about that field.
159.
by the_omegist 6y ago
It's subjective. I made the point that you can focus on many things "google does bad" or "google removes". But the root of the problem is that google is not a perfect and unbiased representation of the web. While it
160.
by the_omegist 6y ago
Just playing the devil's advocate but : when you take a taxi, what do you know about the driver? You can vaguely see if he's sober and that's all. You EXPECT him to have a driver's license, to have a good eyesight, etc b
161.
by the_omegist 6y ago
I can "understand" this from a legal perspective. I can "understand" that ads appear higher in the results. What is less forgivable and more dangerous, and what pushes me more & more toward other search engines, is t
162.
by the_omegist 6y ago
That's a noble practice but I think everyone should stick at what he does best, for a better overall efficiency. As long as you make your paper easily available, as another commenter said, another person can make it more comprehensible