verisimi

11 ms·

211.
by verisimi 1y ago
Good idea. The grey comments often have some of the best comments, if you can read them.
212.
by verisimi 1y ago
Possibly this is it. Perhaps you prefer tax, er, "minimisation", to only be available to corporations and individuals (eg politicians) that have enough power to have law makers and tax authorities (legally) decrease their tax for
213.
by verisimi 1y ago
Yes, it is frustrating that rather than make an argument, people downvote thoughtful comments as if it was a low quality post. Perhaps the downvoting feature is actually part of the problem.
214.
by verisimi 1y ago
Excellent comment. Disagreeable comments can be sincerely held, supported, but this means little if you do not hold the prevailing opinion with the downvoting/flagging/almost impossible-to-read feint grey text, which is often whe
215.
by verisimi 1y ago
There will surely never be a UBI that doesn't have government based eligibility testing. If you aren't a good citizen (that votes, is vaccinated, meets climate change goals, has a gov id, has a phone, etc) why would the governmen
216.
by verisimi 1y ago
Using the example of a laser - you can have a powerful laser that can burn through metal. A far weaker laser (many magnitudes weaker) could still damage eye sight. Alternatively, water erodes mountains eventually. I don't think you c
217.
by verisimi 1y ago
It's a big difference, but it is not obvious to me that there can be no harmful impact from imaging.
218.
by verisimi 1y ago
Do you have a link or something that compares the power in both? I can't find one. This is the summary I get from chatgpt - comparing Histotripsy and ultrasound imaging | Property | Strongest Diagnostic / Imaging Ultrasound | His
219.
by verisimi 1y ago
But surely it could cause some damage at a lower frequency, power, etc anyway?
220.
by verisimi 1y ago
If it can target and kill cancer, how can it also be safe for foetuses?
221.
by verisimi 1y ago
We don't get to find out much about these folks - their background. However, for this person, we get given a little bio here: https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2019/12/geoffrey-fowler-tech What do we read. We
222.
by verisimi 1y ago
I don't think so. Tech reporter at the WaPo? No way.
223.
by verisimi 1y ago
I think you will have been through a pretty thorough vetting process to get to work there (private schooling, university, connections in the industry, etc)? Or do you think they are there on the merit of their writing?
224.
by verisimi 1y ago
Feeder is excellent.
225.
by verisimi 1y ago
Yes, illegal things are already illegal. But, if you alter the law, you can create new areas to monetise or ways to extract private information from legally minded citizens. In other words, these laws are nothing to do with preventing ill
226.
by verisimi 1y ago
The general understanding is that we do not live in fascism. However, I disagree. Government and corporations are clearly working together.
227.
by verisimi 1y ago
Don't you want ai governance or something? If the last human, political act is to ensure deanonymised data online, and there is then the capacity to slurp all that data up and auto-governance is ushered in, you then just need think ab
228.
by verisimi 1y ago
It's almost like eroding privacy is a shared goal of corporations and government, and that both are fine with endlessly tormenting and selling out their customers/those they represent. It's as if they are the common person&#
229.
by verisimi 1y ago
> What I see nowadays is a complete lack of curiosity. Nobody wants to try to understand why people "go bad", they just want to put them in the bin. That only works if those "bad" people are a minority. It's simp
230.
by verisimi 1y ago
I see the banking complaint all the time, but most banks provide a web site too. Is it really such a chore to use the site rather than the app?
231.
by verisimi 1y ago
It's not sudden, and it's about control. You probably don't remember a time when you could switch/remove batteries from your phone. All manufacturers removed this ability.
232.
by verisimi 1y ago
> From your profile, I'm guessing you approach this from a Judeo-Christian perspective? Perhaps they are someone stuck in a bad marriage but trying to justify it... Who knows?
233.
by verisimi 1y ago
'Building yesteryear's history today' for tourism, like so many "historical" sites.
234.
by verisimi 1y ago
It is really great that Snopes was around in medieval times and can confirm or deny! /S The thing is, no one knows what medieval peasants were doing, cos we weren't there. We have this or that piece of evidence, but evidence can
235.
by verisimi 1y ago
I don't think those at the top of the social hierarchy would condone the 'better system'.
236.
by verisimi 1y ago
> how can I reinterpret the past such that it also experienced a bunch of clownish nonsense? The thing is, you don't know what happened in the past - you weren't there. What you have is a lot of stories and films that bring th
237.
by verisimi 1y ago
Unless you were there, there is no reason to think any of the stories (good or bad) are anything other than propaganda.
238.
by verisimi 1y ago
I guess America finds old media less useful for its propaganda than online bots.
239.
by verisimi 1y ago
Tangential, but any individual only knows their 'anecdotal experience'. It is one's golden source. No one knows 'the average'. One can read a science paper or watch a video that purports to present the average op
240.
by verisimi 1y ago
> And it will outright prohibit young people from getting information from non-permitted sources (of course, legacy sources are not affected - incidentally, they're probably more harmful than the prohibited sources). Verification is

More ›