wissler

15 ms·

91.
by wissler 13y ago
I explicitly stated that a libertarian case could be made for regulating nuclear power, on the grounds that it constitutes a threat. Is there a reason you're choosing to ignore that fact? "I reject the implication that government
92.
by wissler 13y ago
Whether most agree or disagree is irrelevant. It is immoral to attack someone who has not attacked or threatened you. It is likewise immoral to advocate attacking innocents. Take that how you will. Nuclear power is a special case since
93.
by wissler 13y ago
I think you're confused. Actually, you're just misinformed, e.g. read this: http://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/priceanders...
94.
by wissler 13y ago
"I think there are similarities between the nuclear power debate and the GMO debate. In both case, I think it's stupid to be fundamentally opposed to the technology/research itself. But in both case, the industry is so fucke
95.
by wissler 13y ago
Lex malla, lex nulla.
96.
by wissler 13y ago
When you were a child, would any of you have believed that one day in the early 21st century, you would wake up in a world where your own government spies on each and every single citizen... A child with a proper education in history woul
97.
by wissler 13y ago
You're the one who can't use words properly. A "gap" is a generic term, an "airtight gap" is a type of "gap." You're quibbling about words, you're on the wrong side of the quibble, and on to
98.
by wissler 13y ago
Consistency across scales of abstraction, amazingly rare...
99.
by wissler 13y ago
So, it's good to think differently than you and challenge your pre-existing assumptions, but just not regarding when to downvote? ;)
100.
by wissler 13y ago
The reason to downvote you is not because your rationale is necessarily "illogical", but because 1) it's speculation, and 2) it's better to spend your speculative effort defending and supporting the good guys than the ba
101.
by wissler 13y ago
Your trifling quibbles don't matter. It doesn't matter what you call it or how you implement it, my original point stands. The Dr. is suffering from a lack of imagination.
102.
by wissler 13y ago
Because the tube must be maintained at a near-vacuum, it can't be "gaps" -- it would have to be expanding slip joints Well you're doing to me what the Dr. is doing to Musk. Obviously they'd have to be airtight, bu
103.
by wissler 13y ago
I am no expert on such things, but it seems to me that Dr. Drang has a very basic misunderstanding or lack of imagination. He seems to assume that Musk intended for each section of tube to physically be touching, when instead Musk intended
104.
by wissler 13y ago
It's not economic at all, it's political (whether it is intentional or not is a different question). In evidence is all the violence that is brought to bear in sustaining the current economic status quo (i.e. the piles of regulati
105.
by wissler 13y ago
Side question: with $12M of equipment, wouldn't it make sense to have an independent limiter of some kind to prevent damage? Is there something about this equipment that makes that greater than $12M in difficulty? Because relying on ha
106.
by wissler 13y ago
Why quit cold turkey and invite suffering, when all you have to do is reduce your intake over time?
107.
by wissler 13y ago
Exactly -- the police screw up and the judges let them off the hook, while if a citizen makes an equivalent error he's convicted of murder and sent away for life.
108.
by wissler 13y ago
People aren't using the first amendment while they can -- and by that I mean that they 1) do not engage each other on politics nearly enough; 2) when they do, they are generally not very honest or rational. In short -- on average and w
109.
by wissler 13y ago
He's right that people think they can have an opinion on politics or religion without actually knowing anything, but this is something they are taught to believe in school and church. It's a result of widespread poor upbringing an
110.
by wissler 13y ago
1) What does that have to do with the subject at hand? 2) Citation?
111.
by wissler 13y ago
"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine
112.
by wissler 13y ago
This is a really fantastic essay, but I was disappointed by this: The people who are really good at acting formidable often solve this problem by giving investors the impression that while no investors have committed yet, several are about
113.
by wissler 13y ago
My my, what an unpatriotic attitude.
114.
by wissler 13y ago
The trouble with this is that no centralized analysis can determine what "qualified" actually means; only an individual employer can determine that. So if they say there are no qualified engineers then that's the end of discu
115.
by wissler 13y ago
At some point people need to wake up enough such that they recognize the equivalence of being surprised and being naive, which is an important reason they've trusted government to its own devices for far too long.
116.
by wissler 13y ago
I don't see the point of your question. What you consent to is what you consent to. You can consent to just one pizza or you can consent to a succession, it's up to you.
117.
by wissler 13y ago
It's a good suggestion but his evident premise that "licensed teachers" uniformly do better is either extremely naive or speaks to an agenda on his part.
118.
by wissler 13y ago
Well first of all you didn't point any fundamental flaw in reasoning; you engaged in it yourself. Second of all this is just pure ad hominem. On top of that you've failed to respond to the point at hand, i.e. my underscoring of yo
119.
by wissler 13y ago
This is actually a very deep question. To oversimplify, yes, the difference is that you've consented to the rules. Imagine you and your friends decide to order a pizza and agree to vote on the toppings. That's fine. But it's
120.
by wissler 13y ago
HOA's can be formed based on a premise that democratic procedures govern the creation/modification of new rules.

More ›