wissler

37 ms·

121.
by wissler 13y ago
The HOA is just an example of how creative solutions can be found, it is not an answer to every problem. Did you really expect me to provide a full theory with all solutions to all problems in this post? Your tacit premise is: "Since y
122.
by wissler 13y ago
The heart of the matter is this question: should the community violate the consent of the individual or not? Coming at it from the utilitarian point of view (for sake of argument -- I am not a utilitarian[1]), does it really need to be argu
123.
by wissler 13y ago
But on that logic, my opinion here would be fine too, right? So your answer "if you don't like my comment, don't pay attention" would apply to mine too. But on a deeper level, your response equivocates between two entire
124.
by wissler 13y ago
What a bizarre and nihilistic reaction. People will look at the app for themselves, decide whether it's a good value proposition for them or not. Nobody needs your bitching and moaning; if you don't like it, don't pay anythin
125.
by wissler 13y ago
Don't put words in my mouth, I didn't claim he was "stupid." To say that one thing he said somewhere is stupidity is a far cry from claiming he is stupid. I also never said that "opinionated design is stupid".
126.
by wissler 13y ago
Nonsense. This is just more arrogance. JSON is code because I use it as code. It's not your business to tell me it's not code -- you haven't seen how I'm using it . And don't go chirping that I should only do thing
127.
by wissler 13y ago
"I removed comments from JSON because I saw people were using them to hold parsing directives, a practice which would have destroyed interoperability." -- Crockford This is horrific design reasoning. It's an authoritarian, pr
128.
by wissler 13y ago
So long as we don't know what our government is doing, so long as it gets away with lying to us (e.g. Clapper to congress) it's better to be more suspicious than less. So I really wonder why it is that you are gloating.
129.
by wissler 13y ago
Actually we are in tyranny's clutches and have been for a long time. That most don't recognize it for what it is shows just how powerful it is.
130.
by wissler 13y ago
> Try having 'no filter' in a marriage and most of you would be headed for divorce. Quite a generalization, but just because you are touchy doesn't mean everyone is.
131.
by wissler 13y ago
It's not "bullshit", it's just doesn't come with the same kind of guarantees that religion does. Our knowledge is refined and expanded over time. This is perfectly natural. The problem is when people are taught in a
132.
by wissler 13y ago
Obviously you'd pick a better phrase than "cipher mode". But you make a good point. I think this approach can still work though. - Rotate the cipher based on the current day/time, or rotate it based on the previous use.
133.
by wissler 13y ago
Here's a simple idea (lacking in specific implementation details, sorry): - Figure out how to add a text filter between DragonDictate and your system. - Program the filter to look for a special sequence, e.g. "cipher_mode" -
134.
by wissler 13y ago
Fructose (as in HFCS) goes through the same metabolic pathway as alcohol, so it's important to differentiate between fructose and glucose. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM
135.
by wissler 13y ago
I think Jobs is definitely a creative type, he had a clear and distinct vision that went beyond what most CEO's would ever dream of let alone approve to drive resources into. Being a creative type does not necessarily mean being an eng
136.
by wissler 13y ago
It's rare that the creative types end up being billionaires. Note that even Steve Jobs was kicked out of his own company, and then later only barely squeaked into the CEO slot, and only because the company was about dead anyway. He&#x2
137.
by wissler 13y ago
David Hume said it first: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant_conjunction
138.
by wissler 13y ago
If you follow this strategy, then in a fairly decent environment, the first thing that will happen is that you will eventually be promoted or be given more responsibility. This sort of leadership is generally rewarded -- at least at first,
139.
by wissler 13y ago
You should do more study on the varied senses of "theory."
140.
by wissler 13y ago
You are not the arbiter of what constitutes a "theory." And it's a good thing, too...
141.
by wissler 13y ago
"Those would not be theories, those would be observations. Theories attempt to explain why things happen as they do, observations are statements that something has or has not happened." You are very confused. The observation is th
142.
by wissler 13y ago
Nonsense. Barring semantic games played by fools, we know the Earth orbits the Sun, not the other way around. We know that matter is composed of atoms. Etc.
143.
by wissler 13y ago
First of all, it's none of anyone's business what some individual wants to invest their money in. It's a moral obscenity to forcibly prevent him from investing. It's not only presumptuous to say "if someone's n
144.
by wissler 13y ago
"This to prevent exploitation of unsophisticated investors." Sure it is.
145.
by wissler 13y ago
As I just pointed out, whether a theory is effective or not is irrelevant, the question is whether it is true or not. So I reinterpreted the original point so it actually made sense, and rightly so. You are not only confused about that, but
146.
by wissler 13y ago
Heaven forbid that the peasants should get to decide what to do with their money.
147.
by wissler 13y ago
Theories are concerned with truth . That true theories are also effective is a side-effect. I.e., you are a very confused person.
148.
by wissler 13y ago
Just because you are told that something is the "base of science", doesn't make it the base of science. Also, read Newton's Rules of reasoning for a better example of a philosophy that's successfully been at the b
149.
by wissler 13y ago
The theory that it should be falsifiable in order to be valid, is not falsifiable.
150.
by wissler 13y ago
Yes but you get points for being introspective, which is essential to being moral.

More ›