wqaatwt

10 ms·

241.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
If the US government is treating its constitution hardly any better than toilet paper (and it clearly is) that is not an unreasonable thing to do. If the current trajectory continues those “defensive” capabilities will obviously be used aga
242.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
He’s certainly mostly right about > me since 99.9% of Googlers won’t leave over this Of course maybe not 99.9% but almost certainly >= 95%
243.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
> Venus quite visibly orbits the Sun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tychonic_system Was already a thing, though.
244.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
Based on data and evidence that we now have? Yes. Back then Galileo’s theory wasn’t exactly provable and while he did get the core idea right he was still wrong on quite a few important things. e.g. Tycho‘s model solved quite a few question
245.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
> learned Rust in 2017 Seems more like a hobby activity than a decision that would lead to any practically meaningful outcome. Since as you said, you were already a billionaire in 2017 any money you could make by writing software yoursel
246.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
That someone with inside information will e.g. make 500% while those late to the party e.g. only get 10%? (of course your example is not very realistic to begin with)
247.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
More friction -> less users -> lower revenue -> more companies lobbying against these policies. Seems like a good thing.
248.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
> we are up to thousands of little emperors all telling the world how we have to think, how we have to compute Imho that’s one of the best outcomes i.e. companies which will try to comply with all of the rules will go out of business or
249.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
Well it’s obviously technically feasible (which seems like the least relevant part) if you want to have zero privacy because every single general purpose computer has unremovable spyware builtin..
250.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
Which just seems like a slippery slope. Since there is no friction and users are not annoyed anymore governments will just continue requiring more and more spyware to be added to all software/devices. IMHO requiring every to submit not
251.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
> chance of hitting the Supreme Court? Why would that matter? The constitution is just a worthless scrap of paper these days
252.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
> Lots of obvious waste there Seems like a great thing then. People get annoyed, businesses that comply lose customers and money etc. All that friction means these policies become inherently less popular regardless of anything else. Whil
253.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
You still have a choice whether or not to use those websites. Not sure if having spying malware built in into every OS is preferable to that..
254.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
Presumably if you can afford to pay for all those tokens the computational cost should be mostly insignificant? Spending too much time optimizing for the 1% of extra overhead seems suboptimal..
255.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
> citizens are very privacy senstive Their reaction and opposition to ChatControl (or near complete lack of both) would indicate otherwise? They could hardly care less about privacy. National governments which have openly declared that b
256.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
> they deserve a fair EU trial and not just get sanctioned And if they refuse to return to the EU for this trial? That means they could do whatever they want with no consequences?
257.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
Presumably he’d get an opportunity for a fair trail IF he decided to come back to France. Or do you want him to be tried in absentia?
258.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
> That is definitely not true What can I say.. look up the council of Paderborn and canon law in general during the period. > impossible that an "official position" would be held and revoked later You don’t know much about t
259.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
> not because they "are impossible" but Well during the “dark ages” and much of the middle ages it was certainly the official position of the Catholic church that witchcraft did not and could not exist. They tried banning it ma
260.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
> not achieving a similar population until the 1300s That’s not the necessarily best metric either, though. Roman city sizes (especially Rome itself) very inflated due to centralized state redirecting a lot of tax revenue there. However
261.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
According to Christian science/theology and worldview witchcraft simple was impossible and belief in it was heretical for most of the middle ages. Witch burnings didn’t become widespread until the early modern period
262.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
High middle ages is 1000-1300 AD. Organized inquisition wasn’t even a thing until the second half of that period. > already concepts of a steam engine And it remained a concept (or was forgotten entirely for hundreds of years). So it har
263.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
Paradoxically we do know a lot more about some of the ancient Near Eastern societies than most states that preceded or succeeded them. There are still thousands of clay tablets which nobody really had time to read, while pretty much all Rom
264.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
> living standards of most Europeans That’s not that clear, at least when it came to the median European. Amongst other things demographic collapse usually results in higher living standards in agricultural societies due to there being m
265.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
> why progress was slowed down for so long. I’m not sure there necessarily was that much progress before that, though? With some exceptions ancient societies were highly stagnant especially technologically in contrast to high-late mediev
266.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
The Roman state was arguably much more modern than the medieval kingdom. It was highly centralized and funded through taxation (most of the plundering was already done by the early imperial period). Not sure the Huns were the biggest direct
267.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
> social and scientific development almost entirely stopped Well it did in fact sped to an almost unparalleled pace after 1000 AD or so. How much progress do you think there was before the dark ages? The Roman Empire was rather stagnant
268.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
It was probably the 540s and the subsequent century or so. > there were NO places in Europe where science or scholarship really flourished. If you define ~800 AD as the end of the dark ages then yes. By Charlemagne’s time that had alread
269.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
> The Dark Ages started when Christianity spread through most of Europe. 1000-1400s AD was a period of extremely rapid (by historical standards) economic, societal and technological progress. Just compare with the highly stagnant (in rel
270.
by wqaatwt 8mo ago
Well 7-9th centuries were relatively dark in Constantinople as well, it took quite a while to recover from the Islamic invasions. It was just not a good period for Europe and the Mediterranean economically, demographically and politically.

More ›