135 karma · joined May 5, 2015
https://ayaderaghul.github.io/
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/brainless-slime-m...
That explains the weird stuff floating around Vietnam social media (which is a smaller scale version).
i agree w this comment on twitter: Let's say that Thiel & Gawker is a match made in heaven.
No matter how dumbed-down the tone, for me behind it always lies a figured out person doing smt that is definitely cool from the start.
More than just selling to the lazy ones, it protects itself from being criticised by the competent ones. (You end your concern w an agreeing sentence: the point is valid). (It can do this because it's written by a cool guy sharing cool stuff).
What i take from a story like this is that it's not abt CS, not abt woolf. It's basically: "how to become a perfect painter? Become a perfect person, then paint naturally"
If one never has to burden any thing on one's shoulder, probably that one is the burden of someone else. It's like this: we civil people can't stand killing and shooting, that's why we outsource it to the government and praise the army for their service.
Is it hypocritical? I don't know anymore.
However, for now, the narrative shifts to "poking around, hoping to poke the right thing"?
I use Racket & its thinking for research. I think that structured thinking is still intellectually important. So it'd still survive, as there'd still be people sticking w it.
Second, in academic research, we mean 'correlation doesnt imply direct causation'. Because we're talking science (what's significant) not astrology (as above, so below).
For example, the octopus predicts the results of football match correctly most of the time. But as a scientific person, would you say that there is any conceivable causation?
The important word is conceivable.
Judging academically, the original paper and the refuting paper is a healthy debate, but the dynamic of the society and politics ab-use them to attack a whole school of thought at large (the austrian school: less bailout, less intervention by government, less control over everything) in favor of keynesian school (more bailout, more government spending, more public debt, especially in recession and crisis).
Anyway, it remains a controversy, because theoretically one can do what one wants, but once it involves policy and real life matters, it is hard to argue for what method is right and what is wrong, in the presence of so many (ready to b angry) interest groups.
Treatment needs time.
So maybe Trump can sell his presidency, who knows.
For example, in hotel industry, you open the fridge for 5seconds, that charges to the bill, and they tell you it has become industry standard everywhere, you'd eventually accept it that they're producing electricity for your service (even just 5 seconds of opening the fridge, and dont touch anything).
I got upvote for simple jokes, but never got upvote for invested comment. I dont understand why, but meh..
I like the chimp that hid stones to throw at visitors that annoy him later haha
I sprung up from bed, said smth i couldnt remember, and just like that passed out again when a friend got in the room in my sleep. Weird.
Same for cognitive medium (like mathematics, we are able to think in term of mathematical concept to express ourselves better in daily life matter -> we have more freedom), so augmented human seems far future, but tools are augmenting us everywhere. (Augment = expand capability). And the limit of my tools are the limit of my world.
It's also true for other-regarding preference, if you identify someone (your kid) to be yours, you can take a cost for them. Or lovers, they self-interest the joy of each other.