231 karma · joined May 9, 2016
Bam. Scientific American here I come.
For example, say you have some delicate news you need to deliver to a coworker. Follow these steps: A) Close your eyes, B) construct the situation in your head, C) take the role of your coworker, and D) imagine delivering the news to yourself. It's impossible to do this 100% correctly because you are not your coworker but you'll get more than you'd think from exercise.
This is especially true if you practice step C).
I imagine these aren't for sale, but I'm just throwing it out there that I would prly buy them if they were.
The issue is similar to the one that ruined their custom search offering: it doesn't make them enough money to justify its existence as anything more than a public service. Unless charity is what Google had in mind when they launched the api, their behavior makes business sense.
The mystery-box-that-reads-my-mind-then-poops-out-links model feels increasingly clumsy as the years go by.
PDF: https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/...
I think you're really close, but have specified the inverse of the fundamental problem. The system is generally dominated by seller interests. There is no consumer advocacy on the level of corporate advocacy.
This question gets at the crux of the problem; its answer depends entirely on "what are the atomic constituents of a musical work?"
With consensus around a legal catalog of sounds, you could use reasonable assumptions to estimate a year by which all musicians have a 99.999% chance of being dirty-dirty infringing criminals.
Possible link between enjoying yourself ever and cancer.
No it doesn't, but that's not what's at debate. The fact anyone needed to be told plants aren't conscious is kind of crazy.
There's an insinuation that level-of-consciousness is the measure by which we should judge the importance of organisms. This is an anthropocentric view of life, and a shallow one at that.
> "...the ignorant notion that our public officials are moral actors..." - Yes good point. Politicians are inherently evil. We should just let Walmart run the country.
> "We have to be brave and fight back or else..." - Gotta love militant pacifism.
It would be like federally outlawing clothes to make sure no one in America has a gun. Also, and aside from the whole premise being unconstitutional, shallow, & generally kind of silly, enforcement would be just about impossible.
Once or twice a year I like to throw my kids into a pit-maze, which I've been digging for the past several months, and fill it with various kinds of dangerous creatures and turn on strobe lights.
Do they hate it? Sure the ones who make it out definitely do, but that's life. I'm preparing them for life.
Steve Jobbs was a visionary tyrant who miraculously knew all this shit. They better be listening.
No, but nice try. Maybe in some circumstances, maybe even several, but this isn't THE concern online. Anonymity is not always bad.
Anyhow my main issue with what you've said is how you've glossed over how you think the author is wrong. What are some reasons attributes are a poor substitution for identity as described?