vik0

>it should be taught in reverse chronology. Basically here's what's happening now, and that's due to what happened last year, which is due to what happened last decade, etc

Boy, oh boy, you will hate Karl Popper if you ever decide to read him lol

Waterfox is not new

Thanks for your thoughts. I'll probably finish it

>I'll go against the common advice and say, stick to it, finish the degree because it will give you good social mobility (when trying to travel for work to any country in the world, you'll either need to be a specialist in your field with few years experience or have at minimum a bachelor degree).

I don't like being a salaried employee (nor do I plan to become one, long term), but I might just finish my degree because life happens and there may be a time when I'll have to search for a job like that one day. So, purely as a backup option and because the sheepskin effect is very real

>Its not nearly as free to market as you seem to think it is. Soil conservation efforts where the government subsidizes you to not grow anything have been a thing in the past, to raise the price on certain goods, and there is always the risk that in an unforeseen emergency that your production is seized.

I'm from a European, but non-EU country and I used to study law before this, and no such regulation exists here, as far as I know, so I'm good there

Also, my parents do agriculture work so I know a few things about it, having helped them with their work

>You might look into vocational training, maybe retrain in a trade like plumbing, hvac, pool maintenance, welding, etc. Its doubtful that AI will take over these jobs.

I know how to weld, but poorly. I can always get better though, so it's not a big challenge for me

There are no robots in agriculture, there are machines. Sorry for being pedantic.

>I don't know if by "getting into agriculture" you mean running a farm itself, or if the farmers would be your customers, and I don't know if the situation is different in Europe, but in the US, running a farm is almost never profitable, even with government subsidies, but selling equipment and services to farmer can be very profitable.

I was thinking of getting into growing crops. My parents are in that field, and even though they have a lot of work, and stress associated with the work, they're pretty well-off. A big positive to their work is that during these colder months, they have nearly no work, so lots of free time to recuperate and do whatever else they want. So, for whatever reason, unlike the US, it seems to be decently profitable here

Also, if I do go down this road, I was thinking of starting an egg farm on the side as well for extra cash, particularly during winter when there's no work in the fields

I'm not against the idea of selling services and/or equipment, but for my local area and for the time being, I don't think I'd be able to sustain myself just by doing that, i.e there's not a lot of demand to justify the costs of running that kind of an operation, from a cursory look

A cure to Alzheimer's

Give Taleb a read

>Unorthodox suggestion - look at the documentaries and lit on mob tactics.

You got any documentaries and books/articles to recommend?

>open source company

A huge misconception. Telegram was never, is not currently, and will never be entirely open source

You're either (entirely) open source, or you're not. Telegram is not

Lol okay; have a nice day as well

The onus falls on the one making the first claim to explain how the government could possibly have no free speech rights in the first place.

But fine:

The government - all three branches of it (judicial, legislative, executive) - is not some nebulous entity made up of some nebulous actors. The government is made up of people, more precisely, citizens of the United States, a.k.a Americans, not just by feeling - but by law as well.

Americans, as you may - or may not - be aware, have free speech rights as defined in the Constitution of the United States - the First Amendment, if I'm not mistaken.

Americans, when fulfilling certain qualifications, can one day, become part of the government, whether that's going to be a more visibly important position (like, say, the POTUS, a Supreme Court Judge, or a Senator, or a Governor of a state, or a Director of some agency, or other positions that I did not mention), or a, relatively speaking, menial employee, working for some government agency.

The President has free speech rights, the judges (in all courts) have free speech rights, the Senators and all other law-making individuals at the federal, state, or any other level, Governors have free speech rights, "menial" employees, and all others, have free speech rights.

Their free speech comes from the fact that they're, one, American citizens, and, two, on US soil, thanks, in part not just to the First Amendment of the Constitution, but also to the long-practiced precedent of freedom of expression expressed on that particular part of the world.

The government, being made up of American citizens (in all three branches), as explained, has, ipso facto, free speech rights.

Now, please tell me - as it is your turn to do so - if you are a gentleman, how these Americans on US soil, who happen to govern (make the laws, judge the laws, execute the laws) these United States on any possible level (federal, state, county, municipal, etc.) could possibly NOT have free speech rights PURELY because they happen to govern? What is it that you imagine the government to be in the first place? Thank you.

I suppose i was a bit overly harsh with calling 3d guns what I did

> Certainly wasn't to the German Kurd 'Jstark' who invented it and indeed concealed it on German soil.

Okay, I don't know much about him aside from just now doing a quick search on him, but he didn't conceal carry the fgc9 when out in public did he (correct me if im wrong)? And that's what im trying to say, the gun he made - while it is better having something than nothing - you cant conceal carry as you could a glock or any other pistol; or are there small, relatively decently reliable 3d guns that you can that im unaware of?

>Rights are 'god given.'

I'm not religious anymore, but wasn't it Paul who made the argument that we should respect temporal authority and their temporal laws, because it was God Himself who allowed them to become an authority in the first place?

>fgc-9

Isn't it a bit too big to carry concealed for self-defense purposes?

That aside, don't 3d printed guns jam much more frequently than "real" guns?

So, for example, if you're in a life and death situation, and you live in a country that doesn't allow the concealed carrying of guns, and your opponent is a mafia member - who is, for all practical purposes, untouchable by the corrupt class of bureaucrats who are there to purportedly enforce and carry out the law (like the beauty of a country i find myself in) - and has a "real" gun pointed at you, and all you have is little better than a glorified plastic bb gun (because these days, unless you have a father or grandfather who had bought a gun 20 years ago to give to you today, buying a real gun is not as trivial as you make it sound, at least where I am), who wins nine times out of ten?

Like, sure, I've read articles about how there are resistant forces in some south east asian country (I forgot which one exactly and im too lazy to look it up right now, nor is it important to what im about to say) that are fighting a dictatorial military regime, and the resistant forces do use 3d printed guns; but the only reason they're doing so is because, one, before the conflict happened the citizenry didn't have a legal "right" to buy guns and so at the beginning of the conflict they had no real amount of "real" guns to use, and, two, they kill the oppressive military officers and take their "real" guns because they're just better.

But keep in mind, they're fighting an actual war, and don't have to conceal their guns (3d guns are too big to conceal in everyday settings), and two, even if someones 3d gun jams, there will be someone else with them to shoot at the opposite side trying to kill you (i.e not something likely to happen in a country that is not the US, where people aren't allowed to carry around guns for self-defense purposes)

I almost thought you were going to present an argument as to how the government could possibly have no speech "rights" in the first place

Do you dislike sports or fitness as a broad category that includes sports?

I have a very cheap TV package that includes something like a dozen, maybe two dozen sports channels. That's where I mostly watch soccer, but very rarely these days. I watch no other sport, and I pay for all of those channels because they come together in a bundle

I occasionally go on r/soccer purely for goal highlights

I used to use sofascore to keep track of games, but I don't anymore since I rarely sit down to watch matches. When I do want to find out when a particular match is, I will search on google

I do play premier league fantasy with a few buddies. We have our own league

Also, I don't think hn is the place to do research about people and their sports-watching habits, since most people here won't watch any sports regularly. A better place would be to go to some communities related to a certain sport and interact with the people there to find out how they do things; but also, if you're not into sports yourself and know a particular sport in and out and the culture associated with it, it's probably not the best idea to do a startup about this

Yes I know that's a potential problem (along with using things like digital wallets), but I don't use banking apps (nor digital wallets)

I've had friends take their phones in for a battery replacement, and let's say the results were not better than before they took their phones in.

As with buying a battery from ebay, it's still not gonna be an OEM battery (or am I wrong?). OEM stuff is more important for phones than for laptops, I have found

>I never heard of someone who bought a new phone _solely_ for a new battery

I did.

I had a Samsung Galaxy s10e, and I have an s23 now, which I got on its launch. The only reason I got a new phone is because they don't have legit batteries to replace my shitty s10e battery in my country of residence (very shitty European country). No Samsung support, no iFixIt (they don't ship here), nothing. Just shady shops selling shady batteries.

I preferred the smaller size of the s10e, and software-wise it did everything I needed it to do. Plus I didn't have to rely on Bluetooth earbuds when I need(ed) to wear some earbuds.

Oh, and the battery has gotten noticeably worse in the past year and a half, and the _only_ reason why I will buy a new phone in a year, year and a half is that I know for a fact the battery life will become (even more) unbearable, and there aren't any official/legit channels through which I could replace the battery.

I know I'm talking about Samsung, but the same would apply to Apple here, and any other brand.

If this wasn't an issue for me, I could see myself using the same phone for 5-6 years, probably even longer if set up lineageOS on it -- but after +5 years I imagine I would like to use some new phone with its "new" features... which I will likely never really use in the first place

Coding and AI aren't mutually exclusive domains

May he rest in peace

Why do so many people online report having poor relationships with their parents? Is this real? I don't know anyone in real life who talks like this about their parents. Am I in a bubble or what?

Thanks, I guess

I really hope the US doesn't become like Europe (Europe in general, as I know it's not an actual untied enough polity at the moment) when it comes to free speech, and, come to think of it, in many, many other aspects as well.

It may sound funny to read, especially if you're an American, but I do still see America as the city upon the hill. I've lived in America, and I'm currently in (sigh) Europe, but I wish to return to that shining city in the future. It may also sound even funnier to read, but I probably love America more than a surprising amount of Americans (not a dig directed to any obvious or non-obvious group within the country currently), even though I wasn't born there. The US has just left a huge impression on me.

>I think the most surprising thing I've realized as I've gotten older is the way in which these cultural and legalistic norms, even 100 years+ bygone, still have considerable influence on modern cultures.

Oh yeah, definitely. I've noticed similar patterns

Anyway, and I know this is completely random, but I think you'd enjoy reading Dominion: The Making of the Western Mind by Tom Holland. It gives a nice overview of the influence of Christianity on modern Western civilization; though, after reading Bertrand Russell's A History of Western Philosophy (which does, of course, have flaws of its own), I do think Hollnad places a bit too much importance on the influence of Christianity, as it is not the only thing that has influenced modern Western civilization, nor did Christianity develop in a vacuum - completely uninfluenced by the societal pressures of the time it found itself existing in - which I think Holland forgets to mention as you continue reading the book deeper and deeper. Nonetheless, both are great books and I recommend them

By all accounts, this looks to me like it's nothing else but a politically motivated decision - and it gives ever more credence to my take that there is no freedom of speech in Europe

As a side note, this is somewhat reminiscent of how the Catholic Church operated at the height of its power - do what we say or burn at the stake. We should then not be surprised that no longer does technological innovation happen in Europe - at least one that's actually important or has the potential to be

I never thought someone would compare polymaths (let's call it, intellectual or mental power) to people with great athletic ability (let's call it, physical power)

Although thinking about it a bit more right now, I don't see why someone shouldn't be able to be great at a wide range of physical activities to be considered a polymath - as opposed to both physical and mental activities, or solely just intellectual activities

If someone excels in a great deal of, say, a number of sports (which I admit, would be nigh impossible in the current age with all the professional sports leagues and their exclusiveness), one could probably argue that that person is a genius

I find it extremely depressing that people here wish for more experts (i.e. specialists). The greatest minds that have thus far graced this planet were not specialists, they exceeded in a wide pool of areas. They were, as the saying doesn't go - jack of all trades and masters of dozens