w0de0

Yeah - let’s give the moronic narcissist a second chance, since he was stymied by entrenched republican institutions and own incompetence the first time. It is only fair!

While we’re at it, let’s do away with voting. Much less polarizing if we stop asking the demos to endorse a government.

Perhaps one wants to be told what they - the paper as institution, to include both owners and editorial staff - think. What values do they hold, and why? These inform their reporting content and choices.

Moreover, no one thinks well in isolation. Others’ ideas challenge and inform one’s own. To engage, to converse, to question: this is not being told what to think, but rather a catalyst of unique thought. Else why are you posting here?

“Spell backwards, forwards.”

Few people know that the first president was Peyton Randolph.

There are no other phenomena which we accept as real - where “accept as real” is an ability to correctly predict and manipulate, ie, create technology - based purely on qualia. This is the essence of physicalism. The hard problem of consciousness is therefore broadly acknowledged.

“Reductive physicalism” doesn’t need to be saved; there’s nothing else; physicalism is the fundamental philosophy of science, the prerequisite for a functional, predictive physics.

Consciousness is the quandary, not physicality.

The stock market has no house. Every winner is an investor.

Granted, retail investors lose more often than they win - but there’s no incentive of the market that ensures this - merely asymmetry of information. In contrast, commercial gambling can _only_ work if the house always wins.

This isn’t belied by peer-to-peer gambling (save for non-commercial instances, like a poker game among friends), since in these cases the facilitator will take an exorbitant cut.

Moreover, the stock market serves an ethically legitimate purpose - the efficient allocation of capital. Not so gambling.

Women also, statistically, commit fewer crimes and far fewer violent crimes. One might reasonably suppose that the statistical output matches the input. (I would also be unsurprised if they were more likely to cooperate, and to plead guilty.) This holistic perspective is less compatible with instinctive misogyny, however.

As a rule, I avoid any text which, on the internet, purports to explicate the meaning of some work of art, high or low.

Even before large language models began remixing this drivel, it was drivel. There is no part of youtube more accursed than those videos which wish to tell me what some film or discerning work “means.”

One must elucidate such, if such exists, in oneself, and in the discussions of true critics. Never from that mumbling middlebrowery now being remixed into nonsense lowbrowery.

Exceptional parties on this and the other village islands of San Blas. The Kuna are a short and welcoming people. Fishing (some of them can free dive to great depths), coconuts, cocaine, and tourism are their income.

Though communities exist along the cost and in Panamá, these 300 or so small islands - the Kuna Yala - are their homeland. All are mere meters above sea level. Their loss will be the eventual end of the Kuna, I fear.

I may very well be mistaken.

By poorly edited I mean there is much heedless verbosity, rather than many grammatical errors. An under-appreciated job of the editor is trimming and tightening, chasing out the dry chaff.

I’m sure to be in the minority in finding this fellow’s writing poorly edited and roundly devoid of incisive insight. I’m being droned at by a textbook whose author has an italics fetish (lest I miss his point in a deluge of exposition - emphasis need not be emphasized were it not drowning).

It’s inevitable one learns, but I long to read a scholar with a little style and rather more respect for his audience’s basic knowledge. Informed and informative, yes; erudite or pithy, he is most certainly not. Given a Gordian Knot this author would spend four years quite precisely untying it, never once noticing the sword he daily affixes to his hip.

In our present marvelous age of information, instructions for painless suicide abound. In societies which grant primacy to the rights of individuals to live and die as they see fit - that is, in which there is a degree of free speech - these resources are easily accessible.

I do believe death is unjust, though not an invalid solution. Death is the fundamental injustice of existence. That something is natural does not make it just. The quest to vanquish death is a perpetual motif in recorded history, across cultures, and a recurrent religious fantasy.

No, I’m not an advocate of suffering. I’m a skeptic of the state’s role in its ultimate antidote. As a cadaver may not be incarcerated productively, I question if one’s right to death is - or can be - denied.

Moreover, is not assisted dying treated as a privilege, rather than a right? Like a driver’s license, one must apply. It is alienable.

Is it not dystopian for the apparatus of state to be involved in suicide? Is killing not a gross violation of the Hippocratic Oath?

Assisted dying seems an evil thing to me - all the more so because suicide is feasible without society’s involvement and encouragement. One worries that the state and doctors will at some point go from saying “you may” to saying “you should.”

Your response made me reconsider two of my claims. Evolution _can_ provide a teleology of both humankind and of consciousness. The latter may be understood as a genetic trait which provides extraordinary survival fitness, and so existence, to the former. We and our traits arise from, and have been fashioned to function within, the system of evolution. The traits, and us, want for no more purpose than this - just as the output of any function wants for no more purpose than the input parameters.

Life, though - that system and its output, holistically - still lacks self-evident purpose. (Which is not to say that it must have one.) Why was this function written? Is it merely the output of a higher-order function? (Involving cosmic turtles?)

In fairness to the explicitly agnostic, I don’t think evolution or genetics are teleologies of humankind, or of consciousness, or even of simple life. These primal questions remain unanswered, if not unanswerable. Granted, a whole host of prior answers were revealed to be nonsense. (I’m sure Franklin would be unsurprised at this; an enlightenment polymath can hardly have credited the common man’s creationism - Jefferson, by way of comparison, was a rational deist.)

How strange to find so very many people working in soulless drudgery in this world where no one is forced to do anything.

Self-awareness - let alone analysis! - is not a part of their or their viewership’s culture. May as well ask when Donald Trump will next reflect on an emotional state not his own.

No, probably not. The word “Zeus” is far older than Greek - it’s a Proto-Indo-European word, and he is an Indo-European sky god, with analogues from India to Iberia. (“Dios,” as in the Latin languages’ word for the Christian god, has this derivation.)

This all to say that the word (and the sacred culture attendant) is far older and far broader than can be ascribed to some just-so story of a prehistoric, let alone proto-Greek, warlord. If I were to look for origins of “Zeus,” the god, I would instead first contemplate how vast the sky appears when seen from the steppe (whence the Yamnaya, first speakers of this language family). How does one not imagine a sky father in that seeming infinity?

That would not be abuse. Eminent domain isn’t theft, and can hardly be characterized as illegal.

The two filters you mention could likely be implemented by anyone with reusable Github Actions workflows.

I recently implemented Terraform for a Jamf instance. In my experience macadmins are often much better at code driven workflows than Windows admins. MacOS is, after all, a real Unix. And Apple’s MDM protocol documentation is far superior (that’s why features are implemented quickly).

Jamf’s script feature is agent based, just like Airwatch’s, not an implementation of the MDM protocol.

There is a lot of innovation, with many viable options, in the Apple MDM market. Kandji, FleetDM, micromdm, etc. In my experience, Jamf is only the ‘gold standard’ when one has only cursory knowledge of the space.

Is free will something asapient animals ever possessed?

Because suffering is a facet, perhaps even the salient quality, of sapience. Awareness of one’s ephemeral existence, awareness of absurdity, particularly that of pain’s pointless pangs, are attendant to any sufficient self-awareness. Ignorance is bliss, and who are we to deprive another class of being of its succor?

That said I doubt we’ll be able to breed canine buddhists for at least another millennium. We may (probably) leave aside such qualms until then.

When I used it, I was managing mostly Macs - and I never used it pre-vmware. This probably encouraged my flippancy!

Is there even an established, reliable alternative to intune for Windows? I don’t know.

I’ve used it. At large enterprises with sophisticated deployments. I disagree.