You traded it for chocolate coins??
1,652 karma · joined September 28, 2016
No mention of crypto required.
2... I disagree with, in the sense that you should still try to reduce the gap and we arent doing enough. You can make it less attractive to own multiple homes or curb airbnb etc to somewhat alleviate supply issues. It is not a panacea but you can reduce the issue.
Your problems with podcasts appear more related to propensity than inherent format issues - that is, books too can come off as self aggrandizing, fluff and winding, but you have found mode examples that don't do this perhaps?
Perhaps one thing inherent to podcasts vs books is that you can simply skip sections and skim past the content you find not worth your time, where podcasts are harder to do this without missing your spot, etc.
Podcasts like 99% invisible I find hit the right balance, but again, definitely have more emphasis on interviews than pure factual info compared to books. But I think that's kind of normal, as podcasts do suit discussion and interviews better than a more straight facts approach.
Still, I feel the points you've listed, while valid, are not always the case and like most mediums, you can find examples that would suit your style.
Damaging property if the motives and outcome align with what we consider terrorism is terrorism.
But the meaning of terrorism is rather vague, and broad.
If I blow up a substation and it causes blackouts and chaos, that can be terrorism.
Loyalty gets you very little in today's climate. Why should I spend time understanding the current system that was developed on yesterdays hotness?
I need to spend my time here developing on the latest trends on a new solution (learning more from running into the same walls the current system did) - not learning the domain knowledge + old framework, so I can move on after a year and earn more at the next place.
Is this good for the world? No. But unless you want to swing the hammock and work at institions that value incumbents, the incentive is to do whatever work improves your resume, not what benefits the company.
I don't personally like it, and I often see old systems that are just fine get thrown out and replaced with the a less featured replacement that grow into the same kludge as the first, but I can't ignore that when you do that you learn way more and have better examples to point at in interviews.
Jamming an open wound into soil is going against the well established knowledge we have on how infection works.
Best of both worlds, community run, unique so communities would form around servers, and can't be obsoleted.
Downside is matchmaking isn't as good, but oh well.
I can see it already.
Can't just shove them in a house and all good, but its a fundamental part of treatment along with social programs. Without stability it's tough to change much in someone's life.
Perhaps I'd understand what you meant with an example? What products are you finding is too varied?
Yup, saved it jaunty, you've still got it.
I believe the days messaging are a waste of time as I have no clue if a spark is there in person before I see you in the flesh. And very quickly, short time for physical attraction, and within 2-3 minutes for interaction, I can tell if there is the potential for something growing. None of that happens in messaging beyond very basic filtering of basic comms.
Messaging back and forth really doesn't mean much for me. I spend relationships with a person in the flesh, and message not very often, so initial contact on dating websites beyond a few basic messages back and forth are essentially just more dancing around before we get to the brass tax of whether there is any chance at all of attraction.
But that's me and how it worked for me and my partner. Everyone's different of course.
If they canvas your house and see a shitty, easily bumped lock, you are now an easier target and they're more likely to break in.
I reckon opportunistic break ins it wouldn't make a big difference whether it's this lock or a better one though.
I would reckon they would change it for a v2 but they need to recoup costs first, but I could be wrong.
Huge genocides are horrific tragedies but did not effect the development of technology like wartime did.
kosovo, congo, rwanda are not major western powers.
If there is a lot of food, people will lean towards sharing their food, and helping others - even anonymously in a truly "altruistic" sense.
If everyone is starving, people will lean towards violence and stealing.
Does this "expose the rotten core within us?", or is it just saying we have the capacity for both? If we were truly completely rotten we wouldn't share in either case.
The fact is that environment and circumstance are inexorably tied in with our behaviour - a fact that we seem to wish to see negatively, our ideal being a perfect person who operates with true altruism in all circumstances regardless of personal cost.
Throwing our hands up and saying "go look at yourself in the mirror" is missing the big picture in my view, which is that if you want a good behavioural outcome, the environment and context of the behaviour is one of the biggest factor, and is a big target to attempt to improve. If more people are operating in a positive environment, you get more positivity.
Personal accountability, yes, is a thing, but is quite a lot more difficult to instil and improve from within a smaller slice of the world, like an app, and is more of a greater societal concern or otherwise would require propagation of an ideal with a reach that is quite hard to achieve through your app.