People don't even think consistently, so correctness is an ever-moving target (aka a negotiation).
64 karma · joined May 18, 2018
Depends on the timescale, but it looks a lot more like the hierarchies re-establish in a similar fashion. Often from the same lineages, over time!
You mean "oracles" (from the blog post). Just program correctly amirite? eyeroll
If your example doesn't deal with user input, you're talking about a problem of modeling under known conditions, which is trivial and ivory tower arrogance.
Morally? Definitely. Incentivizing trade promotes human survival. Is it "just" is a different question, because justice requires a set of idealogical social principles to start from. Natural rights, divine will, reparative, or some other. YMMV
Of course it's fair, in a discussion.
> the OP broke down his arguments for why the author was wrong,
No he didn't. There are no "arguments" presented. There's a vague premise (It can all be compared to how most social mammals operate. <--- not an argument in any sense) then some 1 line ramblings that seem thinly related.
e.g. If you think that tigers are woozles, ok. If you want to attribute woozles with subjective properties outside of a label, you're very likely going to die when you try to interact with them.
I think I have a better conceptualization than many people "discussing" this issue.
> That would be the largest migration in human history, by a wide margin
Nope. How many people have migrated from mexico to the US over the last 50 years? Are you assuming that one day 1 million people wake up and everyone has to move because the ocean is rising? How many feet to permanently displace 1 million over what time and how far do you really think anyone will go? You get people living next to live volcanos in Hawaii where the largest island is kinda the size of Orange County, CA. smh
Calm down and rethink what we're talking about.
Which norms? Which administration didn't act differently than all others? Reagan firing the FAA unionizers was a new one.
Obama said he couldn't “waive away the law Congress put in place.” DHS went and legalized a few million anyway, years later. Sounds very familiar, but somehow different?
I'm not sure what you're talking about, but it sounds awfully revisionist.
Not every person is smart, nor does that translate into correct behavior. Even herd mentality has limits.
The items listed have nothing to do with capitalism. More like "things you often find" or "things you wish were true", or more aptly, "things you are told are true, but are misleading". "freedom" to own things is not a freedom nor is it guaranteed in a capitalism economy nor is it true when faced with anything other than a nascent capitalist economy where other actors make the decision of who owns what, beyond your own agency.
I'm not sure you know what capitalism is now.
<?php
$x = 1;$y = 2;
function test1($x, $y) {
if ($x) {
return $y;
} else {
return false;
}
}
function test2($x, $y) {
return $x && $y;
}
var_dump(test1($x,$y));
echo "\n";
var_dump(test2($x,$y));Unbound variables are the equivalent (detected if used, at compile time), but a much saner way to deal with value-less variables
That seems perfectly reasonable. Nowhere near doom and gloom. There's no doom there, that I can see. Moving a billion people is not that big of a deal, as long as there is incentive. The idea that "the sea" will push people around has been going on forever and doesn't cause mass migrations in terms of the earth. It's the food and distribution a population has to worry about that will cause trouble. Everything else is well within human abilities to mitigate (even when average lifespans decrease by a few decades).
So this is revisionist fluff. How meta.
Not at all.
> Did you willingly provide it AND REMEMBER?
People have inherent expectations and soft historical memories. The idea that consent is some boundary line is a dystopian legal mechanic, which is specifically at odds with the psychology of humans. Agreeing to something doesn't affect if it's "creepy" (a psychological defense mechanism).
I am. Not contributing to the discussion by dismissing the topic.
And/or money. The public parking in the city is prohibitive, alone.
Hardly. There are plenty of psychoanalytical models (still being) explored that have more utility and the inevitable philosophies that extend from them will be just as final. The tools of measure are the roots of modern philosophy and postmodernism is little more than an ancient narrative about behavior that sprouts from mass media.
That doesn't seem to be an argument against, or even related to, what the proposal entails. All of these proposals are reductive attempts to curb the instability that UB introduces, for little value (see the linux kernel).
> because there was nothing to transform them _from_
Yes there was. Anything that can result in UB.
> For C, that’s not something we can realistically do in every case.
That's why the proposal is not exhaustive, as described.
It may seem that way, but it's not. Re: cryptographic functions
...and natural and efficient. ie Not wrong or right. I'm not sure where you get your ideas from.
It's a list of concentration and internment camps. I'm not sure how it's much different than any juvie jail throughout the US, but it's just a political move that happens to fit with a certain narrative.
In a number of gaming sectors, it's already done. Steam is majority Chinese players, mobile gaming revenue has been from China. Steel (until the tariffs) has been dominated by cheap Chinese offerings, killing off a bunch of suppliers in the last 15 years. I dunno what you're talking about, but reality doesn't care what you think anyway.