dabbledash

Why do you think it's great?

Are you saying they fabricated the material?

"It doesn't infringe on constitutional speech rights."

How is that? People who do significant business w the PRC have free speech rights like everyone else.

I'm just going to be annoyed by the opening up of a new front in The War on Pleasure.

Considering how much misery hay fever causes, i would think a treatment with a 20% - 50% effectiveness would be amazing.

> Immigration makes it much harder to fix affordable housing. That's just reality.

Wasn't overall population growth higher back when housing was more affordable?

Because I value living in a society where people aren't free to victimize others more than I value that person being free from arrest or other violence.

This is a silly way to frame the issue. If you tell me "I have a baseball bat and I will use it to either hit a random person or smash the window of this car," I 'll choose the car. On the other hand, if a random person walks up to a car and starts smashing it, I don't have a problem with someone using force to stop that.

>> What is it about teaching that makes people with no training think they can do better than trained professionals?

Teaching one or two students whose home situation supports you 100% is a much much less daunting proposition than trying to teach a class of 30 kids (or several such classes).

The idea that teaching things to your own children (which all humans have done forever) requires specialized training and credentials seems silly. But again, that's a very different job than being a school teacher, I think.

Do you just think 12 is too young to teach a better response?

When you say this do you mean "we have to look for the underlying causes of calorie imbalance" or do you mean "the human body is capable of materializing mass out of nothing"?

I can't imagine someone saying "the gravity theory of plane crashes is exploded" even though when we look at how to prevent plane crashes we look at other causes.

I think you misread me? I said "while people like those things" Maybe you read "white people like those things"?

I think it's possible that we lost this because, while people do genuinely like it, they like quiet, space, and privacy more.

Informing people so they can make their own choice is "having an effect."

And what if it didn't?

"The word is..." is how you preface gossip.

Appetite differences are almost certainly the primary factor in why some people get heavy and others don't, but that isn't inconsistent with CICO at all.

I think they mean: the studies showing bad outcomes from waking up 'kids' early are specifically about teenagers. Little kids get up very early, and the schedules of parents have to account for this.

Basically, I don't want anything I own to supervise me on behalf of 3rd parties, no matter how benevolent.

I don't think "fine contemporary art" is the only kind people pay for.

I'm not a visual artist, but just off the top of my head, illustrations in books, magazines, and ads, as well as a lot of video game art, might be producible using these tools.

Of course, while that might reduce work for artists it might make it easier for other people to create things like games.

I think that would be more analogous to a situation where KF's traffic dwindles to nothing because no one wants to visit.

DDoS is more of a heckler's veto.

"...pressure their respective governments to figure out what should be done, systematically, about hate speech on the internet."

Should be done by whom? If you mean "done by the government," then in the US at least the answer is clear.

Yeah, a scenario where everyone's "default setting" is trying to ban everything they consider "immoral" sounds pretty terrible.

In the past if you made a movie with a lot of sex and violence, you might get some angry letters from conservative moral majority types. But eventually, people learned not to pay too much attention to those letter writers, because they didn't represent the preferences of the actual paying audience.

I don't think discussing those letter writers is similar to engaging in the actual pressure campaign, but it doesn't matter much anyway.

I just think it's likely that the people who prefer to see political ads are small in number but feel strongly and the people who prefer not to see political ads are large in number but less likely to organize around it.

Great. Then I guess desiring not to be inundated with political ads doesn't amount to a desire to avoid "being reminded that reality exists."

"By using hulu at all you're explicitly opting into reality."

I pay for the ad-free tier. I guess you can "opt out of reality" after all.

And there's no real reason why a company can't exclude specific types of ads its customers are likely to find (particularly) annoying.

I guess it's possible i've been sending outraged missives to Hulu in my sleep, but I don't think so.

Why would that be acceptable if entertainment is not?

When will these companies learn that shriekers on twitter don't represent the preferences of their actual customer base?

Or maybe it won't matter, because since normal people have other things to worry about it always pays to give in to the loudest, most obnoxious people. In which case, i guess we can look forward to a future where everything is influenced by the most unhinged.

"The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity."

Absolutely agree with all of this. I think a person trying to dip their toe into cooking could easily get the impression online that it's way more precious and difficult than it really is.