falseprofit

If we’re being honest, the “pixels” contain multiple colors and discernible shapes.

Virtually all monitors are rectangular grids

You could make it optional to grow users and then require it later

I think it’s worth pointing out that there are two “big bang”s. There’s the supposed singularity, which is what it seems we’re talking about here. And there’s the expansion that immediately follows the singularity. We have good evidence for the latter, and the former is on much shakier ground than is widely understood.

I think they were lamenting the fact that the classes did not appreciate at the same rate, and that the more desirable homes appreciated faster. Didn’t claim not to understand it either.

The context here was a charge that should not be paid…

What gave you the impression anyone was confused about that? You just think being taken to jail is no big deal?

I personally think of “will” as being closer to “discretion” than to “action”, but I’ll try to steer the conversation away from semantics.

What I want to focus on is what leads you to conclude that your will, or your discretion, is not deterministic. Forgetting, if we may, arguments for or against determinism from a physics perspective: what’s the argument from your personal experience? As for morality, I would make the case that ontology should inform morality but not the other way around.

I guess I wasn’t sure what you meant by “target”. I agree with you on all counts, except that I’m not sure I interpret the comment as “hateful”. Wrong and offensive, yes.

I think they didn’t really understand the criticism of the ad, and decided that the reason people were so opposed was out of some irrational reverence for the Japanese, themselves irrational due to some spiritual heritage.

You should define “free will” if you want to claim you have direct experience of it. I’d suggest that what you’re experiencing may be just “will”.

And in my opinion, whether you’re “responsible for your actions” isn’t a question about the nature of reality (ontological), rather a question (or one of several) about how we should act in it (moral).

I agree that the comments on Japanese culture were unwarranted, off-topic, unnecessary, offensive… and while I know very little about Japan, I feel I should ignore random internet opinions on it.

But can you elaborate on your second paragraph? Should culture always be immune to criticism?

Since when does “paradox” imply real world application?

In your last paragraph, what you’re describing is just inference based on correlation, which is unrelated to this topic.

Morality motivates our interest in the question of free will, but I understand morality to be a concept only whereas free will is supposed to be a feature of reality. That’s why it seems crazy to me and probably the above poster that morality should be a test of free will.

Please excuse my probably oversimplified understanding of the debate as someone who hasn’t read most of the arguments yet.

It would help, but with only a couple dozen courses and most determined by a couple exams it’s not quite a large number.

Scanning and grading on a computer can alphabetize them.

That article suggests the average ratio to be 1:1, so yes this war has a higher ratio.

I imagine the study included it in the data but did not differentiate it, so you can’t make a specific deduction about it.

If anyone actually has details please correct me.

What ratio?

What is this, a private file?

I don’t think very many people are paying more for daycare than they make while their kids are in it.

A good list of words that people make similar mistakes with…

What do you mean when you say it’s cheaper for you to watch 1 kid? What’s the comparison?

The shower cap didn’t use brain surgery though.

Seems more like a joke than a statement to me.

When the entire field of archaeology experts calls someone out as a crank, you should really ask yourself if you have a good reason to know better than them.

This sounds like you’re downplaying the lack of US recognition. I’m not sure what tantrum you’re imagining, but if it’s for the sake of trade relations I don’t think it’s worth being complicit in denying sovereignty.

I can’t see how keeping human remains off of the moon is about to spread AIDS, so at least for now this seems to be an unfair comparison.

Can you see the dash of magical thinking present in the desire to put those remains on the moon in the first place?

What do you mean? That this security flaw shouldn’t be publicly exposed?

For what it’s worth, there is no indication Uber has ever used battery information for pricing, and they seem to agree with all reasonable people that it would be wrong for them to do so.