indrax

It uses wasd to move, if that helps.

The most significant security response to the novel parts of the 9/11 attacks was done by the passengers on flight 93. It took an hour and seventeen minutes for them to get the news and adapt the strategy to hijackings.

Markets are no better on any of these issues.

They can cross reference with the cases that actually get prosecuted.

Yes similar test scores, for the GPA it might depend on how much we trust the scoring from the good school.

I was imagining that the good school presented more and better information, (perhaps more at the style and pacing of a good college classroom,) While the poor school may not have even presented all the information, or done so in a rushed way. (Focusing on that majority of students bound for community college.)

Ok. If we take that definition, is there any reason a test shouldn't consider whether a student had a very good school and learned half of what they were given, or a very poor school and learned everything they were exposed to? (a contrived case, of course)

That is incorrect.

What would "well prepared" mean here anyway?

An SAT score is an assessment of how well you will do in college. It's not something you can earn or deserve. If someone does less well than you but came from a much worse school district, why shouldn't a predictor take that into account?

If this were almost any other example of adding a modifier to correct for a bias in an initial scoring system, nobody would bat an eye, and we'd be discussing specifics.

Anecdotes are weak as data. One-off instructions are good, and presumably repeatable.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet

> risk-takers, innovators, and all those folks you mentioned who simply work harder at the expense of something else in their lives.

Given just that description, you could be talking about parents. The consequences you list for not rewarding them aren't off the mark either.

> the NSA appears to have demanded an "off switch" for the ME).

This is not incompatible with them encouraging or exploiting a back door, and it is strong evidence that ME is a security risk.

Scare quotes are unwarranted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intellig...

I don't know, but it is possible that the GW encodes something that increases once a century or faster. There is definitely more information in two letters than two digits.

Things change once we've found the rest of a tea set in various orbits. There may not be strong direct evidence but it's no longer a silly conjecture, it's the kind of thing that we find.

So those other examples mean you do have the burden of justifying your 'conspiracy' label.

When you trust the code more than the courts. All courts have bugs. Your trust or distrust may be unfounded, but I think that's the biggest reason.

More light is absorbed at the bottom than at the top. This energy is already doing work as weather.

If the air under the chimney needs to be warmer than the air beside it,this could be achieved with mirrors or a broad greenhouse.

This is absolutely not a free energy device. It may be bunk, but it is an attempt at a heat engine. Or rather, an attempt to make an existing heat engine more efficient/ faster/ controlled. There is outside energy and it is already doing work. We want more heat transfer and more controllable weather.

If the simulation is reasonably predictive and the spoils of war not too severe then the loser won't start the war because they would npt expect to gain enough.

This is what democracy is, a coarse estimate of who has the most soldiers. A 90% majority can do what they want, a 51% majority needs to compromise a little.

But now you're hypothesizing Aliens + some extremely convenient energy source.

In order to justify ignoring all the burning stars, it needs to be easier to tap than solar and much much more energy than all the stars will ever generate. I think that requires new physics.

Really the energy source must be infinite. If you can see that it will run out in a trillion years and you can survive for another billion by harvesting suns, somebody will.

We have nuclear power but still dam rivers, and I think beavers notice.

OTOH If there is a source of unlimited free energy, maybe some of those bright spots in space aren't stars at all.

Is there a github? I thought this was closed source, and the lack of updates made me think it might never get released even as a commercial engine or just a game. I'd love to just try these demos.

>I actually find the hobby energizing. I plan to take a few weeks off, and we’re lucky to have a spare room in our current Sourcery office, which I will convert into a hobby room. I’m working on hiring a personal hobby assistant, and am fortunate to be able to draw on the help of friends.

Why don't those categories provide information about each other?

What will discovering one alien race tell us about other aliens? Can we predict anything about the next unknown species discovered on earth?

Millenials didn't invent video game ratings, movie ratings, the seven 'dirty' words, the hays code, or blacklists.

If your generation targets something that's actually harmful, you're ahead of the game.

Consider a space that becasue all speech is allowed, is dominated by speech that marginalizes some subset of the population. Is that 'free'?

I think that if you want a place of intellectual exploration, excluding people is as dangerous as excluding certain ideas. And there seems to be a trade-off.

Physical evidence is frequently hidden, obscured, and destroyed. Hiding evidence is constitutionally protected.

Is there more to this argument? "everything completely encrypted" doesn't really mean anything. What problem does the digital age present that require new trade-offs?

This is also Direct Action, where what you're doing is solving or mitigating the problem and so you want to keep doing it as long as you can.

It's one thing to not speak ill of the dead, but you're complaining about a judge having their judgements judged.

Even if there is a limit to the size of a mind, there is not a limit to the number or speed. An atomic scenario would be a billion human level intelligences running a hundred times faster.

>appear >public feels

You did not make a counterargument.