Offering something then taking it away is materially different from never having offered it at all.
105 karma · joined December 2, 2022
Offering something then taking it away is materially different from never having offered it at all.
Users love it. Users hate installers. Users hate updates. Webpages have neither.
Companies love it. Makes subscription access apps easy to sell. Makes it easy to target all platforms and keep costs low.
Seems very flippant to completely dismiss the dominant trend in this industry over the past 20 years as simply wrong.
I agree the technologies are not well suited to this purpose which is why I avoid frontend at all costs. But powerful web apps generate a lot of value for a lot of people, myself included.
The commercial product extends the open source project to add other capabilities. The source for these extensions is not distributed. (The result is a tool distributed in binary form).
https://twitter.com/HTheijsmeijer/status/1571174175162699778...
There was a huge popular discourse in 2020 specifically about whether 2 + 2 = 4. See e.g. Kareem Carr, who was a major participant: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/biostatistics/2020/09/kareem-ca...
The steelman argument for the subjectivity of math would be something like: the process of choosing how to represent/model a real world situation in mathematical terms may influence what conclusions can or will be reached under that model, because biased assumptions can sneak their way into the model.
To be clear, this is good knowledge and should be taught.
However, it is not an effective attack on the coherence of natural number arithmetic. We have to get students to a certain level of objective operational competence before they are ready to think about the subjectivity of mathematical modeling.
I view this all as a negative insofar as it nudges cis kids to identify as non-cis and start edging closer to risks to their mental and physical health as a result.
Maybe in 15 years this will look silly and we'll all know that 10% non-cis is totally normal and all these people will be able to live authentic lives.
But if in 15 years we reach the opposite discovery, my view is that we will have done a lot of damage to individuals and to systems along the way.
I will concede that if these things never happened, I personally would find the infohazard argument non-compelling, though others may have their own feared infohazards.
On the flip side, if hypothetically these were common ideas animating public school curricula and/or teacher behavior, would you consider that sufficient justification for homeschooling as being discussed here?
The steelman version is something like the following chain of reasoning: (a) gender identity is something that everyone has that is distinct from sex, (b) with enough introspection, everyone can discover their true gender identity, (c) if you don't have a strongly felt gender identity, you need to introspect, (d) if introspection does not yield certainty then this suggests genderfluidity, or even worse that puberty ought be delayed until certainty is achieved.
Or how about: an AMAB child playing with a Barbie doll often is strongly suggestive that he might actually be trans.
Or how about: values like "being on time" or believing that a math problem has one correct answer are inherently white supremacist and racist.
etc.
Exactly. That diamonds are expensive is almost the entire point. If it becomes possible to buy artificial diamond rings for like $50, the tradition will disappear entirely. People will find some other signaling act.
From that perspective, they face huge downside if they fail to convey a minor to the contracted final destination and then the minor goes missing. A minor who announces the intention to wander away not according to plan sets off alarm bells in someone who has this perspective.
My relationships that work well have a very strong unstated premise of turn-taking. If my friend paid for lunch last time, of course I'm getting it this time, and vice-versa--to me that's just obvious. If I stay at someone's house while traveling, it goes without saying that I will host them at my house (or return the favor in some other way of equivalent value) before imposing on them again.
Americans love Asian cars. Tons of Hondas, Toyotas, Hyundais, Kias, etc. Also while some weeby anime fans may be orientalist, not all are, and love for Gangnam style was genuine. It was a great song and people loved it for that, not because traded on Asian stereotypes. The American geopolitical strategy in the Pacific rests heavily on a very deep trust of Japan, Korea, and Taiwan, among other partners.
I can easily imagine a world where in ~20-30 years, there are no bank branches or phones or ATM machines or cash--because 99.99% of people have no interest in using those things anymore. In that world, suddenly it becomes an almost insurmountable inconvenience not to acquiesce to whatever is required to use online banking.
The other factors were added specifically in order to give universities leeway to massage the demographics of the incoming class. IIRC this kind of holistic admission was invented specifically to be able to reject Jewish applicants who tended to be academically strong but less "well rounded" than WASPs. So ivies effectively put a cap on the Jewish quotient by creating the holistic system.
Following the thread of conversation, it just didn't compute to me:
>>>> Heat pumps are great for climate control >>> Yeah, ducts are dead >> What if you want to recirculate air in your house through your central air filter to eliminate smells? > Just open the window
It's like we've hit a contraction: the premise is that we care about energy but the contractions is then that we don't and we open the window while climate controlling the house. So to me it does seem to prove that in some climates, duct work with a central blower and filter mat not be dead.
Do you have evidence to exclude other possible interpretations, such as the possibility that children resisting the temptation of a marshmallow and their parents being rich are actually the effects of some other underlying single cause?
Anecdotally, in my experience, probably about 90% would've been left in school.