proksoup

It's unfortunate that we must be this paranoid.

The game you play when you retire, get the lowest score.

I believe the title is misleading out of context, I think it is meant to lack conclusions or clear statements and simply outline some areas for discussion ... a proposition paper?

I'm not familiar with what that really means, just jumping to an assumption about the intent of the paper that I think was not made clear in the title as is.

Perhaps the most sustainable way.

It would reduce my stress to imagine a world where my grandchildren didn't die from atrophy during the great power outage of 2079, where only the 10% of humanity that weren't reliant on exercise machines exercising their muscles for them, survived.

> In our culture, people suffering from schizophrenia or other forms of psychosis are more likely than members of other cultures to recognize their hallucinations as a symptom of pathology, but they also tend to have hallucinations that are very violent and negative.

I can see how encouraging positive relationships could be beneficial for anyone with such a symptom, regardless of figuring out if it's a symptom of pathology (depending on the culture context.)

I was asking for a function that converted a number (auto incremented id) to a string, such that all possible shortest urls would be iterated through.

E.g. given character set a-z, 0: a 1: b 26: aa 27: ab

etc.

I probably had no idea what the interviewee was suggesting and tried and failed to explain my question any better.

A lot of information can be conveyed with body language, context and emotion, to the point where it's difficult to distinguish from telepathy. Most especially with folks who've spent a great deal of time together.

I'm maybe not the only one who's experienced bits of 'beaming' with a long time friend or partner?

Perhaps "I have a pretty good idea of what X is thinking" is softer language than "I'm reading X's mind", but I can see how the experience of telepathy is not greatly distant from something that's normal for many people.

Took me months to realize (on macbook) ... no one believes me until I power it off and have them try again.

Spooky is the word.

I enjoy reading things that have more time and intellectual energy put into them.

This is not true of a lot of twitter ... but the short constraint I think is the only thing that really moves the needle in that direction on there.

"IBM CEO Personally Offers Company’s Services to Donald Trump"

[1] https://theintercept.com/2016/11/16/ibm-ceo-personally-offer... [2] https://twitter.com/yogthos/status/799060608561872896

Trump supports free speech? He promised to strengthen libel laws (pretty sure there aren't any such thing at the federal level now ...)

He said a lot of things freely, and a lot of them are interpreted by many as racist or otherwise categorized as bigotry.

I can see the viewpoint that supporting Trump is much more about supporting bigotry than it is about supporting free speech, based on his words and his promises. I have more trouble seeing the viewpoint of the inverse, at this point still.

Seems pretty cruel to me. Would be nice if we had some sort of standards or guidelines or laws against this sort of treatment of prisoners.

Would one need a safe word at all if we did?

To be specific, we mean like a chrome plugin or something at that level, right?

Can't they both be immoral? Whole problem is catholicism is a state supporting religion that says "your government doing evil isn't your problem".

I pay my taxes, but I consider it the least moral thing I do, for my own morality.

I look at paying taxes the same way I view my drug addicted friend that just needs a fix so he can make it til tomorrow. I don't like it, I'm enabling his problem, but I don't want him to get into a worse situation or die.

Wow that's an unfortunate conclusion.

"Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's" and whatnot though eh.

I disagree with Hobby Lobby's decision, but support their right to make it.

There are different types of contraceptives, and that we use the same word for all types is disingenuous and muddies the argument.

The day after pill is very different from a condom, and at least a little different from "the pill".

That social approval is what defines what's socially acceptable everywhere.

Twitter has expanded the boundaries of politically correct / acceptable speech, by enabling that brown nosing and echo chamber re-enforcement and not cracking down further on what's acceptable speech on their medium.

And they would have given up control of the experience, and the types of discussion and interaction would have been different, and the "X and Y fought on twitter last night" would have become "X and Y fought on Zthingthatintegrates with twitter" instead.

Just editorial control over the line of "what's acceptable here" is a huge power to control the boundaries of debate.

That power can be used to make massive amounts of money.

They became the defacto place for public discussion instead.

The focus on 3rd party api's hindered that and would have hurt their growth in that regard maybe?

Journalism happens on twitter first, it's where famous people talk to each other, not facebook, yeah?

Like a world without lawyers, one shudders at the impossible dream.

http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/simpsons/images/9/9b/Bes...

Can you imagine?

There are qc simulators online like http://www.davyw.com/quantum/ but my naive understanding is that dwave is a bit different from this.

It might be the same kind of thing though ... I'm curious if it is.

I'm not sure what the threshold is for being able to downvote stories, but it's pretty high.

Those that have that power have a great deal more control of the front page than those of us that don't.

We're relegated to trying to exercise our power through snarky comments and distracting meta conversations about the voting system.

In my mind, the most fair would be something that didn't grant a monopoly on an idea to one player.

I don't think rewarding patent owners is a goal, except that we already decided the way to reward inventors was patents and selling them (perhaps to those that can realize the value better, build a product and market it etc).

My question is where are the inventors that want a patent system of any sort?

I was under the impression that patents are a tool for lawyers and wealthy corporations to collect fees and maintain monopolies respectively.

What inventor wants to patent their idea and why do they want to do such an awful thing?

Also, this is the most interesting conversation I've ever had, please feel free to email me at derekbreden AT gmail.com if that's easy.

Have a good one either way.

Yes that's perhaps our disagreement as well, the odds of a being being involved.

What need is there for purpose or morality and why ask that of your god?

That is where we disagree I think.

And for the record, finding the god within doesn't have any connotation of worshipping ones self, for me personally, the idea that it might I think is a vestige for those that see a value or need to worship a god without.

The search for purpose and meaning assumes there is one. It's hard to understand how one can ask that question with presupposing that there is some thing as an "objective meaning and purpose" and it's just really confusing to me. If you don't see how the pasting of that quote is confusing, that's what I meant by confusing.

The search for reasons and hows and what happened and what's next seems a lot more interesting of questions, to me personally.

"Why are we here" and "where are we going" are vastly better questions than "what are we meant to do".

Do you see the difference?

"why are we here" can mean "how did we get here, how did we come to be here" ... but if it means "for what purpose are we here" than it turns problematic again, no?