wussboy

Another option, "I'm already doing A/B testing, trust me."

I feel like people who say this haven't read the research about our unconscious biases. My personal "hit me on the head" moment was reading about the Cincinnati Orchestra who started auditioning candidates behind a curtain and suddenly found their ratio of male:female went from 3:1 to 1:1. No one at that organization was consciously discriminating. Everyone thought as you did that they were acting without racism/sexism. And yet (at least) sexism was obvious once they removed it from the hiring equation.

And this leaves people in a quandary. How do you control for sexism when you can't just hide your candidate behind a curtain? The solution society has tried is to mandate ratios. Why they tried this makes sense. It's obvious downfalls make sense. I'm not aware of any other suggestion that is viable.

Is "engagement" the primary metric of modern life?

This is the second pro smoking post I’ve seen of yours on this thread. A curious stance to take.

Could a cigarette fall into the mask stowage box and rest against the oxygen tube thus creating a fire? Yes, it could. The entire and complete elimination of this risk is simply solved by forbidding the pilots from smoking, which is already forbidden to the entire cabin crew and passengers. What’s the big deal? Who is harmed by not allowing pilots to smoke?

That is the opposite of my experience. Slow deploys mean bigger deploys mean more complexity going live mean more nervousness and more testing mean more hesitation mean more chance that something unforeseen mean errors that no one understands mean war rooms.

I’ve often said that it is the speed of deployment that matters. If it takes you 50 minutes to deploy, it takes you 50 minutes to fix a problem. If it takes you 50 seconds to deploy, it takes you 50 seconds to fix a problem.

Of course all kinds of things are rolled up in that speed to deploy, but almost all of them are good.

I don't think this is a cynical take. I think it is the rational take. Anyone not doing this is going to be outcompeted by those who are.

Car-centric cities make allowing kids outside too dangerous.

I would be interested in a high quality version of what you suggested. TFA’s service? Not at all

When I expressed concern that AI generated responses might make inaccurate claims about our products, I was told by the cloud rep to just put the answer through AI to make sure it was compliant…

D.S. Wilson did a lot of work in that area.

The word "generally" is the important one in your sentence. Genes don't know what environment they will be born into, and so they include various strategies to cope with the unknown in the hope that some will survive.

Generally, humans are better suited to stable and safe environments. But it would be irresponsible of genes not to include, occasionally, humans who did better in chaos because chaos frequently happens.

But judging by any other criteria, they're just yesterday.

Is this a goal to which we should aspire? I’m a former evangelical, now atheist and I thought that it was but now I’m not so sure. Darwin’s Cathedral made me rethink this position and I encourage you to read it.

> parking minimums are a red herring

Care to explain more? I hard disagree, and I think the research is on my side.

“Reduce” was never going to work. Only the deep electrification of our economy will save us.

I’m not sure it robs us. It makes it possible, but many people including myself find the artistic products of AI to be utterly without value for the reasons you list. I will always cherish the product of lifelong dedication and human skill

Zoning and parking minimums are the real problem. Ensure houses are safe (fire, collapse, etc.) and let the market decide where, when and what should be built.

But what would be the point of that, beyond the thrill of building a robot? The joy of LEGO is finding the pieces and building it yourself, not in owning an assembled model.

I’ll come in again…

The English pub was a critical “third space”, but modern life (especially car centric infrastructure) has made them go away.

I’m not sure it’s still “Black”. I think it might just be “Mirror”.

I think private communications are a human right as well. But I don’t think every conceivable way of communicating must be private. You can always go outside and talk privately with your neighbour.

To use your analogy: shouldn’t everyone look away when you drive by so that you can have private road usage?

> Old school open source projects don't seem particularly profitable.

And is also subject to survivorship bias. For every OSS project that makes it, tens of thousands do not.

I think that's the last thing they should be spending time on. In my list of browser priorities, security, speed, memory all are much higher.

I asked many of these same questions when I lost my faith. I found compelling answers as to why I had a god shaped hole in D.S. Wilson’s Darwin’s Cathedral. It’s taken 15 years, but I also finally have plans about what the fuck we should be doing about it.

Yup

It is different because one is a human mind falling prey to selective memory and sympathy, and Pinker's book is about facts and data.

In "Better Angels" he chooses "healthy, wealthy and wise" as his three benchmarks. We live longer (and suffer less violence). We have more wealth. We are smarter. That's what "better off" means. You can argue that's not what "better off" means, but you'd be arguing that we should strive for shorter lives, more poverty, and increased stupidity.

It appears to be a quirk of human nature. In fact, it's so prevalent that it has a name in Latin: Tu Quoque.