HN user
I've only read Chiang's, "The Truth of Fact, the Truth of Feeling" which was up for a Hugo a few years ago. I voted against it since it was bland. Are any of his other stories better?
Of course. Worse, they actually have two different strategic factors that play poorly together: 1.) Retain users 2.) Have a personal bias about what will offend users
These two items can magnify each other in a false direction as they attempt to retain users that they perceive they have.
Thanks for bringing that up. I had been unaware since I don't follow twitter much anymore. You are right that is amazingly vile.
Oh they are doing a terrible job. And one of the reasons I don't use a platform that thinks its ok to name groups things straight out of "Fahrenheit 451".
Or Facebook can take their thumbs off the scale on what is supposed to be friends sharing information. Do you realize how Orwellian it is for a big company to say friends Bobby and Sally have to be monitored in what they share? How does this not bother people?
I don't care if Bobby and Sally believe that we never made it to the moon and wear tin foil hats. It is _none of FB's damn business_. They are a _platform_ not the editors of all things true. They should not issue us all with truth detectors.
As someone points out Copernicus was not killed. And it illustrates the problem of FB putting its finger on the scales. Ever.
* No feature list * No game list * Confusing as to what this has to do with "rooms" * Demands I download a web app!?!??!!?
Go home FB. You're drunk.
Indeed it would. It seems that after every purge they've fallen a bit farther. It seems very odd, on a platform dedicated to short witted public screeds, that they would get offended by...short witted screeds. Oh well.
Twitter where free speech isn't. There will be replacements and Twitter knows it.
I'm actually appalled that so many people make comments just like you have and show an ignorance of basic economics and would also assume that everyone can _turn down_ work.
Were you never a teenager? In fact these laws have made it prohibitive to higher local teen agers. Eventually, the trouble of hiring will overcome the initial capital outlay for robots (which can now even do berry picking). You are going to chase people out of work.
Learn about the subjects you are discussing (farming and economics) before coming to wild conclusions.
What on Earth are you talking about. Let's presume you are right and Turkey wasn't being kept out for things like, oh as another pointed out, an occupation of Turkey and Cyprus, how does blocking them from joining the EU make them less moderate? Does the EU have magic dust that effects religious outcomes?
Oh really? So you are saying that if I said a sexist joke at work I could not be legally held accountable?
And trust me, the down votes tend to be pro-marxist. So that this is getting so much attention speaks volumes about just HOW bad he presented this tale.
Excellent point. I've had to work in retail. You don't just get to go to the bathroom because someone has to man the front desk. This is a fact of the business. If you don't like it, feel free to go somewhere else. No one is stopping you.
Or abusing the system to score income on the sale of his house. I nearly snorted at that point.
No I agree with you. I got about half way through till I realized this is all about a self-entitled prick. He spent the front half of the article talking about himself, then justified it with the fact that Google may hire people to do work. OH MY GOSH CALL THE POLICE!
The platform cratered with the dominance of pay to win games and the "freemium" model. This allowed the store to be cluttered with junk. I can't shop there, because I'm not sure what I am buying.
No one has a problem with releasing hemoglobin producing yeast? No one? That sounds terrifying in that many _other_ industries rely on wild yeast.
This goes beyond the general case for GMO (where wild growth is generally crippled) and involves actively modifying the wider environment. This is a serious problem.
Ah the Nordic Self-Selection Paradox showing up in AP studies. Not shocking. Notice too that the writer is not horrified that men don't want to join AP Art History or AP Psychology.
And the police of Britain are so anaemic that they let _THOUSANDS_ of children be abused rather than risk confrontation.
You are not selling me.
No FBI. Hell, not that long ago I started the work to become an agent. I love law. I love bad guys being put away. But you have _ZERO_ need for an escrow on strong encryption. It is perfectly legitimate that citizens don't give up their secrets. This is why we have discovery, warrants, and the Tenth Amendment (however riddled with holes it now is). The government has no compelling interest here.
Do me a favor, don't move anywhere else. We don't need that attitude spreading.
I agree with the many comments here. This is stunningly good work down with such a simple canvass. I'll be taking it to show my kids (who enjoy Greek mythology) this evening.
Wow. That's the most racist thing I've read in a while.
I don't like Peeple because I believe in personal privacy rights. However, this article went a long way into making me like it. Rather than a rational discussion of privacy rights there was screeching and fear mongering.
Absolutely Matt. It is also shocking that most people believe that "peer reviewed" is synonymous with "reproduced study". It is not. One is editorial the other requires longer and heavier work.
In this I hold Einstein much higher. If his work didn't hold up significant portions of modern society would fail.
Indeed that seems to be what they are claiming from the article. This to me sounds shady in the extreme. A later poster argues for a "50%" error rate on both sides.
Try building a bridge with that.
Social Science methodology is piss poor and needs to improve. People don't take it seriously for a reason.
As many others have noted: 1.) The dataset implies that Europe is the most contentious area when it is more likely we just have the best historical records in Wikipedia 2.) The data set is dirty 3.) Because of (1) these are only going to be battles that Europe has found significant. The former Aztec Empire for example is evidently either the most peaceful in History or we just don't know a lot about all the tribes it has massacred in the format that Wikipedia likes.
At the very least he "every" in the title should be dropped. I'd suggest "Historically Significant Battles from a Western Perspective on Wikipedia"
Exactly. The title intentionally conflicts with the theme.