rrss1122

And over 50M voted for Leave.

If you just want to block javascript and you use Chrome, you can use the dev tools. Open dev tools, click the three-bullets menu icon, click settings, then in General click Disable Javascript. You don't get a whitelist, but it's something.

I didn't live in a house with books, but my mother took me and my sisters to the library very often when we were kids. For me personally, I believe that access to books gave me much of my motivation to learn, particularly with regards to astronomy. It was early reading of astronomy books that got me really interested in science. Growing up, I didn't do particularly well in language and literature, mainly because I just wasn't interested. If I hadn't been allowed to develop an innate interest in science through astronomy, I doubt I would have done as well in math and science classes as I did because I expect I would have found them uninteresting too. I credit that early interest in science as a big factor in me now having a well-paying programming career.

Intel is doing a lot of layoffs. I'm sure many of them will be in the US, of American workers in high-tech. Granted, they're not as cheap as H1B workers, but still...

I didn't get that from the article. The author's friend was 31 when she joined the company, not much older than her 28 year old manager. To me it illustrates the churn at the company. The 28-year old manager will probably be fired - excuse me I mean "graduated" - by a 20-something manager after a few years.

For a website called Overcoming Bias, the bias in the article is fairly transparent.

I did find it peculiar that the focus of the leak was Russian wealthy associated with Putin. Curious to see if further leaks expose western wealthy.

Property investors aren't the ones building properties. It's the property developers. I read this in an article explaining Miami's development boom, in spite of the possibility that rising sea levels could inundate much of the new construction in the next century. The property developer's only concern is selling the property. Once it's out of their hands, they are no longer exposed to risk on that property. As long as they can continue convincing property investors that the boom will continue, developers will continue building right up till the moment that property values come crashing down.

Training in statistics, linear algebra and algorithmic thinking is more relevant for today’s educated workforce.

unless you're an engineer

Not so last century, eh?

The major examples the article raises at the start are all major race outrages that quickly fizzled out. Moral outrage is not a sustainable foundation on which to build a movement to the left.

It's still not harassment. It's a computer program.

It's simply that old non sequitur: it's 2016 and you shouldn't do X anymore. That's really their main argument. Stop using a 200 year old technology, even if it still works fine.

Aeon used to be interesting but it's just gone off the deep end recently.

It will be a while still before you can actually party. As long as a measurable percentage of your users are still on these browsers, you're missing out on money of you don't support them.

I can definitely appreciate #3, having faced many incredulous questions when I refuse drinks at social events, but I think most of the author's claims are greatly exaggerated. Your mileage may vary.

Why would they surround themselves with such people? They're already wealthy, they have nothing to gain by talking to someone who will attack their character.

Awesome. Here I thought when TJ swore off nodejs for Go he stopped working in JS entirely.

To offer another sci-fi example, it's how two pilots of an experimental spacecraft in the TV series Stargate SG-1 were rescued when the spacecraft rapidly traveled away from Earth and locked them out of pretty much everything except ejecting from the craft. Their rescuers were waiting in a nearby spaceship to scoop them out of the vacuum of space.

The questions have been raised. They are actually covered in the FAQ you linked to:

"Limitations on inherent tribal powers of self-government are few, but do include the same limitations applicable to states, e.g., neither tribes nor states have the power to make war, engage in foreign relations, or print and issue currency."

I'm not sure if this would prohibit raising an army per se, but what good is raising an army if you don't have the power to make war? Building bases is wholly out of the question, though, since that would involve engaging in foreign relations.

Unquestionably, threats should absolutely be forbidden, and they are. Threatening another person is already a federal crime and anyone receiving threats online should report it to law enforcement so the person making those threats can be dealt with and so that person can't continue to terrorize other people online.

We should feel secure for our lives. Indeed it's one of the inalienable rights defined in the Declaration of Independence: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

What many people now know as safe places, however, overreach their stated goal of providing security for minorities. They sacrifice liberty for life. You can put someone in jail for threatening your life, but you can't put someone in jail (or fire them or ruin their livelihood otherwise) for saying something you don't agree with. If you force someoen to empathize, they aren't truly empathizing, they are remaining quiet for fear of being called a bigot and getting their reputation ruined. They shouldn't have the right to make you fall behind at work because of harassment. Then again, no one should have the right to do that on anyone, no exceptions based on arbitrary classes/categories.

They criticized Nathan Grayson of Kotaku for supposedly having relationships with people GamerGate didn't like and writing about them without disclosing said relationships.

Depending on the site you read, it's either a violation of journalism ethics, or GamerGate blowing something out of proportion again. In lieu of a citation, you can google it if you really want.

It's what one of the comments they quoted at the end said. Terrible, terrible attempt at satire, and he should be mocked for it. But come on, no one is actually for legalizing rape.

Why will companies pay more when the labor supply will increase? The same company that was hiring foreign workers to save a buck won't pay extra to retain that worker. That company will now hire other entry level foreign workers who they can pay peanuts instead, who they can now hire because another company isn't holding their visa hostage anymore.

And so the attack on the upper class changes to now include the upper middle class. I wonder how long till it changes again down the class ladder, and how long till it reaches the natural conclusion of from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.

Next they're gonna want to put trigger warnings on the Internet.

It's just the continued infantilization of adults.

We don't need to sign a treaty for this...

Indulgences were always about making you feel good about you. The Catholic Church merely took some money for the privilege.

The guilt machine has gotten so efficient, indulgences are looking like a desirable possibility.

The article does ask this:

"Why not faster? Why not slower?"

Certainly a lot of physicists are content with leaving it at "because it is." They're not searching for purpose, they're searching for explanation. The article doesn't just ask the question either, it explores a possible avenue for seeking the answer.

Experiments over the past few years seem to indicate that the speed of light can be derived by measuring electric and magnetic properties of the vacuum. This leads to the question: is it possible that the speed of light is the value it is because the vacuum restricts it to this value? This would mean the speed of light is not a fundamental constant, but an observable parameter of the vacuum.

The article is light on links, but here is a paper that I think the article was referring to, by Marcel Urban and colleagues at the University of Paris-Sud:

http://arxiv.org/abs/1302.6165

From the paper:

"When a real photon propagates in vacuum, it interacts with and is temporarily captured by an ephemeral pair. As soon as the pair disappears, it releases the photon to its initial energy and momentum state. The photon continues to propagate with an infinite bare velocity. Then the photon interacts again with another ephemeral pair and so on. The delay on the photon propagation produced by these successive interactions implies a renormalisation of this bare velocity to a finite value.

This “leapfrog” propagation of photons, with instantaneous leaps between pairs, seems natural since the only length and time scales in vacuum come from fermion pair lifetimes and Compton lengths."

The paper claims that the speed of light might fluctuate as a consequence, and proposes possible experiments to test this.

"The propagation of a photon being a statistical process, we predict fluctuations of its time of flight of the order of 0.05fs/√m. This could be within the grasp of modern experimental techniques and we plan to assemble such an experiment."

This could answer the question, why is light so slow?