@MotteInTheEye's banner p

MotteInTheEye


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 13:57:58 UTC
Verified Email

				

User ID: 578

MotteInTheEye


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 13:57:58 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 578

Verified Email

I guess a corresponding benefit could be dramatically reducing the overhead of a small business. But only in a fantasy world where all state taxes followed suit.

Maybe he lost a limb.

I think it's pretty difficult to construct a realistic hypothetical on which to test intuitions. Yours doesn't really work because the woman is choosing between an actual man and a report of a bear (by the man), which is a very different comparison.

I would guess there are plenty of manly men who bird watch, but they are mostly not the ones who sit on the committees and run for president.

that flaw make my man-vs-potential-bear scenario as favorable as possible toward not choosing "man"

Yes, that was my concern, I can definitely imagine a woman coming to the conclusion that a man making that claim was trying to trick her and steering clear. But I think your updated hypothetical is better, and I agree that very few if any would run towards the bear. A sight of an actual bear would act on someone at an instinctual level in a way that the word "bear" in a Twitter poll would not.

That phrasing has a long tradition in Anglo law, see e.g. the Royal Navy's articles of war from 1749:

      • shall suffer death, or such other punishment, as from the nature and degree of the offence a court martial shall deem him to deserve

This or very similar phrasing appears in many of the articles.

I had completely forgotten that that place existed. I think they could have had a much more interesting arc if the moderator drama at the outset hadn't dampened their early momentum.

Oh, I've read that African billionaire thing a lot through secondary sources but I'm not on Twitter, what was the nature of the debunking?

But they and all the big tech companies have stamped out this sort of question precisely because of the chilling effect of the law. You can obviously make a case that it's related to job performance, but their legal departments prefer to stick to coding and behavioral questions where the case is self-explanatory.

Being addicted to fentanyl probably is related in some cases to doctors prescribing opiates without sufficient caution.

It seems like "is related" is kind of sweeping some stuff under the rug in that sentence. My understanding is that there is good evidence that over prescription leads to more drugs available on the black market, but that it is in fact extremely rare for someone to develop an addiction stemming from their own prescription. The vast majority of addicts started on other people's prescriptions. (Let me know if you have a different understanding of this.)

If that's the case, it's not really relevant to the agency that the addicts had in becoming addicted to say that the drugs were prescribed too carelessly in the first place.

Not sure that's fair to Brady, you could just as easily say that playing football at 43 was a low-odds gamble, and he won the Superbowl. The man clearly just decided to keep playing until results showed that he actually couldn't keep up the dominance any more. And the difference between him and the others is that there was little or no chance of his gamble throwing away the things he had already accomplished.

Most people in the private sector don't actually get Juneteenth off here, even though it is a recently added public holiday so that could change over time.

Seems plausible enough to me, but I guess your point is that it's in tension with the overall progressive stance that suicides are helpless victims.

I hadn't realized that DeSantis is a Catholic so I will cede your characterization of him in particular as not living up to the ideals he professes in that regard. I think your insistence on using "true pro-lifers" to refer to the Catholic position is obnoxious but there's no point in an extended argument about a label.

The one doesn't take away from the other. All those kids that love the Narnia series wouldn't have been reading "Transposition" if the Narnia books had been less popular.

I do think that the forum could have scraped by for a couple more years on Reddit, but there was also the risk that the chilling effects of admin threats and mod policies in response to those would have left the forum too weak to execute a move as successfully as it did when the time came.

That's the problem about integrity in politics - none of the voters have any so it's almost always counterproductive for your electability if you do.

It's not that none of the voters do, it's that the electorate as a whole does not (and essentially cannot).

Thanks for this, really interesting read. Like freemcflurry I'm wondering what you mean by attempting a coup, is there a likely mechanism or precedent for that in the last couple centuries?

It seems like a progressive sales would inherently require tying your identity to every purchase, which seems like a huge inconvenience and a tough sell from a privacy perspective.

It's not substantive and I agree with your point but it is really astonishing to me that anyone could get the year in which the world reacted to COVID wrong. I feel like "2020" will never look the same as any other number to me again.

Gender equality before the law must have even higher support, and the Equal Rights Amendment has failed to be ratified for 100 years now because plenty of state legislators know that the signal something sends to their base can be very different from the plain text of a law.

I think this is probably the main thing. Voters know that they can't control what happens once the candidate gets into office. Maybe Desantis wusses out on all his promises. Maybe Trump flounders and runs through a staffing treadmill and accomplishes nothing. But what the voters can control is who gets into office, and the left is busy sending the signal as loudly as possible that the mere fact of Trump getting elected again would be a major blow to the establishment, and conservative voters believe them.

He expanded the death penalty. True pro-lifers are against that.

I predict that support for abortion and support for the death penalty have a strong negative correlation. Do you predict the opposite or is there some other meaning to your claim?

Obviously there was plenty of room for trickery, but Altman was apparently fielding random requests on Twitter and sharing them out with a few minutes of turnaround after the launch announcement. There was likely plenty of selection going on and of course it's possible that the requests were preplanned and posted by plants, but OpenAI's track record suggests that this will be available for the public to play with before long so any major shenanigans seem unlikely to me.

Indeed. I imagine that a teacher has a breakdown on this level once a week or so in this country.