@zPvQINBQvfFR's banner p

zPvQINBQvfFR


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 23:43:37 UTC

				

User ID: 277

zPvQINBQvfFR


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 23:43:37 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 277

I think prescriptivism is of vital importance, because without it language is completely incoherent. I find linguistic descriptivism to be rather vapid, actually - all you can really say as a descriptivist is "that person sure is using word X to mean Y". You can't actually say whether it is correct or incorrect.

You can say whether it's correct or incorrect, it's just that "correct" means "consistent with language norms of a particular time and place" rather than "consistent with the eternal unchanging Platonic ideal of English".

How about multiple levels of Verizon customer support not being able to tell the difference between 0.002 dollars and 0.002 cents? The discussion somehow reminded me of this ancient saga: https://verizonmath.blogspot.com/2006/12/verizon-doesnt-know-dollars-from-cents.html

Eh, not really? Executable files have structure in them other than raw code and still have to be parsed by a loader. A file that's all zeros should fail to load. (Yes, I know DOS had .com files with were just code blobs loaded at a fixed address and immediately executed and I'm sure there are even more ancient examples of that sort of thing, but surely Windows kernel modules can't work like that.)

Anyway, the rumors I've read said that it was actually a data file and that's why they considered it acceptable to deploy it on a Friday -- the assumption being that changing configuration without rolling out a new version of the executable wouldn't break things too badly.

From this, it kind of sounds like rather than having an on-disk data representation that would be parsed and converted to an in-memory data structure, they just loaded the file and accessed the raw bytes as a data structure with internal pointers. Which is... an approach, I guess.

That leaves Trump 3-1 at the moment, and I would say the sentencing in the New York conviction (currently set for September) is likely to get delayed until after the election (when, let's face it, it ain't going to matter)

Wait, hold on. Is this actual optimism or am I wildly misreading?

We have chestfeeding at home.

Also he edited out the Ben Carson brain surgery question.

Huh? https://slatestarcodex.com/2015/11/16/hardball-questions-for-the-next-debate/

Maybe he did edit it out and then restored it, but it doesn't seem like the kind of thing that he'd be worried could get him in trouble.

I too find it incredibly sad when the ones that do write about sensitive topics toe the line dishonestly, e.g. like Nick Bostrom did on race in his apology, and Eliezer and Scott Siskind on trans issues.

Why do you believe that Scott is dishonestly toeing the line on trans issues rather than genuinely believing whatever he wrote?

They are not only playing those games. They keep winning them and getting away with it.

Perhaps wild nature is in fact a giant suffering engine that should be abolished in its current form.

From a SYG perspective, the key question is whether Perry was right on the merits, which comes down to how sympathetic you are to street protest in general and BLM in particular.

Isn't the fact that he was driving the car on a public street trying to get to his destination enough to make him right on the merits?

There are startups working on synthetic milk. Seems like it would be easier to make than synthetic meat. At least nobody should complain about texture.

Animals don't turn sunlight and rain into meat. You need to feed them plants. Which you have to grow first. Possibly on vertical farms run by hippy vegans.

Some animals can graze but I think this could sustain only than a small fraction of current meat production (after a quick googling, I saw the figures of 10% of beef production and 30% of sheep and goat meat production being sustained by grazing).

Finally, the ability to enjoy steak tartare without guilt or worrying about tapeworms.

Well, Cocaine Bear is just from last year.

Ah yes, people with different preferences that aren't aligned with your politics are all malfunctioning mutants. Of course.

It's not that small. If South Korea got teleported to Europe, it would be the 7th largest country by population. It is small by area and has a very high population density, though I'm not sure if urban population wouldn't be a bigger factor in ease of fashion spreading. And South Korea is surprisingly far from the top on that metric.

Not really. I wasn't aware that Title IX was that old and thought it was something created shortly before the whole college sexual assault drama started.

It's possible that it still illustrates the principle, though not as sharply as it would if Title IX was a more newfangled thing, but I don't know how the American political discourse in the 70s looked like.

This ham-handed effort to impose a leftist belief onto Title IX exceeds your authority as President. impose a leftist belief onto Title IX

I wonder if this is an example of the common criticism of conservatism in that yesterday's radicalism becomes today's normalcy and eventually becomes a new cherished tradition to be defended.

I think I remember seeing a lot of discourse a couple of years ago about how Title IX is this awful leftist thing that's the justification of universities' kangaroo court administrative proceedings against male students accused of sexual assault.

What's dumb? Wanting to enjoy a game's mechanics without being forced to compete in big sweaty boy league?

It provides a sense of pride when beating the game. The fact that some people cannot beat the game but you can, is a potential source of pride. If you enable everyone to beat the game, it is gone.

If you're deriving pride from beating the game on normal then how does the fact that everybody can beat the game on story mode take away from that?

Is all of mathematics shallow and trivial?

This post kind of comes off as a self-indulgent power fantasy. You'd need God-empress level of political power to enact those policies, so the whole thing is basically implicitly assuming that you're infinitely stronk, and then writing a long detailed list of all the ways you'd use your unlimited power to put the screws on people whose life choices are (in your view) incompatible with the greater good of society.

And if we hypothesize some alternative society in which those policies would be popular, then would you even need them in the first place? Hm, maybe they would still be useful to fix the pro-natal attitudes and fight against any potential value drift.

Anyway, while I don't expect you to explain how you're planning on becoming God-empress, I'm still curious how would you roll out those policies? Would there be some transition period so for example people who were already old and infertile when the policies came into effect wouldn't get screwed up without any chance to avoid it, or would their unavoidable impoverishment be a sacrifice you'd be willing to make to keep things simple and on track?

On Ozempic I am rather bearish. There are very few buttons in the body which can be pushed for gain without many side effects. It sort of violates a no-free-lunch theorem (which I do believe in) regarding pharmacology.

That seems too strong. A no-free-lunch theorem for pharmacology might make sense for things that we expect to have been already optimized by evolution. Maintaining a good weight in an environment of caloric abundance and whatever else is causing the obesity crisis (corn syrup? microplastics? the chemicals they put in the water to turn the frogs gay?) is probably not one of those things.

By my count it's only 6 simple steps and one is optional but nice to have.