garbagetime

7 ms·

1.
by garbagetime 4y ago
> it is definitely not unbiased. Can one really reach that conclusion from your evidence? A person can recieve sponsorships without allowing that fact to influence the person's writing.
2.
by garbagetime 4y ago
Here's an article by Gumroad's founder that covers how many employees Gumroad has: https://sahillavingia.com/work 25 people work at Gumroad, but none full time.
3.
by garbagetime 4y ago
Nevermind
4.
by garbagetime 4y ago
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conurbation
5.
by garbagetime 4y ago
How exactly does one go about signing this pledge?
6.
by garbagetime 4y ago
Nope. His work on the questions of the nature of thought, language, and mind is both extremely influential & deeply philosophical. Some of his work on linguistics you can argue is not philosophy. Some I think clearly is.
7.
by garbagetime 4y ago
I would say his work in linguistics is philosophy.
8.
by garbagetime 4y ago
Simple explanation, I'm afraid: I was dumb. There are no exceptions (...at least, none that I'm currently aware of). Dang's "missing comment" actually is on his page, just not where I was looking. The comment was ne
9.
by garbagetime 4y ago
Sure. Here's a recent comment from the user dang: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34271566 And here's his page, where the comment can't be seen: https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=da
10.
by garbagetime 4y ago
I don't think that works. It will show the dead, but not their children.
11.
by garbagetime 4y ago
It's not apparent to me. HN users tend to think similarly to each other and are often wrong.
12.
by garbagetime 4y ago
Have you read the papers? Might be they're good, but rejected for dumb/annoying reasons. Exagerating about these things is a personality trait, not a mental illness. Maybe the papers are totally crank, but as I said, not immediate
13.
by garbagetime 4y ago
It's not apparant to me. Cancer claim seemed like a conditional one.
14.
by garbagetime 4y ago
I acknowledge that the word 'race' is used in many ways. But in the context of HBD we can probably limit ourselves to those definitions rooted in biology. I did not invent the definition I gave, though it is written by me. I suppo
15.
by garbagetime 4y ago
If you asked them to list races, they might give those out of some habit, though I doubt anybody seriously considers those to be races. I mean, do people really think that the Han Chinese, the Persians, the Hindu Indians, etc., are all of
16.
by garbagetime 4y ago
A race: a people who have been largely or totally isolated (in terms of procreation) from other peoples for a very great number of generations.
17.
by garbagetime 4y ago
I doubt that any serious racists consider that there is some single "black race". Nonetheless, as far as I can tell, you're presenting the case that there are significant genetic differences between black races and other race
18.
by garbagetime 4y ago
I'm not suggesting that the term "HBD" has other more benign uses. I'm suggesting that it refers to a body of thought in which various claims are made, and that you are focused on one of those claims, whereas our ancesto
19.
by garbagetime 4y ago
> Black people as a whole have more genetic diversity within themselves than every other race. Would you mind explaining this in more detail?
20.
by garbagetime 4y ago
It seems to me that you just have a more specific issue with HBD than jasonhansel has. jasonhansel takes issue with the idea that there are racial differences in intelligence You take issue with another, related, one of HBD's ideas:
21.
by garbagetime 4y ago
The reason akomtu and I adressed the "mott" is that it was the claim ascribed to HBD: > HBD (or "human biodiversity") is a euphemism for the view that there are genetic racial differences in intelligence. and the &quo
22.
by garbagetime 4y ago
Are you saying that the simple fact that many people have come to the same conclusion disconfirms that conclusion?
23.
by garbagetime 4y ago
I just do it the old-fashioned way: memorisation.
24.
by garbagetime 4y ago
They only survived 6 days.
25.
by garbagetime 4y ago
If a person can read he should be able to see that PG's Tweet broke the rule. There's nothing too complicated about it - the rule clearly stated that X was not allowed, and PG did X. You seem like someone who can read, so the char
26.
by garbagetime 4y ago
Using a hyperlink is not neccessary to break the rule. Naming a Mastodon account (or any account) is not neccesary to break the rule. Breaking the rule in the same way that it was broken in the examples given is not neccesary to break the r
27.
by garbagetime 4y ago
The situation is very simple: 1. PG broke Twitter's rules 2. Twitter suspended PG's account 3. Twitter changed its rules 4. Twitter reinstated PG's account Whether you like my use of the words 'ban' and 'evasio
28.
by garbagetime 4y ago
Nah. Maybe if PG was banned for ban evasion there would be an equivilance. But PG was banned for something else.
29.
by garbagetime 4y ago
If you read carefully the thread you linked you will see that Elon affirmed the following statement: > You just can’t create or turn (my emphasis) your account into a free advertising unit for one of the listed competing platforms. Thi
30.
by garbagetime 4y ago
The Tweet very clearly violated the rule. > The user avoided posting the link so that he would be compliant with the rules as the CEO initially interpreted them Where did Elon interpret the rule as being that users can advertise prohibit

More ›