wolverine876

6 ms·

1.
by wolverine876 2y ago
Afiak, the purposes are to begin to setup the infrastructure for permanent habitation, and to prepare for a crewed flight to Mars. > That is explicitly an Artemis mission purpose. Where does it say that?
2.
Higher Education Needs More Socrates and Plato(nytimes.com)
2 points by wolverine876 2y ago|0 comments
3.
by wolverine876 2y ago
Maybe I just have a different perspective than you; it's not a mistake to disagree with you - or vice versa. Unless we're interested in the world outside our perspecitve, how will we learn anything new? > Did you just compare m
4.
by wolverine876 2y ago
If everyone with flaws is disqualified, or is equal to everyone else with flaws, then it all loses meaning. I'm not certain those were flaws in forsight, or necessarily even in hindsight. Regardless, those leaders did not preach or lea
5.
by wolverine876 2y ago
> this is bog-standard MAD that’s been a big part of the US strategy since the Cold War. That's not MAD as I understand it: The essential challenge of international relations is to create non-escalatory situations - situations where
6.
by wolverine876 2y ago
I think it's a strawperson, a distraction, to take it literally and criticize it. That's not the main issue or point of the article. They can't flesh out every point in detail.
7.
by wolverine876 2y ago
(2023)
8.
Strangers in Their Own Land: Being Muslim in Modi's India(nytimes.com)
2 points by wolverine876 2y ago|0 comments
9.
by wolverine876 2y ago
The kids painting street art have no power to consent or not consent to anything. If they had access to art supplies, a loft, and a gallery, they'd probably use them.
10.
by wolverine876 2y ago
What are you referring to? I don't see that in this discussion.
11.
by wolverine876 2y ago
> It’s always a struggle for me to accept that many people actually like graffiti. It's a struggle for everyone to accept different perspectives on art and aesthetics, but we need to accept that others' perspectives exist and a
12.
by wolverine876 2y ago
In a way you are just debating who gets the power, and saying the people you like should have it. The fact that you or I like someone isn't a reason to give them power. The buildings have a lot more impact then the graffiti, and arguab
13.
by wolverine876 2y ago
Where do you live that you see that? I see it in places that are isolated, and as a proportion of urban surface area, very small.
14.
by wolverine876 2y ago
It's usually on public property, or sometimes on corporate property. I don't think I've seen much graffiti on some private individual's property. It's not on the front of people's houses. > Most graffiti is
15.
by wolverine876 2y ago
People tend to apply such hard-core legal standards to those they don't like. As the corrupt dictator says, 'For my enemies, the law! For my friends, everything!' Law-and-order leaders almost exclusively mean it for people th
16.
by wolverine876 2y ago
People do lots of illegal things. When some tech titan does it, many on HN decry the laws, the government, etc. Painting graffiti is relatively, completely, harmless.
17.
by wolverine876 2y ago
> exactly nothing ... tiniest ... I know it's commonplace, but let's consider whether extreme expression has any rational substance to it, whether it's somehow more meaningful than an argument with actual reasons. Outrage
18.
by wolverine876 2y ago
Is outrage somehow a rational reason for anything?
19.
by wolverine876 2y ago
> It always baffles me that people are in such a defeated state of mind that graffiti is just simply accepted and seemingly nothing is done about it. As usual, the answer is found by examining assumptions: 1) It's somehow bad, and 2
20.
by wolverine876 2y ago
Factually, the property isn't destroyed. Beyond that, I think the street art often enhances it and otherwise is easily ignored. You may see it differently, but what you see isn't "what it is", it's just your perspec
21.
by wolverine876 2y ago
> it’s not something everyone can stick their heads in the sand about because it makes them uncomfortable. That's a strawperson and you know it; IMHO that argument is sticking one's head in the sand to avoid the unconfortable i
22.
by wolverine876 2y ago
That's really looking for problems. The Palantir CEO said things much more extreme: As the moderator asked general questions about the panelists’ views on the future of war, Schmidt and Cohen answered cautiously. But Karp, who’s known
23.
by wolverine876 2y ago
> The silver lining is that the people with less scruples might also be less competent and their solutions more fragile resulting in operational failure when deployed, in turn saving humanity. Think of the complete lack of agency, the po
24.
by wolverine876 2y ago
> if you refuse to build it, someone with less scruples will. Every time you see an argument for the inevitability of X - especially something frightening - know that it's just an old rhetorical tactic, even cheap playground trash t
25.
by wolverine876 2y ago
The ability of the extreme right to promulgate talking points seemingly directly into people's beliefs, bypassing the moral, spiritual, and reasoning parts of their brains, is surreal. People just parrot stuff that is paper thin, that
26.
by wolverine876 2y ago
Why not introduce furry mammals that don't need a large expanse of nature, but can adapt to and live directly in the urban environment. Something that could live in all sorts of corners of the city, even underground, and consume unwant
27.
by wolverine876 2y ago
Why do all the arguments for NY being dangerous, etc. lack an objective basis (except one person's)? I think it's because it's fabricated. Lots of NYers love living there, obviously - they are willing to pay far more for the
28.
by wolverine876 2y ago
You some controls: for example, the same mass/second of water - your water pressure might differ between hot and cold sources.
29.
by wolverine876 2y ago
You controlled for the volume / depth of water, which for the same mass would be greater when warmer, and the resulting changed interaction with objects ...?
30.
by wolverine876 2y ago
They run plants, but are they reliably cost-effective?

More ›