Comment Re:Are you kidding (Score 1) 818
Warning: you're just going to make people double down on their previously-held belief:
Warning: you're just going to make people double down on their previously-held belief:
What if your concept of absolute determinism as implied here is actually not absolute and has limitations?
Then it wouldn't be Conway's Game of Life, would it?
Hmm. Overly-cynical thought:
Convict him, put him in prison, let him start serving out his sentence, vacate conviction based on venue.
Re-charge him in the proper venue, put him in jail without bail, let him stew for a few years. Then try him again, convict him again, put him in prison for a year or so again. Then vacate THAT conviction based on another technicality.
Then re-charge him again, put him in jail without bail again, let him stew for a few more years while you set up a third trial. Then try him again, convict him again, put him in prison for awhile again, then vacate THAT conviction...
I wonder how long you could play judiciary ping-pong with someone you REALLY didn't like?
Not if he gave them free willl, meaning even the ability to do things that were "outside" of the creator's will/temperament.
Can you explain what that means within the context of "THE DETERMINISTIC APPLICATION OF RULES", please? Because otherwise you are making zero sense whatsoever.
So the guy at the PC said to himself "Thank you for nothing, guys" and went making himself coffee.
Well, what else were they supposed to do? They're DETERMINISTIC. Their entire existence is based on THE DETERMINISTIC APPLICATION OF RULES, right?
So if the guy at the PC is butthurt, maybe he should have picked different rules or different initial conditions, right? Because once you hit 'run' you can't really blame the process for giving you its output.
Because those are the only two possible choices we could make here.
Unfortunately, yes. "Over-regulated bureaucratic tyranny" and "Unregulated plutocratic tyranny" are both strong attractors in our economic phase-space. Any attempt to compromise between them is basically flipping a coin to see which one you wind up with - and if the coin lands on-edge you wind up with an over-regulated bureaucratic tyranny serving unregulated plutocratic masters.
Good luck!
So, you are saying boxer B never fought?
I'm saying people will generally treat Boxer B as if he never fought, compared to how they treat Boxer A.
Maybe you treat your friends, your allies, and your heroes like their effort matters, but for everyone else, the Fundamental Attribution Error is the fallback of choice.
A fight is not defined by the outcome but by the effort.
No it isn't. Not to people outside the fight, anyway.
When you are depressed you are supposed to have lower mental activity, and yet some of the most brilliant people have been known to be clinically depressed [citation not needed]. So then, if depression sometimes comes with brilliance, what gives?
Here's a weird analogy that seems roughly accurate:
Being depressed is like being perpetually out of gas. You just can't *do* anything.
Now, your average person's brain is a typical Honda 90 horsepower engine. Good gas mileage, terrible performance.
Your average genius's brain is like a Ferrari V8 - super-high performance, but at the cost of needing a LOT more fuel.
If everyone's getting the same amount of emotional 'fuel' from their friends, family, culture, society etc., who's going to run out first?
Can you please convince ESR to change his name to Eric CloseParens? It's been bugging me for like, decades.
especially when the current method of revealing software trade secrets is "right-click, select 'decompile'".
So what happens when the flywheel shatters at high speed?
You clearly have a knack for doing outrageous, dangerous, or even illegal things and getting away with them, while others would get pinched.
What do you attribute that to? Why do you think you've managed to violate so many laws, customs, and mores and get away with it, compared to your average resident of San Quentin?
And yet, AT&T wants more money because they think they have the right to charge Netflix more to pass through their tollbooth.
- it's not their 'tollbooth', it's their road. On a road you can charge different rates for different types of vehicles, this is the same situation. An eighteen wheeler can cause more damage to the road that requires more maintenance than a motorcycle, this is the same thing: a movie that needs to be streamed a million times takes up much more capacity and energy and basically uses the system much more than millions of small individual requests do.
See, I even used an appropriate car analogy.
Wait, the internet is back to being like a truck? I thought it was a series of tubes.
Do you think that people who disapprove of science are going to let their kids watch a science show?
Many people are unenthusiastic about their work.
