>Do you believe rehabilitation is impossible or do you want revenge?

I don't believe that someone who commits mass murder can be rehabilitated, no. It isn't about revenge; it's about public safety.

Someone once pointed out that hoping a rapist gets raped in prison isn't a victory for his victim(s), because it somehow gives him what he had coming to him, but it's actually a victory for rape and violence. I wish I could remember who said that, because they are right. The score doesn't go Rapist: 1 World: 1. It goes Rape: 2.

What this man did is unspeakable, and he absolutely deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison. If he needs to be kept away from other prisoners as a safety issue, there are ways to do that without keeping him in solitary confinement, which has been shown conclusively to be profoundly cruel and harmful.

Putting him in solitary confinement, as a punitive measure, is not a victory for the good people in the world. It's a victory for inhumane treatment of human beings. This ruling is, in my opinion, very good and very strong for human rights, *precisely* because it was brought by such a despicable and horrible person. It affirms that all of us have basic human rights, even the absolute worst of us on this planet.

This is precisely why I lost all interest in Oculus the instant I heard that it had been acquired by Facebook.

My recent favorite response: "I reject your linear thinking. You are much smarter than I about how to find technical solutions"

Although it's clear I'm not smarter than him as I hadn't considered leveraging non-linear causality to complete technology projects on-time

I thought it was wacky before I understood where he is going.

Essentially he wants to push responsibilities down to the state level, making the individual states essentially compete with each other. Right now, if you don't like how the Dpt. Education does things well tough luck. You'd have to immigrate to Canada which is typically impractical. So there's no incentive to fix things really, because the US Govt has a captive consumer. Having the individual states compete, there suddenly becomes motivation to improve.

Sounds like a plan, but I still don't feel it applies to the scientific research agencies. I don't see how you can have those as anything but a collective resource.

Depends who you ask. Easterners use the definition which suits their political inclinations. Everyone else says "look at a map jackasses".

It's pretty clear to me that the danger comes from divided attention and the level of concentration required to interact in a remote conversation with terrible signal to noise.

If the danger arose from holding the phone to your ear then we should also outlaw scratching your ear and adjusting your glasses. The current law is safety theater.

Most lenses reach ideal sharpness around F8, so you are both right.

Smaller apertures and you run into diffraction limitations. Larger apertures and you run into narrow depth of field issues, as well as design issues. I believe it is difficult to accurately manufacture the lens to align at large apertures.

I notice in myself that music can distract or enhance concentration depending on music style.

I've concluded that music with vocals is very distracting. I believe there is contention for the language part of my brain which is simultaneously trying to decode the lyrics and decode the words on the computer screen.

On the other hand, if the music is entirely instrumental, then there is no such issue and I can have full concentration.

The audiophiles I've talked to don't get turntables and tube amps for better accuracy. They just like the sound better.

Essentially the turntable and amp become part of the instrument. They do change the music, but in a desirable way.

In the crossing points I've been through, you are on US soil when questioned by US guards. So if they don't like something you can be detained.

I find it somewhat strange that US guards could operate on Canadian soil.