= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
CAE_Jones comments on Open Thread, September 23-29, 2013 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (261)
I'm seeing a lot of comments in which it is implicitly assumed that most everyone reading lives in a major city where transportation is trivial and there is plenty of memetic diversity. I'm wondering if this assumption is generally accurate and I'm just the odd one out, or if it's actually kinda fallacious.
(I can't seem to figure out poll formatting. Hm.)
A city of ~200,000 people if you include the outlying rural areas, in which you can go from the several block wide downtown to farmland in 4-5 miles in the proper directions. Fifteen minutes from another city of 60,000 which is very much a state college town. Forty minutes away from a city of nearly 500,000 people.
Granted the city of ~200,000 has a major university and a number of biotech companies.
Its somewhat inaccurate in my case (I live in the suburbs of a semi-major city).
A lot of the CFAR/MIRI core lives in Berkeley.
I think living in a big city is the standard that most people here consider normal. It's like living in the first world. We know that there are people from India who visit but we still see being from the first world as normal.
When you have the choice between living in a place with memetic diversity or not living in such a place the choice seems obvious.