Comment author: Douglas_Knight3 09 November 2008 09:44:53PM 0 points [-]

our social structure and business rests on the tenets of what we believe

That sounds like propaganda, like the claim that atheists can't be moral. Don't let anyone tell you what to believe, especially don't let them tell you that if you disagree one one point, you must disagree on others. Work out for yourself what is possible.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight3 07 November 2008 01:47:50PM 0 points [-]

When someone asks you "Why are you doing X?", And you don't remember an answer previously in mind, Do not ask yourself "Why am I doing X?".

How dangerous is that second step? There's definitely potential for confabulation when you try to remember if you'd ever actively decided on X.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight3 07 November 2008 02:12:21AM 0 points [-]

Trying to get people to mentally commit before they find out how expensive it is?

Bah, that's nothing. For American healthcare, you have to actually commit before learning the price.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight3 05 November 2008 05:12:38AM 0 points [-]

The congressman didn't say anything about voting.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight3 04 November 2008 05:25:50AM 2 points [-]

Boris: There's a small amount of subtlety in actually doing step 1.

Isn't it simply impossible? That doesn't interfere with your claim that such a Turing machine exists, but step 1 claims that it's computable.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight3 18 October 2008 04:32:43PM 1 point [-]

Marcello, I think your list generalizes too much. I see three main types of words on the list. The first type indicates in-group out-group distinction and seems pretty poisonous to me. The second are ad hominem arguments which are dangerous, but do apply sometimes. And then there are a few like "too complicated." You call those "negative affect words"? Surely it is better to say "that is too complicated to be true" than to say simply "that is not true"?

Comment author: Douglas_Knight3 16 October 2008 05:05:52AM 0 points [-]

But if we aren't to forgive tyrants for their good intentions, shouldn't we only judge GW by his results?

Yes, when we judge people, we should judge them by the same standard. But this post mentioned the tyrants' intentions, so it should also mention GW's.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight3 14 October 2008 04:00:26AM 3 points [-]

TGGP: at the very least, it's well-documented that he defused a couple of coups.

My understanding is that GW decided he'd get more pages in the history books if he declined the crown. George III agreed: "if he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world."

Comment author: Douglas_Knight3 28 September 2008 08:54:41PM 1 point [-]

michael vassar, You've quietly slid from engineers to programmers. Other kinds of engineers need a lot more money to make it a hobby. Maybe they make up for it with less variation in ability, but I doubt it. Even if you didn't mean to talk about other engineers, their situation needs explaining.

In response to The Level Above Mine
Comment author: Douglas_Knight3 26 September 2008 03:52:27PM 3 points [-]

How much do you worry about age 40? Is that just based on your father? Conway passed 40 before Marcello was born.

View more: Prev | Next