All of VManuel's Comments + Replies

VManuel00

That's actually in incredibly good, rational method for learning to write. It allows the writer to study an existing model, practice, then compare against the model afterwards. One could do this with pretty much any author, journal, or paper that you enjoy, and it should be effective no matter the type of writing. Now that I think about it, I'm going to suggest it to some friends of mine who teach English classes in the area. Thanks!

VManuel10

I think you're on the right track, Caesium. I've arrived at 41 years with a dynamic 25-year plan ahead of me, and I would suggest that you spend some time spreading yourself among very different activities and causes for at least four years, then consolidate your time into what you enjoy most. You will find that not all charitable organizations are equal, and there will be some causes (whether charitable or not) that really grab you by the short hairs and demand your attention. Think of it rather like the second run at your school life - you start with as... (read more)

3Vaniver
I suppose, but "America" recent rather than "Internet" recent. Carnegie's Dictum is relevant, as is Wesley's sermon The Use of Money, delivered in 1744. Those are just the two that I'm familiar with off the top of my head; it would not surprise me to see prominent figures from earlier with similar plans.
VManuel20

The world is not an inherently kind nor fair place. It is up to us to make it so.

  • E.A. Manuel, Jr.
1beoShaffer
Um, who are you quoting? -edited to add Ah, E.A Manuel thanks for adding that bit
2Desrtopa
Have you read the sequences yet? It seems like you're anthropomorphizing AI to an unreasonable degree (yes, arguing about how they're going to be different from us can still be too anthropomorphizing,) and that humans are "inherently untrustworthy and random" is a pretty confused statement. Humans are chaotic (difficult to predict without very complete information,) but not random (outcomes chosen arbitrarily from among the available options,) and as for "inherently untrustworthy, it's not really even clear what such a statement would mean. That may sound overly critical or pedantic, but it's really not obvious, for instance, what if anything you think would qualify as not inherently untrustworthy, and why you think they're different.
VManuel10

Human nature dictates that we both assume 'someone else' is going to start a group, and assume the task of creating said group is very difficult. So even those people who lurk and say to themselves, "Gosh, I'd love to have a group like that in my city" won't take the first step unless they are given "permission".

In that sentence, you really did hit the nail on the head there, Bentarm.