extremely dobbsian concept imo

It's sad that there was never a scene or era where click-down immediately caused an action to go through. We were never willing to sacrifice the possibility of double-click or drag actions for the absolute mousefeel that would have.

To achieve the required levels of purity, such a web browser would need to have existed in the pre text-input era. I think Netscape arrived too late.
Unfortunately, mspaint had a text tool.

The rapturist apocalypticism of Republicans is a notable one because, I'm pretty sure open conversation would cure them of that, It wouldn't take much arguing to make a convincing case that no one's getting into heaven for exacerbating climate change, or instigating a war, or manifesting Gog or wtv.

The whole separation of church and state thing seems politically cursed to me: How can you ever have a civil conversation with someone who you've essentially banned them from honestly communicating the real reasons they want the policies they want? (abortion, rapture, heteronomativity etc)

"stop listening to podcasts" says medium diametrically opposite them. "stop microblogging", says podcasts. War between nations of podcast and micriblogging expected by 2040

What's your favourite font. I think mine's Rubik, but I always end up using Inter everywhere.

background: I see a lot of people who seem to think that because they hear lots of negative takes from american things and no negative takes about chinese things, this must be because the chinese things are less bad.

When I'm doing as much as I possibly can about a situation, when my skill is maxed out, I allow myself to relax. Is there anything blocking you from reaching that state with this nightmare?

I wonder whether Elon's opinion of sam has found purchase. Stargate suggests otherwise but it's unclear.

Option 2. Why are you asking this?

One of my top peeves. Why do people conflate these? Is it because of Peter Singer specifically? (he used to be prefu but turned hedu and is currently the most famous utilitarian. Parfit was also hedu or something like it.)

My answer to this is just that it's not a problem, we don't need true bleeding heart preference utilitarians in order to implement preference utilitarianism. Egoists trading with egoists would implement it due to preference concavity.

Do you actually mean "just as"? Like have you actually been attempting to quantify the arbitrariness of cooperative frameworks?

The Lynn post wasn't about why he believed it. Should it have been?

Could you give some examples of some lynchian realities?

Oh. Well, I always laughed my ass off whenever I read "grotesque penguin" because it suggested to me that lovecraft either didn't know what penguins looked like and just assumed they were grotesque, or did, and somehow considered penguins to be grotesque. Either way, extremely iconic of him.

I bet all of the kids there agreed with the sentiment and were glad to have their feelings validated.

I'm not saying you should just never do black-box learning, I don't know if there's an alternative, but I am gonna start looking for an alternative.
Which I guess we can call "principled learning".