I like sfo, but he's a perfect example of someone who is wrong about shit.
If I gotta hate people for being wrong about shit, I've got to hate myself first because I was wrong for a long time about a lot of things.
If I gotta hate people for being wrong about shit, I've got to hate myself first because I was wrong for a long time about a lot of things.
If this is a government school, the sort of government school that kids have to go to by law unless they're being homeschooled, that's a hangin'.
I don't even care about what it's about. Make it a Russian flag or Ukrainian flag or an Israeli flag or Palestinian flag I don't care, that's a hangin'.
I don't even care about what it's about. Make it a Russian flag or Ukrainian flag or an Israeli flag or Palestinian flag I don't care, that's a hangin'.
Even if that were true that they did, I don't know what to do with that information.
I mean, there's a lot of famous people I might pay to see naked, but he's one of the ones I'd pay not to see naked.
I mean, there's a lot of famous people I might pay to see naked, but he's one of the ones I'd pay not to see naked.
Honestly, anyone who knows about Haiti knew he was right about it. The only people for whom it was a surprise are people who don't know anything about what's going on beyond their own borders.
Anyone who says that they have nothing to hide hasn't thought about it hard enough.
I'm sure most of them have at least one detail about their lives that they would like to keep from at least one other person in their lives. Maybe they would like to prefer to keep their porn searches out of their mother's mailbox, or maybe there's a private conversation between two people that would really make their lives difficult if it got out. Not to mention, standards change -- you're telling me that 20 years ago you never said anything, not one thing that could be taken is wrong now, that you've never had one stupid idea in your head that you've put pen to paper it about?
I mean it's possible, but I don't really believe it. The only person who could possibly be so perfect is a person who's never done anything.
I'm sure most of them have at least one detail about their lives that they would like to keep from at least one other person in their lives. Maybe they would like to prefer to keep their porn searches out of their mother's mailbox, or maybe there's a private conversation between two people that would really make their lives difficult if it got out. Not to mention, standards change -- you're telling me that 20 years ago you never said anything, not one thing that could be taken is wrong now, that you've never had one stupid idea in your head that you've put pen to paper it about?
I mean it's possible, but I don't really believe it. The only person who could possibly be so perfect is a person who's never done anything.
I believe in the United Kingdom right now 60% of GDP is government spending.
More money is being spent by government and by the rest of the economy combined, and some good old boy with a couple buckets of paint has to go fix up the signs because there's no money.
More money is being spent by government and by the rest of the economy combined, and some good old boy with a couple buckets of paint has to go fix up the signs because there's no money.
There is more than one culture on Earth. You can be many places around the world and while they may not completely agree with the specifics, there are some general agreements on what is good and what is evil. In most places, murdering an innocent person is considered wrong for example. Many if not most places have something approximating property rights, virtually everyone has some sort of familial ties and community ties.
In the graysonian ethic in one chapter I consider a creature that is nothing like humans, and it becomes immediately apparent that a creature that is nothing like a human would not share any of our values, whereas a creature that is like a human would likely share many of our values because the fundamental stuff that we are ends up shaping what we would consider to be values to uphold...
There are always going to be different values at all, survival of the self versus survival of the community or the family for example. Freedom from rules versus protection of rules. The rights and responsibilities and duties of one person and where they intersect with the rights and responsibilities and duties of another person...
In the graysonian ethic in one chapter I consider a creature that is nothing like humans, and it becomes immediately apparent that a creature that is nothing like a human would not share any of our values, whereas a creature that is like a human would likely share many of our values because the fundamental stuff that we are ends up shaping what we would consider to be values to uphold...
There are always going to be different values at all, survival of the self versus survival of the community or the family for example. Freedom from rules versus protection of rules. The rights and responsibilities and duties of one person and where they intersect with the rights and responsibilities and duties of another person...
I don't know how safe it is to say that it's good to be evil, but something that I've been thinking about a lot lately is the fact that we really do need to have both but would be considered good and what would be considered evil in order to survive in this world. The world is harsh, we've managed to make it into something reasonably livable, but there are good times and there are bad times and when there are bad times in particular sometimes you need to make hard decisions that are going to hurt someone else just to survive, and in those moments if you can't make hard decisions you might just take everyone with you.
It's like... We have to live with the fact that we have to be evil sometimes because that's the world we live in, but we have to have faith that being good is good so that we don't fully lose ourselves to evil. In the end, where we can be good we should be good.
It's like... We have to live with the fact that we have to be evil sometimes because that's the world we live in, but we have to have faith that being good is good so that we don't fully lose ourselves to evil. In the end, where we can be good we should be good.
My dad and I both agree that music kinda died around 2000.
Now you might think with me saying that that I just picked the music that I already liked, but I've found music I like since then, it's just that none of it was created recently.
I mean, around 2000 entire genres just sort of stopped existing in a mainstream manner.
I've seen convincing arguments that the boom in piracy around that time is a big factor -- there just isn't as much money to be made so they need to go with stuff that's safe and cheap to make.
Now you might think with me saying that that I just picked the music that I already liked, but I've found music I like since then, it's just that none of it was created recently.
I mean, around 2000 entire genres just sort of stopped existing in a mainstream manner.
I've seen convincing arguments that the boom in piracy around that time is a big factor -- there just isn't as much money to be made so they need to go with stuff that's safe and cheap to make.
Not to mention we know full well that there are major problems in the scientific establishment.
I mean it's great that you can cite some p hacked study that was specifically intended to support your point and could not be reproduced independently for any amount of money, put out of establishments that are on the record as giving support to people who agree with you and will go out of their way to destroy anyone who disagrees with you, and put all it goes to show is that you are well entrenched into the establishment.
This appeal to authority fallacy can be really dangerous. You could cite all kinds of University papers in Germany in 1938, did that prove that those policies were correct and we should be acting on their contents?
Although my argument applies to one side of the political spectrum at this moment, my argument is inherently neutral and at different times would apply to both sides of the political spectrum depending on who controls the institutions of that time.
I mean it's great that you can cite some p hacked study that was specifically intended to support your point and could not be reproduced independently for any amount of money, put out of establishments that are on the record as giving support to people who agree with you and will go out of their way to destroy anyone who disagrees with you, and put all it goes to show is that you are well entrenched into the establishment.
This appeal to authority fallacy can be really dangerous. You could cite all kinds of University papers in Germany in 1938, did that prove that those policies were correct and we should be acting on their contents?
Although my argument applies to one side of the political spectrum at this moment, my argument is inherently neutral and at different times would apply to both sides of the political spectrum depending on who controls the institutions of that time.
I feel like looking for a virgin on tinder is like going to the desert to find water to drink. I mean you might find it, but you're in the wrong place buddy.
They're Porsche. They were never going to sell that many cars, but the ones they do sell are fast. that's their raison d'etre.
Whatever power source they use, that's the point of the company, and if they're not making fast cars people aren't going to overpay for them.
I know a Porsche owner, he drives a Toyota most of the time. I suspect most Porsche owners are like that. Even if they own a Porsche EV, even if they're all-in on EVs, they'll also own a boring EV from a mainstream company for day to day use.
Whatever power source they use, that's the point of the company, and if they're not making fast cars people aren't going to overpay for them.
I know a Porsche owner, he drives a Toyota most of the time. I suspect most Porsche owners are like that. Even if they own a Porsche EV, even if they're all-in on EVs, they'll also own a boring EV from a mainstream company for day to day use.
