Jiro
22m ago
I cannot log in on Firefox under Android.
The behavior is different between a login with a bad password and an unsuccessful login with a correct user and password. In the latter case no error is produced and I see the list of threads but I am not logged in.
Enhanced tracking protection is standard and there are no exceptions. Desktop site is off.
Chrome works fine.
Jiro
15hr ago
Giving him a contract is enough work that they're going to have a filter to get rid of likely spurious offers before reaching the contract stage.
This sounds like the explanation might be "the author just wants an excuse to write about his pet subject, and the scifi elements are only there in service of that and nothing else."
And having Buddhism be literally true in a novel with no other fantasy elements and no effect on the world sounds like the writer believes Buddhism is true in the real world and doesn't think he's adding a fantasy element, or adding an element at all. So no effect on the world is expected. (Googling shows that I nailed it.)
Jiro
1d ago
Is there even a single instance of an indigenous (by which I mean tribal when Europeans showed up, not organized states like Japan) people actually advancing to the technological/military frontier without getting colonized?
There are almost no cases of indigenous people not getting colonized, period. So the fact that there are no cases of indigenous people not getting colonized and also X doesn't really tell you much.
Jiro
1d ago
I think there is a clear distinction between the wishing for someone to die and wishing for them to get murdered.
...
To further complicate matters, there are certainly cases where homicides are widely celebrated.
The difference here between homicide and murder is significant.
Jiro
2d ago
Moses Maimonides says the only punishment the rapist should face is lashings for homosexuality.
C'mon. Where's your source for this? (Notice that the word "only" does not appear above. Also note that "doesn't count as intercourse" doesn't mean "doesn't count as rape".)
Jiro
3d ago
That's out of context in pretty much the same way (except you quoted enough to show the context). It says they're not liable for violating the prohibition against homosexual intercourse. It doesn't say that it removes the liability for violating the prohibition against rape.
I already get why all those medieval lords used to confiscate all the Jews' property and kick them out. They really wanted the property.
I had contractual agreements and financial dealings with a group of people, and I learned that their religious/legal system was based around using cheap wording tricks to bamboozle their own fucking God, I certainly wouldn't trust them to keep faith with me.
I'm pretty sure that the last thing that medieval legal systems were based around is good faith following the spirit of the laws, unless "what the lord says, goes" counts as the spirit of the law.
Jiro
3d ago
if He didn’t rise from the dead, then wasn’t it actually the worst advice ever? The example Jesus provides is an example of how to get killed
If you assume that modern Christianity is otherwise correct about him, his ideas thrived and are believed by billions of people today. That's a pretty big success, even if he personally lost his life.
Jiro
4d ago
Out of context. It means that a boy has to be 9 for an act of intercourse to legally count as one for other purposes. The prohibition on rape is separate and has no minimum age.
Jiro
4d ago
The answer is the same as it is for hairpieces: You can notice that there are some really bad hairpieces, and some somewhat good ones that you eventually notice after a while. This lets you extrapolate to how many hairpieces are so good that you can't notice them.
Jiro
4d ago
The same issue applies to "it's about these specific things ruled illegal by a court" as to "it's about hypothetical illegal things": that's not how people talk. The way you'd have it, it's as if these congresspeople suddenly gave a speech where they said that there are infinitely many prime numbers. Why did they say that? Who knows, we just wanted to inform you about that. Isn't that a weird thing to suddenly speak about? Naah, they just decided to say it. And it's true, after all. Maybe tomorrow they'll explain to you how it's against the law to rob banks.
Making a statement about not having to obey illegal orders from Trump implies that Trump is giving illegal orders, that they should not be obeyed, and that you have some reason to warn people about them. Nobody thinks there's a need to warn anyone about orders that have already been ruled illegal by a court.
Jiro
5d ago
The constitution does not give the President, or any official, the power to give orders contrary to itself or to law. To the extent the President's orders are unlawful, he has no authority to give them.
You are being overly literal to hide what's being said.
Suddenly announcing that illegal orders from the President shouldn't be followed may literally be a hypothetical claiming that to the extent the orders are unlawful they don't need to be followed. But what it actually means is "the President is giving out illegal orders now and they should be disobeyed now," even if the speech doesn't literally include the word "now".
Jiro
5d ago
Ad campaigns cause outrage--and should cause outrage--as if the things in them were said sincerely instead of being calculated. You could even make that a general principle: if someone makes a calculated move about something whose truth they don't really care about, but screws up and does or says something terrible, you get to judge them on it anyway. "I was only pretending to be a jerk" is never an excuse.
Jiro
6d ago
Things that are true can sound an awful lot like things that are false; you need to look at the object level to determine how true and how false the accusations are, not just pattern-match it to what Hitler did. I'm reminded of CS Lewis' remarks about witches: if there really were people in league with the devil, then we ought to persecute them. Witch hunts are bad only because witches aren't real.
Jiro
6d ago
If they're second or third generation, the immigration/naturalization process can't have weeded them out (at least not directly).
Jiro
7d ago
It's much easier for your GDP per capita to go up by a larger factor if you start at a small number, so the comparison to American GDP proves nothing.
Jiro
7d ago
Time savings is linear in distance. I personally don't think it matters much until we're getting to pretty significant distance trips
Time savings per hour spent speeding is constant. The shorter distance also has a shorter speeding time.
Jiro
7d ago
He can definitely afford $15k + installation.
They're not trying to test "can he afford 15K", they're trying to test "is he willing to pay 15K", which is a subset of that. He may have enough assets that 15K wouldn't make a dent in his budget, but that doesn't mean he's actually willing to pay.
Jiro
12d ago
Probably a lot of the people posting here who criticize it aren't against vaccines (although even then I'm not so sure). This place is, compared to the general population, weird.
Except it is patently clear that the audience for this public shaming doesn't exist anymore.
It never needed an audience. It's always been a relatively small number of people doing it--these people just have a lot of power. It doesn't matter that, for instance, Disney refuses to make white men a big part of its audience most of the time. So they lose some money, they don't care. They aren't going to go out of business or get fired because of it.
Also, bear in mind that woke media can get popular. The audience is probably race blind and sex blind in the way that used to be considered good and now marks you as a fascist. They don't actually object to the media being woke at all unless it's very over the top (lectures about how straight men are evil, 100% female cast, etc.)--it's just that if the writers put a high priority on woke, they probably put a low priority on everything else such as good writing, so the odds are against woke things getting an audience. But it can still happen (Baldur's Gate 3 for instance).
Because the Taliban isn't "their country", it is just a group of thugs even if it is located in their country. You wouldn't ask why someone in a place run by the Mafia, or a Jew in Nazi Germany, would sell out "their country".
If they are doing it only for the money, sure, but if they are doing it for other reasons, they still need to eat.
More options
Context Copy link