8077628 | 6 years ago | on: Why is the ‘race to 5G’ a race?
8077628's comments
8077628 | 6 years ago | on: Goto and the folly of dogma (2018)
8077628 | 6 years ago | on: Practices for writing high-performance Go
8077628 | 7 years ago | on: Living Wage Calculator
8077628 | 7 years ago | on: The 'Dark Ages' Weren't as Dark as We Thought
I don't understand why people feel the need to whitewash this, aside from a preexisting religious motive or mindlessly being contrary. Civilization went backwards after Rome fell. It took centuries to rediscover and reincorporate those parts of Western culture.
I worry that too many people secretly want to go back to being serfs.
8077628 | 7 years ago | on: Thomas Kuhn Wasn't So Bad
8077628 | 7 years ago | on: Thomas Kuhn Wasn't So Bad
8077628 | 7 years ago | on: My Salary Progression in Tech
8077628 | 7 years ago | on: WireGuard for MacOS
8077628 | 7 years ago | on: WireGuard for MacOS
8077628 | 7 years ago | on: Did Thomas Kuhn Kill Truth? A review of Errol Morris's critique
There's a mature science, where knowledge is limited but accurate, where new findings cause a recontextualization but no paradigm shift, and the previous knowledge is preserved within its new context,, and immature science, where people are doing things wrong, reaching conclusions with inadequate evidence, and stuff gets thrown out during a "paradigm shift", i.e. when they start doing mature science.
Examples of mature science are physics with the incorporation of relativity and quantum physics, which preserved Newtonian physics, or biology, where the human genome project revealed that there were 1/3 as many genes in humans as was previously thought, at which the field barely batted an eye and shifted in a heartbeat to looking more at gene regulation. Clearly, these are huge changes in the fields, but they don't rise to the level of a Kuhnian "paradigm shift" since the old knowledge and vocab and understandings were preserved.
What's an immature science? Probably the social sciences, or those areas of other fields where there's reproducibility problems, p-hacking, and other dysfunctions. To the extent that these fields have overarching paradigms, they may suffer a "paradigm shift". But in mature science, there just aren't any paradigm shifts, in the Kuhnian sense, happening, because a mature science has sufficient evidence in hand before generating a "paradigm".
Kuhn was wrong. But "Paradigm Shift" is a flashy phrase and it captured the zeitgeist of the time it was written. At this point, anything that helps tame this pop-philosophy-of-science phenomenon is not unwelcome, especially because, yes, Kuhn's writings are supporting anti-realist postmodernist trash, without being especially misread.
8077628 | 7 years ago | on: Ending support for Dropbox syncing to drives with certain uncommon file systems
Dropbox is violating their philosophy as a universal solution and squandering their key selling point for some small cost savings. What a horrible decision.
8077628 | 7 years ago | on: E.E. Cummings on Art, Life, and Being Unafraid to Feel
8077628 | 7 years ago | on: California Eyes Data Privacy Measure
8077628 | 7 years ago | on: Golden Rice meets food safety standards in three leading regulatory agencies
Except the BT gene is exactly the opposite of a pesticide-heavy monoculture. The point is to make spraying unnecessary. Do you usually just invert the reality of things that clash with your preferred narrative?
>Most of the food is still farmed by poor small scale farmers, which are often more efficient than large-scale farmers.
Curious about this claim, I found https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_productivity#Sour...:
Some sources of agricultural productivity are:
-Mechanization
-High yield varieties, which were the basis of the Green revolution
-Fertilizers: Primary plant nutrients: nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium[5][6] and secondary nutrients such as sulfur, zinc, copper, manganese, calcium, magnesium and molybdenum on deficient soil
-Education in management and entrepreneurial techniques to decrease fixed and variable costs and optimise manpower
-Liming of acid soils to raise pH and to provide calcium and magnesium
-Irrigation
-Herbicides
-Genetic engineering
-Pesticides
-Increased plant density
-Animal feed made more digestible by processing
-Keeping animals indoors in cold weather
I don't think any of these correlate with smaller farm size. Do you have any sources?8077628 | 7 years ago | on: Batch editing files with ed
8077628 | 8 years ago | on: Controversial New Milk Shakes Up Big Dairy
8077628 | 8 years ago | on: Controversial New Milk Shakes Up Big Dairy
It's a mixed bag on the gluten free thing, with more availability of GF foods but the GF label not meaning crap to a real Celiac sufferer anymore.
But nobody has an a1 allergy. This is just making the fad without the medical condition existing at all. So in this case, no, there is no benefit, aside from redistributing wealth from the feebleminded to the "job creators". Some people think that's a good thing.
8077628 | 8 years ago | on: Controversial New Milk Shakes Up Big Dairy
8077628 | 8 years ago | on: Controversial New Milk Shakes Up Big Dairy
And the irony is that milk has a component, lactose, that is legitimately indigestible for large numbers of people. It was gluten before gluten was gluten, except not BS! But products already exist for that, so they're glutenizing milk because, let's face it, a sucker is born every second and it ain't cheap sending kids to college these days.
Godspeed A2 milk, may the impoverishment of your customers reduce their propensity to procreate!
Preemptive edit: the stealth marketing is so so thick in this thread! Yuck!