tryonenow's comments

The problem with the definition of equality within the modern feminist movement is that it does not make allowance for the social power that females intrinsically have over men. In particular it completely ignores that, as in the vast majority of sexually dimorphic species, women are (at social scales) effectively the gatekeepers of the bedroom, and this gives females massive influence over male behavior. The dominant socially acceptable view of equality therefore is markedly unequal, and quite self serving as the "ideal" balance of power within the feminist framework becomes rather lopsided.

>This is basically a red flag for any relationship. If the only thing making or allowing a person to be happy in life is their partner then something is wrong. Mental health is no joke and not being able to enjoy life is usually a symptom of an underlying cause. Depression is probably the most common but anxiety disorders can be similarly hard.

This is nonsense. The instinct to reproduce is inescapable for the vast majority of people. Without it humans would not exist. There is only so much social conditioning that can be done to override the innate drive for partnership and sex. Ignoring this basic drive, which is implicit in Maslow's hierarchy of needs, disenfranchises young men who are disproportionately driven by evolutionarily derived instinct to seek romantic female companionship.

>A partner is not a replacement for the natural circle of close friends humans are supposed to have

No, more like friends are not a replacement for intimacy.

They didn't really indicate why the end is sealed with a fluid as opposed to something physical. I suspect it's because flowing ink with a solid stopper would create a vacuum and quickly cease to function. A stopper is fluid and so can flow along with the ink. The space between the stopper and the shell is probably vented.

So the fact that all information is biased is an excuse to force your own ideological bias into every communication?

This is as much of a fallacy as the common "everything is political" refrain. It's nothing but a dangerous rationalization of tribalism which breeds distrust of institutions and disenfranchises political minorities when the entire establishment leans in a particular direction and simultaneously determines the set of "acceptable" or "authoritative" sources. News media, "fact checkers", Wikipedia editors, etc. are implicitly colluding and the results are already manifesting with long term disastrous cultural and political consequences that we are yet to fully witness. There is no excuse for the hyper polarization of modern media, it is a disservice to everyone, and we need to un-normalize the kind of insidious activist journalism that has infested all of our major publications, though the system is self reinforcing at this point.

>Actually that's exactly the problem of systemic racism. Racism is at the level of the system and not the individual (though there are still individual racists out there for sure).

This is a neat explanatory theory but it is only one potential explanation and the reason that the modern movements that are predicated upon it are so dangerous is that it is treated as though it is the only explanation.

>It turns out that one of the likely reason for their disproportionate encounters with Police is their disproportionate socio-economic situation

There is absolutely nothing outside of correlation to indicate that this is a "likely" reason. The influence of a totally broken culture is drastically understated in socially acceptable discourse. This disproportionate rate of police encounters is unique to blacks and not nearly as prevalent among virtually any other low income socioeconomic group. It's trivial to blame injustices of the past (which plenty of other groups have experienced to various degrees) but even discussing the necessary, drastic change in culture required to solve this problem is taboo. And, ironically, such a position is incompatible with the modern progressive framework, within which such a solution would be seen as whitewashing or gentrification. And rightly so, ghetto black culture is inseparable from glorification of crime and violence.

So instead we blame the issue entirely on "systemic racism", the only proof of which is disparate outcome, and the solution will invariably lead the rest of society to suffer the effects of rampant criminality before leaders from black communities will, as has happened repeatedly in the past, later switch to complaining that black communities are underserved by police services, starting the cycle anew. Biden's now unpopular crime bill, along with disproportionate penalization of crack, had strong support from black leaders and black politicians, but today's ideologues class them with the same boogyman of so called systemic racism.

>The approach could one day eliminate the need for arduous physics-based calculations, instead relying on computer vision and machine learning to generate estimates in real time.

This is pretty fresh tech, but industry is already using it. We are doing something approximately similar where I work. Instead of running compute intensive finite element/finite difference simulations of physically dependent systems, a neural network (typically something structured like a transformer) is trained to output the calculations up to 6 orders of magnitude faster in our applications.

This changes this allows modeling dependent science and engineering solutions to be iterated over in real time - you can see the results of your edits as you manipulate your models. And the results, at least in our applications, have some ≈98 MSE. It isn't surprising in hindsight - deep neural networks are universal function approximations, and finite modeling is as close to pure mathematics as you can get in an industry setting. It feels like a perfect use case for deep neural nets.

That's not the application. ML accelerated modeling allows for instantaneous iteration. It dramatically speeds up creative engineering and scientific work. You take the final product and run it through a classical simulator as a final QC - though in my experience (in a different domain, but similar principle) the ML model outputs tend to be smooth/continuous and ≈98% MSE accurate. Of course you need to carefully train your models to span the input space, but for finite element/finite difference modeling this is relatively straightforward.

AWS GPU compute is pretty cheap if you don't need their newest beefiest rigs.

>Have you read a single page of any IPCC report or any major climate science publication?

As a matter of fact I have, though not in a few years. The papers and the commentary are both far less certain in their assertions than you would ever guess judging by the common fervor against "denialists".

>Like, "plants like CO2 so more CO2 might be good" is naive, elementary school reasoning. You might as well say "cardio exercise is good for the heart, so maybe medically inducing tachycardia is good for me". It's a complete non-sequitur with no empirical grounding.

No, it's based on studies of modern [0] and prehistoric plants. The Carboniferous period for example had CO2 levels comparable to today's and an explosion of coal forming plant growth.

>The rhetoric you're spewing is uninformed and dangerous. Even if you are exactly right (and well-founded scientific arguments would suggest you are definitely not), you are speaking completely out of turn without any evidentiary basis.

The "rhetoric" I'm spewing is scientifically rational skepticism. The current science as practiced is one sided, primarily because of reactions like yours, which equate differing opinions with heresy. Climate science is far from settled and so called denialism is nowhere near the same level as flat earth/chemtrails/antivax skepticism to which it is dismissively compared.

Also you haven't made a single argument against my point that we are looking at a tiny fraction of a periodic signal and presuming a trend - and that's because there fundamentally is no argument against it.

0. https://www.noaa.gov/news/study-global-plant-growth-surging-...

In my day to day work, if you showed me a noisy graph of a periodic signal measured over some 1/10th to 1/10000th of a typical cycle period, I would tell you that you don't have nearly enough data to establish a trend. Especially when the underlying phenomena are chaotic, complex, impossible to model accurately, and incompletely understood.

I also believe that the orthodoxy is overly negative. Who's to say that earth won't be better off with the newly arable northern latitudes? The OP seems to indicate a trend toward increasing rainfall as well - and plants thrive in increased CO2 environments.

Then there is the supposed looming socioeconomic catastrophy as sea levels rise and displace coastal inhabitants. That also sounds like positive economic churn to me, especially if you go by the metric of GDP. This will be a gradual migration over 50-100 years and potentially a boon for various economies - jobs for infrastructure and construction.

I'm just not sold on the idea that the world is ending (literally or figuratively) if we don't act.

This is arguably dangerous because I imagine tractor ownership is a strong prior for prediction of political affiliation. Just one of the many exploitable dangers of mass privacy invasion.

>STFU with all of the moralizing and support policies that actually work, even if you have to pony up a bit to pay for them. It's cheaper for you in the long run

>Your options are to be angry today and sick or dead tomorrow, or to let it go, support effective policies today,

You're asking for one portion of the populous to take on the burden cause by lack of restraint by another. There is legitimate reason for "moralizing" here. This is the point where what "two people do in the privacy of their bedroom" spills over into affecting everyone else.

It's ironic that "yelling at people doesn't work" yet we see just as much yelling and moralizing by the people who want the freedom to do whatever they want even when their actions DO negatively affect others.

The real issue is constantly swept under the rug. The only real barrier to POC in STEM in 2021 is POC culture. It's hard to host events for inner city denizens when the vast majority are simply uninterested in such pursuits, or worse, shun each other for having such interests. Lack of representation will not be solved so long as we continue to ignore this inconvenient truth. And it's similar for lack of female representation.

Edit: in anticipation of controversy, it is not my attempt to troll or start any flamewars with this comment. It's a perspective that is sorely lacking in discussions addressing diversity in tech, and dangerously so, because if we refuse to question the role of the choices of those who are underrepresented, then the only alternative is to blame people and systems who are not responsible for the issues, which makes the interventions ineffective at best, counterproductive and destabilizing at worst.

Resorting to calling people "anti-science" is just as counterproductive and unnecessary as calling them "anti-vax". You're only solidifying animosity and mistrust. People have every right to question what they're being told by the same governments who mishandled this epidemic from the start - especially since there such strong political incentives that aren't necessarily aligned with scientifically based recommendations.

Not a good look considering indicators suggest inflation is accelerating[1]. Which would be an expected outcome considering how much money the US government printed over the course of the pandemic, and now how much we are about to print to support the next stimulus/infrastructure program.

>Chairman Powell has very explicitly claimed that money doesn't matter in recent testimony. He's basically said that money and the measurement of money doesn't really matter because it's unrelated to inflation

And I don't know how much faith the populous will put in his reasoning as I suspect confidence in government is rapidly eroding, not just in the US but in the first world. But something is probably wrong if your economic advisors are saying that money in circulation and money velocity suddenly don't influence the value of the dollar.

The US is a powderkeg and last year a couple fuses were lit.

1.https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-economy-inflation-idU...

A mob occupying private land, for weeks (months?), and declaring autonomy under a radical, explicitly and overtly anti-american, revolutionary flag, threatening and ejecting any approaching officials, including medical services, with violence. Particularly when this mob is affiliated with a decentralized network throughout the united states with similar goals.

Storming the capitol with weapons, having leaders with knowledge of the layout, and actually spilling blood. The picture of the right in this country by media is generally a caricature of an inbred, uneducated southern hick, so it's easy to pretend that they planned for a serious coup and we're just completely incompetent. But the lack of weapons in any significant quantity, or their use, or even their brandishing in the capitol, suggests that there were never any serious plans for a coup or even for violence.

The fact that "insurrectionists" came within 5 feet of the entrance to the chamber with the politicians they were allegedly targetting and obliviously walked past it more likely shows that there was no serious preparation, given that the layout is easily searchable online.

This is manufactured hysteria by the media, for political goals. It comes from the same place as this twitch policy - we are in the midst of a dirty culture war.

Literally everything you're describing would be identical to that of a preplanned protest. The implication of "organization" is that of a plan for "insurrection", for which there is no proof of premeditation.

>If Trump really wants to get his thoughts out to the world, he can host his own website and publish them there

And what's the recourse when the same forces collude to shut someone or some group out of the hosting platform for wrongthink? Build your own server farm? Build your own cloudflare? Build your own DNS? How far do we go in allowing tyranny by a loud and powerful minority? If we can regulate corporations to prevent corporate monopolies, perhaps it's appropriate to implement loose regulations against social monopoly. Collusion to silence an entire set of viewpoints by unilaterally associating them with a minority of extremists is quite literally oppression.

>Critics have criticized the idea of a "culture fit," arguing it sidelines people of color

Is there any room left in our society to acknowledge cultural clash? It feels like I'm being gaslit when the imperative is to "celebrate diversity" and simultaneously deny that positive differences between cultures mathematically implies negative differences, which among other things can hinder cooperation.

QAnon is fringe. Social Justice is mainstream progressivism. There is no QAnon equivalent to diversity and inclusion policy/training in industry or academia. It is not socially acceptable to discuss QAnon except critically. There is no comparison here, this is the thrust of the social justice movement, and even if one accepts that a minority of progressives believe in this sort of extremism, the unfortunate fact is that it is being forced into society from the top down, with training, quotas, "mental health," and the like.