up_so_floating

The same is occurring in Europe and even America. The establishment is threatened as a result of this mass immigration. Perhaps the difference is that the Saudis do not suffer from white guilt and, hence, attempts at rational discourse are not drown out with calls of racism, Islamophobia, and xenophobia.

When you criminalize a certain pattern of thought, it seems that its inverse will eventually get taken to the most extreme position.

It is already socially unacceptable to promote ethnic cleansing of any sort. Sure, it's important to continually affirm this, but can you name anyone in the Trump administration who is promoting ethnic cleansing?

The OP is just virtue-signaling. He presumably still buys products from third-world dictatorships. Let's ask him. OP, how can you justify boycotting America and not China or a myriad of other countries that are ruled under a far more oppressive regime.

There is no evidence, at least not for such a general claim. Each human has a wildly different experience. For many of us, we never left this era. For others, we have been out of it X years. Etc.

This comment is especially relevant, given yesterday's popularity of Scott Aaronson's blog post.

Perhaps one reason could be changing gender norms.

From the article, 40% reported stressors such as "being single, divorced or separated",

Have we really ever left the "Era of the Bully"?

Do you think China or Russia care about "hurting" others through their actions? You will be competing with them. Can you punish them as effectively as you can "punish" Britain?

Semi-related: http://thenicestplaceontheinter.net/

Should be https://lobste.rs/

Chris Lattner, personally

Your body evolved skin to suit an environment other than a Thai beach. I would not consider that genetic inferiority.

A bit too long-winded for me.

But then you'd have to wait four more. And then four more? Four more after that?

This is a good opportunity for learning. Your perception of the world apparently did not match up with how the world actually is. We've all been there. Get back up, readjust your perspective, and accept the next offer.

I couldn't get past the second episode, or whenever the lead character met the idiosyncratic band of misfit hackers. These individuals seemed extremely cliche and unlike any hackers I have ever met in real life. The terminal input might have been valid, but the people doing the typing seemed out of place.

That would be easier to believe if the US market indices were not at all time highs.

When "fake news" is finished in the US you'll understand why people are panicking.

Peer review and corrections are indeed important, but many have lost respect for traditional news media due to the selective reporting that they feel pushes a certain narrative.

It seems dangerous to view "fake news" as a binary value. All news is just approximation of the truth.

As far as I know, Trump paid all the taxes that he was legally required to pay.

Absolutely, and let's hope we find ourselves in a democratic state at such a time.

I think you are missing another potential implication: as less wealth is generated by productive citizens, and more from automation, there is less incentive for the ruler to maintain or improve quality of life.

This discussion has veered away from the thread topic, but, regardless, thank you for presenting data. My major reservation here is that it seems a bit disingenuous to highlight suicide, while at the same time not including injury, rape, or loss of property that result from home invasions.

Sure, that is a fair interpretation.

Given such an interpretation, I find it is more sensible to label such a person "misinformed", not suffering from "utter insanity". The latter phrase immediately shuts down, at least for me, any productive discourse.

Absolutely. Some people could legitimately view it as not worth the time investment.

I agree that it is wise to avoid a single point of failure, and that multiple layers of security could prove quite useful. All that I am advocating is that a gun is just another viable layer of security.

Can you clarify as to why owning a gun, as both a casual hobby and means of defense for unlikely scenarios, is "utter insanity"? And why do you believe gun owners view themselves as "prepping [...] for some Mad Max bullshit scenario"? Otherwise, using such language strongly discredits your already weak argument.

It is really a simple matter.

I want to help maintain or improve the welfare of those I care about, regardless of scenario.

In order to achieve this outcome, it is usually sufficient to go to work, invest, and partake in mutually fulfilling rituals.

For the edge cases, a gun might be useful. And, in this thread, it is the edge cases that we are discussing.