You literally can’t change this solely by changing your own first order behavior. Only by higher order approaches can you achieve change. (Saying stuff on the internet is not one of those approaches. Being homeless isn’t either).
This interpretation is very interesting to me. Do you know of any other philosophical or scientific research into the relationship between computational complexity / reducibility and free will?
Just about every single Westerner has more than they need in some way, and there’s plenty of folks suffering in the world. Your definition uselessly labels everyone greedy and also does nothing to help those that are suffering.
It’s not the job of individuals to fix our global economic system by changing their individual (legal) behavior. This is a regulatory problem.
Why would experts at programming software necessarily be experts at designing it?
(By “designing” I mean like, designing it in the large, what does it do, not UI design or something. Though of course the same goes for pixel pushing.)
The state of almost every single open source competitor to commercial software (in terms of UI, usability, effectiveness, and market share) suggests that maybe letting experts at programming software design all other aspects of software is not a panacea.
Broken anything is hard to understand without practice, and easy (or, easier) to understand with practice. My experience in urban US is you hear a lot of broken English, so you get pretty good at understanding it.
My experience living in Paris is that a lot of the older folks have very little practice or desire to practice speaking with broken French speakers.
Japan I found to be similar. Fuck up the pronunciation the slightest bit and you’re just stared at blankly.
> It is one of the reasons why 90% of human genetic diversity is within groups and only 10% is between groups.
Can you clarify what this means? I’ve heard it a bunch and I can imagine scenarios that this statement could describe. But also, a naive interpretation doesn’t make any sense.
> The dictator who listens really seems to be what the majority prefer because they don't actually want to be accountable for those decisions they just want a seat at the table.
Yes. I would go so far as to say people want to experience the feeling of making decisions, of responsibility, without actually having any.
The only way to continuously ship in many B2B or enterprise environments is with copious feature flags. You can’t just change shit out from under you multimillion dollar clients — that’s part of the deal. So you flag it all out. Then changing the flag is itself a deploy by another name, and you are damn sure you don’t do it on Friday.