Because Apple paid to produce that knowledge? It's good that people can spend a lot of time and money developing new knowledge and then for some period of time they get to exclusively reap the rewards of doing so.
Do you mind if I MITM all of your work output, your emails, your code, your messages, and attach my name to it and then receive your paychecks in exchange for my work?
Eating peanut butter without cognitive checks can distort judgment. You can put literally anything preceding "without cognitive checks" and the answer will be "it distorts judgment."
You're describing a very new and not-yet-realized state of affairs where large amounts of power comes from solar. In that world, then yeah obviously the initial concern isn't valid.
Recent immigrant to the UK? Why can't you write English like a native speaker? Must be one of those conservative immigrants that thinks they're "different" from the other ones, and just praying that your political bedfellows will agree when push comes to shove (they won't).
In any case, no, that doesn't qualify you to speak on US affairs. Being well-informed and legitimately curious could qualify you, but you've made no claim and no evidence of those, have you?
First, this makes literally no sense, silly guy! Both of these things are bad things! The format is supposed to be inversion.
Second, you are definitely not a native-born American, are you? Are you a citizen at all? Do you even live in America?
Please share how long you’ve lived here in the US that you feel qualified to comment on the affairs of my country. Otherwise I’ll have to assume you’re the kind of very smart person who gets their cultural analysis from x dot com, sitting a continent away, and I’ll unfortunately have to just point and laugh.
It's actually quite normal to try to acquire skill at using tools. It's very normal for toolmakers to share insights and expertise in how best to use the tools they sell.
you... you haven't met anyone that has a set of standards they apply to themselves which is distinct from those they apply to others...?
> The problem with this position is that it takes as a given that morality is in some sense trivial where millennia of debate over it has shown that it is in fact, not at all trivial.
No, not really. People may agree or disagree on what is right and wrong. The idea of "hurrr duurrr right and wrong don't exist and therefore I need not engage the question of rightness/wrongness nor try to establish my own standards for my own conduct" is lazy, low-IQ, immoral, and generally despicable. Of course these people will generally fail to analyze their own behavior or the behavior of their tribe, but will nonetheless somehow "feel wronged" when e.g. their car gets broken into. Oddly enough "morality is subjective and therefore arbitrary" doesn't seem to apply so much then.
Okay so a politician who orders the state to go hunt down your family is in the clear, the guy who drives the secret police to your house is in the clear, but the guys who actually place hands on your children are fully culpable.
What do you mean "causing violence?" It sounds like you're suggesting Hitler's moving of his arm somehow caused violence. Can you explain how that could possibly be true under your model of "arm movements don't matter"?
As far as I know, Hitler himself never struck anyone with an outstretched hand. Certainly that's not the crime he's accused of. I don't think you can actually prove that Hitler's arm movements had any causal relationship to the Holocaust, to be honest. So presumably he's in the clear, and there's no reason a normal person would've cared about Hitler's arm movements in the 30s and 40s, correct?
As far as I know, Hitler himself just said words. Same with Pol Pot, Hirohito, Mao, Stalin, and Lenin. How could you possibly attribute violence to any of that under your model of "I'm so smart I can't see causation or intent?"
"Empathy" is a pre-requisite for nearly all the traits we'd regard as "character and integrity," and Elon has vocally and specifically spoken out against the concept of empathy itself. Then he has behaved as if he had a total lack of empathy as well. He's achieved some great things, but all of them can be explained by low-character/low-integrity traits like greed and narcissism. Not one thing I've ever heard of him doing invokes an explanation of, and therefore produces evidence of, character and integrity.
Lol, no you wouldn't. If you would, this would not be news to you.
"We have a right to do it" is not a response to the allegation of being immoral. There are plenty of immoral things someone is well within their rights to do.
pretty sure PG and sama had a pretty serious falling out because it turns out sama is a complete snake
but you know, go off king (or whatever)