No way, velociraptor was way smaller, you’re thinking of utahraptor

Yeah he makes some solid points, it’s worth a read. The bomb stuff was just a ploy to get it published, it’s not like reading it is going to turn you into a bomber.

Yay, another opportunity to share one of my favorite illustrations ever

I’m all about a federated commune of communes, seriously, but at scale how is that really much different? You can’t have billions of people living on the planet, or hundreds of millions in a country, without some kind of coordination. It’s not practical for millions of people to vote on every little detail, you’ve still got to have focused representatives to, at minimum, collect information into policy that can be voted on in the first place.

Really the only two options, barring authoritarianism, are direct democracy or some kind of elected representatives. Direct democracy doesn’t really work for most considerable topics (agricultural production, electric grid installation, hospital equipment, etc.). Even if people knew enough about the subject to make informed decisions, most people won’t bother engaging. So we’re inevitably left with some kind of representative democracy, councils don’t really eliminate the fact of electing representatives, or the consequences when certain demographics over or underperform at the polls.

I’d say more “select from” than “churn out”. It’s not about generating a hypothesis, it’s about having a collection of hypotheses and deciding which should be your default until additional evidence is provided.

Hanlon’s razor says “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity”, and “adequately” is pulling at least as much weight as “never”. If stupidity becomes a less adequate explanation, nothing stops you from considering malice as an alternative.

People use things wrong all the time, sometimes the vast majority of the time (e.g. “literally”). Just because people use a concept pseudologically doesn’t make it intrinsically pseudological.

But razors aren’t supposed to be logic in the first place. They’re not objective analytical tools to arrive at a conclusion, because they weren’t designed to be. They’re framing tools to help establish an initial hypothesis.

Occam’s razor doesn’t claim that the simplest explanation is true, it merely says it’s the most practical assumption, all else being equal. If additional data provides more support for a more complicated explanation, Occam’s really doesn’t require you to cling to the simpler one.

Similarly Hanlon’s razor doesn’t claim that stupidity is universally a better explanation than malice, only that is the most practical assumption, all else being equal. It does not require you to ignore patterns of behavior that shift the likelihood toward malice.

What system accomplishes that?

Of what happening?

“Capitalism breeds innovation”

I watch basically everything that isn’t music or advanced mathematics at 2x speed. YouTubers talk so slowly.

I know what it says, but “authoritarian communist” is an oxymoron, like “carnivorous vegan”. They may call themselves communists, they may be members of a party that calls itself “communist”, but authoritarianism cannot coexist with a stateless, classless, moneyless society.

Sloppy editing does not change that fact, and there is extensive literature and commentary providing clarification.

I dunno, that sounds like a fast track to being the subject of a murder mystery. I think I’m good.

You’ve never heard of the Trans Siberian Railroad Orchestra?

Being an ethical person precludes most ways to get rich. It’s a much longer process when you’re determined not to exploit people or the environment.

Uh, no. I just have the ability to look up definitions. The word means what it means

Google “ferengi rule 34”

I dunno, SpongeBob occupies a sizeable fraction of successful memes

Not really, no. Words have definitions. It’s not a "semantic argument’ to clarify the definition of a word. It’s not “no true Scotsman” either, that’s when you define a group by some unrelated or incidental quality. What I’ve referred to is the definition of a tankie. The quality described is neither unrelated nor incidental.

Well, the tanks are replaced with ICE vehicles

It’s not that weird if you remember money