Good linking. The book says it's for a quarter acre, not a tenth. This was on reddit the other day (and it's credited as such). Exact same wording and everything.
nymwit
joined 2 years ago
Where I was going was: effects can be different even if all choices and results are unethical. If one cares about the possible impacts of ones actions, consideration beyond "well it's all unethical, so whatever" could be warranted.
are all unethical choices equal? Surely there are better and worse things?
Just criticises? Not "slams", "destroys", or eviscerates? Weak. No rage click from me.
groan
Heartbreaking: The Worst Person You Know ~~Just Made A Great Point~~ uses the comma the way you think it should be used
It does smack of hypocrisy but I've been feeling more it's a paradox of tolerance thing. Which itself a sort of hypocrisy now that I'm thinking about it. Huh.
If I don't show you a video because I don't think you'd enjoy it, that's different from not showing it to you because I don't want you to see it.
I wouldn't disagree those are different reasons for not wanting to show a video but both are curations based on biases.
I guess I just have a more neutral connotation for bias than "biased against you for others' own interests" and so I didn't find bias to be a useful term here to distinguish the reasons behind curation choices.
Nothing really in disagreement here, just fiddling with common usage.
hey it says "in" not "up". Just gotta lay down or maybe go inverted.
...looks like she's trying to persuade people concerned with climate change?
How is bias not inherent to curation? Preference for one thing over another is bias. Curation is literally showing you things it thinks you're biased to like. These groups aren't revealing their secret sauce for curation algorithms so we'd never know anyway.
Antivax crowd no longer drinking milk I guess
Where were you in '91? You could have won Randi's prize! wikipedia on Dowsing