No it’s not. This is divisive bullshit and statistics gore.
The numbers you’re looking at are how districts with more or less transit riders / drivers voted. On top of that, it was a pretty close split amongst both sides, with just slightly more on each side leaning one way or another.
This video does a good job breaking down the core of the truth of why and how altruism arises, and why not everyone is altruistic:
The reality is that evolution and the natural world does not care about individuals, or groups, or species. It is selecting for genes and genes dont give one flying fuck about anything other than whether they help more copies of themselves exist in the world. Sometimes that’s altruistic, sometimes it’s not.
Some hate, at least reactionary hate to circumstances, is inherent in humans, otherwise it wouldn’t be here.
Who taught us hate if not us?
Honestly I haven’t seen a single article written by someone who actually understands the mathematics involved so I call a huge amount of HORSeSHIT on your headline.
Omg, a sustainable, repairable, and open source project costs the same as a closed source, non repairable, locked down option … Those are totally the same thing!
/S
There is an open source project to replace the innards:
No it’s not.
It might be to you, but there are enormous numbers of elderly and disabled people who would benefit from more assistance.
I still wouldn’t trust a robot around them given how inherently dangerous a massive motorized contraption is, but we also shouldn’t be blind to accessibility and utility just because we don’t personally need it.
Yes, I know, do that, or save to do it sooner, or see if you can get low interest financing to do it.
There’s a difference between ‘oh this house’s outlets are mounted lower than code says these days’, and ‘most of the house is missing a core safety wire that’s been part of the code for 50 years’.
I would really recommend fixing the wiring before investing any money in home automation.
Don’t build advanced sensitive low voltage systems on top of shaky high voltage systems that can melt and destroy them. Not having enough outlets because of old shoddy wiring is inconvenient when you can’t plug stuff in and waste time running extension cords, it’s expensive because you end up buying that much copper to run extension cords, it’s expensive because shoddy wiring can easily fry electronics, and it’s tragic and expensive when it burns your house down.
Yeah, yeah it is. It’s got Conor McGregor in there as a villain, so you have to be ok with that, but if you are, it’s honestly just a lot of fun. There’s an unhingedness to it all that really tickles me in the right spot.
It’s not just shaky cam, the sequences straight up don’t necessarily make cohesive physical sense. Like they show hits and moves in orders that don’t properly flow into each other
I find it funny that one of the director’s latest movies is the Road House remake, where they used a new technique that lets them show every impact in incredible clarity. Feels like he really took the shaky cam criticism to heart.
Yeah, iirc first book is basically the length of the first three movies and entirely revolves around Carlos. I loved it when I read it in high school.
The movies were also pretty great, but i think I always expected that as I grew up I would understand the action sequences more, and it turns out that no, the action sequences are just nonsense and don’t actually make sense.
deleted by creator
And your point is wrong because you keep boiling it down to simple black and white.
The Nobel prize is not purely political and is not devoid of merit.
The world is not full of binary systems. It’s made of multi variable systems where multiple influences can be true at the same time.
If you want to make a point about why accurately predicting the structure of hundreds of thousands of proteins doesn’t deserve the Nobel in chemistry then I’m all ears. Please tell us all exactly why you think their prize was political and not meritocratic, and why predicting protein structures automatically is not important?
Because if you can’t answer that very specific question, then you weren’t making a point relevant to the conversation, you were making a snide generalization to hear yourself speak.
Thank you for finally spewing out the point you wanted to make from the jump. It’s irrelevant in the context of the original discussion, but you got to hear yourself talk.
Lmao, it’s binary cause you say it’s binary.
Bro grow up. The world is not black and white. Literally not a single award on the planet is meritocratic if you insist on dealing in absolutes. Every award is awarded by some committee and there is some room left for human judgement, which leaves room for human bias, which makes it not perfectly meritocratic.
If you want to go an unhinged rant that no one wants to listen to then email the nobel association directly, don’t waste federated server time.
Lol if you rigidly define things binarily in a way that doesn’t reflect real world systems, then sure they’re binary.
This is false, it’s not a binary system. The prize is both.
Misleading statistics gore.