FiskFisk33

the idea is that to get to be the one spraying, you have to know first hand how much pain you are inflicting.

One could say he did the wrong thing for the right reasons

This is just plain false.

There is no theoretical size limit to unobserved quantum systems, although it is practically hard to achieve large ones.

the largest ones we've managed are over 100 atoms. https://www.livescience.com/19268-quantum-double-slit-experiment-largest-molecules.html

Yeah its about quantum systems interacting, not sentient beings watching.

still pretty mystical though in my book!

does dry running have any meaning on a function that is inherently stochastic?

I mean, yeah, having good control and a sane culture around it, you couldn't reach USA's sheer number if you tried.

oh, well, luckily its not illegal for researchers in the rest of the world to study gun violence in America.

yeah I think the real world is more complicated. Like, its not just about numbers, but also how control is implemented and even culture.

That is absolutely fucked up, but whats the relevance?

notice how in the graph on wikipedia, excluding USA, the correlation is really not that strong.

dont get me wrong, i agree with the general sentiment, but bad data weakens even the best of cases.

image

Google controls search results and has been caught meddling. Which negates the first two.

No it doesn't negate the forst two. It only addresses the second, and bypassing the results completely, exascerbates the problem quite a bit.

Cry me a river.

great argument.

• It helps spread false information widely

• It puts a lot of control of information in a single companies hands

• It hurts the underlying sources

When google provides the info directly, and the first hand sources has become completely obsolete and shut down, what would new information stem from? It's an inherently unstable and short sighted solution.