Spinozist

ineffective altruist

[Spinozist @CandyClaws2]

@neeratanden @Saqib_hmed @daveweigel By this logic, surely being a GOP activist would be sufficient to consider her allegations non-credible, right? You guys aren’t seeing the hypocrisy here?

[Spinozist @CandyClaws2]

@kuxir @hecubian_devil @dsfence64 @JSweetLI It would do you well to reread the post. If you are unable to grasp the very simple idea here, just don’t opine.

[Spinozist @CandyClaws2]

@BOyster922 @SocialistShinji @JDabknee It’s not the same 18 million every year, obviously

[Spinozist @CandyClaws2]

@themimsshow Wow she sounds even dumber than I expected

[Spinozist @CandyClaws2]

@RyansFortress None of these movies deserve more than 4 stars tbf

[Vivek Ramaswamy @VivekGRamaswamy]

Date night in Cleveland. Let’s go Cavs…all the way back!

[bug @bugcel_]

videos like these are like cocomelon for your coworker who has partial custody of his kid

[Sea Almond @SeaAlmond_]

jesus only had 12 followers

[Spinozist @CandyClaws2]

@JTTSoundSystem @kfgpnz @littmath @lionel_trolling Yes the “closeness” is unbounded. That’s the point

[Spinozist @CandyClaws2]

@DJCrabhat @AbiShuuwi @facetedcarapace Was I making the claim, or was I explaining *his* relatively standard usage of the term? Again, reading would do you well.

[Spinozist @CandyClaws2]

@SirBotso @AbiShuuwi @facetedcarapace I’m aware, you seem to be not understanding that the basis for him making fun of me is wrong

[Spinozist @CandyClaws2]

@AbiShuuwi @facetedcarapace Ironically, you should probably read more books lol

[Spinozist @CandyClaws2]

@AbiShuuwi @facetedcarapace When people say something is “arbitrarily x” they mean that the magnitude of x is unbounded. It’s perfectly coherent.

[Spinozist @CandyClaws2]

@peptide @facetedcarapace The way he used it is fine, if something can get arbitrarily large or arbitrarily close to something, it means its closeness or largeness is unbounded.

[Jane Altoids @staticbluebat]

The Chicken Jockeyfication of Cinema

[Spinozist @CandyClaws2]

@flashgo21 @razibkhan Yeah, my point is that kvetching about the healthcare consequences of a 95th percentile score vs a 99th percentile score is probably unjustified. If the question is about ethics (who “deserves” to get in) that is a separate matter.

[Spinozist @CandyClaws2]

@preshtalwalkar @KiwloOsu The people bashing the IMO are obviously not the same people lauding the Putnam lmao, what kind of silly argument is this?

[Spinozist @CandyClaws2]

@mean_field_zane I mean I think there is a distinction to be made between “problem-solving” (something that we generally try to associate with high IQ) and broader conceptual intuition. It seems like the advantage of “superior problem-solving” is on its way to disappearing.

[Spinozist @CandyClaws2]

@T88621 @razibkhan If you believe reading a passage that spells out the answer to anyone with a content background constitutes “reasoning skills” you are telling on yourself.

[Spinozist @CandyClaws2]

@T88621 @razibkhan I have taken it and scored very highly on it lmao. The verbal reasoning is utterly trivial outside of CARS. You can get a 132 on C/P, B/B, and P/S solely with a sufficiently robust content base.