@usuallypregnant Lots of chat about a concept that no one is bothering to define. It’s a word you know. A word that, using many of its context dependent understandings is incoherent in this conversation. If you are talking about a mora or ethical right, the man it’s subjective by person. No legal
@financedystop My iq is is 149 and want talk to people, only smarts people. No jokes or no chuds. I like to writing English, pluralism, and mountain biking things. Trust me, a smart person.
@RyanHaecker Now find me a thinker who arrives at this conclusion from a neutral baseline, someone whose identity, incentives, and prior commitments are not already entangled with the argument they’re making.
@thoughts17181 I can make it easier, I’m agnostic to almost everything, if I had to assign Bayesian probabilities, I’d put my chips with “I have very reason to posit an amorphous god of the gaps.”
@AgainstAtheismX This is a near-perfect example of bad argumentation: no premises, no logical connection, just an emotionally loaded insinuation pretending to be a point. You’ve confused integrity with…being a human in a civilization or something.
@drridpath@CodyWorsham The Flutie effect is probably more about putting national brand names in front of young peoples eyeballs. Excitement and awareness are prob the real variables, not necessarily winning games or championships.
@sbkaufman I’ve never seen how you can get away from a functionalist definition for these kinds of things without defining said word “…a type of human characteristic…” Same with conscioussness and intelligence.
@HunterLeah28609 @DellAnnaLuca@pmarca Is the distinction here important? The prohibition is a genAI error, correct. Not just someone making an oopsie or fat fingering a year?