• 2 Posts
  • 654 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 18th, 2023

help-circle
  • I believe that’s not the law though. The law outlines the conditions under which a person has an “expectation of privacy.” If you’re inside your house, you have an expectation of privacy and so should not be filmed. If you’re on the sidewalk in public, you have no expectation of privacy. If you’re in a private establishment (restaurant or store for instance), the owner or their representatives can ask you not to record and you have to comply.

    All of street photography depends on this kind of legal framework.



  • Theoretical biologist here. I consider viruses to define the lower edge of what I’d consider “alive.” I similarly consider prions to be “not alive,” but to define a position towards the upper limit of complex, self-reproducing chemistry. There’s some research going on here to better understand how replication reactions (maybe encased in a lipid bubble to keep the reaction free from the environment) may lead to increasing complexity and proto-cells. That’s not what prions are, but the idea is that a property like replication is necessary but not sufficient and to build from what we know regarding the environment and possible chemicals.

    I consider a virus to be alive because they rise to the level of complexity and adaptive dynamics I feel should be associated with living systems. I’ll paint with a broad brush here, but they have genes, a division between genotype and phenotype, the populations evolve as part of an ecosystem with all of the associated dynamics of adaptation and speciation, and they have relatively complex structures consisting of multiple distinct elements. “Alive,” to me, shouldn’t be approached as a binary concept - I’m not sure what it conceptually adds to the discussion. Instead, I think it should be approached as a gradient of properties any one of which may be more or less present. I feel the same about intelligence, theory of mind, and animal communication.

    The thing to remember when thinking about questions like this is that when science (or history or literature…) is taught as a beginner’s subject (primary and secondary school), it’s often approached in a highly simplified manner - simplified to the point of inaccuracy sometimes. Many instructors will take the approach of having students memorize lists for regurgitation on exams - the seven properties of life, a gene is a length of dna that encodes for a protein, the definition of a species, and so on. I don’t really like that approach, and to be honest I was never any good at it myself.






  • Nothing that you’re saying about INR is remotely true. They’re academics and specialists who produce long form research and in depth studies. They’re not “in charge” of anyone.

    Up until the post-9/11 shuffle, the US intelligence community (IC) was led by the director of the CIA, and the IC comprised CIA, DIA, NSA, NRO, INR, defense branch agencies, and others. CIA and DoD were the ones with operational branches alongside analysts, the rest were pretty much analysis-oriented or technical (eg cryptography). Although there is some overlap, the individual agencies largely have complementary missions.

    Foreign actors were already at work in the Palestinian elections. Netanyahu spoke about how his administration was supporting Hamas as the best way possible to avoid having to establish a two state solution with a stable Palestinian government in Gaza and the West Bank.

    Instead of arguing why you seemingly want to lay all of this at the feet of INR, due to some hatred towards Hillary Clinton you’re trying to get out of defending your assertion by criticizing IS foreign policy as a whole. That’s not arguing in good faith, and you’d be better off just acknowledging that you didn’t read the article and have no idea what you’re talking about.













  • It’s not only not a valid question, it might not even be a legal question.

    I’m a hiring manager for a very large tech company in California. I cannot ask any questions about age, ethnicity, country of origin, citizenship status, veteran status, marital status, health, and so on.

    HR can ask if they’re eligible to work in the US, and I can ask whether they have the skills and talents I need for the position, but it’s tightly limited.

    It still crops up all the time. There are decades worth of studies showing how having a non-white looking name or having age indicators present in work history or graduation dates influence reviewers to reject applications they’d otherwise accept.