Juice

5. Its Java and this is a personal project. Might as well say, "loving you is like developing an api for an insurance company. I can't bear to touch you without two drinks and a subscription to jetbrains" This is how relationships end up on the garbage heap.

Unlike therapy, installing Arch on a Thinkpad works more often than not

International worker solidarity!!!

Omg guess I'll go buy gold about it

I was really hoping for a fusion of Lisa Frank + Frankenstein, like rainbows and bright colors and chimeric monsters stitched together from the parts of cute animals

I just bought a Thinkpad, also use mostly for programming, installed Fedora, very happy

Thanks for your input! I'll see what I can find on Haldane, that seems like a good place to continue for me

You shouldn't reject parts of evolution because Malthus used them to justify his political theory

This is not what I said. I said that, according to David Harvey, Darwin based his theory of evolution on the writings of Malthus. I'm saying that I believe that this has flawed the theory, as it is based partially on a flawed premise. It doesn't make the theory completely unusable, a good, incomplete, flawed theory can still make correct predictions. but in certain circumstances the inherent logic, the way it handles certain questions, it will produce flawed conclusions. This is true for every system of formal logic, it is an inherent contradiction of all logical systems (epistemic crisis and incompleteness.) But to varying degrees, and to what extent, and how it produces these flawed conclusions is important to consider.

The best example I can think of while sitting in my car about to go unload groceries is gynecology. Does it effectively diagnose or treat disease and abnormalities? Yes. Do we have a good enough mastery of human reproduction to alter the likelihood of pregnancy? Also yes. The science is sound. But the practice of gynecology is often needlessly, senselessly painful, almost cruel, even when practiced by conscientious caring doctors. Why? It's because the founder of gynecology made his discoveries by torturing and experimenting on living slave women, without anesthetics, and many parts of that tradition persist. Because they haven't been readdressed or reconsidered. And maybe because it serves some other social purpose as well.

Science often fails as a form of critique and self discovery. So I'm just out here asking questions to improve my own understanding. I'm a little skeptical of your use of the term "scientifically sound." Especially coming from a fellow hexbear who should know about bourgeois scientism.

So is a crucial part of the theory no longer "survival of the fittest?" Because that's straight Malthus. I'm not a biologist, but I study and read and try to pay attention.

Yeah but the theory of evolution writ large needs shaking up. The whole theory reeks of Malthusianism, a disproved economic theory, since Darwin was influenced by Malthus. Many of the sick consequences of "Social Darwinism" are a result of the theory's flawed precursory logic.

That being said I tend to skew cynical. Still I'd like to see parts of a mostly-correct predictive model questioned and reevaluated

Blinken gaslights other countries for not believing flimsy justification condoning genocide

I guess I don't totally agree with calling everyone that exists within that weird administrative class "cops," but it isn't a critical disagreement. I get what you mean though, thanks for the explainer