It’s not really subjective if you don’t believe it’s your place to judge the human to begin with.

If you were in their exact life circumstance and environment you would do the same thing. You aren’t going to magically sidestep cause and effect.

The act itself is bad.

The human performing the act was misguided.

I view people as inherently perfect whose view of life, themselves, and their current situations as potentially misguided.

Eg, like a diamond covered in shit.

Just like it’s possible for a diamond to be uncovered and polished, the human is capable of acquiring a truer perspective and more aligned set of behaviors - redemption. Everyone is capable of redemption so nobody is inherently bad. Thinking otherwise may be convenient but is ultimately misguided too.

So the act and the person are separate.

Granted, we need to protect society from such misguidedness, so we have laws, punishments, etc.

But it’s about protecting us from bad behavior, not labeling the individual as bad.

> If you were in their exact life circumstance and environment you would do the same thing.

I don't buy that for a moment. It presumes people do not have choices.

The difference between a man and an animal is a man has honor. Each of us gets to choose if we are a man or an animal.

> It presumes people do not have choices.

No, there are choices. It states that given the exact same starting parameters and sequence of events, you would make the same choice.

You're denying free will.

If everyone would make the same choice, then free will doesn't exist. It's only one step away from what you said.

And sure what you said is irrefutable in the sense that it's impossible to collect evidence about it. That's generally a bad sign for theories.

The role of cause and effect is unshakeable.

> If everyone would make the same choice, then free will doesn't exist. It's only one step away from what you said.

I didn't say anything about free will. "One step away" is where you went, not me.

If you believe free will and determinism are logically incompatible, that's your own theory to prove.

I'm simply saying that everyone would make the same choice given the exact same circumstances and starting conditions.

To believe anything otherwise is magical thinking, and basically implies a moral superiority to someone else.

Let my try another angle.

If someone else in the "exact same circumstances and starting conditions" implies they're identical down to every single molecule, how is that someone else?

If they're not identical at that level, they wouldn't make the same decisions. Put two almost-perfect clones into two exact copies of the world and a week later they'll be on diverging paths.

So if the argument is not to judge anyone as a person because everyone would act the same if they had the exact same life circumstances and environment, and everything that affects their decisions fits into life circumstances and environment, what else is left that it would be unfair to judge?

The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle says otherwise.

> implies a moral superiority to someone else

Some moral systems are superior to other moral systems.

If free will doesn't exist then you "shouldn't" judge people for their choices but also you can't stop yourself from doing so.

If free will does exist then yes you can judge people for their choices.

Everyone is capable of redemption but saying they need redemption is judging them.

A few things:

1. You can't judge the person, you can judge the behavior

2. To judge the person requires the ability to quantify the unquantifiable (circumstance, sequence of events leading to the outcome, going back to the literal beginning of time).

3. To judge the person implies a superiority to that person

Sure, one can take/justify simplistic shortcuts for practical reasons. But some forget that's what they are - shortcuts that bypass the nuances/reality of the situation.

> The human performing the act was misguided.

What does this mean? If someone rapes someone else, they were inherently perfect but misguided, in your view?

You’re correct that belief is a powerful driver of prosperity/poverty - and that believing that you’re headed for either can lead to you to different modes of decision making. I’ve experienced and witnessed both.

An unexpected windfall will amplify the psychology of the recipients. For people who have lived without, the mindset is frequently “live today like it’s your last” or “enjoy it while it lasts” and blow it or self destruct.

Some will be obviously be more mature about it though.

I had, by chance, taken the same approach when reading the Zen and Art of Motorcycle Maintenance years ago.

The title failed to inspire but I heard it was worth the read and stepped through line by line.

It hit with a depth that I know with complete certainty I would not have gotten if I worked through at my usual pace or took it in as an audiobook.

Nassim Taleb’s books are also favorite slow reads of mine.

All this said, I collect books faster than I can read them so there’s always a feeling somewhere that I should be pushing through a little faster.

Ah well, in the end I think that really comprehending a handful of quality books is about as good as a shallow comprehension of many more.

For Grateful Dead fans, a little while back I made an interface for digging through show recordings - all sourced from Archive.org

https://katzgrau.github.io/jerry-picker/

See also https://relisten.net/

I also (usually) go looking right away to see if the syntax makes me feel warm and fuzzy. I’m so shallow.

As a Y! employee for a couple of years - although my time was brief, I can say with confidence that had Yahoo successfully acquired Google or Facebook, both would have been destroyed in short order.

Yes, but that just makes me wish it had happened...

Wish they’d been bought by MS, probably would have sidelined them. Was a really bad deal from memory.

Nobody can beat Yahoo in making bad deals. Lets not forget they made Mark Cuban a billionaire with a legendary Broadcast.com acquisition at $10K per user! $5.7 billion dollars written off in less than two years.

+1 from someone who also bootstrapped a side project into a 7 figure business, and just happens to be absorbing some lessons from Poor Charlie’s Almanac on Audible recently.

ha I listened on Audible too. great audiobook for a walk after dinner. Charlie's advice really holds up. which part have you gotten the most out of so far?

also, congrats!

Re border radius… The coveted rounded corner, the mark of a really slick design before that property made it easy :D

I think media queries/responsive is what did in the last bastion of CSS resistors.

CSS rounded corners often looked a bit pixelated in the early days, and I remember doing image-based corners well after border-radius was widely supported.

By the time CSS rounded corners became really smooth a lot of designers had moved on to the boxy flat look, and square corners were fashionable again.

Eh, I’ll go ahead and trust that life is about as long as it needs to be. Any “things of note” apart from genuinely helping someone else out on their journey when you had a shot is totally irrelevant from the broader perspective.

The part where "you have a shot" is crucially important. Otherwise, if all people do is help others to help others, you have a circular system where nothing is done.

If all everyone does is help others, you have a circular system where everything is done.

There are easily installable databases of IP block info, super easy to do it synchronously, especially if it’s stored in memory. I run a small group of servers that each have to do it thousands of times per second.