For instance, the people who routinely get themselves screened for being a carrier for Tay-Sachs disease are a demographic who have an extremely strong historical reason to be worried about Nazi-style dysgenics, and yet, eugenics is exactly what they are doing whenever a couple of them, on learning that they are both carriers, decide to refrain from having children together, or break off their relationship and seek other, non-carrier partners. The Nazis thought they were practising eugenics. From their point of view, they were improving the gene pool:
Want to start a startup? Get funded by Y Combinator. July This essay is derived from a talk at Oscon A few months ago I finished a new bookand in reviews I keep noticing words like "provocative'' and "controversial.
I was trying to make it efficient. I didn't want to waste people's time telling them things they already knew.
By: Publius Decius Mus September 5, Publius Decius Mus was the pseudonym of Michael Anton, who in January of left the private sector to serve on the National Security Council. - by Imran Khan Why does it seem that American society is in decline, that fairness and decorum are receding, that mediocrity and tyranny are becoming malignant despite the majority of the public being averse to such philosophies, yet the. I like the faith message that I get out of the "literary device" viewpoint. My only minor quibble is that the order of Genesis 1 is close enough to the natural scientific order.
It's more efficient just to give them the diffs. But I suppose that's bound to yield an alarming book. Edisons There's no controversy about which idea is most controversial: I didn't say in the book that variation in wealth was in itself a good thing.
I said in some situations it might be a sign of good things. A throbbing headache is not a good thing, but it can be a sign of a good thing-- for example, that you're recovering consciousness after being hit on the head.
Variation in wealth can be a sign of variation in productivity. In a society of one, they're identical. And that is almost certainly a good thing: It's probably because you have no Thomas Edisons.
In a low-tech society you don't see much variation in productivity. If you have a tribe of nomads collecting sticks for a fire, how much more productive is the best stick gatherer going to be than the worst? A factor of two? Whereas when you hand people a complex tool like a computer, the variation in what they can do with it is enormous.
That's not a new idea. Fred Brooks wrote about it inand the study he quoted was published in But I think he underestimated the variation between programmers. He wrote about productivity in lines of code: But what if the problem isn't given? In programming, as in many fields, the hard part isn't solving problems, but deciding what problems to solve.
Imagination is hard to measure, but in practice it dominates the kind of productivity that's measured in lines of code. Productivity varies in any field, but there are few in which it varies so much.
The variation between programmers is so great that it becomes a difference in kind.July (This essay is derived from a talk at Oscon ) A few months ago I finished a new book, and in reviews I keep noticing words like "provocative'' and "controversial.''To say nothing of "idiotic.'' I didn't mean to make the book controversial.
Discusses issue of violence in society with special emphasis on television violence. - by Imran Khan Why does it seem that American society is in decline, that fairness and decorum are receding, that mediocrity and tyranny are becoming malignant despite the majority of the public being averse to such philosophies, yet the.
With rucksack, naturally. An extended four-minute shot has him doing exactly this all the way through the Harvard campus, before he lands finally where he belongs, the only place he’s truly comfortable, in front of his laptop, with his blog.
This is cool! There’s been this undercurrent in your writings on society and biology for a while now, and I think it’s a radically sane position. July (This essay is derived from a talk at Oscon ) A few months ago I finished a new book, and in reviews I keep noticing words like "provocative'' and "controversial.''To say nothing of "idiotic.'' I didn't mean to make the book controversial.