Yeah, I think the final nail in the coffin for those resisting it was when we finally got good data on the details of the sea floor and we could actually map out the forces that were driving plate tectonics. Also, science in general can be held back by older generations resisting new ideas. IIRC the theory of part of the heat in the Earth's core being caused by radioactive isotopes was basically dead in the water because Lord Kelvin refused to accept it, and his death finally allowed people to really start arguing for it.

Very impressive, a truly beautiful rendition.

Can I ask - Is it expensive to buy the Sentinel-2 imagery?

Data found on Page 6 https://cdn.openai.com/papers/gpt-4.pdf

Loved it!

[removed]

They're saying it's murder by analogy.

Murder is the immoral killing of someone, and are implying it should be illegal.

It was not designed for the tax rate to slowly increase over time.

I have two songs called “One” on my everyday playlist, one by Metallica and the other by Ghostface (both are considered classics for their respective artists, and are on albums that are also considered classics). I wonder if there’s any others.

Has anyone here ever really needed more precision than 3.14159? For real?

I think it's a schooner.

That’s fair but ambiguous to me. how am I supposed to know if they are inferring immoral or illegal. But it begs the question, is it unsustainable by design. It was designed from the beginning for the tax rate to slowly increase over time as needed based on life expectancy and birth rates. The initial tax rate was only 1%. Birth rates were declining in the 1930s.

Now they’ve got another year to figure out the next one.

Now I am left wondering what is the average digit value of Pi? I assume every number appears an equal number of times so I am guessing close to 4.5.

Spotify gave all these songs a name now in addition to their Untitled #X. I kind of miss the nameless versions tbh

No they want to persuade people it's immoral because murder is.

I'm making the argument that SS is inherently flawed for the same reason Ponzi schemes are: they're structured in an unsustainable way.

And I don't think that even counts for this graph since the official title is Stay (I Missed You).

Because they want to persuade people to believe the actions are illegal. So my question is are you making the argument that social security is illegal bc it is unsustainable? Because it is strongly implied by asserting the analogy to Ponzi scheme just like murder and theft

[deleted]

As much as I understand this isn’t your fault, democracy index is a really really bad way of measuring democracy.

The data is extremely opaque and basically originates in asking an unspecified list of ‘experts’ for their personal assessment of the how the country functions with respect to a large number of questions.

There is no indication whatsoever who the experts are, where they’re from, or why we should take their perception as fact.

Wonderful chart. Thank you.

Now do one with songs that have come out in the last 2 years about voices in your head.

I kind of want a 2nd axia for this. Something like quality of life.

People arguing the police murder innocent civilians all the time. They are using the word murder by analogy.

The same goes for theft when tax dollars aren't used for what people want them to.

So you say. I’m too tired to check.

> Except it isn't a false analogy simply because it doesn't have all the qualities of a Ponzi scheme.

I agree

> Thinking analogies are lazy is misunderstanding their purpose. Analogies are the very means of illustrating a concept by means of comparison.

I find them lazy when used in debate bc they are usually used to over simplify differences .

> Ponzi schemes are inherently unsustainable, but they're not inherently forced.

I think whether social security is sustainable or not is the question that has to be agreed upon or else we are at an impass.

> I can have objectives to it on forced participation grounds too, but I wouldn't call it a ponzi scheme to do so.

I agree but that wasn’t my point. My point was if social security has questionable legality, it is less misleading to use an analogy to other illegal topics even if the reason they should be illegal is different

Chili peppers