The term “newtonian solution” just implies that you’re using gravitational and kinematic approaches to the model. I think Newton probably would have done much better had he made an earnest study with the resources he had available. People in shipping towns knew when tides and currents would be favorable and ships would try to leave at those times.
Ive heard of gnu taller before and I've tried to understand its scope of operation, but haven't been able to. Could someone ELI5 what does this give me that my bank's app doesn't? Is it _just_ privacy? Is it just the fact that the merchant can know nothing about me? Because if that's the case, isn't it really simple for banks to offer that feature as well?
Do we know for a fact that Michael Jackson did anything wrong? On Wikipedia you can read that the original accuser suspect his son was being molested, and asked for money or he would go to the police. Doesn't this undermine the credibility of the accuser?
> Chandler demanded money from Jackson, threatening to go to a criminal court, but no agreement was reached. After Jordan told a psychiatrist that Jackson had molested him, the Los Angeles Police Department began a criminal investigation. The investigation found no physical evidence against Jackson.
Update, I just read that entire page and it seems obvious the whole thing was a set up.
I suspect that in our society the answer is: if that's done on an individual basis, it's criminal, if it's done as a matter of policy and you can argue it's beneficial for shareholders, then it's encouraged.
> Except Friedman wasn't a racist, and the quote is cut specifically to make it appear that way.
He doesn't say that Friedman was racist, you made that up.
He says that Friedman was a fundamentalist and that people should be allowed to discriminate on the basis of race, and the quote illustrates that well and the context doesn't change anything to that point.
I'm saying he clipped the quote to give that impression.
> He says that Friedman was a fundamentalist and that people should be allowed to discriminate on the basis of race, and the quote illustrates that well and the context doesn't change anything to that point.
No, Firedman says that government force isn't the best way to address discrimination. Again the quote is clipped to mislead.
Page 93 (as numbered on the pages, IDK which PDF "page" [edit: nb the table of contents gets it wrong, one supposes the pages were re-numbered in the digitization process, or something]) or just search "Capitalism and Discrimination" and it'll get you there fast, for anyone who's interested. The chapter is... well, I found a real howler, but then I have odd taste in entertainment, sometimes, and my enjoyment was almost certainly not by a route the author intended. I'd recommend it just on that basis, regardless of its role in this thread but, uh, only for my fellow weirdos.
I figured you had, and posted it for others. Should have made that clearer.
FWIW I didn't find Zitron's framing of it misleading, having now read it (I'd read excerpts of that book before, and maybe even that chapter, but couldn't recall for sure, so re-read it just now)
My point is the author did not say Friedman was racist, you invented that the author said that. Address that, instead of talking about what Friedman say.
I’m saying the author frames it that way, and other people here clearly drew that conclusion. The author also took out some of context the clip from the 1970 article.
> What do you mean by "other tasks"? Why are these questions never asked?
To anyone else who, like me, has noticed this, the answer is: these interviews happen so that the interviewee can put out the message they want, and so that the interviewer can charge advertisers. Asking questions that could derail the theatre is not in the interest of the people involved.
This also creates an environment where the interviewers are self selected. Interviewers who derail the interviewee's exposition don't land important interviewees.
I imagine that an interviewer who suddenly put out an “emperor has no clothes” interview could short the stock and do quite well. It would also be a public service.
> "being good at stuff" matters far less than the appearance of doing stuff
I've recently figured this out a out the company where I work, after an embarrassingly large number of years. My manager pays lip service to "high quality code" to justify his endless torrent of nitpicks, but when it comes to his own stuff he hides some times serious problems. Like, seriously, I've found undeniable evidence that he was aware of the malfunctioning of a data collection system and instead of reporting/fixing, he made sure to make it harder for anyone else to find it.
He's very well respected, however, and has this incredible aura of professionalism.
This realization also explains why everything is done so poorly in my company. Hitting the ill defined requirements in letter but not in principle, and then blaming a different team when problems are uncovered, is more than enough.
Am I the only one skeptical that Newton would confuse a force with a displacement?