Tax paying citizens who want their concerns addressed absolutely LOVE hearing that "Ackchyually, your problem doesn't exist and is all in your head".

P.S. - I have no skin in the game regarding EU immigration policies, just making an honest observation about engaging with people who might have opposing views.

Because in my experience talking with them, most don't, and the vast majority are anti-federal organizations of any kind. And these have been multiple discussions over the course of 20+ years.

Making the ultimate visibility tool isn't just helpful to me as a newcomer. It may be useful to many veterans and people who haven't had the time to make this tool for themselves.

But I'm also somewhat biased towards laziness/observation.

Do the most unethical profit-maximizing thing, but also account for the eventual lawsuits and loss of goodwill in your calculation.

More data centers, less low-end lawyers, probably more pressure on the judicial system.

I just made a not-great comparison, since the stakes of a video game item and things like health care are not the same.

What I was trying to get at it is a situation where little value is provided at great cost to the consumer in an imperfect information scenario.

If you have some kind of point to make about the term, please list your qualifications on what makes you an arbiter of meaning.

Persistence hunting isn't just running 25km to catch 1 deer.

It may also involve multiple scout runs (perhaps 50km or longer) to find where the deer are after the current local deer supply is exhausted. It may also involve moving the entire tribe unit to a location 100-200km away from the current one, which would involve people less fit than tribe hunters.

> It's certainly possible that persistence hunting happened to some degree, and it's a fun idea so it really caught on in popular consciousness, but the actual evidence is limited.

Well, the problem is that evidence for just about everything related to our existence from before the glacial period ended is very limited due to a population bottleneck.

But there's no reason to assume that our ancestors did not use every tool available at their disposal to survive, one of the tools being persistence hunting, which we are still very good at, despite there not being evolutionary pressure to be selected for for the last 7-8 thousand years.

Do you have any evidence for that? Aside from the thought-terminating cliché "it was used by Marxists once" ?

What in the world are you talking about?

It absolutely is a real thing. You don't get to declare that an existing word with more than 2000 years of history doesn't exist.

It may not exist in the Bay Area or in whatever subset of parameters you invented, but it absolutely exists and is something to strive towards.

> The idea that simply "talented" workers should rule just seems to speed run towards fascist aims.

Complete non-sequitur with 0 evidence.

> How do you consider which workers are worth more than others? If you do to the wrong school are you suddenly worth less? Do you think society will have certain preferences?

You decide just like everything else. Based on context and some objective measurements. It's not a perfect system, because sometimes measurements can become the goal, rather than the underlying objective, but it's the best system we have.

One of the frequent stories to hit the grapevine was someone putting up a common item at an insane price point in Jita or other popular trading system. And people would buy them (rarely, but consistently).

Something like a piece of an asteroid ore at 50 million ISK.

It's not exactly a crime, but for me it definitely sits in a moral grey area, somewhere between American Health care and selling bottled water in the desert for $1million/bottle.

Potato chips are generally very low weight, and include other calorie containing products, such as oil.

Global warming is geoengineering. And any geoengineering out of it will need to eclipse the current geoengineering in size, energy and effort.

> And for the record I'm definitely not saying the left is somehow perfect. Obviously the left is a bit of a mess too. It's just that they're not the same kinds of messes across party lines.

Seems like you've fallen to the same fallacy within the same paragraph, which is quite ironic.