I agree. My point is we shouldn't simply open the doors for this degenerate content and make it easily accessible for children. Children who are already addicted to porn will be more inclined to find a workaround. But new children who haven't been exposed yet will be less inclined.
This all or nothing mentality is so disconnected from the real world. Of course some people started using VPNs, of course some children even started doing it. No law can prevent all occurrences of what it tries to prevent. But it can make it more difficult, and heighten the barrier of entry for children that are introduced to the internet.
It's great news.
The purpose is to make it as difficult as possible for children to access this type of content. Of course some will find workarounds. But if laws are supposed to be 100% foolproof then no law actually does anything.
Very interesting, thanks for sharing! I didn't know Elixir was so invested in Machine Learning. I have a background in Erlang so I'll definitely dive in. Do you know of any individuals / companies that have had success with Elixir+ML in production?
Is any of this usable on hosted GPU notebooks (e.g. paperspace)?
I'm currently diving into Machine Learning using Python + Scikit-learn, and I'd love to one day replace Python with Ruby. But looking at the current ML ecosystem I don't see that happening. Does anyone have experience building (Supervised / Unsupervised) models using something other than Python (including deployment)?
That's very interesting. But if two people are friends with a person, don't they have a different view of that same person? They might be friends with a different idea / perspective of that person, but it is still the same person.
It might not mean much to you, but I'll pray for you. I wish you the best!
I'm sure I don't have to explain Christian theology to you. It's very sad that you have to go through this physical pain, as well losing faith as a result.
As for people who say one thing and do something else. People are fallen and hypocrites. I myself an still trying to do better, but I realize I'm still full of anger. I hope to better myself eventually.
Out of curiosity; did your spiritual life end with Christianity? Or did you continue your search?
I don't know you, but I am also in my mid 30s, work a boring (but comfortable) tech 9-5 job, and have been trying to build something on the side for a while. I have a great girlfriend, earn a decent amount of money, own a house, am healthy and work out.
So we do seem similar, but I did abuse alcohol and more. Tried to find pleasure in hedonistic ways.
A few years ago I started asking myself: "Is this it? Is this all that life has to offer? What's the point?". I was raised secular, and never knew spirituality or religion, but decided to delve in.
I was, however, very much against Christianity and was willing to try anything except that. Long story short, after reading about religions, history, theology, I ended up becoming a proponent of the thing I hated the most.
Now I see beauty in life, and especially the future. My fiance and I are getting married, we now go to Church, we're both looking forward to starting a family.
I don't know if you're religious in any way, or interested at all. I was definitely not interested the first 30 years of my life.
If you'd like: I'd be willing to get into contact with you if you need to talk. Not to convert you to Christianity, but since we seem similar in this very narrow scope, maybe we can both learn from each other.
Regardless, I truly hope you find your salvation, as I have found mine. God bless!
Many people forget (or never knew) that Catholicism / Christianity basically kickstarted modern science. A large misconception is that Christianity and Science can't coexist. When in reality they amplify each other.
> For example you have similar candidates, take the one who’s least represented in your org.
This would be the only edge case in which it would "work". And even then you're still systematically rejecting someone based on who they are rather than what they can do. I'd rather lose to a coin flip.
> Or you have a “pure” meritocracy, but you spend more energy and money sending your recruiters to areas and schools whose students are more likely to not be represented at your company.
Then it's not pure, because you're actively avoiding people.
> If you can’t understand that you shouldn’t be commenting on DEI stuff.
Regardless if your statement is true or not, you believe we should exclude people from discussions because they might not have enough knowledge on the subject? (Ironic for a topic on inclusion)