rwtwm
@rwtwm@feddit.uk
- Comment on If I snapped you back in time 650 years right this very second, how would you use your current knowledge to succeed? 2 weeks ago:
I think a lot of people in this thread are overstating the suspicion of outsiders. International trade has existed for thousands of years. There was even limited tourism in the middle ages. It would be rare to encounter people that you couldn’t communicate with, but I don’t think you’d be automatically sacrificed.
I’m in London, so would fare better than most as they would definitely be familiar with outsiders. That said people in many of the old European cities would likely be able to blag their way to local universities. Oxford definitely already existed 650 years ago so I’d start by heading there.
I think all scholarly writing was in Latin at the time, so I’d need somebody to translate, but (with luck) I could move maths on a couple of hundred years. I reckon I could get basic electricity going too. Obviously the more you said upfront the more suspicious people would be, but if you drip-fed knowledge over a few years, trying to let the steps rest upon each other you could probably share a lot of what we know today.
- Comment on Realistically... How fucked is the US? 6 months ago:
All that, and you may have left out the most damaging of all… Trump will likely pull the US out of Copenhagen, leaving no chance of limiting temps below 2C let alone getting anywhere near 1.5C. The excess deaths from this will likely dwarf COVID.
- Comment on Amazon cloud boss says employees unhappy with 5-day office mandate can leave 6 months ago:
I’ve only watched the first of these, but having done so, I’m not sure I want to bother with the second. The guy in the first video repeated the (likely true) claim that WFH impacts commercial real estate value and then dunked on a couple of articles about return to work policies. But the question was, why does that sway Amazon’s thinking?
- Comment on Why preventing long-term sickness in the UK is an economic necessity 9 months ago:
Does nobody else find the framing of this article a little weird? I thought the argument for boosting the economy, was because it correlated well with people’s well being. (Not that I personally but that, but I understand the line of thought). Now instead we’re suggesting that human outcomes are important because it boosts an arbitrary measure? I feel like the cart is now dragging the horse along the ground.