Wednesday, April 14, 2021

Can Data Improve Life? And other letters to the editor

to the Editor:

In the discussion of larynx, The subject of “This is sound” (7 March), both reviewer, Mary Roach, and author, John Colepinto, miss a key point. They skirt the underlying anatomy and completely ignore the contribution of the hypoid bone. This horseshoe-shaped structure rests immediately under the jaw bone and connects muscles that help swallow and become vocal. It is our only bone from about 206 that does not contact any other.

The howler monkey represents the symbol of the development of the hypoid, where the bone is about the normal size of a round-bottom cup. Highler is helpful in Howler’s ability to present his voice about two miles. Given the relative number of havers and humans, it is good that we are not sounding so well.

Roy A. food
Los angeles

to the Editor:

I have followed Bill McKibben’s articles for 30 years, but I was disappointed by his praise, but I was disappointed Its review Bill Gates’s “How to Survive the Climate Crisis” (March 7).

It is unfair to criticize a writer for being within the scope of his ability. As Gates acknowledges, he thinks like an engineer and accordingly presents an engineer’s assessment of the options available to mitigate the emerging climate crisis. Within that focus, his analysis needs to be well informed, authoritative, and in dire need.

Michael murphy
San francisco

to the Editor:

In his By book interview (Feb. 14), Bill Gates writes about how Google searches can be used “to improve life”. I can search without tracking people instead. Acceptance of the “end-user” as someone manipulating and gathering information is increasingly sophisticated and increasingly inappropriate, and I look forward to a growing resistance to it.

It is great that Gates is against climate change. However, Microsoft has been doing pointless work as a delay in telling me what I’m typing – in all my interests, of course – while being informed that my “data makes ads more meaningful” “As I wanted more meaningful advertisements, I would be less and less interested in listening to Tech Moguls Opin ‘on anything.

Christina Albers
new Orleans

to the Editor:

in His essay “Witness for the Defense” (7 March), Emily Mortimer makes a wonderful and conceptual witness to protect Vladimir Nabokov’s “Lolita”. She is proud of her father.

However, reading his essay I remembered very little inspiring witness: Adolf Eichmann, who (according to Hannah Arendt) told his jailer guard that he considered “Lolita” to be “quite a spammy book”. There is more irony in the world than iron.

Louis phillips
New York

to the Editor:

I will give your readers an account of what an elder man did to me at an early age in the name of love. I am personally familiar with those who experienced a similar decline.

But I will tell you that Emily Mortimer’s ardent admiration for “Lolita” made me really sick. I am too old now, but one must write a comparatively “exhilarating and paradoxically cleansing” novel, which allows us to “worry about right and wrong and to feel things for another person to feel.” Will allow. “

One’s own disintegration is an experience that is unfortunately impossible to portray, but it is the only novel that will shake off the collapse and calliness that marked our engagement with “Lolita”. This is not a moral condemnation. It is a pure human expression of truth.

Susan Mullendore
Tucson, Eries.

Source link

Translate »