@ArjinFerman's banner p


Tinfoil Gigachad

2 followers   follows 3 users  
joined 2022 September 05 16:31:45 UTC


User ID: 626


Tinfoil Gigachad

2 followers   follows 3 users   joined 2022 September 05 16:31:45 UTC


No bio...


User ID: 626

I hold some capital D deranged views on the nature of our elites. I'm pretty sure mass scale depopulation is one of their goals, and another is setting up a global digital panopticon where they will have total control over what we say, do, or even think.

You might be right on basic stuff like "murder bad", but I wouldn't say that constitutes 80% agreement.

To be fair, I'm kind of an extreme case in how much I hate having to conform to any community

I'm not much of social conformist either, in fact my distaste for modernity stems directly from that. The issue is that it seems the only choice is who to conform to, and in hindsight conforming to your family and community seems strictly superior.

But by the same token, isn't you saying "being dominated by people who know nothing about me, and have values completely alien to mine" also a pretty strong exaggeration of what modernity is actually like?

Not really. My point was that it's comparable in it's intensity to the pressure your local community would put on you. I don't think that's an exaggeration.

The reality, it seems to me, is that the average social conservative of today probably shares like 80% of values in common with the average elite of today. It's just that we focus on the differences.

Now this is where I hold some extreme views.

Before gay marriage was legal a Christian could speculate about all kinds of consequences of allowing such unholy unions, but they didn't really happen, so

They were absolutely right it was a slippery slope. Maybe they didn't hit the nail on the head with their predictions, but in fairness "we will start sending male rapists to female prisons" and "top academics won't even be able to tell what a woman is" would have seemed like too much of a non-sequitur compared to "they'll legalize polygamy or bestiality next".

That's more the "slippery slope" argument than "Katrina was god's punishment".

I don't think religious belief necessarily implies feudalism, or that lack of religious belief implies non-feudalism. I also thought you meant having to socially conform to your local community, not literal serfdom.

It's not gaslighting if it's true.

How can it simultaneously be true that woke messaging is not a big deal, and that people should not be allowed any option to remove it?

But I have yet to meet anyone who thinks Peppa Pig is LGBT propaganda and can't comprehend the criticism levied against their modding choices who doesn't also think "wokeness" in video games is a problem, period.

I'm having trouble parsing this sentence. You're saying that if he had his way, he'd just turn the tables on the woke, and censor them, including their mods? If not, I'm not sure I see where you're going with this argument.

Feel free to ping me if you need any help figuring it out!

Increased alienation of the individual is compensated for by the fact that humans are now more free from having their lives dominated by the small communities in which they grew up.

That's small comfort when that dominance was just replaced with being dominated by people who know nothing about me, and have values completely alien to mine.

I'm sorry, I don't see how that changes anything. OP was talking about games in general. You made a point about the gaslighting being justified, because a lot of people seem to agree with the guy you linked to. I'm saying that argument would only make sense if he wanted to purge all wokeness from all games, rather than just complaining about how top corporations are pushing it through it's media.

Whether that's how it should be is a separate question.

It's not. We're talking about whether or not Tora's post is actual high-quality journalism compared to legacy media. Clearly it is. You explained why legacy media has such poor journalism, but you haven't argued that it's not poor quality.

Weren't a lot of centralized Communist regimes just straight-up atheist?


Democratization and social progressivism are two global trends that happened at sort of the same time, but I doubt the causal story is that simple.

Right, just like the story behind the pope's decision is not as simple as "he's a central authority, of course it would happen"?

The difference between these contexts is irrelevant. Providing a link to the primary source, after you already looked it up, is trivial, but legacy media routinely refuse to do so.

I agree with him. Your argument would make sense if he complained about ANY game EVER catering to the pronouns crowd, it makes no sense in a context where mods that cater to him are censored.

I don't see how that's a counter.

  • OP said "looks like the Pope is legalizing gay marriage?"
  • Eatan said: "haha, silly Catholics, maybe you shouldn't have put all your eggs in the Papal Infallibility basket?"
  • I said: "that didn't seem to be a bad choice given how more democratic strains of the religion have faired"

... and you seem to be saying "it's not necessarily bad to destroy traditions, we have always done it". Even if, that seems to be neither here nor there.

But to address your point - not only do I not see how it would "optimize" the Church, I am yet to see one of these "we must make a fundamental change to [institution] to appeal to more prograssive audiences, and grow our membership" scenarios play out in a non-destructive way,

I was also trying to come up with a scenario where we could test some of the game mechanics we've been discussing. I was thinking about something along the lines of:

Tensions between [our Glorious Motherland] and [Evil Empire] have been rising. Hostilities have not broken out, but both sides are obviously preparing for war. As a result, the prices of [strategic resource] have skyrocketed, which in turn caused an increase in pirate activity. [Interstellar Mining Corporation] has requested military assistance in securing a recently established [strategic resource] mining base. Pirates have been raiding their freighters en route to [industrial center], and the frequency of the raids suggests they managed to set up a base in the same system the [Corporation] mine is located. Your orders are to locate and destroy the pirate base.

The rules would be:

  • Subspace jumps give away the ship's location at long range, unless line of site is broken by a large body like a planet/moon.
  • Depending on the distance between the detecting and jumping ship, and/or the quality of it's sensors, the destination of the jump can be estimated.
  • Infra-red sensors can pick up moving ships at short distances without giving away their own location
  • Radar can pick up static ships at short distances, but gives away it's own location
  • Ships can be pulled out of subspace with a warp inhibitor
  • No communication is possible with a ship in subspace.

Every once in a while a freighter would arrive to pick up the cargo, and then try to make it to a jump node at the outskirts of the system. If the pirates manage to figure out where it's going, they can pull it out of subspace and attack it, and if they're equipped with a signal jammer, you won't be able to tell anything is off until the ETA at the destination. You can counter with making a series of shorter jumps letting you confirm the status of the freighter, and narrowing down the location of the attack if one does happen, but almost certainly giving away the freighter's route.

You'd be judged by how many freighters make it out of the system before you destroy the pirate base, and any delays your security measures might have caused. The idea is that you'll have to make some sacrifices in order to learn where the pirates are launching their attacks from.

I think a scenario like that should be manageable in terms of development, would let us test which mechanics work and which don't, and would be a decent first mission for a larger campaign when we get to that point.

And yet, any form of democratic rule, or even decentralization, ended up accelerating "progress" exponentially, and was a disaster if the goal was preserving tradition.

I haven't used it in a long time but 3rd party apps for Big Tech social media generally tend to be faster, have cleaner UI, and a workflow that doesn't suck you into foreverscrolling.

The second and separate argument is "but we don't ban paedophile apologists, Holocause deniers, etc." and my response to that is "yeah, so?"

So... they are not banning based on content?

Where it bleeds over is "you are being banned for your belligerent tone

Look, I already ate a ban or two for being "antagonistic" and think the criteria are rather arbitrary, and depend on the particular mod's mood, but I think it's pretty clear there's no bleed over between moderating on tone, and moderating on content.

(and also stop talking about this one thing all the time)".

So far the only person this was applied to is a guy that is literally unable to discuss anything other than Holocaust revisionism.

That's absolutely brutal. Best of luck to you, man.

A lot of jobs I applied to preferred to give a simple programming task somewhere during the interview process, rather than just look at degrees / experience. That even made it into rat-adjacent folk-wisdom as 199 out of 200 applicants don't know how to write fizzbuzz. Personally I think the ratio is absurd, but the idea is directionally correct. An ex-boss explicitly told me he got burned on a lot of people who looked good on paper.

It's not sarcasm. I can't tell you about people who went through a boot camp, and maybe it's a generational thing, but my experience has been that self-taughts have a better understanding of technical subjects in general, because they picked them up out of interest, rather than because they needed to pass an exam. There's also an overlapping cluster of self-taughts who got a degree that might be muddying the picture. We might argue what their success should be attributed to, but I'd attribute it to being self-taught since I seen them breeze through their classes, and their knowledge of the subject predated the participation in the class.

Some users have been asking for top level deleted comments to be forbidden. So that is one case where deleted comments might be held against a user.

There was a very interesting debate about one of the J6 protesters being a fed, half of which is now gone, so I can understand that. The suddenly disappearing top level posts are also annoying, but I meant more this:

Otherwise not officially. But if you post a trolling comment towards a mod it doesn't go away when you delete it. And I'm not going to completely ignore the fact that they were trying to be a dick.

Surely, someone being a dick, and realizing afterwards they were out of line and deleting the comment should not be against the rules?

@remzem Just so you and others know, moderators can see deleted comments.

Are going to start had holding deleted comments against people?

The only difference between what you're suggesting, and what they did, is that they left it open to "non-binary identifying" people as well. Maybe if you enforced a very feminine dress code, some kind of shame would kick in, but then you'd probably be excluding the actually female attendees too.

The ECB is raising rates too. Maybe because we were so underpaid all the time, the European IT labor markets have been at a state of constant shortage, and we're just in a somewhat milder shortage now? All I know is the last few companies I worked for have been BEGGING me to recommend someone else they could hire.

It's not really an issue for good graduates of good universities, but there is a sea of bootcamp people who want in, previously could and can no longer. And I'd grasp at any networking opportunity if I were in that situation.

This is another thing that sounds bizarre to me. Good universities teach you to program?! The whole reason I'm in the field is that it's not credentialist. Whatever is going on with you Yankees, can you keep it on your side of the Atlantic?