justcool393
you are loved <3
No bio...
User ID: 1784
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
good thing we're not talking about proper cremations! you do realize the nazis weren't exactly interested in giving the people they genocided a proper burial, right?
i seriously don't know what your trouble is when both @official_techsupport and @faul_sname gave you very good explanations, with faul_sname handholding you through the math while you regurgitate fucking chatgpt and present it as an actual argument
this implies that the people even voted for such a bill. let's not kid ourselves here: these are all career politicians, they're not paying for anything and as such will vote however it's most politically expedient to do so
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
the government has zero intention of giving up policing power, despite what token gestures towards "racial equality" may seem like. why would a government cut its own nose off? that's completely illogical
justcool393
you are loved <3
5mo ago
it necessarily would increase it if there are more people on the road. but how many people it has an effect on doesn't matter. in your proposed world, if X% of drivers don't have insurance, that's X% of drivers that have never been tested.
look, driver's tests may be incredibly easy to pass, but it is a working high-pass filter. if someone (not on the basis of discrimination like what the Aussies want to do) can't get a driver's license because they've failed a driver's test, what makes you think they're going to get insurance for driving if they can't pass that exam?
and what's even worse now is that you have people who have been previously filtered out of driving altogether are now both on the road and uninsured.
that sounds like a recipe for disaster.
justcool393
you are loved <3
5mo ago
what if someone just doesn't get insurance then...
justcool393
you are loved <3
9mo ago
What cost would that be?
negative reactions to surviving where someone else didn't are common. this is not a hard concept to understand nor grasp.
by the power of snuggles and friendship, magic will happen and we will gain the ability to fly if I do that!")
in this scenario, i think you have to realize that 50%+1 picking blue does save everyone, including those who misread the question or whatever.
justcool393
you are loved <3
9mo ago
depends on the type of incompetence and to what scale. i think a general statement like that is hard to prove and probably doesn't have merit.
justcool393
you are loved <3
9mo ago
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/little-child-pushing-menu-button-260nw-1319473658.jpg
for one
...or anyone who accidentally presses the supposedly "bad one"
justcool393
you are loved <3
9mo ago
We already do tend to do so every single day
justcool393
you are loved <3
10mo ago
for movies that purport to be based on true stories, maybe lack of realism should be?
justcool393
you are loved <3
10mo ago
The title of that article is laughably false. The underlying point it is based on, that under normal operation a nuclear plant releases less radioactive material into the environment than a coal plant, is technically true but grossly misleading.
I addressed this in the footnote.
the radioactivity concern is concentrated purely into the possibility of something going wrong.
It is a quite common myth that living near a nuclear power plant emits radiation during ongoing operations.
justcool393
you are loved <3
10mo ago
Some countries like China and India went to quite extreme lengths to lower their population growth.
sure i'll give you China and India, but outside of that I still find the argument that this is happening on a mass scale outside of these 2 exceptions to be lacking and without merit
That's the beauty of it: if you successfully decrease the natives' fertility, you can then use it as an excuse to increase immigration. By the second generation the immigrants from the fertile countries you're importing will turn into the same sort of hedonist-nihilist low fertility bots westerners have already become.
as ironically nihilistic as this comment is, it seems again a extremely poor choice. why not just do both? you can get unchecked immigration with a rising population, although it's admittedly not very stable at high rates of both, and also lock people into bitter political rivalries
Except Elon Musk is now a "far-right extremist"
being far right or whatever political philosophy you say he is does not exempt him from his primary motivation: wealth accumulation. his concern is a poor theatre. he is one of the richest men in the world, he is going to advocate policies that are going to be in his interest, while putting on a poorly done kayfabe of concern for humanity or whatever.
justcool393
you are loved <3
10mo ago
so I've seen rumors around, and keep in mind these are just rumors, from HN and others that Twitter has been accidentally DDoSing themselves.
in the Twitter UI as of a few days ago (and earlier while looking for more information on a related thing I accidentally confirmed this), it'd start making hundreds of requests per minute to Twitter's servers. now looking through it, I found this
This is hilarious. It appears that Twitter is DDOSing itself.
The Twitter home feed's been down for most of this morning. Even though nothing loads, the Twitter website never stops trying and trying.
In the first video, notice the error message that I'm being rate limited. Then notice the jiggling scrollbar on the right.
The second video shows why it's jiggling. Twitter is firing off about 10 requests a second to itself to try and fetch content that never arrives because Elon's latest genius innovation is to block people from being able to read Twitter without logging in.
[...]
https://sfba.social/@sysop408/110639435788921057
obviously my source is pretty biased, but the self-request spam seems to at least be happening to some extent.
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
the games are wacky and fun! whether you're someone like @carpathianflorist who will trust someone for no reason at all, whether you're like @aqouta who wants to build charts to figure out who the demon is, or like me who will get into a counterclaim with my own minion my first game, there's a lot of fun to be had!
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
added a issue for it on github. not sure, should it go on all comments or just top levels? (i'd probably advocate for no dials)
also worth knowing is that there are potential bad implications here as this could more easily lead to vote rings.
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
i'm pointing out the flaws in someone's argument, which amounts to "out-group bad"
the response i got was continued attempts to assert such and was clearly made in bad faith, as was the initial comment in the first place. it's low effort and is only inviting circlejerking, which i am going to push back against because... well there's no substance to the argument.
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
i did already
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
the political agenda of Sam Altman.
given his political agenda is doing what is profitable, unless it becomes unprofitable for him (or any other for profit corporation based solution) to do that (as given by the popularity of ChatGPT, clearly the free market has decided that wokeness is profitable), then it probably won't be
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
...well definitely not in an elevator in the wee hours of the morning. i'm actually kinda surprised at the controversiality of @FarNearEverywhere's comment. it seems obvious if you haven't been irony poisoned.
justcool393
you are loved <3
5mo ago
i don't really see the point, i think it'd likely just be as abused as upvote. it'd just be that "quality post" would be the new upvote and "not quality" would be the new downvote where "agree" is just a weaker form that would be uncommonly used.
i think it would be neat to see some indicator of controversiality though.
justcool393
you are loved <3
5mo ago
A non-narcissistic person will be able to consider the possiblity that she is mistaken and that when community with as high an average IQ this one forms an consensus, indicated by mass-votes is correct; while a crank considers disagreement a sign of suppression and persecution.
this comment has a nice "to be fair you have to have a high IQ to understand themotte" type vibe to it, which comes across as pseudointellectual at best.
more seriously though, just because a comment is highly downvoted doesn't necessarily mean it's inherently garbage or that it was a "low IQ" opinion. a lot of very smart opinions or ideas were not deemed to be very popular in the past, and I think it'd be foolish to think that what we think is objectively correct.
justcool393
you are loved <3
6mo ago
he's on reddit's board and was the interim CEO after Ellen Pao left. he helped to bring Steve Huffman back as CEO. people complained about Ellen Pao ruining reddit by making it into a "SJW safe space" or whatever, but the truth of the matter is a lot of that happened not as the result of Ellen's tenure, but because of board pressure being applied after Ellen left.
Sam is a part of that and is probably also why reddit is basically forced into the "we must grow at all costs and justify our valuation" mode of operation and has been since even before interest rates started rising.
at 100% cooperation between all parties, there is no difference between blue and red. chug them both if you want and wash it down with a chaser.
I think it is a given that some people will either:
- misread the question and choose the option they don't intend to
- be transiently suicidal and would be helped by not encouraging someone towards suicide
- have unironic mental retardation (in the clinical sense) or be mentally disturbed in some other way (schizophrenia, etc)
- be incredibly young and do not understand the effects of either option
- have someone they know and care about that fits in the above 4 groups
- have someone they know and care about that might fit into the last option
if any of these are the case, it is almost certain for there not be 100% coordination to pick one or the other. it is not only probable, but imo extremely likely for someone to pick blue based on the last 2 or more uncommonly the first 4. therefore, untold numbers will die if red wins. you don't need to be unintelligent for the first to occur (even highly intelligent people make mistakes). therefore, we want to reduce the number who die. and the only way to do that is to get 50%+1 to pick blue.
it is much more attainable for 50%+1 to do something than for 100% to do something. and so, we should be focusing all of our effort on getting 50%+1 to do something by encouraging everyone to do something, because 50%+1 blue or 65% blue or 84.25% blue or 100% blue has the same outcome as 100% red, but the inverse is not true.
are you sure all of the people you care about will pick red? would you bet their life on it?
justcool393
you are loved <3
9mo ago
I mean if we're going to add a layer of "what do we think would happen for realsies" I imagine the blue % would go way up when you account for the risk. sure you might not pick red, but can you say your friends will for certain? and can you say the same that your friends won't go through this same process? what about your family?
I mean, there is rdrama.net for low effort culture warring I suppose...
More options
Context Copy link