domain:inv.nadeko.net
EverythingIsFine
Well, is eventually fine
7m ago
Who is “they”? Best I can tell it was mostly the parents and school trying legal tricks (presumably to protect their reputation or something)? And the stated purpose feels at least facially plausible even if made in bad faith (that releasing shooter thoughts only makes them more famous and validates their approach as their writings are guaranteed notoriety) even if you disagree (as I do) and think there’s more to lose by a perception of secrecy. I mean, despite thinking this, it’s also true that media attention spawns copycats. I’ve never seen the copyright angle used but it also seems legally plausible.
ThisIsSin
Cainanites and Abelists
7m ago
Who are you to claim everyone's equally slaved to such passions?
edmund-nelson
Filthy Anime Memester
11m ago
How do you best verify Large language model output?
I hear lots of people say they use LLM's to search through documents or to get ideas for how something works, but my question is how do people verify the output? Is it as simple as copy-pasting keywords onto google to get the actual science textbooks? Or is there some better set of steps to take that I miss. I also wonder how you do that for looking through a document, is there some sort of method for getting the LLM to output page citations so you check those (maybe it's in settings or something)
Just finished reading the first Volume of The chemical Formulary, a book which is best described as "What if the Necronomicon were real"
It's got all sorts of recipes from adhesives to cosmetics to explosives to (insanely sketchy) medicine. It also presents everything in a mater of fact way without telling you of all the demons you are possibly creating.
Here's the recipie for cleaning coins for example
Sodium Cyanide 8 ounces
Water 1 Gallon
Apply the above solution with a tampico brush and when tarnish is removed wash with cold clean water then hot water and dry.
Note: this material is Poisonous and care must be taken in handling.
When this book says something is dangerous what they mean is this has a level 4 safety risk in the data sheet cleaning coins just requires enough cyanide to kill 2000 people
In volume 6 they have a Defense against war gasses section on page 535.
The describe Titanium Tetracloride smoke as "harmless", and Zinc Chloride smoke gets the same treatment
Yeah that's right this book is that unhinged.
It's also got great recipes for making Hydrogen Sulfide gas, a chemical that if it reaches 1000 parts per million and you take 1 breathful you die instantly.
This book is both a gold mine and a walking disaster. The funny thing is most of the chemicals used in the recipes are super easy to purchase at your local hardware store or wal-mart. Then you can light your house on fire, give your neighborhood cancer, die of Cyanide poisoning (ok that one is harder), die of hydrogen sulfide poisoning. Some of the stuff is harder to make thankfully but the danger levels of this book rival removing a microwave transformer.
wayfarer
17m ago
But people (non-prostitute people) break all of these conditions all the time.
that does not make prostitution "normal, healthy, average relationship"
in the same way as someone being a thief does not mean that murder is normal, healthy and average
whether things you mention are bad or not is a separate topic
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
23m ago
For help with the setting, Sanderson was inspired by rock pools at a beach he visited, which is why almost everywhere is rocky or sandy, most creatures have crustacean features, and 'grass' and other plants act weird.
IGI-111
God was a dream of good government.
24m ago
That's just ad hominem. Who gives a shit if it's a tyrant's excuse?
Is it true? Whatever the answer it, it certainly doesn't seem "objective".
wayfarer
24m ago
tend to have deeply conflicted world views that they never examine
well, examining your world view and deciding that you have room for "actually, I will go out in maybe pointless last stand if someone will leave me no other option that is acceptable" is also possible outcome.
And "would you prefer to rape children or murder grandmas" surely fits into category where this kind of response is OK.
And probably far earlier. (For example some chunk of millions murdered by Germans and Russians and Japanese regimes surely wished they did something a bit earlier, even if it would be doomed and only had a tiny effect)
I am fine not only with winning. I am also fine with "fuck you" type of hopeless stand.
Even if it only mildly inconveniences enemy.
Yes, I prefer cheating to win or seriously inconveniencing them, but at some point I prefer doomed last stand than playing. Not bothered to predefine what is the end stop for me but it is definitely far before engaging with "'An elderly woman will be tortured to death unless you have sex with a six year old. So, what are you going to do?" as invented by Aella.
hydroacetylene
34m ago
Abolitionists absolutely saw it as part of their identity, at least.
EdenicFaithful
Dark Wizard of Ravenclaw
42m ago
Adding Political Ponerology to my list.
my mental model of a trucker is still a fat white guy with a hat.
There are still a lot of those, and a smaller number of black and hispanic guys, but they mostly stay in their lane, probably on cruise control, and if they get over it's because someone is stuck on the side of the freeway or something. My guess about the leapfrog guys is that they think of themselves as therefore working harder than the cruise control guys. The aggressive Indian drivers seemed to be an I-40 specific phenomenon (there are new truck stops springing up there, serving Indian food as well), it isn't noticeable on N/S highways, and was less of an issue on I-10, it looked like there were more highway patrol enforcing the laws there.
"Elefantenrennen" (elephant racing)
Haha, that's a good term, I hadn't heard it before.
crushedoranges
44m ago
I don't know how you could manage to turn political murder into something fake and gay but the Zizians managed to do so. It's not the principles that are important, it's actually being able to do shit. If I could radicalize the people inside of an Applebees at 7pm they'd be able to do much more damage and cause a nation-wide lockdown.
orthoxerox
If you can read this, you're using a custom theme
46m ago
Yes. Palestinian children, to be precise.
hydroacetylene
48m ago
Sexual freedom is not a real thing in the individualistic sense, because sex isn't really an individualistic activity. We should judge sexual freedom by whether society's norms more easily feed into what makes people happy in the long run, not by the theoretical freedom of activity.
It's unclear by that standard that western societies are sexually freer today or in 1875 or 1950 or whenever.
Goodguy
50m ago
When OR decriminalized drug use were the addicts freer?
Yes. Some of them just used this extra freedom to make decisions that made them less free. But the decriminalization itself made them freer. They just didn't necessarily make good choices with that freedom. Part of what freedom is, is that it sometimes allows people to make decisions that make them less free in the long run. That does not mean that it is not freedom, though.
hydroacetylene
51m ago
Assuming you're referring to an Anglosphere country, there was no draft in 1875(although there was one in France and Germany). The anglosphere adopted conscription en masse for the world wars and, while the US used it for the civil war, that was seen as an exception. Instead, anglosphere armies recruited the poorest in society by promising better conditions during long terms of service- and the barracks probably actually did have better living conditions than home for the poor until at least the fifties, if not even later.
AvocadoPanic
55m ago
When OR decriminalized drug use were the addicts freer? It seems they had fewer options as they were slaves to their addiction. They possibly have an additional choice, homeless addict living in a tent (this was an option before too), but far more choices are now unavailable to them, as we see how challenging it is to move on from homeless and drug abuse.
Did it make the larger society around them freer or do they too now have fewer places to be free of homesless addicts living in tents.
Individuals have alway had the 'freedom' to be lustful degenerates if they were willing to face the opprobrium that went with it.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
55m ago
I think that the attention span thing is real, and quite troubling. I find it very rare that anyone can even articulate what they believe and why they believe it, let alone provide evidence that backs up their positions. Most people, when pressed to explain where they get their information, it generally reduces to social media, YouTube, or podcasts. In short, for the vast majority, their view of reality is based on the AI running their social media feeds. In this sense we are very far behind the people of 1824 or even 1724 who generally got their news from newspapers that came out once a day and contained long-form articles about the news. This means that they at least understood the bare facts of the issues. And that puts them far above us in being able to understand the world, and take positions based on the facts and their own thoughts about those issues. We run on vibes.
The bigger difference between their era and ours is that we’re much more narcissistic and see political opinions as parts of our identity. In 1824, you wouldn’t have made an identity of your policy positions. A person’s lifestyle and hobbies were not affected by their politics. People might have interests, but being in favor of the fugitive slave law had nothing to do with how you saw yourself as a person. You didn’t pick up or drop interests because they were coded “other team”. Nobody stopped drinking tea because it was marketed to the Southern people. We dropped Bud Light because it was marketed to trans people.
hydroacetylene
58m ago
ACB as a 'liberal' is a bit of a stretch. She's probably better described as a moderate conservative on non-social issues.
Throwaway05
1hr ago
Interesting, my mental model of a trucker is still a fat white guy with a hat.
RE: overtaking, as per google AI summary:
"In Germany, "Elefantenrennen" (elephant racing) refers to the slow overtaking of one truck by another on a highway, often blocking all lanes and causing traffic congestion. It's a common, and often frustrating, phenomenon where trucks with minimal speed differences attempt to pass each other, causing delays. This practice is actually illegal in Germany, according to GermanyinUSA."
Shrike
1hr ago
Of course there are perhaps more moral parallels with the extreme abolitionists, but in terms of contempt for the constitution, federal authority, and inability to understand the game theory of their opponents, the anti-ice protestors remind me a lot more of Jeff Davis and Robert Toombs than William Lloyd Garrison or Abe Lincoln.
William Lloyd Garrison burned a copy of the Constitution while calling it "an agreement with hell." In many ways I think the radical pro-slavery South Carolinian Fire-Eaters gave the other side a free win by splitting from the USA first, saving the radical abolitionists from the unpopular position of "destroy the Constitution and abolish slavery by any means."
I see a lot of parallels between the South's position in the 1850s and perhaps surprisingly the pro-immigration crowd in California/other Blue States.
While I understand where you're coming from (and wouldn't necessarily disagree in some respects) I actually think their position is closer to the North's in a specific aspect that is under-discussed.
A lot of the anger in the North towards the South wasn't due to the abstracted question of slavery, it was because slaves would escape from the South to the North, settle someplace like Massachusetts that would welcome escaped slaves, and build a new life for themselves...until federal officials showed up, tore them away from their family or friends, and returned them to the South, as was required by the Constitution. What caused the South to secede wasn't that the Constitution didn't favor their position, it was that they were getting locked out of conventional power by the more numerous free states (that's why South Carolina bailed when they did, after it became clear the federal government was going to be hostile to them due to a presidential election, even though the pro-slavey side had been racking up Wins like the Dred Scott decision just a few years earlier. (In this respect, I think your blue-states-as-South analogy is arguably very apt: the center of gravity in the electoral college is shifting redder and redder every census, and the Supreme Court's decisions haven't been cutting towards the blue states either.)
Interestingly, the Lincoln-Douglas debates saw the introduction by Douglas of the "Freeport Doctrine" which essentially said that even when slavery could not be legally prohibited, if the local government exercised its authority in such a way as to be inimical to slavery it would constitute a de facto ban.
It seems pretty clear to me that the blue states (or at least some of them) have been running their own version of the Freeport Doctrine as regards illegal immigrants and get upset about ICE for much the same reasons as Northerners were upset about slave catchers. And while that might function for a while, it seems unlikely that the United States can survive with each state having its own immigration policy any more than it could survive half slave and half free. Returning to your casting, it seems to me that the administration is quite content to dangle Fort Sumter in front of the other side, not necessarily in terms of secession but just in the reality that violent demonstration against the governmental authorities will radicalize reds and blues, but it seems plausible to have a net effect that favors the administration's position. Perhaps just as firing on Fort Sumter gave the abolitionists on a platter what they otherwise were arguably decades away from being able to seize by conventional political means, so too the protests against ICE in California (no matter how popular they are in California) will enable the Trump administration's previously radical push to aggressively deport illegal immigrants writ large.
Are there other examples that you can think of where the attention span and deep thought that Postman aspires to have helped cities/nations get through tough political challenges?
Off the top of my head, the Revolutionary War might be the best example. Unlike other examples (such as World War Two) the Founding Fathers were having to make up a lot as they went along because they had to create the institutions they needed to be a nation as they went (yes I know the state Congresses were already a thing, so there was actually less of a jump there than one might think, but still!) and from what I can tell they did a lot of it on sheer "I have read history for 1000 hours and we're remaking the Roman Republic from scratch but better this time" energy. (Back to the Civil War: the South actually aspired to emulate the success of the American Revolution and saw their secession as an ideological successor but failed in part because George Washington could afford to retreat from the British in a way that a slaveholding agrarian state fighting for its independence against a neighboring country could not.)
hydroacetylene
1hr ago
A very large supermajority of six-precepts following Catholics who don't dissent from the doctrine of the Church voting republican is not the same thing as most Catholic republicans being six-precept following believers in every jot of Church doctrine.
The actual name for the prior group when identified in social surveys is 'conservative Catholics', and pollsters literally identify them in part by their beliefs about things like papal infallibility and transubstantiation. @100ProofTollBooth may not be literally correct, but his statement is almost assuredly close enough for government work.
I think this is bad advice. First, because that is not generally agreed upon (the fourth book is excellent in my view), but second because if you read three doorstopper fantasy novels you're not going to stop there. Pretty much anyone who enjoys them enough to get that far is going to keep going to see how they like the books they were advised against. Third, it would be extremely frustrating to get only 30% of a story. Better to not read the books at all if they really do go downhill to such an extent.
More options
Context Copy link