Ah yes, “we did good but they messed it up, as usual!”
If the US cared enough about the well-being and the services the people have access to in the nations they invade, they would probably not do the invading bit.
- 1 Post
- 37 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: July 30th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
2·2 months agoHey everyone get a glimpse of this loser!
12·3 months agoDo you mean malware?
Am I the only one who fails to see anything seriously wrong with what you list there? I’m purposefully ignoring “misinformation spreading conspiracy theorist”, because that’s a pretty meaningless accusation and is often added as an easy character assassination rather than something substantial, but I’d like to see you elaborate.
I mean, we’re talking jail time and extradition, and nothing you’ve mentioned is even against the law in the slightest. Yes, there was piracy on his file sharing site, but that’s true for practically any service on the internet, from Google drive to Amazon S3 and anything in-between and vaguely related.
Characters like him are targeted because they are both successful and anti establishment, the eccentricity just tops it off. But why should that result in a lack of sympathy? The world doesn’t have enough of these people who rock the boat if you ask me.
Oh right, so you were talking about the content, that’s not what I understood under “frontend”. Thanks for clearing it up.
I don’t have any experience with the platform, so I’m not in a position to judge their decisions, but it’s always tricky when you present yourself as censor free. There’s things you obviously don’t want on your service, but if it falls within the legal realm, it is no longer a matter of “will we block Nazi material” but whether from that point onward you start taking a moral and political stance.
Things get incredibly tricky and cumbersome if you choose that route, not just from an administrative perspective but also technically. I can understand why the people who operate the platform would prefer to primarily use legality as a deciding factor, as not every ideological issue that you open yourself up to if you take the other route is as straightforward as fascism.
Guys, just because the backbone of your site is decentralized doesn’t mean your centralized frontend can’t be modified by you.
I don’t understand what you’re saying here. Did you mean can be modified? Or what does this have to do with Nazi rhetoric? Maybe you have a different idea about the word “frontend”?
Either you understand that the consensus is that naming things is hard and you just want to elevate yourself above everyone else by arguing against it, or you’re unaware that it is the consensus, in which case your opinion doesn’t really matter because you most likely underestimate the issue.
It’s such a truism that I’d suggest googling "naming things is hard*.
There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation and naming things. – Phil Karlton
“Figured it was a bad idea” actually means that some people were against it because they believed semantic class names were the solution, I was one of them. This was purely ideological, it wasn’t based on practical experience because everyone knew maintaining CSS was a bitch. Heck, starting a new project with the semantic CSS approach was a bitch because if you didn’t spend 2 months planning ahead you’d end up with soup that was turning sour before it ever left the stove.
Bootstrap and the likes were born out of the issues the semantic approach had, and their success and numbers are a testimony to how real the issue was, and I say this as someone who never used and despised bootstrap. Maintaining semantic CSS was hard, starting was hard, the only thing that approach had going for it was this idea that you were using CSS the way it was meant to be used, it had nothing to do with the practicality. Sure, your html becomes prettier to look at, but what good is that when your clean html is just hiding the monstrosity of your CSS file? Your clean html was supposed to be beneficial to the developer experience, but it never succeeded in doing that.
14·8 months agoThis.
I see your point, thanks for the insight! Did you base your reply on the abstract or the full article, because they do specify “vegetable” oil. Also, in their defence, they not only state that they only intended to show a correlation instead of a causal effect, and even add that:
we only found the relationship between the cooking oil type and cardiovascular health in the elderly over 65 years old in China, and could not explain the reason.
Where do you get the idea that they focus only on sesame oil?
11·8 months agohttps://youtube.com/shorts/Ipw8GjRUfiA?si=RjD075y0aS6xCQHA
At least these idiots agree with you. Water freezes at 30% hot!
“The 100 is hot” idea is not only completely arbitrary and human centric, but also a vague personal perception. And I’m trying to be nice because it’s actually egocentric buffoonery that stems from the idea that everything revolves around us, whereas the metric scale puts people inside a measurable scientific interconnected system instead of our feelings being the center.
We as people can perceive imperial temperatures a lot better than metric.
This is entirely the result of what you’re used to and has nothing to do with the system itself.
I don’t know, lard is pretty awesome. It’s a bit of a tradition around here to keep the remains when cooking bacon, put it in the fridge and then spread it on some bread.
Well you can find quite a few scientific studies saying exactly what I’ve said. I agree that plant based oils are not all the same though.
Just one example:
3918 of those who cooked with vegetable/gingili oil had ASCVD, and 249 of those who cooked with lard/other animal fat oils had ASCVD. The prevalence of ASCVD in vegetable/gingili oil users (31.68%) was higher than that in lard/other animal fat oil users (17.46%). Compared with lard/other animal fat users, the multivariate-adjusted model indicated that vegetable oil/sesame oil users were significantly associated with a higher risk of ASCVD (OR = 2.19; 95%CI, 1.90-2.53). Our study found that cooking with lard/other animal fat oil is more beneficial to cardiovascular health in older Chinese.
Yep, also Oreos are overrated!
That’s like ejaculating on someone’s face and then working your way to foreplay. If this isn’t against the Geneva convention it should be.
People who separate anything they eat are heathens. The proper way is to stuff bits of everything on your plate in your mouth at once for the correct taste and texture sensory overload.
You can use animal fats. There’s also evidence saying they’re healthier than plant/seed based oils because they contain more saturated fats and don’t oxidize as quickly.
21·9 months agoI did not. That’s what I alluded to in my last sentence. But I believe the bigger picture is more important and that automation is a step towards getting out of consumerism, exponential growth and job creation just to keep the bar moving, which all ties in to why we’re in this situation in the first place. It allows us to reevaluate what’s important in life.
How is your intelligence different from being “biased data that can be accessed”?
The fact that something can reason about what it presents to you as information is a form of intelligence. And while this discussion is impossible without defining “reason”, I think we should at least agree that when a machine can explain to you what and why it did what it did, it is a form of reason.
Should we also not define what it means when a person answers a question through reasoning? It’s easy to overestimate the complexity of it because of our personal bias and our ability to fantasize about endless possibilities, but if you break our abilities down, they might be the result of nothing but a large dataset combined with a simple algorithm.
It’s easy to handwave the intelligence of an AI, not because it isn’t intelligent, but because it has no desires, and therefore doesn’t act unless acted upon. It is not easy to jive that concept with the idea that something is alive, which is what we generally require before calling it intelligent.