LOGIC💣

What’s not funny is that Elon Musk is CEO of a space travel company and what you’re describing he’s doing is almost the same thing that caused HAL 9000 to go insane in 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Ascendance of a Bookworm is getting a new season in Q2. It’s my favorite light novel series. I’ve read all 33 books three times. In my opinion, the books sort of keep getting better and better, all the way to the end. The author did such a good job at world building and character building, and as you get further into the story, it becomes clearer how deep the lore is and how interesting the characters are.

So, I’m really hoping that the anime acts the same way, and that the new season hooks the viewers even more so that we can get the full story animated.

I bought it because everybody said it was good. I’ve tried playing it several times, and I can completely understand that it’s good, but I always end up abandoning it before a year is up in game.

I see. I was unaware of the Master Debater meme. I thought the meme was an attempt to poke fun at that sort of person.

I understand the message of the meme, but I don’t understand the relevance of the meme template.

The guy on the bottom is not visually portrayed in a good light, especially juxtaposed next to GigaChad. It’s like the meme template is trying to tell you that the guy on the bottom is wrong.

Also, it goes without saying that tons of competent people work at Microsoft, despite OP saying exactly the opposite.

Now we just need these laws worldwide.

I mean, it’s the left-wingers who want to increase the level of education for everybody, and that’s one of the things that is shown to slow population growth. It’s the insane population pressures that result in the need for building stuff like that.

It’s very difficult for a good billionaire to exist in the first place. Like, maybe they inherited the money, but somehow weren’t raised as a selfish piece of shit. But even then, a good person could only be a billionaire for a very short amount of time. They don’t need the money, so a good person would find a way to use it to help others.

Basically, a person who accumulates a billion dollars is a person who has already had many chances to help others, or try to improve the government or whatever, and repeatedly passed up the opportunity. So, they can’t really be good people, and so a good billionaire really can’t exist, or can’t exist for long.

fancy cabinet

Maybe this is the old man in me talking, but every time I’ve had any sort of lighting in my PC or RGB in my mouse, for example, it’s just been distracting. Nobody but me ever even looks at my PC, and now, every time I see a fancy cabinet, it just looks like an eyesore to me.

Let’s see if the rats want to play global thermonuclear war.

I don’t wish to make too many tangential top-level comments, so I am declaring this the tangential thread, but all I can think of is that America is on a path where someday we’ll also have journalists who will literally have to choose between the truth and their own safety. We already have so many who choose lies over the truth when their safety is not questioned.

steganography markers

On top of everything else, this isn’t even the correct term, nor does its meaning match the sentiment you wish to convey.

America was founded on the concept of no taxation without representation.

Next experiment will be the Banach–Tarski paradox.

Let’s consider the chart for a moment. The black line represents the metal of the hook. The hook shape is to demonstrate the distorted way that people who claim to be centrists are actually the far right. So, the “far right” and the “centrists” dot are both directly on the black line.

However, the “far left” dot is in the middle of the eye. In the hook analogy, it’s not on the line. The “far left” is off the hook.

It’s more like the ancient phenomenon of spaghetti code. You can throw enough code at something until it works, but the moment you need to make a non-trivial change, you’re doomed. You might as well throw away the entire code base and start over.

And if you want an exact parallel, I’ve said this from the beginning, but LLM coding at this point is the same as offshore coding was 20 years ago. You make a request, get a product that seems to work, but maintaining it, even by the same people who created it in the first place, is almost impossible.

For me, the important thing is that this is a vibrant community.

That means that from the mods’ perspectives, they don’t get too loaded down with moderation work, or need to defend themselves and create friction with the community.

It also means that when people want to contribute to the community, they’re not afraid of what the mods will say. If they post without reading the rules, like probably most people do, it’s really the poster’s fault. But if they are afraid to post even after reading the rules, then I think that has a freezing effect on the community.

As for people who are looking for loopholes, I think they’re trying to make the mods’ lives harder, and so I don’t really think they’re worth worrying too much about. They’ll probably get banned sooner or later because that is the attitude of a troll.

Just my opinion. I’ve never been a mod, and I don’t think I could handle that responsibility. I just try to be empathetic with everybody involved.

You’re right. One problem is, even though mods already have the power, specifically saying in the rules that the criteria is subjective sounds like something that a mod would make when they are tired of having to explain their moderation choices.

They can just say that it was low-effort, and problem solved. They don’t need to explain themselves, right?

But when the rules are vague, I think they’ll end up with more complaints from people who have different criteria of low-effort from the mods. This sort of interaction leads to accusations of mods power-tripping.

If the mods can nail down exactly what is low-effort, like, “X will always get removed. Z will never get removed unless it violates other rules. Y may be at risk of the moderator’s mood. You have been warned.” If they nail things down a bit more, then they will probably make things easier for themselves in the long-run than just keeping things vague.

Plus, if the rules are not vague, then people can discuss them safely when the rules are changed. When rules are vague, people will simply be upset that moderation was sprung on them, and everything will be discussed while people are upset. My belief is that people best discuss things while calm, and not while experiencing one person having power over another.

How many ban reversals end up with the return of an active user? My guess is, “very few.”