tyler
@tyler@programming.dev
- Comment on THIS JUST IN: FBI suspects Kirk was likely targeted, more info to come 4 days ago:
You don’t think that maybe trump just doesn’t wait for a news article to be posted? Maybe he got a call and since he’s incessantly posting tweets he did it before an editor could approve the news article change? There’s a lot more simple explanations.
- Comment on anon discusses car dependence 6 days ago:
Man, y’all really have no clue about other countries do you.
- Comment on anon discusses car dependence 6 days ago:
I mean we do need that, but that has nothing to do with the problem. the majority of people don’t live in those vast expanses of nothingness. Most of our cities are just as populated as most European cities, we just have shit laws around zoning, single family housing, population density, NIMBYs blocking any change, and people that think public transit is for poor people. They don’t travel to other countries and so have no clue how good things could actually be.
- Comment on The planet still belongs to the dinosaurs. 1 week ago:
The bird count is over 11k now! I think something like 11300ish. Let me look it up.
OK it’s 11250!
- Comment on If you argue for a cause like affordable housing for everyone, is it necessarily hypocritical if you also own investment properties? 1 week ago:
The top comment I replied to stated that this was a black and white issue. Either you are a landlord and that’s unethical or you’re not and it’s ethical. You seem to have taken this conversation in a completely different direction. It is solely about whether you can be a landlord ethically.
I also did not assume the majority want to do anything.
- Comment on If you argue for a cause like affordable housing for everyone, is it necessarily hypocritical if you also own investment properties? 1 week ago:
I know people (including myself who actually owns a house) who would love (or already do) travel the world and buying and selling houses in every location you travel would be a hindrance not a help.
There is no black and white, this is an ethics discussion, there are shades of gray for everything. Just because you want to stay in one location and never move doesn’t mean others want what you want.
- Comment on If you argue for a cause like affordable housing for everyone, is it necessarily hypocritical if you also own investment properties? 1 week ago:
you say this as if most people would be like that. whereas most people don’t want to travel all the time
I do not, I say it because it has to be involved in any discussion of ethics. It isn’t a binary problem. There are shades of gray to everything, which people hate talking about.
I know many people that like renting because they want to move every few months or years. Their job affords it (which any reasonable nation also allows), they work remote, or they’re mobile, etc.
Acting like everything is black and white when it literally never is is making it impossible to have actually discussions that enact change.
Wouldn’t you like to travel the world and see the sights? Would you want to have to buy a house and sell your old one every single time you changed countries? I think not.
- Comment on A robot walks on water thanks to evolution’s solution 1 week ago:
Sorry, I should be more clear. I’ve seen water striders before, but this article is about a specific kind of water strider that’s faster than others due to its fan propulsion. I wanted to see that type of water strider because I want to compare with the robot they created.
Cool video though. I didn’t know that’s how they eat.
- Comment on If you argue for a cause like affordable housing for everyone, is it necessarily hypocritical if you also own investment properties? 1 week ago:
That’s not my assumption. I know people that only want to rent, they don’t want to own. In that worldview someone owns it.
In regards to paying for shelter, unless you get rid of money, things have to be maintained, that costs money, and someone has to be paid to fix it, even if it’s the government paying a contractor.
The government doesn’t like owning things that require enormous amounts of maintenance. It’s a liability, because they can’t then focus efforts on actually serving their citizens. So if the government is already going to pay someone to maintain buildings, it’s better to not own the buildings and instead regulate in a manner than serves everyone.
That means there will still be landlords. There are still people that want to rent, the government doesn’t like owning buildings, so there will still be people owning and renting their places out.
- Comment on A robot walks on water thanks to evolution’s solution 1 week ago:
That’s of the robot. I want one of the bugs. It’s hard to understand what they’re replicating.
- Comment on If you argue for a cause like affordable housing for everyone, is it necessarily hypocritical if you also own investment properties? 1 week ago:
In what way? The majority of affordable housing (as defined by the government) is housing to rent. Someone has to own it and it’s incredibly likely to not be the people living in it because they can’t afford it or do not want to be buying a house.
- Comment on A robot walks on water thanks to evolution’s solution 1 week ago:
Videos of the bugs in question would have been a good addition to the article…
- Comment on He took it literally 2 weeks ago:
Was there ever a conclusion?
- Comment on Would you ever give up your right to leave a bad review about a company? 2 weeks ago:
See the top comment
- Comment on 6 AM Monday. Dreading whatever fresh hell awaits this week. Cranky, definitely getting a cold. Barely awake. Husband starts blasting this song that is now stuck in my head for all eternity. 3 weeks ago:
Fuck yeah, what a great song and game and show. Man I miss that shit.
- Comment on Is This Social Media? 3 weeks ago:
Thankfully I think most people are idiots who wouldn’t be able to name what their operating system is so I also don’t give one shit what they think Reddit is either. Turns out most of the population can’t use a dictionary or we wouldn’t be calling idiots Nimrods.
- Comment on Is This Social Media? 3 weeks ago:
But it’s not. Someone edited wikipedia to put a definition only cited in one business article from 2010. It was never the common definition until news companies started calling anything they didn’t understand “social media” because it became a catch all. Forums aren’t social media.
- Comment on Is This Social Media? 3 weeks ago:
I don’t give one shit what Wikipedia says. I’ve argued this on here before. Wikipedia’s definition includes every website on the planet because of how wide ranging and useless of a definition it is. Defining social media in that way makes the meaning useless and only serves politicians who want to block things they dislike on the internet. Essentially “social media” == internet to them.
- Comment on Is This Social Media? 3 weeks ago:
No: you don’t follow “real identities”, it’s a forum, not a user generated feed of personal life details, the votes are not likes/dislikes of personal content, but upvotes and downvotes to indicate whether that post belongs in that forum or not. For the most part users are not generating any media at all, though they can (exactly like a forum). The basis of the site isn’t around following anyone or the content they’re generating, but instead subscribing to communities.
It’s only social media if your definition of social media is “people commenting on stuff” which would mean that almost every website on the planet is social media. Clearly one of these definitions is wrong and I don’t really understand how we got to the place where “commenting on stuff” made it social media when it’s clearly not.
- Comment on 3 weeks ago:
Sure, and not calling them fish is even more scientific. From a grouping perspective, (which is how you refer to it) there is no such group.
- Comment on 3 weeks ago:
In a break from the long tradition of grouping all fish into a single class (‘‘Pisces’’), modern phylogenetics views fish as a paraphyletic group.
Paraphyly is a taxonomic term describing a grouping that consists of the grouping’s last common ancestor and some but not all of its descendant lineages. The grouping is said to be paraphyletic with respect to the excluded subgroups. In contrast, a monophyletic grouping (a clade) includes a common ancestor and all of its descendants.
This is in contrast to the class
Mammaliawhich is a complete clade.In other words, I could make up a branch of science called
foobarthologythat studies Jurassic raptors, whales, and the Rock Dove, but that doesn’t mean those things are related, or a ‘true’ scientific group of their own. It just means I put them together for some other reason, either cause it’s easier for the requirements of the job, or I wanted to, or many other reasons including historical. - Comment on Not even my cat ;_; 3 weeks ago:
I misread this as “I got gas cool”
- Comment on 3 weeks ago:
I think the even more nuanced answer is that “fish” is not a scientific category so comparing it to mammals makes no sense.
- Comment on What would be ancient ways to properly store vitamin C? 4 weeks ago:
Yeah. Fruit…
- Comment on Bird Calls 4 weeks ago:
Correct, it also could have been a call for a predator approaching. In other words, life or death.
- Comment on It Looks Like a School Bathroom Smoke Detector. A Teen Hacker Showed It Could Be an Audio Bug 5 weeks ago:
The security wasn’t patched. Any firmware update can be modified since the keys are provided with the update. So while the patch may have been applied, it’s not permanent.
- Comment on Why is land/sky so cleanly split between mammals/birds? 5 weeks ago:
There’s a lot of good answers here but there’s some missing things as well.
To start with, there was a separate category of flying dinosaur, those with ‘fingers’. They could climb trees, grasp things, etc. They were large and heavy. The heaviness was due to the increased weight that these joints added, including in their legs. When disaster struck, the lighter dinosaurs (descendants of today’s Aves) were able to escape the disaster due to reduced energy usage, snapper energy requirements, etc. The heavier ones were not.
Second, there are a lot of categories that birds fall into. Like others have said, birds in isolation eventually revert to flightlessness. It’s advantageous.
I’m not sure why you think mammals/birds are the dividing line either. There are many animals that “fly” that aren’t birds (bugs, bats), and there are many mammals that aren’t on land as well (whales, bats, etc).
I feel like your question is maybe more a question of “why are mammals so dominant” which probably comes down to many differences in avian biology, adaptations that explicitly make life easier in the sky vs land. Better usage of oxygen, ability to lay eggs out of reach of predators, explicit bone structure for flying. Flightless birds have lost many of these things. Mammals have other adaptations that make life easier for them on land. Trying to cross this boundary usually results in disaster for the evolutionary line and so it doesn’t happen.
- Comment on Anon learns a new spell 5 weeks ago:
Thanks
- Comment on Anon learns a new spell 1 month ago:
idgi
- Comment on hygiene 1 month ago:
Wait are you suggesting I put a crumb tray under my chair or that my chair already has a crumb tray and I never noticed?