jsomae

@jsomae@lemmy.ml

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Hades II - Post-Launch Patch 1 Preview & Notes⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  Still playing Silksong… why did they launch now…

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Landlords are parasites⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  I dislike personifying landlords just like I dislike personifying greedy corporations. It’s the system which is broken, and entities which act in greedy self-interest are merely a symptom.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Landlords are parasites⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  I’d say that’s what separates a good landlord from a bad landlord, is if they are intentionally adding knives and grenades.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Dinner is ready! ⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Dividing the world according to this uniform mathematical system is so stupid. Is this secretly a pro-gerrymandering psyop?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I Got This Right, Right?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  yeah, I agree. But like, pointing fingers at “politicians” broadly speaking is still just pointing fingers.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I Got This Right, Right?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  The oligarchs want that, and the oligarchs have many politicians in their pocket I presume. However, it’s not like non-corrupt non-bought politicians have any reason to be afraid of a unified nation – they’re in politics to effect change in the first place.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I Got This Right, Right?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  if he’s a leftist, then of course he had “evil leftist” influences. The internet exists.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Hmm this "unisex" bathroom seems biased...⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  	Number 1	Number 2
  men	up	down
  women	down	down

  3/4 of these are down, so it seems to me like the etiquette should be to leave it down.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I’m sure OOP works for big AI.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I Got This Right, Right?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Fair enough, but I think we shouldn’t be basing our inferences about the shooter from his family’s political leanings. My feeling is that somebody who does something so drastic is likely enough to be an outlier from their family that we can’t really know one way or the other.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I Got This Right, Right?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Is this actually true? There’s too much disinformation about the shooter, his motivations, his identity, his family, his partner going around that I have no clue what to really believe about him.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  You sound like the people in my chemistry class who say things like “don’t describe subatomic particles as happy when they’re in low-energy states.”

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Know your place⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  why does the existence of larger things have any bearing on our significance?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Know your place⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  bigger than I thought, tbh.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Say hello to Bary⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  The OP does not claim that all barycenters are outside of the sun. OP correctly claims that Jupiter & Sun orbit a certain point, and that point is known as the “barycenter,” and that point is outside the sun. I’ll admit they could have gone further to convey the additional curiosity that for other planets the sun-planet barycenter is within the sun, but then it might not be facebook-tier anymore.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Say hello to Bary⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  I can’t reasonably glean that, because the OP clearly says this:

  It is so massive that both Jupiter & Sun orbit around a common point that lies outside the Sun known as the “barycenter”.

  I agree that OP is facebook-tier but your reply is reddit-tier :P

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Say hello to Bary⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  No, it is not true in general that the barycenter lies outside both objects.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Are you not entertained?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  then they’ll bring along their security escort.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Are you not entertained?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  If we ban private jets, billionaires will just buy every seat on the commercial jet. This will be even more inefficient fuel wise, and worse for the environment overall.

  Don’t ban private jets. Ban billionaires.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨nooo my genderinos⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Granted, it’s not proof, but I find it very hard to believe that all cases of identical twins with apparently differing gender identities is explained by one of the twins simply electing not to transition while the other does. This is particularly hard to believe given that the twins grow up in similar environments, so if one is in a transition-hostile environment the other likely is as well. I think we should believe people when they insist they are not transgender, especially if they are part of a study where their identical twin is comfortable being open about it. If this were a rare occurrence, I would be more inclined to agree with you, but it is not rare at all.

  “transgender”

  One instance where I have seen “transgender” used this way is from the same article where I learned about the link between transgender, skin elasticity, and hyperflexibility:

  it’s at least possible that EDS and transgender are linked

  It’s no typo; other articles by this same author use the same grammar. I have also for sure seen this used on other sites, including by trans authors, but in 5 minutes of searching I can’t find those instances. “Being transgender” does seem grammatically fitting to me, but it doesn’t always make sense to use “being transgender” as a substitute for “transgenderism”*/“transgender.” Anyway we more or less agree here.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨nooo my genderinos⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  gender dysphoria is not what I’m talking about, since not all transgender people have dysphoria.

  To be clear – “transgender” the noun is not referring to a person (“that person is a transgender”* – proscribed) but rather as a substitute for “transgenderism”* (proscribed). Personally, using “transgender” seems linguistically strange to me and it just reminds me of Trump saying “transgender for everybody” but if it’s what people prefer then who am I to judge.

  Anyway – yes, I agree that it seems very probable that there are strong genetic components to transgender, but it’s also clearly not purely genetic.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨nooo my genderinos⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Funny.

  If we assume that the distribution is measuring some trait (e.g. “testosterone content,” “femininity,” measured however you will), and it’s bimodal (distribution is dominated by two binary sexes), then there will be people on either side of both peaks.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨nooo my genderinos⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  my bad, updated to “transgender,” I read online that’s the preferred noun form (though it looks more adjectival to me)

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨nooo my genderinos⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I don’t entirely agree, because gender identity is known to be at least partially biological, e.g. there are correlations between transgenderism, skin elasticity, and hyper-flexibility.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨nooo my genderinos⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  it’s a normalized distribution. The y-axis is unitless.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨nooo my genderinos⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  yes.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨YOU HAVE NO POWER HERE⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Yes, but the top level comment is countering it using an incorrect application of the theory of evolution.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨YOU HAVE NO POWER HERE⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I’m not claiming that this change in how eyes work would be an improvement. I’m claiming that the following does not hold generally: “Doesn’t have adaptation X ⇒ adaptation X would not improve fitness.”

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨YOU HAVE NO POWER HERE⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  The problem is that the landscape of where the global maxima are changes faster than evolution can keep up. If the environment were entirely static, then yes, mathematically speaking any random optimizer would eventually reach a global maximum. However, it could take, say, 10^50^ years or more to jump from a local maximum to a distant, higher maximum.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨YOU HAVE NO POWER HERE⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Okay true, but I still feel the comment was misleading. If it were phrased as “If vertebrae don’t have it, it means it wouldn’t improve their fitness” it would be wrong.