Digit
@Digit@lemmy.wtf
techno hippie
- Comment on I dunno 21 hours ago:
Oops! Typo. School failed me hard!
- Comment on I dunno 23 hours ago:
Hrmm.
I read that as resulting in 21.
My education system did fail me.
I plugged that into ghci as 5+2*(8-5), and it says 17.
:(
I did (5+2)*(8-5).
Doh.
- Comment on Insulin 23 hours ago:
A patient cured, a customer lost. A dead customer, just a cost of business.
^ Say “for profit medicine” (oxymoron btw), behind closed doors.
- Comment on Insulin 1 day ago:
Welcome to USA, I guess.
In other countries, you could probably completely fill a fridge with insulin for $800.
- Comment on Feeling that groove 5 days ago:
Some day, I’ll get my (20) albums turned into vinyl.
That day moved a little closer, seeing this.
- Comment on Racism restaurant 5 days ago:
Poe’s law has struck again.
- Comment on Radon 6 days ago:
I make art.
^ real job.
I get disability benefit trapping me in dependence on the system under threat of impoverishment, destitution, starvation, freezing, if i dare ever attempt to do anything productive, or even look like it, or even not. Paid to do nothing.
^ real bullshit job.
Oh what a great system you have there. >:[
- Comment on Screw your zodiac sign, tell me.. 1 week ago:
So, instead of the unique astrological profile, nor even the mere sun sign for a mere 1 in 12 division, we’re now to discern more about us each, from just 10 different patterns on plates? Oh yes, that’ll be much better. My whole family are exactly alike. The plates don’t lie. :3
- Comment on Anon sees through the lies 1 week ago:
Depends on rest of diet and starting conditions and duration.
Like if in a highly glycolytic diet/state… severely not advisable to do large doses of salt. But if in ketosis, you’ve a far higher ceiling. 3.5g’s normal. 35g’s likely going too far even when in ketosis.
- Comment on 🔥🔥🔥 1 week ago:
Now with that perception, is that his face while getting a bj?
- Comment on Today, mostly play: Boards of Canada, soffmi muhod, or autechre? 4 weeks ago:
Is it like, boards of canada’s nostalgia, tainted with truth, and autechre’s the autistic future, and, soffmi muhod’s the child of those?
- Comment on Today, mostly play: Boards of Canada, soffmi muhod, or autechre? 4 weeks ago:
It’s open to interpretation.
Answer it like its general advice, like it’s preference, like it’s only for today or like it’s asking more deeply about our times, which is more called for, which depicts, for whatever philosophical leanings one has, or even dont even answer at all, and just listen and muse upon the idea, and get inspired to make your own child of music.
Also…
… I hear Tortoise are releasing a new album soon.
- Comment on Today, mostly play: Boards of Canada, soffmi muhod, or autechre? 4 weeks ago:
Today, mostly play: Boards of Canada, soffmi muhod, or autechre?
- Comment on Today, mostly play: Boards of Canada, soffmi muhod, or autechre? 4 weeks ago:
Currently, it’s between 1 & 2 here.
Some boards of canada beautiful place and a couple unreleased tracks, and soffmi muhod counterpart before, perhaps then the enthusiast, and then semble, maybe later, some autechre LP5, and plus. Maybe. Or more soffmi muhod. or more boc.
I hear (~ from myself), boc is mother, autechre is father, and soffmi muhod is a child of music.
- Submitted 4 weeks ago to [deleted] | 6 comments
- Comment on If only we knew... 4 weeks ago:
Also reminds of www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwpYMYnAsz4
- Comment on If only we knew... 4 weeks ago:
Reminds of how some self professed “anarchists” insist on capital punishment, like an unwitting opposame, to, e.g. nazis, not realising/admitting what they’re really engaged in is another form of malarchy, not anarchy. Reminder, malarchism is not anarchism.
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 month ago:
how so?
- Comment on PRAISE HIM 1 month ago:
I was thinking of his noodliness
- Comment on Why can't we have a static vintage web? 1 month ago:
Do you know of any browsers that would not render <html>simple site</html>?
I just tested it in brave, dillo, librewolf, links, and it works in each.
I only recently discovered this (that contrary to prior belief and training), even <body> is unnecessary.
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 month ago:
Nope.
But I’d still love to hear what credence is behind your metagaming introduction assertion.
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 month ago:
For the original version, nearer true, since suppression may take time and effort, or none, similarly with violence. Even then, arguing tone seems to always take more time and effort than mere contradiction.
- Comment on Why can't we have a static vintage web? 1 month ago:
At the browser level?
Otherwise,
can haz
<html>simple site</html> - Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 month ago:
You’ve introduced metagaming.
???
I’m not sure you’re aware what’s happening here.
You’ve introduced
This is an attempt at a re-creation of someone else’s extended version. As noted in the text in the image, and in my other post here (which in hindsight (especially after seeing this comment) I think I should have included in the original post, and put my question in the title.)
It’s an interesting thing you’ve created, but it’s not the same kind of thing.
Like I say, I’m not sure you’re aware of what’s happening here.
If you are, then please, by all means, if you have access to the original extended version this is a re-creation of, please share it, so we can compare where I went wrong. (I re-created it as faithfully as I could from memory, after exhausting myself on several attempts to find it again.)
If not, and you thought this extended version is entirely created by me, then let this reply be a correction, refuting that.
Also… re:
metagaming
it’s not the same kind of thing.
I’d like to know more about your thoughts and feelings on this, as it’s not clear to me how you think this is so, and is not apparent to me how the original 2-layer-extended version I’ve copied from memory is doing this.
To my thinking this extended version seems exactly in the same spirit of Paul Graham’s original, adding necessary extension to cover further levels by which some people seek to win arguments by worse means than mere name-calling.
But like I say, I’d love to hear more about your perceptions of this is being in error, and it being “metagaming”, and “not the same kind of thing”. If you can, for those of us to whom that nuanced insight’s not apparent, may you please elaborate on that?
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 month ago:
Wouldn’t that merely be responding to tone?
- Comment on Why can't we have a static vintage web? 1 month ago:
We can.
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 month ago:
Yup, it is problematic when others keep their arguments nearer the bottom. But at least your argument will have been valid. Even if they do attempt childish suppression.
One can even reference Graham’s Hierarchy of Disagreement, and some will still remain on the attack at the bottom. As just happened to me on another thread on lemmy. It harms their credibility, and their cognitive ability.
- Comment on Cause and Effect 1 month ago:
Wow.
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 month ago:
The chart does not cover fallacies like strawman arguments. Perhaps that’s around a corner of the “pyramid”, on a side not shown.
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 month ago:
Could be not even on the chart, or could be suppression.