gandalf_der_12te
@gandalf_der_12te@feddit.org
- Comment on This place is a prison 2 days ago:
don’t drink and derive!
- Comment on 👴☝️I did that 2 days ago:
ehh, why not? electronics got really cheap.
- Comment on Anon is an introvert 3 days ago:
how do you meet new people?
i assume you just don’t
- Comment on Anon is an introvert 4 days ago:
god my primary/secondary education was so AWFUL too. nobody in the entire system had any legit knowledge
lol i know that feeling.
- Comment on Anon is an introvert 4 days ago:
can we swap? i’d like to go there instead, people here are all “oh that’s sexual harassment” if you look at them a second too long.
- Comment on Wildfire Griffin 5 days ago:
wtf is this nonsense. mods pls delete this
- Comment on Nah, mi español no es muy bueno 5 days ago:
i don’t remember german holding a word for it either … it’s just “wort-spiel” which literally translates as “word-play”
- Comment on Microspecies 5 days ago:
species as a strictly defined category only exists for eukaryotes which can only breed with a narrow group of other living beings
for bacteria this is not applicable as any bacteria can breed with possibly any other bacteria as long as the environmental circumstances are right (conjugation in bacteria, horizontal gene transfer, …). yeah yeah somebody will correct me and say “but the different bacteria expect different environmental circumstances, so they cannot interbreed”, to which i say, it’s complicated.
so instead, for bacteria the concept is a bit more applied spontaneously without much consistency behind it at all. it’s kinda used in a “huh, these bacteria look similar and behave similarly (biochemically) so now i call them the same species” thing.
- Comment on how much money is there in total? 5 days ago:
damn
- Comment on Science 6 days ago:
is this supposed to have sound?
- Comment on how much money is there in total? 6 days ago:
Do you consider gold money?
no, i mean in today’s money system.
- Comment on how much money is there in total? 6 days ago:
For #1, it would be some profligate mismanagement of money for a bank to just obtain a loan “for the lolz”
yeah i know that no bank just takes out a loan “for the lolz” but it helps to understand what would happen if it did.
- Comment on how much money is there in total? 6 days ago:
yeah i’m actually asking not so much with inflation in mind, more out of general interest into how things work. i’m just trying to understand the distribution of money and wealth throughout the world, for which it would help to understand the total sum of all money, and of all wealth (which is not the same!) in the first place.
money and wealth is not the same btw. by money i mean money issued by the central bank (i.e. USD) while wealth is the sum of all assets, which can include ownership of land and real estate, for example.
i suspect that the total amount of money in the world is close to zero, because what the central bank gives out in loans, becomes liabilities to the loan holder to pay back, so the sum of money + liability is zero. since you (at least formally) have to pay back what you took out as loan. meanwhile the amount of total wealth in the world is larger than zero, because the amount of total real estate in the world is larger than zero. so these two terms are not the same at all.
- Comment on how much money is there in total? 6 days ago:
A bank can have $1 mil on hand and lend out $10 mil plus, as long as they have a high enough percentage available for withdrawals.
yeah but they have to pay back the $10M eventually, at least formally, so they have that as debt at the same time. thus the sum is zero, where they were before.
- Submitted 6 days ago to [deleted] | 25 comments
- Comment on [title] 1 week ago:
existentialism imho is finding meaning in the nihilism. i.e. if there is no meaning, that means that we ourselves make the meaning, therefore there always is meaning in the world (which causes the existence of a conscious observer in the first place)
- Comment on [title] 1 week ago:
The Apex aren’t anarchists, they’re fascists. They think everything different than them exists to be exploited and abused by them.
yeah i know but they consider themselves that way. that’s why i put “anarchists” in quotes.
- Comment on [title] 1 week ago:
that kinda doesn’t really answer the question at all
- Comment on [title] 1 week ago:
Yeah, it’s all in the facial expressions.
I was gonna say the same! That’s what makes it so difficult to interpret it, because we cannot say how they feel except by reading the subtle hints in their body language, which is vague and easily misunderstood. I guess that’s why these philosophical topics are so difficult, because really there’s a lot going on in the emotions (that tells us how to feel about something, whether to like or dislike a theory) and a lot of it is very subtle, which makes it challenging, also to agree on stuff with other people.
And then there’s this thing:
You and Me, the kind of creatures who want to be our own masters and would rebel even against the universe itself, are a rare kind. Most have to be talked into independence.
Why do you think that other people have to be “talked into” independence? What if you don’t do that? What advantage does it make?
- Comment on [title] 1 week ago:
I’m currently watching Infinity Train season 3 and
Spoiler
There’s a whole season about how some kids (“anarchists”) run around and smash things. They call themselves the “apex” (clearly a reference to apex predator) so they don’t have to respect anything or anyone besides themselves. Needless to say, they’re often very cruel to the environment, destroying living rooms and beings alike. The twist of the whole series is, however, that the whole world is fake. It’s all a kind of computing machinery that’s driving the train and all of its natural inhabitants. So in a way, you could say that all the beings in it are computer generated anyways, so they don’t actually feel real emotion. Does that make it ethically unproblematic to smash them? It’s a really nice way to think about things Anyways i highly recommend watching infinity train season 03 in this context.
- Comment on [title] 1 week ago:
in that case i still don’t get your comment.
- Comment on [title] 1 week ago:
this but replace homer laying on a sofa with a shitpost thinking of a shitpost
- Comment on [title] 1 week ago:
i’m not sure whether you’re being sarcastic
- Comment on [title] 1 week ago:
What actually has “intrinsic value [in the] universe” and what difference does it make if my experiences are “intrinsically valuable” or not?
i think what donald is referring here is the concept of the universal, which is a very important concept throughout all of humanity’s history. it says that there are ever-lasting, always-present laws (the so called universal laws) that everything is derived of. As such, there are clear ways to act and that distinguish right from wrong. This is the basis of all morality and therefore also of the legal code, politics, philosophy, and everything that guides our societies.
This is also frequently brought into connection with natural law, which states basically the same thing.
The reason why it is important is because it is really the only thing holding society together. You can’t have a country of a billion people if the people think that you can just make your own laws and do whatever you want. The reason why world-spanning connections exist is because we believe in coherency, i.e. that things are the same way, more or less, everywhere, and it is therefore possible to establish communication and provide something like a connectivity tissue across the whole globe. Without that, you wouldn’t really have one humanity at all but a whole lot of very small tribes all probably fighting each other, no state building or higher society. So it’s a really important concept to think of.
- Comment on [title] 1 week ago:
and it still wouldnt give you any course of action with which to “fight” the nature of the universe.
well, i’d say, deeply embedded into many of us is a deep sense of magic; that the world can in fact be changed if we give up the materialistic worldview. so, the moment we stop thinking in terms of chemical processes happening, is when the true change/magic happens. at least that’s my view of it.
i think lots of people have that worldview, including the mouse in the comic and probably also many american capitalists, because as long as the world is materialistic, you are bound by its laws and reality, meanwhile the core concept of a lot of tech bros’ worldview is that we will eventually be able to transcent that material nature; transhumanism, that we will make the (supposedly) “impossible” possible (thinking outside the box), “singularity”, etc.
- Comment on [title] 1 week ago:
yeah actually that’s the only critique that i have about mouse’s comment. mouse is a machine, knows only productive output but no relax and chill.
- Comment on [title] 1 week ago:
no, the joke is that you don’t actually know that the chemicals inside your brain are actually chemicals. for all we know, we could all be living in a big computer simulation, and your feelings are actually caused by bits and bytes on a computer. so, we only think that we’re driving on a brain powered by chemicals because of the things that we can observe from within the simulation, in other words, the simulation makes us believe that we’re only feeling love because of silly chemicals doing things. meanwhile our feelings could be much more generic and come from the simulation itself, while the chemicals are only a pretense to make the simulation more believable.
- Submitted 1 week ago to [deleted] | 51 comments
- Comment on Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should 1 week ago:
- Comment on Moving to the USA could be the Most Expensive Mistake of your Life 1 week ago:
They also hate all other immigrants and believe they’re superior to them in every way, even if they themselves were undocumented at one point
chauvinism
