mfed1122

@mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Hope you like math⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  “i do not give a single fuck” implies an additive identity fuck, and “I don’t give two fucks” implies a multiplicative identity fuck. That’s a start at least!

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Why do neurotypicals like AI slop?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  As others have pointed out, I don’t think you have solid evidence to suspect that this is a neurotypical vs ADHD thing. Personally I think it’s just a matter of poor taste. The sad truth is most people cannot appreciate good art, and the only reason why most works of art are as high quality as they are is because artists make them, and artists do appreciate good art and have high standards. From the artists point of view, their piece needs to meet criteria X, Y, Z, etc. to be a good satisfying piece. But from the point of view of the tasteless plebian masses, it probably only needs to meet criteria X. I first noticed this when I saw that almost every highly upvoted artwork on Reddit years ago was a really hyper realistic pencil drawing, usually of a pretty girl. Most people don’t appreciate form, composition, subtle meanings, abstraction, etc. Those things require more thinking and are therefore too difficult for many people to engage with. Instead, “how hard does this seem to make” and “how much do I like this at first glance” become the proxy standards used by tasteless lazy people to judge art, and hence the “best” art by those standards is a super realistic pencil drawing of a pretty woman became “zomg I thought this was a photo!!!” and “I couldn’t do this in a million years!!! So impressive!!!” As if the point of art is just to flex on people? But it gets worse, because even when people decide to half-ass their ingestion of art by flattening it down to a single dimension of “how realistic is it”, again, because people aren’t artists and have never even tried to engage in art (and this I actually don’t hold against them, unlike their prior laziness), they don’t have a trained eye. So sometimes you’ll see just a mediocre pencil drawing of a pretty girl, and people with less art skills will be like “wow 10/10 it’s perfect!!!”, but people with art skills will be able to notice things like “well if the shadow on the neck is like that the shadow on the nose should be going the other way, you mixed up your light sources”, or “the perspective is off on the angle of the eyes here”. Sometimes these improvements would be subconsciously picked up by the masses, but many times not. Often the subtleties that make an artwork go from mediocre to amazing are lost on the masses. As a result, the masses are equally satisfied with poor quality AI-generated images as they are with high quality human-generated images.

  TLDR; The lack of media literacy among many people strikes again

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨"We approached payment processors because Steam did not respond" - Australian pressure group Collective Shout claims responsibility for Steam and Itch.io NSFW game removal⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Thanks for taking the time to put those resources together for me.

  That’s absolutely crazy, my goodness… Some people really are insane when it comes to sex. It reminds me a bit of how you can show soft penises in American TV to some extent without it being considered pornographic, but hard penises are pornographic. But this labia issue makes even less sense than that, because it doesn’t depend on arousal. What a backwards situation

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨"We approached payment processors because Steam did not respond" - Australian pressure group Collective Shout claims responsibility for Steam and Itch.io NSFW game removal⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Never heard about this, what are you referring to?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Itch.io apologise for "frustration and confusion" after delisting thousands of NSFW projects⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  We need zines to be a bigger thing again

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨As an American, I'm offended at AliExpress' portrayal of my people.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  It’s so dainty 🥺 yeah, far from the norm here I’m ashamed to say

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨As an American, I'm offended at AliExpress' portrayal of my people.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  That would probably be a “small” at most fast food drive thrus here. Also, nobody orders a small unless they’re on a “diet”. Generally everyone gets a large, which looks like this here: www.gettyimages.com/detail/…/145545668

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  How many times do we have to teach you this lesson, Mickey7? Stop posting this shitty boomer Facebook humor that is neither accurate nor funny. I understand this is likely a bot account, but maybe whoever manages it will see: We aren’t falling for it. Save your electricity and go post this trash on Reddit

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨As an American, I'm offended at AliExpress' portrayal of my people.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  All joking aside, the cup really is too small and the burger really is too lettucey to look authentically American, 100% seriously

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Please fix this site - Pay so the site gets fixed⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Really missed an opportunity to have an element greater than 100% of the screen width causing horizontal scroll into an empty white space to the right of the page

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Sounded great when I was young⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Cease posting

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨coping⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Absolutely there is, but unfortunately the solution to CP is having moderators who can delete content, and that alone is enough to cause all the problems with moderators. It seems largely intractable to me. The only thing I could see maybe working is some system where moderators can be removed by community vote, but then you rely on systems preventing fake accounts from being created or account age to stop those votes from being botted, etc… I just don’t see how to technically solve the problem of moderators having power to delete things. It’s the classic issue of who watches the watchmen. Humanity has never had a great solution to this.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨coping⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  The problem is that if you actually have no or insufficient moderation then people just start using the site to post child pornography. And then you visiting what used to be a site you like becomes basically illegal and dangerous, not to mention potentially traumatizing. I’m not exaggerating, there was a small game fan forum site I used to love along with many others, but someone caught on to the fact it was run by just one guy and kept signing up with fake accounts and posting child porn or links to it. Luckily I had already fallen off using the site by then, but one of my Internet friends who still visited it kept me updated on the drama. First everyone normal stopped visiting. Then it eventually got so bad the owner had to shut down the site.

  People lack imagination when it comes to what will happen with no moderation. It quickly becomes horrible.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Dolph is prime human⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I, too, spent longer than I ever should have thinking about this. My first thought was, they’re just using it in a linguistic sense, so it doesn’t matter that the exponent would have to be something very small to go from 1 qualification to 4. But then I thought, hm, I guess since there’s only 1 qualification for Bill, no exponent would be enough. But then I realized that grammatically the value in question is “qualification” and not “number of degrees”. The number of degrees is merely standing in as a heuristic proxy to illustrate qualification. This “qualification” scale makes the most the most sense if it’s between 0 and 1, representing percentiles or qualification. Therefore, the exponent applied to Bill’s qualifications must also be between 0 and 1 in order to increase the value to Lundgren’s. For a moment I thought this was the nail in the coffin for the original text, but of course the word “more” there again refers to the qualification, not to the exponent itself. This interpretation has the nice benefit that no matter what the exponent is, we always get a qualification value between 0 and 1. Hence I can conclude this is the only viable headcanon for this post.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Luv Me Chips, 'ate Seagulls...⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  I think there is a substantial difference though. Meat processing is done in a measured, considered way for a benefit (meat) that cannot be obtained without killing the animal. It is done in isolated facilities away from people who find the process disturbing. Just because people find something gross doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done - we have sewage maintenance done out of the public eye too - but it does maybe mean it should be done where people don’t have to see it. The only benefit this man gets from killing the animal is some sort of “revenge”. But this is in principle completely contradictory to meat processing, where animals are seen as less capable of higher order experiences and therefore more acceptable to kill. To seek revenge, you would need to be assigning more higher order experience to the seagull than we typically see it as having. You have to see the seagull as selfish, stealing, criminal, rude, etc., even though in reality a more reasonable person understands that it’s just an animal looking for food. Meat processing is not done out of some emotional vendetta against the animals, rather it is the cold detachment of it that is exactly what makes it acceptable. Can you imagine if we killed the same amount of chickens every day, not to eat them, but just because we hate them? This is much more horrifying! Because that would mean we think chickens are having complex enough inner experiences to warrant hatred, yet still we kill them.

  Meat processing maybe isn’t great, but it’s still much better than this seagull killer. It isn’t impulsive, it isn’t disproportionate in response to the situation, it acknowledges and conceals its own horrors; thereby paying respect to important social codes. The actions of this man, though, disregarded the well-being of children and others around him, in an impulsive and disproportionate response - your average meat-eater is indeed better than that, I think. When I have a craving for some meat, I don’t drag a calf down to the nearest playground, cut it in half and spray blood over the children, and proceed to mock the calf’s weakness and inferiority as I beat it to tenderize it before consumption. I just want some food, dude. But what’s this guy’s beef? It’s not beef, and it’s not even seagull meat, but rather some frightening notion of swift and decisive revenge, which reveals that he is just waiting for any excuse to get away with brutalizing things around him.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Oldie but Goldie.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  What’s always upset me about this is that I don’t get to see the illustrated diagram. I want to see the diagram.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Hundreds of Capybaras ‘Conquered’ This Town. Now What?⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Has anyone here read 100 Years of Solitude? This seems exactly like something that would happen in that book.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Nintendo confirms $90 price for full Breath of the Wild experience on Switch 2⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  In many ways I think rising prices could be great, but in reality, they won’t be. With the technology available today, we could have even cooler games than we do, and more games, and more great games. We could have more diverse and experimental games. It would be lovely if solo indie developers were able to make a living from making great games, rather than basically needing to chase a dream akin to getting drafted into the NBA. Game developers are seriously underpaid, it would be great if they got paid as much as other software developers, especially since their work is equally complex and usually more stressful.

  In reality, rising game prices will not help with any of those things, and will just make the C-suite richer. The one silver lining is that this may allow small indies to start charging a more livable realistic price for their games.