EQmWgw87pw

5 ms·

1.
by EQmWgw87pw 6mo ago
I’m thinking the same thing, Codex literally ruined the codebases that I experimented with it on.
2.
by EQmWgw87pw 7mo ago
I didn’t say that they said it’s funny. I was saying it’s funny. You just twisted my words.
3.
by EQmWgw87pw 7mo ago
Personally I’ve had encounters with LE and have not had a gun drawn yet, so it’s obviously not the default. But I disagree, I think brandishing a knife is already extreme behavior, I don’t think it’s logical to think “because he has a weapo
4.
by EQmWgw87pw 7mo ago
Doing quick research says about 1 shot at per day, 1-2 fatalities per week, and about 26,000 assaults per year
5.
by EQmWgw87pw 7mo ago
I don’t know if there is any precedent from taking away hundreds of millions of guns from an armed country actually
6.
by EQmWgw87pw 7mo ago
This is such a common argument that’s basically a fallacy. Many of those dangerous jobs are dangerous because of human error. So it’s funny that you think 60% of deaths being on purpose is normal, what other job in the dangerous top 10 has
7.
by EQmWgw87pw 7mo ago
So are we all just oblivious to the fact that in the US, civilians practically have access to military gear? How can you police that type of population with sticks and stones?
8.
by EQmWgw87pw 7mo ago
What you pointed out doesn’t change the argument. That IS a main driver for NIMBYism in wealthy areas, even if they’re wrong or misguided, even if it’s just false perception. Don’t really know how doing some whataboutism will change that. I
9.
by EQmWgw87pw 7mo ago
Because neither loot boxes nor Pokémon cards are actually that addicting. There is no strong link to actual gambling and these mechanics. The reason loot boxes get regulated at all is because people simply don’t like them, and they scream t
10.
by EQmWgw87pw 7mo ago
A bicep and a piston both push and pull things, but an AI cannot do what a smart brain can, so I don’t think being smart will no longer have an advantage. I mean, someone has to prompt the AI after all. The mental ability to understand and
11.
by EQmWgw87pw 7mo ago
Well as of right now, mathematically and scientifically, the way an LLM works has nothing to do with how the human brain works.
12.
by EQmWgw87pw 7mo ago
You can compare the idea of trying to make a game with a framework versus an engine rather than compare MonoGame and Godot directly.
13.
by EQmWgw87pw 7mo ago
Tbh, after using it myself, I genuinely don’t see it writing code this buggy, so I don’t get what’s going on here
14.
by EQmWgw87pw 8mo ago
I would not advocate against democracy. But do you believe it is flawless?
15.
by EQmWgw87pw 8mo ago
What you’re saying isn’t necessarily wrong, I just don’t think it adds up cleanly to “evil”. Skipping nuance is bad, I think
16.
by EQmWgw87pw 8mo ago
Hesitating to answer a question that may have nuance is not being “ambivalent”. He literally says “there’s multiple questions implicit here” in response to the question asked of him. I genuinely think people like you making sweeping assumpt
17.
by EQmWgw87pw 8mo ago
I’m hearing this a lot but never with any substance, would you care to elaborate with a hard action or idea with a direct result?
18.
by EQmWgw87pw 8mo ago
So someone is evil because they answer questions by thinking through them? There are no questions in the universe that can’t be stopped and pondered over. In fact, it’s dangerous to even suggest that, that’s the exact mechanism that propaga
19.
by EQmWgw87pw 8mo ago
Instead of thinking about cables, have we considered the idea of satellites getting cheap enough to launch?
20.
by EQmWgw87pw 8mo ago
First step to have a protocol that depends on mass adoption to be useful: choose an unpronounceable name
21.
by EQmWgw87pw 8mo ago
It’s vibe coded and doesn’t really work for now
22.
by EQmWgw87pw 8mo ago
The modern generations are already starting to open up ChatGPT for basic questions. Not sure how long it’ll be their biggest market for.
23.
by EQmWgw87pw 8mo ago
Do you think most YC companies make money?
24.
by EQmWgw87pw 8mo ago
I’m not really sure what having a purpose has to do with it. Whatever your purpose is, it is sustained by corporations and other people working for them, unless you are farming your own food and building your own house.
25.
by EQmWgw87pw 8mo ago
But that’s the point. UBI allows people to not work for a corporation while also costing money that came from somewhere. Generally when there are corporate docs and owned property, those are the things required before production starts. Wha
26.
by EQmWgw87pw 8mo ago
What’s another way you can measure or define value? What would you say is the non-monetary value of non-buyable things?
27.
by EQmWgw87pw 8mo ago
Do you think people would do the following arrangement; work for free until the business becomes profitable (which could be never), but then get a much higher share of the labor margin?
28.
by EQmWgw87pw 8mo ago
Your argument makes sense, but a park has a measurable scope. We all want it to be X sqft, with Y trees, and it will cost Z dollars. Are you going to force artists to make the specific art that the community is in need of, or can they just
29.
by EQmWgw87pw 8mo ago
You’re making a logical leap, how can you say only money has value when things are worth money? That item has value equivalent to the money given for it, therefore that item has value. It’s likely you’d be able to find people who are willin
30.
by EQmWgw87pw 8mo ago
Corporations produce things (productive), while UBI rewards unproductive behavior (theoretically)

More ›