nyeah

25 ms·

391.
by nyeah 1y ago
I appreciate this perspective. To oversimplify, you're challenging total beginners to self-teach guitar repair at a level beyond what normal guitar shops offer. Your attitude toward playing seems like my attitude toward my profession,
392.
by nyeah 1y ago
That stuff is kind of cool, but it's definitely not a shortcut to making an ordinary song! I haven't used Ableton for 5 years or so. I got addicted to GB and then Logic (an easy step from GB). But I should try it again. I mean Ab
393.
by nyeah 1y ago
Thanks. I think that's all valuable context for a beginner thinking about using a very low-priced guitar.
394.
by nyeah 1y ago
You're really going to dump a total newbie into simulated rack synths, computer music languages, and whatnot? In order to "save time" over learning a DAW? I'm sympathetic to some of what you're plugging. Really. I l
395.
by nyeah 1y ago
Me either. Links or no downvotes, bruhs.
396.
by nyeah 1y ago
I'm sure it seems that way to you, but for people who never touched an electric guitar before that's going to be torture. You need an instrument that you really want to pick up and play, that stays in tune, etc. It doesn't ne
397.
by nyeah 1y ago
If you want to make "normal" electronic music (and never tried before), use GarageBand on an iPad. It's easier to learn than Ableton et al. because GarageBand has reasonable settings built in. I.e. it will make sounds right a
398.
by nyeah 1y ago
I mean, often, sure. Also problem solving is often a matter of making a spreadsheet full of +, -, *, / operations. Problem solving is often a matter of counting permutations and combinations. It's often a matter of setting up the
399.
by nyeah 1y ago
It's been a ... little while since NYC was Dutch. Let me put my tricornered hat on and think carefully.
400.
by nyeah 1y ago
Awesome! A literal actual debate between absurd humongous dependencies and the known dumbness of "Not Invented Here". Pick a wrong side folks. (No, "respect for reality" doesn't count as a side. Try again.)
401.
by nyeah 1y ago
"Neoliberal" means free markets. Most US conservatives insisted on free markets from 1980 until 2016. They claimed it would benefit the overall US economy (and maybe it has). They claimed those benefits would be shared by all Amer
402.
by nyeah 1y ago
Thanks, but I don't think that's exactly what it says. It says "Most archaeologists assume that boiling in perishable containers cannot pre-date the appearance of fire-cracked rock (FCR)" "This paper has two princi
403.
by nyeah 1y ago
This is the only comment here that I'm 100% sure is accurate.
404.
by nyeah 1y ago
Who says they didn't know?
405.
by nyeah 1y ago
Let's keep up the mathiness. Look how much economics has benefitted from that.
406.
by nyeah 1y ago
Do they claim it's packed solid all the way through?
407.
by nyeah 1y ago
BTW: If you try this fix: In your mind and on any paper plans, label the second 90% as something indispensable. Do not call it "refactoring" or anything else that sounds like it could be done after you ship. It can't. Ask me
408.
by nyeah 1y ago
One cause of this is that folks finish the first 90% and are surprised to discover the second 90% still undone. It feels, intuitively, as if you should be able to subtract. (Everything - 90%) should be around 10%, right? No. It's like
409.
by nyeah 1y ago
Or "garbage in, garbage out"? But that's really about computers. And maybe it is name calling. Is there no standard name for this? Or not in English? Maybe it's similar to the "Good Student" picture. Bright wi
410.
by nyeah 1y ago
"Is engagement the only metric that matters?" Yes.
411.
by nyeah 1y ago
Monads? I'll give you monads on your behind.
412.
by nyeah 1y ago
Maybe "appeal to authority" covers it. The "rationality" or "intellect" or even "brilliance" of some claim's originator are fun things to talk about. But (even taking the claims at face value), t
413.
by nyeah 1y ago
Let's read the thread: "There has to be (or ought to be) a name for this kind of epistemological fallacy, where in pursuit of truth, the pursuit of logical sophistication and soundness between starting assumptions (or first princi
414.
by nyeah 1y ago
Yeah, though I think you may be exaggerating how often the "genius insights" rise to the level of correct restatements of basic facts. That happens, but it's not the rule.
415.
by nyeah 1y ago
Yes, there's a name for it. They're dumbasses. “[...] Clevinger was one of those people with lots of intelligence and no brains, and everyone knew it except those who soon found it out. In short, he was a dope." - Joseph Hell
416.
by nyeah 1y ago
But that common use of the word is ignorant nonsense. So, yes, someone is wrong on the internet. So what?
417.
by nyeah 1y ago
'Reductionist' can be an insult. It can also be an uncontroversial observation, a useful approach, or a legitimate objection to that approach. If you're looking for insults, and declaring the whole conversation a "cultur
418.
by nyeah 1y ago
Ok. A lot of things are very 'reducible' but information is lost. You can't extend back from the reduction to the original domain. Reduce a computer's behavior to its hardware design, state of RAM, and physical laws. All
419.
by nyeah 1y ago
tl;dr Basically a lot of sorry excuses. If you're a plant, don't buy into the negativity. Work your way up the food chain. If you eat it, then it's your food.
420.
by nyeah 1y ago
Only I feel like it says Euclidean 3-space in the abstract.

More ›