the_af

33 ms·

751.
by the_af 10mo ago
> It doesn't change the very trivial fact that engaging in such behavior is a choice. Nor does it change the fact that virtually everyone has choices. Quite the contrary, it does change it. > As I said, even if you have kids,
752.
by the_af 10mo ago
> As I said - barring some violent circumstances, having a child, or at least the actions leading up to it, is a decision one makes. This is simply a falsehood you believe. Or rather, it's a very constrained, mostly unfree "c
753.
by the_af 10mo ago
> If they have children, barring some violent circumstances, then they've already participated in designing their life. This is not the kind of design we're discussing here; "not having children" is usually a privil
754.
by the_af 10mo ago
How about close friends who live on the other side of the world? Telegram and Signal are, to me, about as trustworthy as WhatsApp. Well, actually, nobody really uses Signal, and Telegram is about the same as WhatsApp so who cares. Waiting t
755.
by the_af 10mo ago
Yeah, agreed. Otherwise it's a kind of low stakes "non-conformity", even a conformity of sorts (because everything lowercase is/was actually an internet fad, so it's a kind of "extremely online" conformity
756.
by the_af 10mo ago
"Reasons to do computer: 1. To contribute to the world's spiritual growth" ...damn, there go (out) most computer jobs!
757.
by the_af 10mo ago
Agreed. I would add to the mix, however, that MAGA and adjacent groups made the Epstein scandal a big deal. Remember among them you can count QAnon, the Pizzagate, the people who believe the elections were "stolen", the Capitol st
758.
by the_af 10mo ago
I don't think it's condescending to believe a large number of people mostly cannot design their lives. At best they can try to make it better for their children, if at all. Why is this condescending? It's not their fault, it&
759.
by the_af 10mo ago
I agree many Trump supporters will be able to spin -- even if just to themselves -- any damning news no matter what (especially in this age of easily spoofed photos and videos) but still, puzzlingly enough, his voting fanbase actually made
760.
by the_af 10mo ago
I think Trump being shown with underage girls (or irrefutably implicated in pedophilia) would damage his reputation with his MAGA fanbase. It's the one thing they won't forgive him for, if enough evidence is provided. They already
761.
by the_af 10mo ago
But there's no reasonable indication that the person you're replying to has committed any crime, while there is evidence that some of the people on Epstein's list, including Trump, have committed crimes. In fact, Trump made
762.
by the_af 10mo ago
> Imposing the garrish 5-yeard old colouring book style is no less biased. I don't think they claim this is what the statues actually looked. In fact, the article quotes an expert saying the opposite : "we can never know wha
763.
by the_af 10mo ago
I believe researchers are under pressure not to extrapolate too wildly, unless they can find strong evidence for their extrapolations. In TFA itself they are quoted (very briefly) saying this is not a representation of what the statues ac
764.
by the_af 10mo ago
Well, to be fair the comment that sparked this subtree asserted (maybe in jest? I hope!): > It's a website with the smartest people in the world. The level of conversations here are unrivaled in internet communities. Surely that H
765.
by the_af 10mo ago
How do you prevent introducing a bias that then becomes what we "know" about how statues were painted? By introducing modern aesthetic sensibilities and present them as plausible, we then reinforce that this is how statues were pa
766.
by the_af 10mo ago
I'm not sure whether they look "bad" is enough justification. The author dismisses the possible explanation "maybe they didn't consider this bad style back then" without any real argument other than "there
767.
by the_af 10mo ago
> If only there were some system that could start from some sparse and noisy observations and weave together a plausible completion... Humans?
768.
by the_af 10mo ago
> I do realize research budgets are not that awesome, but when claims are of aesthetic in nature (explicitly and implicitly) and deal with human craftmanship there should definetly be collaboration with also craftsmen subject experts.
769.
by the_af 10mo ago
> Give them the tools that were available at the time and let them do their best. The end result would surely look better, but how would we be assured it resembled historical reality? Do we know for a fact in these reconstructions ther
770.
by the_af 10mo ago
Which disparaging remarks? I just claimed HN is ok/average, not "the smartest place on the internet", and that it's typical of online communities to consider themselves "the best". The unsubstantiated claim tha
771.
by the_af 11mo ago
Agreed! I think HN is average, and its userbase think themselves smarter than they really are. ... but I still cannot tell if the original commenter was sarcastic or not! ;)
772.
by the_af 11mo ago
> Name some others then, compare and contrast. No need, because whether an online community is more thoughtful or smarter than another is very subjective. Almost by definition, HN is not it. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary e
773.
by the_af 11mo ago
It's a testament to Poe's Law that I genuinely cannot tell if the OP was being funny or not.
774.
by the_af 11mo ago
> It's entirely possible that this is the smartest place on the internet, but also often dumb. In fact, it seems likely. More of an indictment of the rest of the places on the internet. Almost every (non-troll) online community th
775.
by the_af 11mo ago
> Incorrect, Raymond Hill authored both extensions, both being forks of HTTP Switchboard. You're right, let me try to amend my statement: at the point uBlock Origin was forked, Raymond disowned the earlier uBlock, and it had becom
776.
by the_af 11mo ago
> It's a website with the smartest people in the world. Nice joke! At least, I hope it was a joke...
777.
by the_af 11mo ago
Not the same author.
778.
by the_af 11mo ago
I was mostly arguing that Altman's statements, if taken at face value, show him to be unfit to be a parent. I stand by this, but mostly because I think people like him -- Altman, Musk, I tend to conflate -- are robots masquerading as h
779.
by the_af 11mo ago
> Arguably, yes? No. The USA is the strongest military power in the world. They are not the underdog. If they resort to war crimes or unfairness, it's not because they are the underdogs; it's because this is what top dogs do.
780.
by the_af 11mo ago
Ah, yes, the USA is the underdog here, they cannot win at war unless they ignore the conventions of war.

More ›