Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-09-23, 00:11 in Anticipating near future [politics]
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #641 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
Posted by wareya Well, I don't agree. I only have anecdotal evidence to back this claim up, but it's been my experience that the news cycle is a leading rather than trailing indicator - if the media stops writing about it, it is no longer something to be discussed. Likewise if the media were to change their position, then they would change it to be in accordance with them, we have always been at war with Eastasia-style. Posted by wareya It's still quantitative and measurable, which is the best we can get. There isn't really any good way to measure 'word out on the street' save for polling, and I can't find any polls asking the question "is Trump a Russian asset?" over time. Google Trends do measure more than the news cycle, they measure what people are thinking about. If what you're saying is that these two are isomorphic to one another, then that's my point entirely. People talk about Trump's general corruption all the time. They're even trying to connect him to Epstein. The moment that Russia comes up regarding him again it'll be all over the place. You're also assuming that the Mueller report had a very narrow topic. The media was into the whole Trump–Epstein stuff too, though - arguing that this was organic seems far-fetched. What the Mueller report was or wasn't about is completely immaterial, what matters is how it was perceived. And we can observe that e.g. Rachel Maddow's ratings sunk considerably (~19%), which indeed does seem to indicate that interest in Trump–Russia connections did sink after it. All that matters is the headlines, which were as I recall them widely considered to be good news for Trump. That people still talk about it seems fairly reasonable, it's just one of the stock lines of slander that one has for their political opponents. But it has stopped being a common insult levied against him in the press, and perhaps more importantly, it has stopped miring him down. To claim on basis of this that he hasn't been exonerated is as if claiming that the previous holder of the office had not been exonerated from those accusations levied against him on basis of demography, just because it in certain circles remained customary throughout his terms to refer to him while emphasizing his middle name. What is interesting is what the broad layers think, no? And it was certainly not something which kept miring him down as soon as it had been 'dealt with', which is also the case for Trump. It's kind of like the copier thing. If you ask to use the copier, people let you do it 60% of the time. If you ask to use the copier to copy some documents, people let you do it 97% of the time. Same goes here - if people feel "oh yeah they did the investigation now and it turns out he's OK," then that's good enough for them - problem solved, can now go do something productive with my time instead of obsessing about government minutiae. You are incredibly uncritical of yourself. It would do you a great deal of good to not develop such strong opinions and to pay more attention to how events flow into one another instead of just taking snapshots and taking permanent stances on them. Well, how else are you supposed to go at things? I think the great chess legend sums up my point of view nicely; Our mind is all we've got. Not that it won't lead us astray sometimes, but we still have to analyze things out within ourselves. ... I think once you start distrusting your own mind you're finished. From there you just get more and more confused. Once you think that your own mind is not your friend any more-your own conscience and your own mind is not your friend-then I think you are on your way to insanity. I do make an effort to keep an open mind and change it whenever I am wrong, and I would be inclined to think that is the local maximum. Posted by hunterk Why would they want to impeach him? With the economy taking a walk on the proverbial razor's edge, it's a far smarter move to just take it easy and hope he gets stabbed in the back by the Fed. With the whole PPT stuff that might actually never happen though, in which case they win anyway 2024 and onwards. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-09-23, 00:24 in N64 emulators vs. "PJ64 v1.x" emulators
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #642 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
I disagree, I think HLE is a nice optimization. For N64, which can not always be emulated at 60 FPS without issues (think mobile etc), why wouldn't you want to use it? It's like compiling with -O3 - sure, debugging will be hell, but it runs much faster. If you already have an accurate LLE emulator, why not? And if you don't, HLE is both faster to make and nicer to play. LLE is pretty much only useful for research, or for when it's so fast that it doesn't matter if you do HLE or LLE anyway. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-09-23, 10:22 in Anticipating near future [politics]
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #643 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
Posted by hunterk Sure, but for predicting the future? What the Mueller report was "actually" about is completely immaterial to what people think it is about, since those two are only connected by the thin shred of headlines. Likewise, Dems *need* to impeach him, not out of political expediency but because it's what the Constitution demands in this situation. By refusing to do their part of it, they are just as complicit in his crimes as the Republicans that shield him. That seems like a technicality - going off and screaming about the constitution demanding X, Y, and Z makes you no less of a kook than the 4th amendment or 2nd amendment or 1st amendment clientele - none of which are taken very seriously anymore. Political expediency is the only relevant metric here. As for the actual merits - is the claim really that he should be impeached because the Russians exposed corruption on the part of his opponent? This seems absurd - in any other reality, the Russians would have been praised as the heroes they are for doing so, but here they are just evil, because it lead to the election of Bad Orange Man. Were it really better that people be mislead into voting for his opponent, even if they had then done so on the basis of worse information ('lies')? Also, when the economy goes pear-shaped, it's not going to be because the Fed "stabbed him in the back". That's just buying into his conspiracy drivel. The Fed doesn't have the power to cause or control the business cycle, only to take the edge off the extreme peaks and valleys (at best). Well, sure, but it can cause it to crash sooner or later than it should have otherwise. It's definitely reached the end of the line, but there is a need for an actual trigger, like rates rising. Obviously, the people are not interested in boring drivel about 'zombie companies' or 'stagnation', they just want to keep their job and house. So the Fed have the power to make or break a president who is in office during the late stages of the business cycle, and in this sense they can indeed be loyal or disloyal to them. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-09-23, 20:11 in Anticipating near future [politics]
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #644 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
Posted by hunterk Right, so it's a procedural crime downstream from the Russia stuff, except for the part where it isn't actually a crime but might have been? I don't see why reading this report is any important - the actual matter of things are incredibly dull, uninteresting, and most importantly immaterial. If you just read the headlines, that is perfectly enough for analysis here, whereas anything else would just taint your judgement. Posted by sureanem My understanding of American law is shoddy, but to nitpick, isn't exactly that the case? Unitary executive means that the president cannot commit a crime (e.g. whatever the president does is inherently legal), but they can remove him from office by means of a vote for which no reason has to be stated, after which he can be tried for other crimes allegedly committed after losing this immunity. It's the same here - the king can by definition not be found guilty of a crime, since a crime is not something a king may be the perpetrator of. And the report goes along with this, and says that he by definition did not commit any crimes, but that the question otherwise is left in an indeterminate state as it were rude to do otherwise. However, this is all completely irrelevant. People read the headline, "report says Trump didn't do anything illegal," and they tick that issue off. Nobody goes reading a 400+ page report just to keep up with vulgar politics, especially not for an utterly uninteresting issue outside of an election season. In other words, the predictive value of the report is nil. The Democrats do not need to impeach him any more than the electorate demands it, and it has not appeared to be very bullish on the matter, so it follows from this they do not need to impeach him at all. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-09-24, 06:11 in Anticipating near future [politics]
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #645 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
Objective reality does matter; if a policy is implemented which is going to have disastrous results then it is definitely useful to realize it will have such, and that obviously has predictive value, even if we can hardly rely on this clientele to realize it. Furthermore, the media takes pains to avoid appearing inconsistent with the past. For instance, if they are changing their position on a given matter, they will generally do so slowly and edit older articles to be consistent with it as they go along, instead of publicly announcing a U-turn - this tends to confuse and anger people and in some cases even get them to lose credibility. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-09-24, 18:19 in Anticipating near future [politics]
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #646 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
Surely if one believes Brexit will have disastrous effects one could make political predictions off that, even if people do not take them into account while voting? There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-09-26, 11:36 in What are you listening to right now?
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #647 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
What abuot shazam? There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-09-29, 13:41 in Mozilla, *sigh*
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #648 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
I'm not quite sure I follow. Do you defend the UK censors' alleged sovereign right to censor the Internet, or do you concede that this would indeed be a major blow towards such censorship but still assert that it's not worth it because it would undermine your idiosyncratic blocking solutions? There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-09-29, 20:48 in Mozilla, *sigh*
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #649 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
It's not as if China don't do both. Besides, "Business" "Insider" reporting that an "independent tribunal" (read: some Micky Mouse org which doesn't even have a Wikipedia page) told the UN that China did X is hardly conclusive evidence of anything. Personally, I think that there's nothing wrong with taking organs off death row prisoners, and that it in fact is a commendable practice with which the Chinese ought to have continued–their blood is upon their own heads, and they're dead anyway, so what's the argument against not letting the bodies go to waste? I would argue they forfeited any and all alleged rights they had, the moment they committed such unforgivable crimes, and so the rest is, as one might say in the industry, undefined behavior–behavior, upon use of a nonportable or erroneous program construct or of erroneous data, for which this International Standard imposes no requirements. (Of course, if your issue is that China have a dubious justice system which has a bad tendency to wrongfully convict people, then just say that outright, but I'd say that's a whole other issue from organ transplants, which in my opinion would be completely fine were they done in a civilized country) Also, I find the whole Uighur thing to be extremely questionable. I can definitely think up good arguments for why censorship would be a far worse transgression: one is a clear-cut human rights violation and a direct admission of wrongdoing that you can't really explain away, whereas the other one is just an internal dispute between two ethnic groups, of which one arguably is not native to the country. Genocide is the sort of thing that happens every now and then in every (non-homogeneous) civilization, whereas there is not ever any good excuse for–in countries who otherwise were able to sustain democracy–transgressions against human rights such as freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and the like. I don't intend to imply that the UK are worse than China–they aren't, because China are a worse transgressor on almost all of these facets–but I would like to argue that it's hardly as open-and-shut a case as you argue, and that genocide alone does not strictly disqualify a country from being free. Just my two cents. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-09-29, 22:17 in Mozilla, *sigh*
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #650 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
Posted by CaptainJistuce Genocide is directly downstream from ethnic conflict, and ethnic conflict happens when you get sufficient ethnic tensions, which is to say everywhere you have different people living together. Can you put up even one counter-example, of a civilization or time that was free from genocides despite heavy ethnic conflict, or free from ethnic conflict despite various ethnicities? It is deeply ironic that you assert that your fatherland is such an example. Pray tell, what happened 54 years after the ratification of the passage you quote? Granted, this was according to many observers how it was able to avoid going the way of South America or the African colonies, and one could argue–I am not taking a position on the issue–it was thus necessary, but it nevertheless very much happened. Whether pornography is covered under the freedom of speech is a hotly debated issue, but you likewise ought to be familiar with the conclusion of your Supreme Court in the case of Miller v. California. At any rate, is not the pursuit of Happiness but rather the right to Liberty under which it would fall. So, no, would be my conclusion. While it as you note did indeed not directly write let alone ratify those passages, it did consistently carry out actions consistent with at least the former, and later on the latter. It appears perfectly reasonable to me that your Founding Fathers would have found Internet censorship far more objectionable than the genocide of domestic ethnic minorities. Genocide is an activity which sometimes may be legitimate and sometimes not, whereas censorship–at least to the degree that it infringes on the right to freedom of speech being necessary for the proper functioning of the free marketplace of ideas–is a direct admission of wrongdoing that is always a crime against humanity. It is important to keep in mind that the negative effects of genocides on human rights are extremely limited; although they may be regrettable in other regards, they rarely constitute a significant threat to the health of the democracy. I will conclude by paraphrasing the abortion enthusiasts here; their subjects, their choice. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-09-29, 23:33 in Mozilla, *sigh*
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #651 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
Well, that's certainly a controversial topic. But as examples, I have heard–and I want to be clear, I take no position here–good arguments for Melos, Yugoslavia, Israel, China, and the US constituting such. While all are certainly regrettable situations, a peaceful resolution of the conflict was hardly possible. This stands in opposition to for instance the World War II-era genocides, in which people were murdered without provocation or any underlying conflict. More or less any genocide that happened as a result of conflict, as opposed to the other way around. To be clear here, I'm not praising genocide in describing it as "legitimate," but if you have two peoples who do not and will not like each other and one swath of land, then the old adage this town ain't big enough for the two of us applies, and then the only feasible resolutions are the departure of one party (e.g. surrender) or strife, both of which constitute genocide. Of course, a peaceful resolution could also be reached, but this is never guaranteed and appears unlikely if either party stands nothing to gain from it. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-10-01, 22:28 in Mozilla, *sigh* (revision 1)
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #652 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
Posted by tomman Isn't your ISP state-run? Wouldn't they kill you if they were to read your posts here? Fine if you lived in an ostensibly free country, but doesn't the saying "those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" very much apply here? Posted by tomman By what metric is this easy? I'm not trying to put you on the spot here, but if it's so easy then why haven't you done it? Posted by CaptainJistuce Well, I don't reckon I could respond to the other stuff, unfortunately–if you post it in Politics!, I would be happy to–but I would reckon this part is just about close enough to the thread topic that it's OK if I put it in a spoiler. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-10-01, 22:29 in Board feature requests/suggestions
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #653 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
What happened to the posting form? It looks all odd and the user fields are gone. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-10-13, 15:15 in I have yet to have never seen it all.
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #654 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
- This can also hit your beloved open source software. Remember, Microsoft now owns GitHub, and this means that if one of their useless lawyers decides to pull an Adobe, it means that I'll be out of a job, forever. Wait, what? Do you work at/with GitHub? Or are you just opposed to proxies/VPNs for the same reasons as you don't like Bitcoin? There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-10-24, 18:26 in Making interactive fiction
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #655 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
If you're making a compiler, why not support both? If you're intending to support cookies, you'll need to serialize the state anyway. Then all you need to do is to settle on a standard format for it, and Bob's your uncle. And those who don't want it just omit the .php file. What do you need the JS for anyway? If you're making a point-and-click game, I think good ol' CSS can do anything. Failing that, there's always image maps. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-10-24, 18:27 in I still HATE smartdevices
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #656 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
Posted by tomman How do you know that though? There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-10-26, 03:04 in Making interactive fiction
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #657 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
Posted by wertigon Well, that's where the PHP comes in. Click the key, the key gets attached to the cursor (or just marked with an asterisk as "held"), click the door, door opens. (You could maybe also do it with pure CSS using hidden checkboxes, which is genuinely useful for implementing non-JS spoiler tags, but it's definitely overkill for this application) There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-10-26, 03:10 in I still HATE smartdevices
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #658 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
Posted by tomman Yeah but I mean doesn't that go for the authorities too? He could very well have turned it in and then had it stolen by a different scumbag. It sucks to hear anyway, man. How do these things work over there? I mean, I'd imagine a smartphone is still worth like $50, but the monthly wage is far less than that. Are smartphones trading at an extreme discount, or did you just lose X months of salary? There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-10-26, 03:20 in Stupid computer bullcrap we put up with.
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #659 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
Ceremonial reasons. If it's not big then how can it be serious software? Meanwhile, vim clocks in at 2.4M and clang at 33M, for a grand total of 0.0354 GB. But I guess that's not enterprise certified. Why are you installing Visual Studio anyway though? That shit should be on your work machine and the responsibility of the IT technicians. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| sureanem |
Posted on 19-10-27, 11:50 in Stupid computer bullcrap we put up with.
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #660 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1763 days Last view: 1761 days |
An interesting exercise could be if your 250 MB DLLs compress well. If so, it ought to be trivial; just enable the NTFS file-system level transparent compression. I can't imagine those DLL files have any need for high-performance access anyway. You really should not be using Visual Studio anyway. It is an atrocious piece of software made for a certain clientele, to which I am fairly certain no members of this board belong. Perhaps we have some unfortunate school-age kids or such who are forced to use it though. It is vulgar and in poor taste, it's as if anyone above legal drinking age were to drink premix drinks. If you want a better IDE there are many good choices, if you want a better debugger there are many good choices. Posted by tomman Does it? I seem to recall installing LaTeX and it didn't take more than a few megabytes. As I recall it, there is a package with "everything but the kitchen sink," but there is also a package that just has the required parts. I think that would be "texlive-latex-base," as opposed to "texlive-latex-recommended". You do however need to install some language packs (in my case texlive-lang-greek, for the symbols, and texlive-lang-european, for special characters and hyphenation), but it's still quite lean. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
