I’m sure someone already made a graph plotting the hours wasted learning vs the seconds gained not moving your mouse.

We’re back to square one, I argued what was wrong with your logic in that statement when you first posted it and you came back with an insult and no attempt to clarify, and now you simply repeat it. Don’t come crying now.

No what I said is that them being idiots doesn’t excuse you being an idiot as well.

If public enemy number 1 in a banana republic gets 98% of the votes and people state the people’s favorite actually won (implying voter fraud), you’re saying the people’s favorite can’t run again because people stated he won?

That is your logic right there. And you don’t evaluate your stupidity because Trump is an incredibly easy target so nothing you say should be scrutinized. I think that’s stupid and detrimental and you should hold yourself to a better standard instead of simply throwing out silly statements aimed at easy targets.

You mean the point I started with 2 comments ago?

Try to keep up buddy.

Mate if you don’t know that there’s a difference between him winning and someone stating “everyone knows he won” then I would be careful questioning what people know.

What would be the point of saying “everyone knows he won” when he’d actually became the president? It makes no sense. You should learn to read between the lines, which says “he had more votes so he should’ve been the president”. And before you go off again about the popular vote you should realize that what I know about how elections function has no effect on the lack of logic from the guy owning the truck.

You’re so eager to make the other side look bad, which they do a pretty good job of by themselves, that you’re no longer critical of what you’re saying.

I mean, fuck these idiots but that’s a dumb take. It could very well be true that someone is cheated out of the presidency while everyone knows them to be the people’s favorite with the most votes, but knowing that doesn’t mean they actually became the president, which is the requirement for them to not be able to run again.

It’s just a tighter grouping of (biased) data that can be searched and retrieved a bit quicker.

How is your intelligence different from being “biased data that can be accessed”?

The fact that something can reason about what it presents to you as information is a form of intelligence. And while this discussion is impossible without defining “reason”, I think we should at least agree that when a machine can explain to you what and why it did what it did, it is a form of reason.

Should we also not define what it means when a person answers a question through reasoning? It’s easy to overestimate the complexity of it because of our personal bias and our ability to fantasize about endless possibilities, but if you break our abilities down, they might be the result of nothing but a large dataset combined with a simple algorithm.

It’s easy to handwave the intelligence of an AI, not because it isn’t intelligent, but because it has no desires, and therefore doesn’t act unless acted upon. It is not easy to jive that concept with the idea that something is alive, which is what we generally require before calling it intelligent.

Ah yes, “we did good but they messed it up, as usual!”

If the US cared enough about the well-being and the services the people have access to in the nations they invade, they would probably not do the invading bit.

Hey everyone get a glimpse of this loser!

I don’t think it’s funny, because the joke is illogical. If he is a teacher in a University, and it looks like it, that it is his job to mansplain.

So close. You seem to have Sheldon levels of understanding sarcasm.

It’s just a simple joke about the term being misapplied to an everyday setting.

I would advise avoiding things with sucralose.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8880058/

Yeah but does the one on the left fit a rack server? I think not!

It’s a bit late to worry about internal mics when everyone has their phone on them at all times.

That’s because it’s not dirt but normal pigmentation of the shell.

What would be the point of washing that part of the egg you’re going to throw out 3 seconds later?

Do you mean malware?

Am I the only one who fails to see anything seriously wrong with what you list there? I’m purposefully ignoring “misinformation spreading conspiracy theorist”, because that’s a pretty meaningless accusation and is often added as an easy character assassination rather than something substantial, but I’d like to see you elaborate.

I mean, we’re talking jail time and extradition, and nothing you’ve mentioned is even against the law in the slightest. Yes, there was piracy on his file sharing site, but that’s true for practically any service on the internet, from Google drive to Amazon S3 and anything in-between and vaguely related.

Characters like him are targeted because they are both successful and anti establishment, the eccentricity just tops it off. But why should that result in a lack of sympathy? The world doesn’t have enough of these people who rock the boat if you ask me.

Oh right, so you were talking about the content, that’s not what I understood under “frontend”. Thanks for clearing it up.

I don’t have any experience with the platform, so I’m not in a position to judge their decisions, but it’s always tricky when you present yourself as censor free. There’s things you obviously don’t want on your service, but if it falls within the legal realm, it is no longer a matter of “will we block Nazi material” but whether from that point onward you start taking a moral and political stance.

Things get incredibly tricky and cumbersome if you choose that route, not just from an administrative perspective but also technically. I can understand why the people who operate the platform would prefer to primarily use legality as a deciding factor, as not every ideological issue that you open yourself up to if you take the other route is as straightforward as fascism.

Guys, just because the backbone of your site is decentralized doesn’t mean your centralized frontend can’t be modified by you.

I don’t understand what you’re saying here. Did you mean can be modified? Or what does this have to do with Nazi rhetoric? Maybe you have a different idea about the word “frontend”?

Either you understand that the consensus is that naming things is hard and you just want to elevate yourself above everyone else by arguing against it, or you’re unaware that it is the consensus, in which case your opinion doesn’t really matter because you most likely underestimate the issue.

It’s such a truism that I’d suggest googling "naming things is hard*.

There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation and naming things. – Phil Karlton

https://www.namingthings.co/