pancake
Now
•
66%
Well, NoFap is against the porn industry, which is why I used to believe its spread would be beneficial, but there is a large part of the community that expresses very clearly misogynistic or pseudoscientific views, and I no longer think it's feasible to reform NoFap in any way to overcome this, other than the unlikely case that they make clear those are not welcome in their community.
pancake
Now
•
100%
This is amazing, I think it could even nicely fit a use case in a project of mine. Thanks!
I know what the general process is (mix essential oils, etc.), but I have no sense of smell so I have no way to know if the result is good. I'd like to read some scent theory but I don't even know where to begin.
pancake
Now
•
100%
Even if you often try to make that person feel understood and empowered to express their views, everyone's needs are different. For example, if they tend to feel inadequate or are self-conscious about their achievements/intelligence/etc., you may need to go the extra mile here.
Try to identify all the positive and negative interactions with them (i.e., those in which they get the impression that they are right versus those in which they don't) and make sure that positive ones greatly outnumber negative ones. If you need, you can try to acknowledge more situations wherein their contribution to a conversation deserves praise, or even simply not point out their mistakes if the question at hand is not critical for you (easiest imo).
pancake
Now
•
100%
This brought a smile to my face, I love those face-melting red thingies!
pancake
Now
•
100%
When a person says this, sometimes even if they do it in a positive tone, it's usually a way to verbalize more concrete concerns that you should address. For example, they might feel that you are always dismissing their opinions, that you don't listen to them in general, or they would simply like to get support when they express their views in a group so they get some recognition. In any case, they feel like you can do something to help but may not feel comfortable to express it or may not have fully identified it. If that person is important to you, you should be able to see what they want and take action.
pancake
Now
•
100%
Hope you're good now. Never had trouble with them, but did with other stuff, so I'm much more careful now. Coffee is tasty too :)
pancake
Now
•
100%
I use the same method that used to work for me at university: gulping down the whole thing quickly and then looking for things I might not have understood. With enough coffee/stims, the second part is not necessary lol.
pancake
Now
•
100%
I'd hate on any country that was the bloodthirsty, manipulative, living incarnation of capitalist interests at the world level, the US just happens to be that.
pancake
Now
•
100%
Sorry, stupid mistake. "I see it’s what you guys defend" refers to "my stance", not "even socialists". I'm so stupid that I had to ask a friend (with better English) to understand it. I've edited the original comment to reflect this.
pancake
Now
•
100%
Thank you. I've already requested a Lemmygrad account! Been lurking here for some time, but with the influx of new users I get insulted a lot more lol. So time to find a new home with you guys.
pancake
Now
•
100%
Oh, thanks for explaining, my bad. I've never been good with language... My intention was to complain that I see left-leaning people defending that stuff. To be clear, I do NOT believe that. I'm pretty disconnected from this community though and wanted to hear some related points of view. Maybe another time.
pancake
Now
•
100%
Brilliant. That makes a lot of sense, especially the more concrete the goals are. I wish it were easier to achieve, maybe the theoretical frameworks for this will be a reality in a few decades... Your implementation at least seems more plausible.
pancake
Now
•
100%
You don't think a US-dominated unipolar world is a threat to socialism worldwide and must fall? And why don't you think that?
Edit 2: sorry, I realize my mistake. "I see it’s what you guys defend too" would have been a better wording, otherwise I imply that you are among the "even socialists" mentioned at the start.
Edit 1: Nvm I've been called a tankie on another instance, now this. Maybe I'm acting weird, that's all, I'll take good care of my health for a few days and come back. It would help me if you explained yourselves, but I understand if you don't.
pancake
Now
•
55%
Well, I see lots of people (even socialists) that think that the path taken by the ship is good, it just needs socialism or whatever. Of course, my stance is that this path doesn't lead to socialism and a violent change of world order is necessary before it can achieved. Which might be true or false, but I see it's what you guys defend (edit: to clarify, you guys defend the same position as me, "my stance", not the first one I mentioned, "I see lots of people").
pancake
Now
•
83%
Okay, my answer is pretty removed, but I'd say I'd like a system where decisions are made by submitting automated proofs of their optimality, either absolute or over all submitted proposals in a defined time frame. The conditions of optimality would be pre-defined in a Constitution, and non-provable facts would be accepted or rejected via a decentralized voting system that would keep multiple diff chains and penalize e.g. voting for facts that are later proven false via a submitted proof. The proof system would hold all powers, but would be able to delegate decisions to entities under proven rules, which would come faster but possibly be overriden.
pancake
Now
•
100%
Multilateralism is the exact opposite of what would happen if the US manages to fend off Russia and China. The only way multilateralism can truly emerge is a confrontation between two or more blocks where there is no clear winner and thus big countries need to offer more autonomy to small countries in order to win them over. The US sparking wars to keep poor countries sending raw materials home, leveraging the dollar and nuking from orbit anything that even remotely looks like socialism as they've been doing right up to this point is the worst case scenario, and the global events that are weakening this should go on as much as possible. The best case scenario is that a revolution becomes easier due to instability, and cooperation between socialist powers appears as a new stabilizing force.
pancake
Now
•
100%
If you use my snippet, I want your game. If you don't agree, then you can't use my snippet. The purpose of the GPL is simply to prevent people who don't share from benefitting from people who do, which I think is pretty fair.
pancake
Now
•
85%
Absolutely. But I don't want to influence anything, just make the OP slightly happier and hopefully have a good read myself.
pancake
Now
•
95%
The reason some desires are universal is that they are achievable, thus it makes sense that an entity that looks for them exists. And we don't yearn for God, we yearn for happiness, empathy and staying alive, and some of us have created a conceptual entity that gives us an infinite supply of those.
pancake
Now
•
60%
I tend to upvote everything, no matter how much I disagree. I don't trust my own opinions or the authors', all of them are flawed in some way.
First subreddit over 10M to go private. The message shown when trying to enter the sub is a quote from spez: > I think the problem Digg had is that it was a company that was built to be a company, and you could feel it in the product. The way you could criticize Reddit is that we weren't a company – we were all heart and no head for a long time. So I think it'd be really hard for me and for the team to kill Reddit in that way. Steve Huffman, CEO of Reddit, April 2023
ChatGPT will gobble up every symbolic manipulation task I give to it. At worst, sometimes I have to check its output and point out anything weird, then it'll correct it. I'm writing pages over pages of scary differential equations and the damn thing is saving me lots of time on it. And everything checks out! I wonder about GPT 4, since it is supposed to give correct answers without help as often as the average calculus student...
worldcoin.org
I'm not sure what to think about this project. "Accelerating the transition to an economic future that welcomes and benefits every person on the planet" sounds like a good idea, especially coming from the person that stated his tech would "break capitalism". And starting by giving some of the currency to every person on the planet, for free, is an assertive way to make this goal credible. Of course, it's probably a cryptocurrency that will be used for speculation. And my bias in favor of blockchain technology, which I believe can be used for good, is not sufficient to make me trust the project.
www.phoronix.com
The comments are pretty interesting...
Should probably talk to my psychiatrist so I get a change in my medication. Every time I start many weird projects, feel like I can easily change the world or have invented something that can, need basically no sleep and/or get aggressively political (even religious), I know the drill... At least I'm not paranoid though. Hope the best for you all too <3 Also sorry if I've bothered someone these days, it really wasn't my intention.
I just can't find the words to describe how happy I was to receive so much feedback and understanding on your part, this community is truly wonderful <3 I'll work on some of your (legal) ideas in my spare time, which is not much but I work fast! So far I've designed a generalized edit distance function with some pretty cool properties that would make it useful for running an organization under non-friendly conditions: ``` $ cat message1.txt Liberal anti-fascism is a reactionary idea. Anti-fascism is not practical without being anti-capitalist. $ cat message2.txt The anti-fascism of liberals is not a progressive idea. It is impractical with no anti-capitalism. $ cat leak.txt Liberals' anti-fascism is not useful without anti-capitalism, not a progressive idea. $ ./trace.py leak.txt message*.txt Delta | File name ---------------------- 19 | message1.txt 8 | message2.txt Predicted origin of 'leak.txt' is 'message2.txt'. ``` So far it works with any sufficiently long text I've thrown at it. Make two versions of any text, rewrite any of the two into a third file, and the algorithm will trace its origin. Also the math is pretty elegant! For obvious reasons I won't be publishing any of it any time soon :) Maybe the RTC will advise me on what to do. Or maybe I'll just hoard a bunch of software like this. Anyway, thanks, I'll keep at it.
Disclaimer: bipolar rant. tl;dr: I'm frustrated that no one is working on clever schemes like this where I could help. All the weaponized math is for capitalist crypto-bros, [drug dealers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darknet_market#Customer_interactions) and think tanks, what an unfair world... --- Honestly, seeing the real economic and social implications of fields like game theory, cryptography etc. makes one wonder if it could be possible to put these to revolutionary use. I know about the Revolutionary Technical Committee and might get in contact with them, but I'm not sure if they'll know of some concrete project that would help, something like a bunch of decentralized software, smart contracts, mathematical proofs... I can write all of these, but what for? For example, [this comment of mine](https://lemmy.ml/comment/424525) proposes an economic scheme that would require all of the above to coordinate, secure and trust, to optimize functioning and minimize necessary involvement. But I'm sure there are other (better?) ways to use math and tech directly for revolution. Any revolutionary ideas where the questions arise of "why should I trust...?", "how can we ensure...?", "how to optimize...?" can theoretically benefit from them. Even my local revolutionary organization mentioned a problem that could be solved using a certain crypto scheme, namely securely and anonymously swapping vehicles between owners, to be presented to the general population but actually meant to avoid identification while reducing transportation costs.
According to the document: * The project involved, among other tasks, performing gain-of-function on bat coronavirus SARSr-CoV WIV1, with the aim of studying its potential ability to infect humans. * The researchers believed regulations on gain-of-function research did not apply in this case, since the original virus did not affect humans, despite the desired product virus being able to do so. * Their risk assessment does not include the possibility of the newly created virus accidentally infecting workers or human research subjects. * The resulting viruses were to be tested on both human tissues and modified mice with human ACE2 enzyme. * Human subjects from "high-risk areas" were involved on-site for non-experimental purposes. * These experiments were performed within facilities of the Wuhan Institute of Virology. * The phase of the project wherein these experiments were first mentioned started on June 2019. Additionally, [this](https://www.nih.gov/sites/default/files/institutes/foia/1R01AI110964-year-1-tranche-01.pdf) adds: * The entire project started in June 2014 and initially involved collecting virus samples from different sources, including the wildlife market in Wuhan.
My region is home to the world's largest worker cooperative, Mondragon Corporation. Do you think worker cooperatives are useful to us? Why aren't they more widespread? Could their growth be facilitated by new technologies like the Internet or Blockchain?
Direct download link. Also, have a look at [takeshixx/redstar-tools](https://github.com/takeshixx/redstar-tools).
Now