AnarchoEngineer @ AnarchoEngineer @lemmy.dbzer0.com

Posts

1

Comments

30

Joined

1 mo. ago

True, but in those cases you don’t want them to stop, unless of course, you are getting distracted by them and would like to stop in which case: suffering. Context is more important than raw qualia.

I do love that Aotearoa has incredible avian diversity.

On one hand, we have Kea parrots who are smarter than most of the human tourists they like pranking and stealing from.

And on the other side of the spectrum we have the kakapo: literally the dumbest bird in existence.

Such amazing biodiversity lol

I’ve come to the conclusion that suffering is really just anything that invades your focus without your desire for it to happen.

Thinking about anything you would rather not think about is suffering. You get cut and your brain constantly reminds you of it because evolution is a bitch. Hatred, envy, anger, intrusive thoughts, headaches, itchy clothes, annoying noises in your environment, etc. Anything that steals your attention without your consent is suffering.

So if you’re so focused on avoiding suffering you aren’t able to focus on doing what you want then yep, suffering.

I’m a mechanical engineering student with a math minor and I’m a switch so yeah, I’d take either side of this

You could always make a gigantic super absorbent polymer bead and wear that to a similar affect

I’m not quite sure what you mean by “always like this” because, from my understanding, the rich exploiting the poor and fucking up the world in the process has always been.

In the past, the “most successful states from the perspective of a peasant” were successful because of their conquest of others.

Furthermore, this success is measured only relative to other capitalist states doing similar fucked up things, so I wouldn’t exactly say that’s evidence

The perceived “end” after 2008 you feel is not because capitalism or the mechanisms holding it in place changed, it’s because the internet made it easier for exploitation to occur and to be witnessed by you.

The state didn’t change its goals. It still doesn’t care about its citizens just like it didn’t care in previous centuries. Capitalism didn’t change either, the definition you listed is still the same.

What changed was the new methods available for the state to pacify the masses and the new sources of exploitation capitalism could acquire.

Sure it is getting worse and states that had socialized programs were better off because of it. But that doesn’t mean more socialized economies wouldn’t have been better. In fact it would imply the opposite. Especially since the erosion you mention is a direct effect of the capitalist parts

…will act in bad faith if the state doesn’t check them

The very purpose of the state is to not check them.

If you’re curious, you should read State and Revolution. Short version is that daddy Engels outlines that the purpose of the state is to protect the bourgeoisie and their interests.

…what do you think capitalism is?

Capitalism forces businesses to enshittify as they grow

“Zoidberg had hair?”

“I never said he had hair! If you chose to imagine him that way that’s your business!”

Apart from “being summoned” yeah. No desire or consciousness just a thing that modifies everything around it by nature. It doesn’t care that it drives animals insane or turns them into monsters, because it’s probably not aware of what an animal is to begin with.

Also kinda coincidental that Color Out of Space makes plants bigger. Before we had better gene editing methods, scientists used radiation to trigger mutations plants attempting to find some mutations that, among other things, made the fruit bigger lol

My earliest memory (that I have a solid time estimate for) is from 2yo. It’s not a memory of questions though, I was a curious kid; it’s a memory of me and my older siblings coming up with stupid names for our soon to be born younger sibling.

So, my guess is that it’s more about trying to come up with your own thoughts and ideas and answers than it is about asking questions specifically.

Perhaps this is just a projection of a square from a non-Euclidean space in which the lines are in fact straight and parallel.

I think the 2D surface of a cone (or double cone) would be an appropriate space, allowing you to construct this shape such that angles and distances around geodesics are conserved in both the space itself and the projected view.

This shape in that space would have four sides of equal length connected by four right angles AND the lines would be geodesics (straight lines) that are parallel.

I just started learning rust like two days ago and I haven’t had too many issues with OOP so far… is it going to get considerably worse as the complexity of my projects increases?

The word for established assumptions is “axioms”

Definitions are kind of the most fundamental axioms. Abstracting things helps us build with them and they’re true because you say they are.

We use axioms in models to derive new theorems/information. But that is often what makes us resist changing them. If you build your other assumptions on an axiom, you have to rethink all those assumptions or even throw them out when it gets proven wrong.

However, attachment to a belief, holding to an assumption even when it’s been proven wrong, is called “delusion” and yeah those beliefs tend to be the most destructive

I think by cornerstone, they are referencing that beliefs are assumptions that form one’s model of the world.

You think by logically building on assumptions. “I remember putting leftovers in the fridge last night, so I don’t need to make dinner tonight” You assume your memories are accurate (or accurate enough) and then build on other things you “know” to construct every thought.

Sights, sounds, and vibes are a different story. They are called qualia and the raw experience of them cannot be described.

Think of qualia like the raw data you collect from an experiment. Your worldview is the scientific model you’ve built to describe this data and it rests on both fundamental logic and the beliefs/theories you currently believe in.

Unfortunately people don’t like having to change their worldview. And when you’ve held a belief for long enough, it becomes foundational to many of your other assumptions. Some people would rather say reality is wrong than change their beliefs.

The word for a belief that cannot be changed via evidence is called a “delusion” in case you ever want to piss off a religious person who says “nothing can shake my faith” like it’s a good thing.

if a belief is a model/theory/assumption that a person will not change regardless of evidence against it, it is by definition a delusion.

If a belief is an opinion, it is a personal statement. Statements like “Vim is the best IDE” are really conveying the information “I prefer Vim over all others IDEs” which is a true statement.

If a belief is a hypothesis then the person holding it will accept if it ends up being wrong.

Only in the first and second cases do people usually place importance on their beliefs, and typically, only the first case leads people to harm others or themselves with no way to convince them to stop.

Fun fact, my grandfather worked on the Saturn V and, according to my father, got in an argument with Von Braun at least once

I mean not fun because of working with Nazis, but fun because it’s interesting history

Unfortunately no, also I haven’t really watched much anime (I only know who three of the people on the chart are).

However, in the non-anime category, the tv show “Hannibal” has two very intelligent characters play this same kind of game of cat and mouse.

You know who the antagonist is, but the other characters… not so much. So you get the same kind of dynamic where people are talking with Light like he’s a normal person when you know he’s Kira.

You also get some seriously fucked up mind games between the antagonist and protagonist and get those same moments of “well how is he going to get out of this?” For both of them.

It’s also like a normal-ish crime TV show. Anyway, good stuff, idk if it’s what you’re looking for but you might like it regardless

Disclaimer because I’m about to start defending his intelligence: Light is a horrible person regardless.

Light’s first slip up is his temper, causing him to act without thinking to kill Lind L Taylor on live TV. In all fairness, until that point he had killed hundreds of people already with zero resistance and if you want people to “know of my existence” what better way to do so than to kill someone on live TV and get away with it.

The next “mistakes” he makes are in focusing on killing L instead of hiding from him. But really he would rather play a deadly game with L than anything else, and he does play that game intelligently and win despite many unforeseen obstacles.

Point is, light doesn’t get caught because he isn’t intelligent, he gets caught because he’s more obsessed with power and domination than not getting caught or actually saving the world.

I mean that’s literally why he’s evil: he’s not trying to fix the world.

He himself mentions that society just tends to decay and—knowing that he won’t live forever—he must know that killing evil people and trying to keep people in line with fear will not work and will not last. However, he does it anyway because fixing the world is just the excuse he uses to justify his god complex.

He’s not stupid, he’s just more entertained playing with death than he is doing anything else.