Kerfuffle @ Kerfuffle @sh.itjust.works

https://github.com/KerfuffleV2 — various random open source projects.

---

Read more

Posts

3

Comments

253

Joined

2 yr. ago

It doesn't mean doing the exact same thing, it means treating others in the way you'd like to be treated.

Maybe. I feel like it's going to be kind of hard to make them care if you're still buying their product though.

Doesn't the article contradict what you just said?

"We believe, and Apple’s Security Engineering and Architecture team has confirmed to us, that Lockdown Mode blocks this particular attack," Citizen Lab said.

I’ll plug in my phone, ignore your entire. Infotainment and actively campaign for it to fail and blow up in your face.

This sounds kind of funny. "I'll spend $60,000 on your car but I won't turn on the radio. That'll show you!"

The title makes it sound like Rotten Tomatoes deliberately did something shady. What actually seems to have happened is:

1. Rotten Tomatoes aggregates critic reviews. As far as I know, those critics aren't really affiliated with Rotten Tomatoes.
2. Some of the critics that make up that aggregated rating got bribed to increase their evaluation of the movie.
3. Consequently the score on sites that aggregate reviews like Rotten Tomatoes increased.

Man, can't even block the user without blocking all replies too.

Get psychological help

How about addressing my points instead of the ad hominem attacks?

Feeding pedophilia is directly harmful to children who grow more at risk

Like I said: "I’d personally be very hesitant to ban/persecute stuff like that unless there was actual evidence that it was harmful"

If what you're saying here is actually true then the type of evidence I mentioned would exist. I kind of doubt it works that way though. If you stop "feeding" being straight, gay, whatever, does it just go away and you no longer have those sexual desires? I doubt it.

Much as we might hate it that some people do have those urges, it's the reality. Pretending reality doesn't exist usually doesn't work out well.

I’d personally be very hesitant to say “it’s okay to beat off to children”

I never said any such thing. Also, in this case, we're also talking about images that resemble children, not actual children.

It should be very clear to anyone reading I'm not defending any kind of abuse. A knee-jerk emotion response here could easily increase the chances children are abused. Or we could give up our rights "for the children" in a way that doesn't actually help them at all. Those are the things I'm not in favor of.

It's obviously very distasteful but those needs don't just go away. If people with that inclination can't satisfy their sexual urges at home just looking at porn, it seems more likely they're going to go out into the world and try to find some other way to do it.

Also, controlling what people do at home that isn't affecting anyone else, even in a case like this isn't likely to target exactly just those people and it's also very likely not to stop there either. I'd personally be very hesitant to ban/persecute stuff like that unless there was actual evidence that it was harmful and that the cure wasn't going to be worse than the disease.

That certainly sucks all the joy out of pirating it.

Ah, I see. I was going to recommend you a link to the audiobooks that I found.

I managed to find what I assume are English fansubs.

It was on Amazon Prime's streaming service for a while so there should be official subs at least floating around.

It's fairly entertaining but you really have to suspend disbelief. I'd call it fantasy with some sci-fi jargon more than actual sci-fi. I guess I could say overall plot doesn't make a lot of sense but scenery on the way isn't too hard on the eyes.

Just curious, to you speak Mandarin?

As for me, it would have to be a number of people that, by their sudden absence, manifestly affects the life of people I do know and care about. Like, at least a billion or so if randomly chosen

If they ask someone else, you'd better hope that other person doesn't think like you - for your sake and the sake of people you care about.

I hope you're just looking for interesting responses rather than a definite answer!

I genuinely wonder if saving a negative number of people would be better overall. Humans, especially ones in developed countries like those privileged enough to be posting about stuff like this are responsible for a lot of negative effects we don't really like to think about. We benefit from exploiting other people, animals, using resources in unsustainable ways.

I think even if someone takes a lot of individual steps like going vegan, trying to recycle, minimizing transportation and other consumption, not having children, etc that they're still not even going to break even with the harmful effects just existing causes.

If it wasn't for effects like that I'd probably say 2-3 but in reality I'm not really sure if I truly should save anyone. (By the way, you don't have to worry about me going out and murdering people.)

A lot of people don't understand the limitations/weaknesses of AI. The carelessness was probably more in not actually learning about the tool he was relying on (and just assuming it was reliable information).

I would just leave the "From a utilitarian perspective" part out. The rest of what you wrote seemed to describe your position adequate.

So is the question how many it would take for me to believe that I should give my life, or how many before I'd actually have the willpower to choose to die?

From a utilitarian perspective, if it helps people I’m invested in then the number would be low. But if it helps people who have no connection with my life whatsoever, then the number would be close to infinity.

This is basically the exact opposite of utilitarianism. The utilitarian perspective would be to look at it in an objective way and determine what choice, overall, lead to the highest utility. Your decision is completely subjective.

Sadly many people who own dogs fall into that category.

I think we can just say "many people fall into that category".

we aren’t breaking the event horizon threshold as title suggests

It wouldn't be pop-sci if it didn't have a misleading clickbait title!

Then my awkward ass is sitting there knowing I need to say “I’m good. How are you?”

You don't have to say that.

1. "It goes."
2. "Another day, another doughnut."
3. "How's it going?" - people really won't be surprised if you just don't answer at all.
4. "I've been worse."
5. "If I complained, who'd listen?"
6. "Hi."
7. "Hey."
8. "No news is good news."

In the context of random people who don't know each other, it basically just means "I acknowledge your existence". Acknowledge their existence and you're good.