Mnemnosyne @ Mnemnosyne @sh.itjust.works

Posts

0

Comments

310

Joined

2 yr. ago

Nope, wouldn't really be in less danger. That's something that bothers and concerns me, people act like it's Trump that's the problem, but he's really kind of irrelevant. This is the Republican party, this is all Republicans. Trump is not some bizarre outlier, at least not in the sense of the things he wants to do and will push for and enable as President. Every Republican wants those too.

That upper class definition needs a little adjustment:

Remove 'their lifestyle' and replace with 'a comfortable luxury-filled lifestyle'.

Also he needs to be up there to hit them with his sword.

I did years ago when Google started censoring my search results even with safe search off.

Unfortunately Bing is doing it too now and I can't find a search engine that isn't, though I would love to learn about one that isn't.

That's exactly what the agitators and such want - not to get people to vote for Trump which they know isn't gonna happen, they just want to convince enough people not to vote against him so he wins.

The big question is how many times to press it. Once at least is a given. It does specify the death as gruesome, so I don't really want the death, but I'd also like enough money to not have to worry again until a non gruesome death.

Like, if it was painless death, I'd probably say something like 20 or 30 times, but with a gruesome one...maybe 5 max, or perhaps even less. Still, one or two pushes is a given.

I think abolishing intellectual property would hurt capitalism more than it would benefit it. Already it is strongly in favor of the rich and the big corporations. Getting rid of those limitations even without abolishing capitalism first, would, I think, be more to everyone's benefit than detriment.

Yes, as long as people keep focusing on fighting the technology instead of fighting capitalism, this is true.

So we can fight the technology and definitely lose, only to see our efforts subverted to further entrench capitalism and subjugate us harder (hint: regulation on this kind of thing disproportionately affects individuals while corporations carve out exceptions for themselves because 'it helps the economy')...

Or we can embrace the technology and try to use it to fight capitalism, at which point there's at least a chance we might win, since the technology really does have the potential to overcome capitalism if and only if we can spread it far enough and fast enough that it can't be controlled or contained to serve only the rich and powerful.

I bet some people flashed that one and such too, but I could find no indication that it was shut down because of that.

It feels like society has backslid tremendously on some freedoms in the past 15 years, particularly where it comes to prudishness.

These days we even have otherwise progressive people jumping on the prude bandwagon along with hyper religious controlling anti feminists and it just makes for such strange bedfellows.

I feel like it should be simpler: did the culture the body came from have good enough records in other ways that we would be unlikely to learn anything by digging up the body that we couldn't learn by studying other records? Then leave it alone.

If they failed to keep good enough records, and knowledge would be gained by the study, then study away.

If it is solved it will definitely be through technology of some sort. While I agree it will not be one brilliant scientist, technology will be the solution.

That technology may come in the form of a way to produce more energy without fucking up the climate, and the engineering and logistical capacity to roll out the change at a breakneck pace.

It may come in the form of simply developing a way to control the global climate directly.

It might come in the form of some technology to control the behavior of humans so that we can actually respond appropriately.

Or it might come in the form of the singularity, when self improving machines grow so far beyond us so fast that they can just do what is needed whether we like it or not.

But one way or another I guarantee that if it's solved, it'll largely be a technological solution, because getting humanity to just...stop using energy at our current rate...is just not going to happen.

Science is blue because in every 4x game I've ever played the science icons are some form of blue.

Lucky? From some of the other comments it sounds like you may be referencing something, but just taking the comment at face value, there is no way that is not the most horrific fate I can possibly imagine.

Assuming you're not conscious the entire time and only 'wake up' when you enter a solar system to study, it's still horrific. You wake up, completely alone. You have no body and cannot move, and your attention is directed toward gathering data on some distant points of light. When you understand what's going on, sure, there's a bit of a sense of wonder...but it quickly becomes tedium, maddening, isolated tedium, as you slowly drift through a star system, gathering data on each planet and its star, over the course of fifty years or so. There's certainly bits of interesting stuff, but we are still talking insane levels of isolation and boredom. Assuming you're somehow prevented from going insane by the software in order to keep you functional, you can't even escape into madness.

...and then we imagine what happens if you aren't shown the mercy of being conscious only during the few decades the probe is drifting through a solar system. What if you're conscious the. entire. time. Once you're in deep interstellar space, you're alone. Able to think, perceive, experience, but in an unchanging, static existence. A year passes, and everything is so close to exactly the same that only with the precision of the measurements your tools can take can you determine there's been any change. Ten years pass, then a hundred, a thousand. You drift, slowly, through interstellar space toward a destination impossibly far away, all while you wait, conscious, unable to die, unable to escape into madness, just...eternal...waiting. Until thankfully you finally enter a target solar system, get a few blessed decades of what, to your new perspective, seems like frantic activity. Something, finally, to do, to see, that actually changes. And then...you drift back out into interstellar space after a few gravity-assisted slingshots around this star system's worlds, only to proceed on to your next destination, another several thousand year journey away.

This is, by far, the most horrific imaginable torture.

You probably had the same damn book I did, with an illustration of him eating an orange and seeing the wings of a butterfly coming up over it and supposedly realizing they look just like the sails of a ship and so, gasp, the world must be round like this orange!

Yeah, these projects done by one or two people could be better with a larger team, but it's definitely not a matter of hiring a big pile of people suddenly.

The ideal size is probably a couple dozen people, but scaling up to even that will take months since the one person currently in charge has to do a lot. And it'll almost fully pause work on the project for a while.

Cause if there's one person, they've got to find all the candidates, do all the hiring, then bring people up to speed.

The real problem is if the person who made it doesn't have the skills to manage even a small group of people.

I don't understand the complaints about the expansions for these games. Ok, there's a lot of them? But they're generally good. And if you don't want them, just...stop updating and stay on whatever version you liked?

And unlike most, they make it easy to play an older version. Did I like a particular patch better and hate all that's come since then? Easy to roll back to it. What do people want...for them to not put out expansions?

Some of them, sure, but there are a lot of stories of how many lies recruiters will tell you to get you to sign on, so a pretty significant number are genuinely bad people.

So one thing I don't fully understand is this: the secret service is required by law to protect the former president, but...is there anything that actually requires the state of New York to accommodate the secret service in doing so?

In theory, couldn't the state of New York just actually throw Trump in prison, no special privileges, and also no special accommodations for the secret service?

I'm reasonably sure that that route neither begins nor ends in Holland. I think Holland is the western area of the Netherlands, not the northernmost bit.

You take off the glasses during totality. Only during totality is it safe to look.