Ryantific_theory @ Ryantific_theory @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

186

Joined

2 yr. ago

Why does every cool innovation have to have an immediately applicable shitty implication 😭

screaming intensifies*

"Whoops, turned it up instead of down, one sec."

BANG

Yeah, I was gonna ask the same thing, there are a lot of really great shots of the moon, but shots of both the moon and the earth are somewhat uncommon for... reasons.

For real, I knew a guy that kept an ounce as his daily supply. As in, he'd set aside an ounce each day for casual smoking with friends. This whole four month raid was over three days of heavy college smoking. The demonization of marijuana is such a ridiculous waste, and leads to weird stuff like selling K2, which is a shittier version of weed, with actual risks as you can overdose on K2.

Yeah, and a lot hinges on the definition of cyberbullying. If they mean a sustained and targeted campaign of bullying, that's one thing, but if it's just being the target of toxic behavior on the internet that's pretty easy to trip over on social media.

Man, I remember back when it was women's studies getting bullied, then they added gender studies, now we've got African Americans, Germans (I assume because of Marx?), the study of the development of society, and the study of society. They're becoming so inclusive in their discrimination 🤗

The American Dream lol.

Really? I kept seeing him get chewed on in news articles, but felt like he'd have instantly stolen second place from Desantis purely from mirroring Trump, if he were white and not named Ramaswamy. Haley too felt like she'd have been a standout, were she not a woman look for support from the GOP. Kept throwing me for a loop seeing the articles saying Desantis "won" the debate. It'll be interesting to see what happens with the next primary debate.

The aggregated polling at 538 still has Ramaswamy in third place at 7% and Haley right behind him at 5.5%, but given that Desantis has dropped all the way down to 14.2%, I wouldn't be surprised if one or both of them pushed him out. Trump is still sitting at 55.3%, but he's also skipping the next debate, so hopefully that can fade. Plus, you know, all the criminal lawsuits.

Mmm, rope meat.

... I kinda wish I liked mussels better now.

God gave us four fingers and a thumb, so we can properly hold mice by their fluffy little tum.

... Why does Saddam Hussein have an enormous erection?

Y2K: Passed ✅

2038: "Wanna see me do it again?"

Ha ha, well I have absolutely no faith that we will collectively solve that unless 32 bit systems stop working on their own before then. If Y2K happened again today, there'd be a handful of companies handed billions of dollars to fix everything, and it'd wind up half done with demands for more money.

Yeah, there was a chunk of time where there was some spat going on between them and VPN providers, and whenever I would wind up on an exposed VPN server every single captcha would take over a minute of clicking through different prompts. Happened so frequently for the fastest server that I just switched to Firefox and DuckDuckGo because I couldn't stand getting hit every single time I googled something. Not just every session, but literally every single search.

The worst was when it would test me for several minutes straight, and then have the gall to tell me to start over again. Google's really been racing to the bottom lately.

It's been a while, but I'm confused. I never said anything like that, but that is essentially the government's point of view. Erotica requires one to be 18 to see, whether written, drawn, or photographed. Depictions of sex and nudity either ban everyone under 17 ( or 17 and under for NC-17 ratings), or expect parents to restrict those under 17 in the case of television as it can't be moderated (for now).

At any rate, I just wanted to respond and clarify despite the better part of a month passing.

homepages of major porn sites is unique compared to the pre-internet days.

It's really not. You just weren't exposed to it and think it's new. The only change is the quantity, not the depravity. Marquis de Sade, the origin of the word sadist produced a significant amount of incredibly depraved erotic works back in the 1700's, and he was not unique.

To your second point, should their first exposure be to porn? Of course not, but developing, evolving and maturing is done by exploring, not by sitting in a cave and generating knowledge from scratch, even if you have an equally amateur friend. That's how people get hurt because they have no idea what they're doing. If they want to see what's out there, let them. Trying to ban everyone from sexual content until 18 is a uniquely modern take.

Not to mention, we're far too uncomfortable with the topic to have their first exposure be anything but porn, since sex ed is all drawings and awkward anatomy. And childbirth videos. Since I was a kid myself, all I've seen is moral panic that wants nothing more than to simply shut the blinds and pretend that there's nothing there.

There's some argument over adopting the term GSM (Gender and Sexual Minorities) as an inoffensive general term.

I mean, why? What is the unprecedented threat?

And I think you have a misunderstanding of how isolated teenagers were from sexual content before the internet, magazines weren't exactly hard to get. Even before then, we've literally been making porn in every form of media since we were painting on cave walls.

Not to mention, do people really believe that people shouldn't be allowed to see sexual content until they're 18? I started looking up titties when I was eleven, and as I understood it, the generation before mine either inherited or stole porn mags and tapes from older brothers/dads or got somebody to buy some for them. Given how useless sex ed was on the actual sex aspect of things, how are teenagers supposed to figure out anything besides anatomical structures?

The fundamental premise just seems weird to me, why are we trying to hide away pornography like it's this shameful corruptive thing? I maybe knew a handful of weird kids that listened to the 18 year old restriction (all on extremely religious grounds), so the idea of actually trying to enforce it seems kinda crazy. I don't know, it just reeks of the idea that masturbation is a sin, but everyone's so uncomfortable with the notion of teenagers + anything sexual that nobody wants to touch it.

I just feel like the next couple generations are gonna be weird with the tug of war between book bannings, LGBTQ+ bannings, religion in schools/out of them, and all the other proxy wars being fought using schools as the battle ground. Not to mention all the shootings.

We aren't, we just have a massively complex biological computing network that has a number of dedicated processing nodes refined by evolution to create a "smart" system. Part of why it's so hard to make true AI is because the way brains process data is far messier than how computers function, and while we can simulate simple brains (nematodes and the like), it's incredibly inefficient compared to how neurons actually handle processing.

Essentially, we're at the cave painting stage of creating intelligence, where you can kinda see what's going on but they really aren't that close to reality. To hit the point where an AI is self-aware is going to be 1) an ethical disaster, and 2) either an advancement in neuromorphic chips (adapting neural architecture to computer architecture) or abstracting neural computation via machine learning (ChatGPT - not actually copying how our minds work, but creating something that appears to function like our minds).

There's a whole lot of myths tied up around human consciousness, but ultimately every thought in our heads is the process of tens of billions of cells all doing their job. That said, I'm hoping AI is based off of human neural architecture, which produces sociopaths and monsters sure, but machine learning creating something that appears to think like a human but actually operates on arcane and eldritch logic before presenting a flawless replica of human thought unsettles me.

Bro, how do you think the things would spy on people, if they don't have computers in them? You're just splitting hairs because you think it's moral to spy on everyone through a sextoy with an internet connection instead of any other computing device with an internet connection, just because it isn't illegal yet.

The whole "those with nothing to fear have nothing to hide" bullshit falls apart when used on you. You may not have anything to hide, but I doubt you'd be happy to let law enforcement watch you masturbate, or sleep, or shower, because you don't have anything to hide. Invite them in to record you talking to friends and family to ensure you aren't communicating about crimes. Sure, you might not have anything to "hide" right now, but there's plenty of things you don't want to share, and you never know what the government is going to be like in the future. Imagine an extremist party gets to power and you hold freely recorded views antithetical to their beliefs? Or you or a family member jokes about speeding or shoplifting and now you're flagged as under suspicion for criminal activity, a preferential suspect for any unsolved crimes geographical near them because breaking the law once makes you more likely to break it again.

Silently watching everything people do isn't some zero cost activity. It's people watching you, your kids, your friends, your family, at all moments of their lives and if you don't think it'll be abused then you're out of your mind.

Hang on, hang on... What if we check twice?