gila @ gila @lemm.ee

Posts

0

Comments

354

Joined

2 yr. ago

Not really, but I think it probably starts with trying to be more aware of where the productivity blitz you're in the middle of is stress-induced, reflecting on what you're feeling in that moment, and trying to remember those feelings and internal reasonings at times when you want to be motivated but aren't feeling it.

For me it's a lot more helpful and impactful when it's a self-realisation vs. someone telling me the same thing, so it might sound silly or nebulous coming from someone else, but just have a go at practicing more mindfulness and go from there - eventually you'll be in the hardworking phase of the cycle while also being aware of that, while you're experiencing the feelings that cause you to be in that phase, and then later you can get to examining 'why'. It might not reverse the instincts you've learned over a lifetime, but it can help

A close relative, sure. But to point to reading comprehension and go on to elocute about that would not have basis in this example, in my view. The crux of the issue literally isn't written, as you say, it is assumed. The point being it is an implication from fully external understanding. It isn't that there is an inference to be made or dots to be connected based on notions only vaguely referenced by the text, e.g that the value could be equal / that dice rolls being equal is a valid answer. Because there is no vague reference in the text. Correct understanding in either case fully depends on understanding of concepts outside the text. The person with the best reading comprehension in the land would be unable to comprehend the text without that external understanding.

To put it more succinctly, if comprehension is understanding stuff, reading comprehension is understanding stuff based on what is written, right? The issue being that in this case the lack of comprehension is about something that wasn't written. It is a comprehension issue unspecific to reading.

It’s not about reading comprehension, it’s about the reader not understanding the unwritten parameters of the question. That the possibility that neither have greater value exists.

I recall one occasion where something similar happened to me back in middle school. We were learning about probability using dice rolls. One of the questions on the worksheet was (something like) “What is the best way to influence the probability of the dice roll outcome?”

When the question was posed to me I fully understood that there was no way to influence the probability, assuming no influence by external factors, the probability of a given outcome will always be equal. But the fact that the question was posed to me in this way led me to believe that this was not the answer the question was looking for. It implied that in fact there was a way to influence the result, so I got very frustrated in trying to come up with an answer which made sense. In this situation I felt that actually the question was wrong, and got upset that the task I had been set to answer it was impossible to complete correctly. When I realised that the true intent was just to get me to acknowledge that there was no way to influence the result, I felt betrayed by the framing of the question. I knew the answer the whole time, it was obvious, but the framing of the question misled me to believe that was not the intended answer.

The question in my case wasn’t actually an earnest question about probability, the pretext for is was deliberately false. There was no way for me to figure it out using better reading comprehension. The intent of the question can only be realised via comprehension of non-written concepts, essentially being able to recognise when someone is trying to throw you a curveball. It isn't quite the same as just recognising the path of the ball being thrown to you, because in that case it appears to be being thrown away from you.

If you examine the person replying person's responses, that's pretty much where they're at. The whole 'dude is expecting the answer to be their own views' thing is conjecture, what they're expecting is a view given an existing proposition that there is a view to take.

Yeah I lived in Auckland for a bit, they don't care as much about sunscreen. More sun safety conscious than Pacific Northwesterners in my experience, but probably closer to that group than myself as a fair-skinned Aussie that's used to getting burnt after just sitting outside in the shade for awhile

I couldn't find it in my comment history, but I saw a thread months ago where someone was lamenting migrating from reddit where they used to just google "episode ### discussion" for the show they're watching and would find a corresponding reddit thread, but the same thing wasn't working for them with Lemmy. Someone else pointed out that it might be because Google personalises some of the search results now, so I tried their example query and the top link was to the post I was commenting on. It had already indexed to the most relevant result about an hour after the original post

Lol, they mustn't be a great one, because their design seems to have led at least one of y'all to interpret the labels as denoting for the category below, rather than upper/lower bounds between two categories. i.e. things in the blue category above the "speculation line" label are speculative but not yet "leaving reality"

For sure, she is still a media critic in public (following intially going into hiding), and has talked about it numerous times. Her historic stance hasn't really changed though, I'd imagine at a certain point you'd just want to move on to something else, in her case to pivot toward speaking on female empowerment etc indirectly related topics. Pretty sure she's not done any gaming-specific media work for a number of years now.

I was wrong to make the proposed exercise such a zero-sum game though, I just mean to highlight how ridiculous the opposing position (that any article quoting Hasan for any reason is auto trash) is, in this particular case.

Sorry for assuming, I'd encourage you to check Anita's own opinion about speaking on gamergate though. She doesn't want to.

He's grifting them into not listening when he says "I'm a socialist propagandist", I guess

This place has a lot of lib/leftist infighting, it's generally the most left social network in my experience though

Hasan was the biggest driving force behind anti-gamergate sentiment originally and that deserves to not be disrespected in the comments because of some unrelated gripe you have with him that is founded on a logical farce, that's it

I think in your rush to namedrop someone else involved you maybe neglected to consider whether that's actually the case. Anita went into hiding and gamers don't know who she is anymore

Hasan was quoted by this article because he was notably outspoken about the original gamergate, had the correct take on it, and the current trend is literally just an attempt at relitigating those same issues.

Here's an exercise for you: can you name a single person on the planet that would more appropriate to quote on this issue than Hasan, and why?

Even if I accept and agree with the position in your comment, there isn't.

Because socialism is when you're poor

I completed this game over a couple of sittings one weekend after it came out on game pass, and loved it. I was just driven to find out the ways that the environment could be manipulated, and figuring out how to get up somewhere that I could see from below or through a hole in the wall etc. I would continuously be presented with some in-game element that inspired some curiosity about it, and the game is great at indulging and responding to that curiosity with a fulfilling resolution, i.e. the path to get there was interesting and fun. There's nothing that complicated about it, it's just a simple, easy, fun game with a charming setting. It's been a few months so I could definitely see myself going back to it, there's just so much to play right now.

Just to add context because this is a somewhat polarising headline, gamergate shit is back on the rise. Gamers generally aren't being considered potential extremists, only literal extremists that happen to consider their opinions as representative of gamers

I'm not sure about pixel 8/8a,, but I'm typing this on a pixel 7 and it sure ain't got no headphone jack, Jack. If that was my prerogative I'd be using a budget Xiaomi device

The only reason we have $2k flagships is because they have more premium features which people with lots of disposable income would want to buy. But where are these features now? Provided you aren't shoving extra displays in your device for kicks, everything is ubiquitous (or you're just paying extra for a SaaS unlock). If Tensor G3 sucks like G2 sucks, that impacts all Pixel 8's, not just the A.

There's no more space in the market for an A model and a flagship model. In terms of being the appropriate option for the average person looking for a new phone (i.e what a flagship actually is in principle), the A model is the flagship now.

That's why the price is increasing - it's too popular, they've realised price is once again the driving factor behind most purchase decisions and are now acting to try and preserve the status quo of people buying needlessly expensive handsets for no reason.

Dolphin is in a better state than it's ever been, now has a resampler so you can get those crisp pixels like on original hardware. For anyone whose interest is in actually playing old Nintendo games over speculating on their IP, even if they own a cartridge, they're probably playing on Dolphin.