Lvxferre @ lvxferre @lemmy.ml

This account is being kept for the posterity, but it won't see further acti

---

Read more

Posts

17

Comments

1,115

Joined

4 yr. ago

Pretty much. Or, rather: this shit should be viable for any smarter animal, including dogs and humans.

Willpower is just an abstraction. It is not a "real" thing, consumed once you do something you wouldn't.

That said yes, you can train it. Or rather, condition your behaviour so you do things that you'd otherwise avoid. The how-to is actually simple:

1. Choose a task to perform. Push it a tiiiny bit harder.
2. Did you manage to push it harder? If yes, reward yourself. If not, skip.
3. Repeat 1 and 2 for some time.
4. Gradually decrease reward frequency, make it a bit random. Oddly enough this makes the desired behaviour to stick further.

Eventually you won't need the reward, but the behaviour is still there.

What you consider a reward is up to you. For example, for me snacking on cheese is a reward, but it might not be for you. With the right mindset, even mundane things can be a reward, like taking a comfy shower or playing some games.

I don't even blame it for the ban itself, to be honest. The person in question was trash, but it's simply easier to enforce a rule like "don't goad suicide" than one like "don't goad suicide, unless the person in question is a piece of shit", and the later opens some awkward precedents. I do blame it for 1) the gaslighting in the ban message ("multiple violations" my arse, it was one violation) and 2) banning 3/4 of my accounts - and the exception being the acc that I used for mod duties ("keep working for free, sucker").

It is, but I only use it for online identities that I don't mind associating. Plus the username is a bigger concern in this regard.

Also, often I use other smoking chimp pics, although this one started it out for me.

It's mostly Mastodon. The text doesn't even mention Lemmy or Kbin.

I'm glad that Mozilla is doing this. It benefits both sides (Mozilla and the Fediverse), in a transparent way. Hopefully we get some Fediverse companion for Firefox, Thunderbird and Seamonkey.

I could bullshit that the smoking chimp is a comment on human nature or whatever, but the truth is: someone sent me this pic, pointing out that he holds his cig the same way that I do when I'm drinking in a photo. And that was right when I was looking for online avatars, since I didn't want to use devils any more (too "edgy teenager").

More than a decade later, here I am, still with smoking chimp avatars.

Frankly? I'd rather stick to a normal package manager too, if available. But the alias trick is useful in a pinch, if you must use a flatpak.

As a local fix, you could set up an alias. Open .bashrc and add the following line: alias firefox="flatpak run org.mozilla.firefox"

That doesn't surprise me.

Linux users are biased towards higher technical expertise, and they have a different mindset - most of the software that we use is the result of collaborative projects, and we're often encouraged to help the devs out. And while the collaborative situation might not be true for game development, the mindset leaks out.

Don't feel stupid - the subject is complex and it took me quite a while to understand it too.

How does Bob do this? Why doesn’t he just menopause too? If menopause ensures more descendant survival wouldn’t they both do it?

Because both Bob (the old male) and Daniel (the new male, likely Bob's son) are slightly discouraged from having new children, until they get access to more resources. That results in both ceding a bit, but not too much - with a slight lower fertility for both sides, but they don't shut off reproduction completely.

The same won't happen between Alice and Charlotte, because no matter what Alice does, Charlotte will keep pumping out children. So Alice keeps ceding, ceding, ceding, for the sake of her grandchildren, until she has zero fertility (i.e. menopause).

Note how Charlotte and Daniel's roles are essential to understand why Alice and Bob behave in one or another way. Hypothetically speaking, if Daniel kept pumping out children even if this endangered Bob's children (i.e. Daniel's siblings), Bob would eventually be forced to undergo menopause, like Alice. That doesn't happen though.

Why doesn’t Alice just die? // The troupe still have to find enough food for her, how is that an evolutionary advantage to keep a non breeding member around?

Alice is an adult. As such, she likely contributes with more food than the clan needs to provide her. She might not be getting new children, but by hanging around she improves the odds of survival of her grandchildren. (That's also present in the grandmother hypothesis.)

Give this article a check. It's explaining menopause for another species (humans), but the reasoning should be identical. There's also this article about menopause in cetaceans, but take conclusions from it with a bit of salt because the social structure among cetaceans is different from ours (humans and chimps).

Cracking the Cryptic always lulls me to sleep. Specially Simon.

Kind of funny that you mentioned fascists - my first permaban there was from telling Nazist to shoot himself like Hitler did. (10/10 experience, would get banned again.)

On-topic: I believe that abuse of the report function to get people banned is already a reality there for years. Not just from fascists; the typical Reddit user is petty, and I do think that the so-called voting brigades also abuse the report function.

What am I missing here?

The competition with the younger generation putting the older females in a disadvantageous position, but not the older males.

Let me put it this way. Imagine the following chimp clan:

• Alice - old female
• Bob - old male
• Charlotte - young female; unrelated to both above
• Daniel - young male; Alice and Bob's son, Charlotte's mate

Now imagine that the clan has resources to raise exactly one child. Once it has two children, both are likely to starve.

From the male side of the things:

• If Bob has a new child, Daniel won't have his own child, to avoid starving his [half-/full ]sibling.
• If Daniel has a child, Bob won't have a new child, to avoid starving his grandchild.

As such, you'll see fertility going down regardless of age, to adapt themselves to the situation.

From the female side of the things, the picture is different:

• If Alice has a new child, Charlotte will still risk it and have her own, even if the chance of the new child surviving is rather small. Because Charlotte doesn't give a fuck about Alice's children, they are not Charlotte's relatives.
• If Charlotte has a child, Alice won't have a new child, to avoid starving her grandchild.
• If Charlotte is likely to have a new child in the future, Alice won't have a new child either - because it'll likely die, but it'll still reduce the odds of her potential new grandchild to survive.

As such, Alice shuts off her reproduction through menopause, and Charlotte keeps high fertility.

First off, you have to act like a massive shit-loaf to get perma’ed from Reddit in the first place.

In a lot of cases, yes. Not in all of them, due to bot-based bans.

didn’t gnome 2 get forked into Mate?

Yup. I use it. It has a few rough corners (e.g. the weather panel suddenly stopped working), but it works fairly well.

I feel like eventually it should be merged into Xfce. But that's harder than it looks like.

you’re entitled to nothing

I agree on legal grounds and disagree on moral grounds.

People are entitled to be treated in a transparent and fair way by other people and entities run by other people. And the way that shadowbanning works in Reddit is neither transparent (it's shadowbanning) nor fair (too prone to false positives).

Shadowbanning is a good albeit misused resource. Ideally it should be only used against automated systems, such as spammers or karma farming bots. And it certainly should not be made illegal (also, remember that "unethical" isn't necessarily "should be illegal").

The problem that you're noticing is elsewhere: Reddit doesn't really care about its users or fairness, so it sees no problem on using automated systems to ban users, without manual review. (It's basically "you're a user so we assume that you're shit anyway".) That is bound to create false positives, and if the system handles shadowbanning it'll do it towards genuine users too, not just bots.

They don't because the males in a clan are likely all related, as father and sons and grandsons. For them the relationship is mostly symmetric:

• young male PoV - the children of the old male are likely his half-siblings (1/4 relatedness), rarely full siblings (1/2 relatedness)
• old male PoV - the children of the young male are his grandchildren (1/4 relatedness)

It becomes the same explanation once you take into account that younger females don't care about the rest of the clan - because they are not her relatives. Only the older females have some reason to shut down the mechanism.