xantoxis @ xantoxis @lemmy.world

Posts

3

Comments

1,144

Joined

2 yr. ago

Jon Ringer's actual actions did include pushback against representation for trans people. I'll take your word for it that this article didn't mention those exchanges; I'm not readin' all that.

I'm not gonna read this person's Evangelion analogy, but I did go to the trouble to hunt down what Jon Ringer actually did.

Here's a link.

I don't agree with him, and representation of particular minority groups, including gender minorities, are important when they are particularly under attack. It is important to actively resist the marginalization of groups under attack by elevating their voices.

That said, I'm not sure what Jon did was actually "actionable". I'd say, stop listening to him and treating him as a leader? As someone with lots of close trans friends, I think this guy lowkey sucks, but I think this suspension is weird.

So they went to the trouble to point out what your reaction looks like, but they have not once in x decades reconsidered the strategy of asking you annoying questions.

You made the right call. Someone else needed to say it.

Much to think about here. I count 11 stickers if we treat "GLUTEN (subaru logo) MATTERS" as a single sticker, and each heart as one sticker. Add in the GLUTEN plate, and we're at exactly 12. Really on the border between deranged and artistic.

OK. Why?

She's not protected by the double jeopardy rule? WTF?

Terraform and OpenTofu are great tools for building virtual infrastructure, e.g. using AWS API calls to spin up AWS virtual machines and provision them with networks and security relationships and stuff like that--in an automated, repeatable way. They are generalized tools for deploying and modifying infrastructure, even if it's not in the cloud (there are many tools in these frameworks that apply to self-hosted setups).

The rest of the words after "Terraform fork" are just the names of companies that decided to help OpenTofu, and are not especially helpful in understanding what it is or what it's used for.

So, I'm curious.

What do you think happens in the infinite loop that "runs you" moment to moment? Passing the same instance of consciousness to itself, over and over?

Consciousness isn't an instance. It isn't static, it's a constantly self-modifying waveform that remembers bits about its former self from moment to moment.

You can upload it without destroying the original if you can find a way for it to meaningfully interact with processing architecture and media that are digital in nature; and if you can do that without shutting you off. Here's the kinky part: We can already do this. You can make a device that takes a brain signal and stimulates a remote device; and you can stimulate a brain with a digital signal. Set it up for feedback in a manner similar to the ongoing continuous feedback of our neural structures and you have now extended yourself into a digital device in a meaningful way.

Then you just keep adding to that architecture gradually, and gradually peeling away redundant bits of the original brain hardware, until most or all of you is being kept alive in the digital device instead of the meat body. To you, it's continuous and it's still you on the other end. Tada, consciousness uploaded.

The problem is capitalism, and it's beyond the reach of education or regulation. There are other methods that could overturn it, of course, but not those two things.

Even if you established another economic system, though, that system too would be subject to corruption. I don't know how a society regulates itself in such a way that economic systems never get corrupted by the desire for short-term personal gain.

FOH there's no way a graboid is bigger than a sarlacc.

Edit:

OK with some web searchin', I got some rough guesses as to the size of each one (spoilers: OP's chart is so far off it's probably a troll):

• Graboid. They fit in a flatbed truck bed. The Tremors wiki puts them at 9m long and 2m wide, making them approximately 2 rhinos big.
• Beetlejuice sandworm. There's an amusing behind-the-scenes photo of the set construction for the sandworm scene, which has a model sandworm next to a model door, the door they step out of when they try to leave the house. The sandworm's visible body is perhaps 2x the height of the door, and most of it is underground. Figuring a 2m door height, we can estimate this guy is about 20m long. Not something you want to meet in the dark, but only about 4-8 rhinos big.
• Sarlacc. A real big boy, about 100m in length, unknown average diameter but the artists' depictions I've seen make it look like roughly 30-50m in circumference, or about 12-16m in diameter. Probably 400 rhinos big.
• Shai Hulud. One of these things eats an entire spice harvester in one bite. Basically doesn't even belong on this chart unless this is a log scale, these guys are 15-25 meters in diameter, big enough to eat the flatbed truck and the graboid without even noticing it swallowed them. Probably a mile or more in length. Given the current state of the rhino population, a Shai Hulud almost certainly outweighs all rhinos put together.

It should be noted that while the sarlacc's diameter seems to put it in punching range of the shai hulud, two things really set the Dune sandworms apart:

1. Basic biology math. The mass of the creature increases with the cube of the diameter, so a ~2x increase in diameter for the shai hulud translates into a mass ratio of 8x.
2. Length. Shai Hulud are much more wormlike than Sarlaccs. That means they're far, far longer relative to their diameter.

Put these together and you can be pretty sure that a sarlacc to a dune sandworm is like a puppy.

EDIT 2:

I am pleasantly surprised to learn that some species of rhino have many thousands of individuals. I believe they would, in fact, outweigh a single Shai-Hulud.

Eh, none of the answers you've received so far really explain it correctly.

"VC" or venture capital is a financial instrument by which people with millions of dollars to piss away do so by funding a series of startups. These days, those startups are usually tech/sw companies but VC funds other things, too, with similar results.

When a startup is very small, it usually only needs a little bit of VC money--such a small amount that often it's difficult to even find a VC firm interested in buying in. But once they get seed funding, they must exchange some control over their fledgling company for that cash. They hold onto and spend that cash, losing money in the process but building their product and their team and becoming a real company that has the potential for (at first) any revenue at all, and (eventually) the potential for profit.

Then they get another round--these rounds usually have letters like "A round", "B round", etc. At each stage, the stakeholders in the previous round either cash out or trade up to more leverage. They start to have more of a voice, and as these rounds build up, the founders usually have less of a voice. It becomes hard for the founders to tell their funders "no", even if they retain a majority share: if they never listen to the whims of their investors, they will have more trouble attracting new ones at each successive round. This is especially true since the higher you climb the VC ladder, the fewer players there are, and the more they all talk to each other about what kind of a business you run.

The trick, of course, is if you run a customer- or employee-focused business, they will put you in the spreadsheet marked "losers" and nobody will talk to you again. They want you to run an investor-focused business, and they'll get their way eventually.

Most startups simply collapse quickly, of course, and you hear nothing about them.

A few make it past a couple of rounds of funding before dropping out, and you would be forgiven for ignoring them.

The few that get big enough for you to hear about them, the investors are already tucking their napkins into their shirts and getting ready to dine. These companies get a few years in the limelight looking like tech darlings, and then the investors get their dinner. In many of these, the original founders simply do what the investors ask for, whether they like it or not; no need to speculate about hiring short-term thinkers, this is the original founder doing it! In some cases, the founders are forced out by the board that runs them, and somebody new is put in. We must be clear that, while the new CEO is certainly not blameless in the fall of the tech darling they've been given, they're still just a pawn of VC.

How do companies become resilient to this? Don't take VC. Fund it yourself if you can, and then whatever you say becomes the law. Sell your product for money, and use the money to run the business. Even taking a bank loan is better than VC, if your top priority is keeping control; the bank just wants their interest.

How do companies become immune to this? They can't. Even if you are independently wealthy and seeding your company out of your own cash, even if you are the most ethical capitalist to ever fund a business, you'll die or retire someday, and then all bets are off.

This is the fate that will befall every for-profit company.

Can you explain more? I don't see how this is any more than using a regular red line to indicate something on a map. Since I don't speak French, I don't know what it's indicating, but I don't see anything to do with cops or nurses here.

All about fitness boulder on top of the hill

"Met his match"? Trump meets his match every time he encounters an 8-year-old boy with emotional control issues. He only gets away with shit because he's a useful pawn.

The judge may have been anticipating this media circus. Now there's a clear reason to remove the audience, so it's safer.

Trump was going to spout lies and nonsense no matter what, and the people who believe him now will believe him no matter what. My money says the judge just wanted an excuse--and we'll see a complete lockdown with no audience from now on.

well if it's acid, this person is in real trouble

OP, do you think autocomplete was invented by the people who talked about autocomplete on Twitter? I just want to know how this fits together in your mind

Why does he have to take a stance at all? Just shut up about Israel and fight your war.