Yeah I don't know. I want to believe people can do it, to be honest. Leaders do seem messed up but it feels to me that the problem is just accepting that. Shit should be burning in the streets all over the "western world".
I get human brains aren't made to ward off the propaganda but I can't empathise with an inability to bring some/any logic to bear. I'm not immune to propaganda, I used to read the Economist. What I can't understand is people who cannot grow past convenient nonsense.
Edit: second thought, I don't represent the neurodivergent but my personal feeling is "normal" people don't care about what's true. That could just be my own obsession, I do physics for a reason.
I am kind of torn about therapy. This seems beside the point but hear me out. I am autistic, every time my therapist explains normal people to me increases my belief that you lot are too stupid to self govern. You obviously can't govern each other either autocraticly and no one sane would do it anyway. Interesting problem, unfortunate that it affects everyone.
But you made no good points. The only consistent root position for your arguments to me was "everything good guys do is okay" and "war isn't nice". That's why I decided to cut to the chase and ask the only relevant question. Tangential historical waffle for vague justification, without addressing the point, doesn't interest me. Either it's okay to kill 20% of a country, while claiming the moral high ground, or it isn't.
Bombing of Germany and Japan was necessary sure, but the degree and targets are in question. Did they need to level Dresden or nuke Japanese cities? Did they have to target civilians en mass? No, they were just barbarians invoking "turnabout is fair play" and offering mealy-mouthed "war isn't nice" canards in their own defence. Japan, in particular, was just a test of their new toy, perhaps one of the most disgusting things ever done. Notably in neither of these cases did the allies destroy 85% buildings for an entire country and kill a such a large fraction of the population.
Perhaps the undoubtedly vile Kim regime has been so hard to dislodge because the "good guys" inflicted such unnecessary mass destruction and trauma. It's very easy to sell a narrative that the world is out to get you when the world was actually out to get your parents.
"Not afraid of vacuum cleaners", now just look at all the"rationalists" terrified their chat bots will become sentient and eternally punish simulated copies of them for not ushering in the singularity with sufficient fervour.
It sounds to me like you think anything is fair in war. Provide as much random background as you want, none of it justifies the scale of destruction. Just look it up on Wikipedia and tell me again that it's just war and it was all necessary to prevent the undoubtedly awful things NK had planned.
And the standard penalty for invading another country is being bombed into the stone age? Nothing you said justifies what happened. Were NK bad? Fuck yes! Does that justify killing a quarter of their people? I hope you don't think so, or you are at least are willing to massacre close to a hundred million Americans for consistency sake.
It's amazing when people say these things. Even Wikipedia will tell you 85% of all structures in North Korea were destroyed. No one even bothered to estimate military versus civilian deaths. I fucking hate tankies but there's no point in being useless bullshitters ourselves. People with no regard for the truth are even worse than tankies.
It's far darker than this. You're all one step away from this kind of flip. I mean neurotypical people here (though I doubt neurodivergent are proof against it, normal people are just super vulnerable). It's all based on identity and once something is part of your identity there is no logic that can shift you.
I don't think people here understand this yet: he doesn't care. He won't abide by any court rulings and there's no one to make him do it. Your system was always broken, and your rights are just a gentleman's agreement. Now you ran out of gentlemen.
The equations emerge from thin air without justification. Free parameters abound so anything can be fitted. The primitive variables seem to imply non-fundamental physics. How does a "recursive" field have pressure or tension? These imply it's made of something? Moreover, your equation's units make no sense. Looking at your simulations, you are tuning the free parameters by hand to get vague agreement with data. This is entirely unserious.
If that were actually happening it would be astounding. But they never measure the particle in one arm and the spin in the other in the same run. They conduct different experiments for the two results. The two experiments have different conditional probabilities. In the first run the particle can only be in one arm of the experiment. The changes made for the "grin" experiment break this condition though. So the particle can be in the same place as the "grin". In short, there is no evidence the property was dissociated.
But there's nothing interesting in the quantum Cheshire cat, just fuss and noise because people don't understand conditional probabilities. So the "quantum eraser" all over again.
Incoming: voted for by all democrats
So what happened when they weren't blind? Did people just do shifts when blind?
Inaccurate. This image narrows towards the waist.
So they realised Spotify hosts Joe Rogan?
Pretty sure it was authorised muskification
Yeah I don't know. I want to believe people can do it, to be honest. Leaders do seem messed up but it feels to me that the problem is just accepting that. Shit should be burning in the streets all over the "western world".
I get human brains aren't made to ward off the propaganda but I can't empathise with an inability to bring some/any logic to bear. I'm not immune to propaganda, I used to read the Economist. What I can't understand is people who cannot grow past convenient nonsense.
Edit: second thought, I don't represent the neurodivergent but my personal feeling is "normal" people don't care about what's true. That could just be my own obsession, I do physics for a reason.
I am kind of torn about therapy. This seems beside the point but hear me out. I am autistic, every time my therapist explains normal people to me increases my belief that you lot are too stupid to self govern. You obviously can't govern each other either autocraticly and no one sane would do it anyway. Interesting problem, unfortunate that it affects everyone.
But you made no good points. The only consistent root position for your arguments to me was "everything good guys do is okay" and "war isn't nice". That's why I decided to cut to the chase and ask the only relevant question. Tangential historical waffle for vague justification, without addressing the point, doesn't interest me. Either it's okay to kill 20% of a country, while claiming the moral high ground, or it isn't.
Bombing of Germany and Japan was necessary sure, but the degree and targets are in question. Did they need to level Dresden or nuke Japanese cities? Did they have to target civilians en mass? No, they were just barbarians invoking "turnabout is fair play" and offering mealy-mouthed "war isn't nice" canards in their own defence. Japan, in particular, was just a test of their new toy, perhaps one of the most disgusting things ever done. Notably in neither of these cases did the allies destroy 85% buildings for an entire country and kill a such a large fraction of the population.
Perhaps the undoubtedly vile Kim regime has been so hard to dislodge because the "good guys" inflicted such unnecessary mass destruction and trauma. It's very easy to sell a narrative that the world is out to get you when the world was actually out to get your parents.
"But it will compute the dankest memes known to man" - Elon musk, probably.
"Not afraid of vacuum cleaners", now just look at all the"rationalists" terrified their chat bots will become sentient and eternally punish simulated copies of them for not ushering in the singularity with sufficient fervour.
It sounds to me like you think anything is fair in war. Provide as much random background as you want, none of it justifies the scale of destruction. Just look it up on Wikipedia and tell me again that it's just war and it was all necessary to prevent the undoubtedly awful things NK had planned.
And the standard penalty for invading another country is being bombed into the stone age? Nothing you said justifies what happened. Were NK bad? Fuck yes! Does that justify killing a quarter of their people? I hope you don't think so, or you are at least are willing to massacre close to a hundred million Americans for consistency sake.
It's amazing when people say these things. Even Wikipedia will tell you 85% of all structures in North Korea were destroyed. No one even bothered to estimate military versus civilian deaths. I fucking hate tankies but there's no point in being useless bullshitters ourselves. People with no regard for the truth are even worse than tankies.
It's far darker than this. You're all one step away from this kind of flip. I mean neurotypical people here (though I doubt neurodivergent are proof against it, normal people are just super vulnerable). It's all based on identity and once something is part of your identity there is no logic that can shift you.
I don't think people here understand this yet: he doesn't care. He won't abide by any court rulings and there's no one to make him do it. Your system was always broken, and your rights are just a gentleman's agreement. Now you ran out of gentlemen.
The equations emerge from thin air without justification. Free parameters abound so anything can be fitted. The primitive variables seem to imply non-fundamental physics. How does a "recursive" field have pressure or tension? These imply it's made of something? Moreover, your equation's units make no sense. Looking at your simulations, you are tuning the free parameters by hand to get vague agreement with data. This is entirely unserious.
Does outlook actually produce useful error messages? My institution uses it and I have never seen it do anything useful. #sympathyfortheidiot
If that were actually happening it would be astounding. But they never measure the particle in one arm and the spin in the other in the same run. They conduct different experiments for the two results. The two experiments have different conditional probabilities. In the first run the particle can only be in one arm of the experiment. The changes made for the "grin" experiment break this condition though. So the particle can be in the same place as the "grin". In short, there is no evidence the property was dissociated.
But there's nothing interesting in the quantum Cheshire cat, just fuss and noise because people don't understand conditional probabilities. So the "quantum eraser" all over again.
Them: this time we will discover supersymmetry.
Narrator: they won't.