Of course the entire thing is an insidious cancer, but allowing people to bet on catastrophes they can potentially bring about or intensify themselves is on another level of dangerous.
“There’s also the heightened risk—according to state and local fire officials—that individuals could be tempted to commit arson in order to make sure their bets are successful,” the letter continues. “By offering contracts on fires, prediction market sites run the risk of encouraging people to influence fires that have already started, creating additional concerns around public safety and insider trading.”
I honestly think it's hard to know.
I actively dislike AI and so its formulations are cringe to me. But it seems unsurprising that someone that enjoys using AI would pick up some of its mannerisms, whether consciously or not. This is of course ugly and depressing, as they're essentially borrowing from a piece of software what would normally be imported from culture.
But I think it's plausible that Hank actually formulated that part himself - the guest did after all "push back" on his claim that all words are made up and immediately after the cliche he presents a more nuanced elaboration of his original claim.
It does feel quite awkward because he cuts in so many qualifications and elaborations in-between that by the time we get to that part we're like "what pushback?".
I also don't recall him having actually explicitly made this excuse, though I'm open to being wrong on that part, I don't follow him anywhere except yt.
Unfortunately, I think there is a pretty easy way for them to detect comments that were deleted/edited with the intent of making them useless to Reddit: check the age of the comment/post when it was modified.
Whether they would bother to do this is a different question.
I'd be interested in your results a few weeks/months from now.
I also think most of the back sides are just generally uninspired - bland, almost AI-like look, no interesting (or even aesthetic) themes. Many of the front sides I liked, so this is disappointing.
IMO You should add that detail to your top-level comment, as it's going to be seen by more people than this clarification that definitely runs counter to how I interpreted your comment.
The problem is not their personal account but the communities they manage, which are presumably also stuck on piefed and much more cumbersome to migrate and rebuild.
From another of PugJesus' comments in this thread:
Yeah, as a user, it's great to have options. If I was just an ordinary user, this probably wouldn't even faze me. I'd hop over to Piefed.ca or something.
Unfortunately, I run several large comms who I managed to just about get to functioning without me...
... three times, so far, just before having to migrate and start the process all over again.
Poe's law is a bitch as always, but between the display name, the flags and the message itself (particular words as well as the fact that the statement is bordering on incoherent), I'm fairly certain this position is not sincerely held by the poster.
Now, whether it's a leftist satirizing unhinged right-wingers or a troll account posing as leftist to portray them as deranged - your guess is as good as mine (though I'm leaning toward the former).
The kneejerk reactions are justified IMO. You don't need to "minimize" peas and carrots to have a healthy diet. Obviously they shouldn't be all you eat, but that holds for pretty much all foods - balance is key.
There's several issues with your source.
First, it would have been nice of you to link to the relevant figure so others aren't forced to comb through the whole thing.
Second, it's important to point out that this data only shows correlation. The data is interesting for sure, but one should be cautious about demonizing a particular food group based on this alone, considering that the main point of the study was to analyze the health benefits of particular diets rather than food groups.
(note also that fast/fried foods got a positive score, which makes me further apprehensive about drawing quick conclusions from this data)
Third, this study focused on health professionals only. I don't know why it shouldn't generalize to the general population but it is not a given that it does.
Most importantly, it is not clear (to me at least) that peas and carrots are part of the category "starchy vegetables" according to this study. I couldn't find any explicit description of the categories, please let me know if there is one in the study or one of its sources.
From what I could find online, peas can be considered starchy vegetables, but carrots usually aren't.
For instance, this site classifies both carrots and some types of peas as non-starchy.
To that point: it's 2 factor authentication. That is, proving who you are through 2 different factors, usually something you know (a password) + something you have (a physical device) or something you are (biometrics).
The point is that "something you know" can often be easily acquired by malicious third parties and it is generally much harder for them to gain access to "something you have" or "something you are". Thus requiring 2 different factors blocks most nefarious access attempts.
Authorization is a separate, different step that, usually after having already proven you are who you say you are, verifies whether you're allowed to do what you're trying to do. This generally doesn't require multiple factors because you've got nothing left to prove: the system knows all about what you're permitted to do.
Mnemonic:
authentication: you are an authentic person (as opposed to impersonating someone)
authorization: you are authorized to perform an action
Because it's a repost.
If you go to the original, OP actually has the top comment explaining exactly that: "idiots" refers to MS treating their customers as such, not a judgement by OP.
I think getting an even vote split adds to the meta-irony
The straight-forward reading is of course obnoxious and misguided
That is in part because it's an over-the-top caricature, and the implication is that voting for sightly less bad candidates that might win is worse than voting for better candidates that have no chance or not voting at all
I personally find meta-irony humorous but I think it's detrimental to political discourse
Could you elaborate on the 70% figure?
A quick search returns multiple hits suggesting the 70% number is actually related to agriculture, not electricity production. See e.g. here.
Or did you mean 70% of the water used be data centers?
I think it'd be great for like 2 days. After that your circadian rhythm is sufficiently fucked that you're somewhat unlikely to still be enjoying yourself.
Maybe after a month or two we've mostly adapted and are sleeping 10-12 hours. That still leaves us with a cool 2-4 extra hours, not too shabby.
Alternative proposal: simply change the working day to 6 hours.
Abs radiance is worse, but not just because it's more difficult. It's also a lot less fun, at least in my opinion. Think buffed Markoth kinda BS (which I just now realized, makes a lot of sense thematically/lore-wise).
Pure vessel was one of my favorite fights despite taking me many many attempts to beat.
I don't disagree with the overall message of the "pamphlet", I take issue with its execution. It's low quality, low effort media, created with the same technology that the ruling class is currently employing to steal from workers, cut their bargaining power, alienate them from their work and from each other, shirk legal and moral accountability, and destroy the environment.
Of course the entire thing is an insidious cancer, but allowing people to bet on catastrophes they can potentially bring about or intensify themselves is on another level of dangerous.
I honestly think it's hard to know.
I actively dislike AI and so its formulations are cringe to me. But it seems unsurprising that someone that enjoys using AI would pick up some of its mannerisms, whether consciously or not. This is of course ugly and depressing, as they're essentially borrowing from a piece of software what would normally be imported from culture.
But I think it's plausible that Hank actually formulated that part himself - the guest did after all "push back" on his claim that all words are made up and immediately after the cliche he presents a more nuanced elaboration of his original claim.
It does feel quite awkward because he cuts in so many qualifications and elaborations in-between that by the time we get to that part we're like "what pushback?".
I also don't recall him having actually explicitly made this excuse, though I'm open to being wrong on that part, I don't follow him anywhere except yt.
Unfortunately, I think there is a pretty easy way for them to detect comments that were deleted/edited with the intent of making them useless to Reddit: check the age of the comment/post when it was modified.
Whether they would bother to do this is a different question.
I'd be interested in your results a few weeks/months from now.
I also think most of the back sides are just generally uninspired - bland, almost AI-like look, no interesting (or even aesthetic) themes. Many of the front sides I liked, so this is disappointing.
This just made me realize that Ryan Howard from The Office is The Little Man from Inglorious Basterds...
Somehow I never noticed.
binary solo
IMO You should add that detail to your top-level comment, as it's going to be seen by more people than this clarification that definitely runs counter to how I interpreted your comment.
The problem is not their personal account but the communities they manage, which are presumably also stuck on piefed and much more cumbersome to migrate and rebuild.
From another of PugJesus' comments in this thread:
I have to agree.
Poe's law is a bitch as always, but between the display name, the flags and the message itself (particular words as well as the fact that the statement is bordering on incoherent), I'm fairly certain this position is not sincerely held by the poster.
Now, whether it's a leftist satirizing unhinged right-wingers or a troll account posing as leftist to portray them as deranged - your guess is as good as mine (though I'm leaning toward the former).
The kneejerk reactions are justified IMO. You don't need to "minimize" peas and carrots to have a healthy diet. Obviously they shouldn't be all you eat, but that holds for pretty much all foods - balance is key.
There's several issues with your source.
First, it would have been nice of you to link to the relevant figure so others aren't forced to comb through the whole thing.
Second, it's important to point out that this data only shows correlation. The data is interesting for sure, but one should be cautious about demonizing a particular food group based on this alone, considering that the main point of the study was to analyze the health benefits of particular diets rather than food groups.
(note also that fast/fried foods got a positive score, which makes me further apprehensive about drawing quick conclusions from this data)
Third, this study focused on health professionals only. I don't know why it shouldn't generalize to the general population but it is not a given that it does.
Most importantly, it is not clear (to me at least) that peas and carrots are part of the category "starchy vegetables" according to this study. I couldn't find any explicit description of the categories, please let me know if there is one in the study or one of its sources.
From what I could find online, peas can be considered starchy vegetables, but carrots usually aren't. For instance, this site classifies both carrots and some types of peas as non-starchy.
To that point: it's 2 factor authentication. That is, proving who you are through 2 different factors, usually something you know (a password) + something you have (a physical device) or something you are (biometrics).
The point is that "something you know" can often be easily acquired by malicious third parties and it is generally much harder for them to gain access to "something you have" or "something you are". Thus requiring 2 different factors blocks most nefarious access attempts.
Authorization is a separate, different step that, usually after having already proven you are who you say you are, verifies whether you're allowed to do what you're trying to do. This generally doesn't require multiple factors because you've got nothing left to prove: the system knows all about what you're permitted to do.
Mnemonic:
Because it's a repost.
If you go to the original, OP actually has the top comment explaining exactly that: "idiots" refers to MS treating their customers as such, not a judgement by OP.
I down vote this for several reasons:
Could you elaborate on the 70% figure? A quick search returns multiple hits suggesting the 70% number is actually related to agriculture, not electricity production. See e.g. here.
Or did you mean 70% of the water used be data centers?
I thought it was implied that this is being said to one's significant other.
I think it'd be great for like 2 days. After that your circadian rhythm is sufficiently fucked that you're somewhat unlikely to still be enjoying yourself.
Maybe after a month or two we've mostly adapted and are sleeping 10-12 hours. That still leaves us with a cool 2-4 extra hours, not too shabby.
Alternative proposal: simply change the working day to 6 hours.
Abs radiance is worse, but not just because it's more difficult. It's also a lot less fun, at least in my opinion. Think buffed Markoth kinda BS (which I just now realized, makes a lot of sense thematically/lore-wise).
Pure vessel was one of my favorite fights despite taking me many many attempts to beat.
I don't disagree with the overall message of the "pamphlet", I take issue with its execution. It's low quality, low effort media, created with the same technology that the ruling class is currently employing to steal from workers, cut their bargaining power, alienate them from their work and from each other, shirk legal and moral accountability, and destroy the environment.
Seriously this low effort slop graphic is cringe