Shockingly dancing was not mentioned? Or have I missed it?
I’ve encouraged many programmers to start dancing as they are naturally gravitating toward Argentinian Tango which is flourishing with good programming of steps combined with improvisation.
772 karma · joined October 9, 2019
I’ve encouraged many programmers to start dancing as they are naturally gravitating toward Argentinian Tango which is flourishing with good programming of steps combined with improvisation.
which are? …
Right as long as you know what poison you choose. At least control someone who controls your machine, including the building process.
>Thus I pay to live inside the walled garden
At the moment it’s more like you pay for garden with imaginable walls while in reality there are no walls and frankly it doesn’t look like garden at all.
The only real wall you face is when you are trying avoid living in this fantasy. There is more precise definition for such ‘garden’ - starts with prison. Is it total freedom ? no, but it seems it’s reasonable for …. I barely see something reasonable about it. It’s more like a luck of wish to stand for own dignity thinking that such stand is possible to avoid.
When people (some people) thought sharing some data is not a big deal in current conditions. Did they think about another situation when current form of AI is around? Did you think about changes of the environment when you wrote ‘ it’s reasonable enough’? You didn’t even add ‘for now’ suggesting of course you know everything that ‘now’ is happening. And you even ready to expand this vision to whole family? I wish to be that sure about the future.
I am not trying to attack you personally, I think it is very common ‘logic’ these days except I cannot see it as logic at all.
Right, Including protecting me from me unless I find extra pleasure in ‘calling big fruit boss every few days’ for running my own soft on my (supposedly) own phone.
To avoid this ‘pleasure’ I have to pay developer fee yearly. If someone is looking for definition of ‘idiocy’ one should look no further.
Yet there is always someone trying to justify even that. ‘It is more secure ‘ - they usually say forgetting to mention that security starts with control and ends without it.
The obvious question to ask usually would be:
So who would protect you from Apple itself?
More entertaining question could be: Who is going to protect you from you?
But then we recall about AI and we can guess the answer which spoils the whole entertaining aspect of the question.
So the only question left is: What people would not justify when some big company does it?
Some would enjoy nostalgia and some perhaps would actually learn something from them. May be you can recommend a few titles that would be relevant for today or simply fascinating, regardless of their relevance."
We are perfectly aware of how to deal with extra-sensitive people and kind approach is the way to go. However on this site I expect certain level of technical training and intelligence in answering direct questions without being offended by search for a deeper understanding of some topic and without inventing emotions that never been there in the first place. I was also under impression that guidelines of this site directly where encouraging answering I expect by declaring : “be kind” “don’t be rude” “suggest a good faith” and unfortunately none of those were demonstrated by your answers even when you have learned the fact that you were wrong and your accusations were completely ungrounded . The fact that such behaviour was encouraged by (as you claim it) “multiple people” including moderation of this site tells a very sad story about this site regarding following own declared principles.
And this example:
“Which crypto? Where can I pay with it? What if I don't want to have a hardware wallet everywhere with me? Can I cancel transactions and get my money back? Does it use more energy per year than Argentina?” (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36656667)
tells another sad story about hypocrisy which means it’s hard to take “friendly“ advice seriously. The next time you wish to give a truly friendly advice try to be kind in the first place, do not suggest a bad faith and do not insist on false ungrounded accusations encouraged by confirmation biases especially when clarification presented.
You could have just apologise for own real aggression contrary to imaginative aggression from my questions and simply give answer while keeping “friendly” advice to yourself.
This way people would learn something about the project rather than learning something about cancelling “culture” which is under the flag of “being nice” demonstrates much worse behaviour in practice than one it claim to oppose. You actually among others should be very aware and disgusted by those tactics after you’ve seen effects of “soviet methods” in Romania.
Why this tool was created? What was the reason for creating such tool? Why it was named this way?
Explanation for wishing to flag/block/bully basic simple questions: Questions mean what they ask and nothing else. Any imagination of aggression or anything else related to emotions is misplaced.
As someone unfamiliar with the field I’ve read GitHub page and didn’t find answers to things I was curious about regarding this project. So out of curiosity I wrote simple basic questions:
“Why this tool was created? What was the reason for creating such tool? Why it was named this way?“
Suggesting that if I didn’t figured it out by myself perhaps some one else who also wish to join the field and looking for entry point to try something in practice would also be confused and thus answering those simple basic questions would really help to the beginners.
With experience of entering into many new fields I know that usually there is a lot of confusion in the beginning about basic stuff .
I also suggested that those are obvious reasons why people ask questions and didn’t expect to be ‘bullied’ for basic simple questions. There were no one word of aggression in text. Perhaps seeing aggression there requires certain level of misplaced imagination.
Usually there is a fun story about the name for example GNU is Not Unix etc … This is opportunity to tell it if there is. Sometimes name holds some clue about functionality and then it’s easier to remember. Sharing it can help too to beginners.
So out of curiosity I wrote simple basic questions:
“Why this tool was created? What was the reason for creating such tool? Why it was named this way?“
Suggesting that if I didn’t figured it out by myself perhaps some one else who also wish to join the field and looking for entry point to try something in practice would also be confused and thus answering those simple basic questions would really help to the beginners.
With experience of entering into many new fields I know that usually there is a lot of confusion in the beginning about basic stuff .
I also suggested that those are obvious reasons why people ask questions and didn’t expect to be ‘bullied’ for basic simple questions. There were no one word of aggression in text. Perhaps seeing aggression there requires certain level of misplaced imagination.
> Especially the one about the name, is the name offensive or what? To me it sounds quite benign.
So why the simple question doesn’t sound benign to you? Usually there is a fun story about the name for example GNU is Not Unix etc … and sometimes it holds some clue about functionality and then it’s easier to remember.
> Because
well… it’s still unclear
>The really cool thing about this sniffer is that it integrates with Wireshark. You can make use of protocol decoders already built into Wireshark for interpreting USB packets, as well as its fancy filtering capability. Ellisys devices, in comparison, use a proprietary USB analysis program. Protocol decoding is unlocked for an extra charge of thousands of dollars.
So when an aggressor throws bomb and it is falling near by merely killing a person then one should not interpret it as intentional and should not become angry on those who through such things, right?
According to your description of the basic idea one should not interpret falling bombs on his head as directed against him. It’s just a neutral event and probably some boys just having fun with throwing heavy things … including bombs.
Perhaps people in Ukraine are unfamiliar with great works of this ‘most influential psychologist of our time’ and thus managed to survive and fight back.
can you name those? I am eager to try them in system with minimum resources.
Perhaps he didn’t and isn’t it a part of the problem to apply math?
>Then you basically not only get better tools to operate (model) in real world, day2day life, but also it opens you doors to highly paid careers.
can you elaborate on how “it opens you doors to highly paid careers”?
So now what? The only way forward is to really dig deeply into the ‘beauty” of C to make it work? This is exactly what I was trying to avoid in the first place!)
Perhaps you are the right person to ask. Do you think it is a design flaw to have vm tightly coupled with C and all it’s compilation nightmares ?
It doesn’t compile/run on the machine, possibly due to the lack of sound hardware but excluding sound package didn’t help. Where/what is the best way to get help with that? Perhaps you can give a wise advice on that.
actually this sounds much more like paranoia then this:
> I really don't like my face in the corporate surveillance panopticon
which is more close to reality
> on the other hand people are very quick to dismiss anything that sounds like paranoia from anyone.
do they really? All they need is paranoia nicely wrapped into something more digestible and you wrote it yourself…
>Yeah, it's a joke, but it seriously gets more acceptance and understanding
So while one type of “wise” people are building corporations disrespecting people and using other “wise” people who help them without thinking … those who really get frustrated are photographers.
As to the joke about some part of the soul taken.
Photo is not taken. It is made. Preferably by someone who knows what he is doing and it’s more like a part of the soul will be preserved to shine more. It is of course suggesting that subject has a soul in the first place.
Please more details about the practical benefits because I kind of see in general why it can be good but there is still certain lack of the real practical demonstrations from those who use it daily.
Source: https://censor.net/en/p3426649
what kind of disagreement? hard to understand without knowing that.
I just open the first page . Scroll it to the end and there is nothing interesting to see but you can’t scroll more. I think that is the essence of their ‘great’ optimisation.
yes but I do not know how it helps.
> Responding to someone implicitly says "this thing I am responding to is worth my time," even if that is not your intent.
I would agree and yet if you aren’t responding they pollute the space and talk to each other simulating a real discussion and creating an effect that many are agree with them. Naive people unaware of their tactics were literally telling me “ this is what majority think”. So only after my explanation about how it works they were more questioning it. But some people were still arguing: No, no , I’ve heard it from real people the same …. And you can imagine where those ‘other people’ were taking ideas from.
It’s a huge problem and I am still looking for a proper solution.
> Here is what he would say about your post in the form of a reading from his book On Tyranny:
I would probably agree with his ideas but my general impression from this is : too little too late.
I was kind of doing what he suggests but an effect is incomparable with enormous influence of online activity by propaganda.
I agree. This way is more precise or I can reformulate what I’ve said this way: shift discussion toward justification to avoid responsibility.
> I kind of knew what that person was doing, and engaged with it in good faith anyway, which I regretted.
well, I know the feeling. Actually it’s the goal of propagandists to create such regret and more preferably a desperation with lack of wish to fight for reason to prevail. They try to exhaust opponent by intentionally saying some bs and forcing opponent to explain obvious things while push their lies and mostly ignoring the answers.
On the other hand I should say that I enjoyed reading your argument and the very fact that propaganda was met with a proper response done in good faith. I think this keeps hope and light to those who read it. At least it has this effect for me and I am thankful to you for your efforts.
>The sad part is that when you run into someone like this person, the battlefield is the only way to resolve the dispute.
Unfortunately.
It is still a question what to do with intentional propagandists. Giving them answers that are blocking their ability to spread another lie is degrading the discussion. Giving them proper answers feeds them with grounds to push their narrative more.
Perhaps in a discussions with such people we should pronounce that we kind of know what they are doing and address the core of their motivations instead of the topic itself which they aren’t discussing properly anyway. I am not sure it will work and still looking for a better solution.
For those who think it’s not a big deal I wish to warn you that those come in numbers with the time an exhaust real people with all kind of malicious tactics including switching topics, twisting facts , personal attacks and even threats.
They never tired and take by numbers promoting designed narrative making any meaningful discussion impossible. There farms of those and I see dangerous development here because they are not stopped even though they break all the rules here.
Interesting dynamics. I wander where it would lead.
First russians did when they occupied some territory of Ukraine is to remove and prohibit Ukranian language.
It is as similar to Nazi as could be except the name. Their ideology is to slowly remove any nation russia controls and claim them to be russians. Rise children as russians and kill nation if it doesn’t obey. Literally.
We can argue if it’s new form of Nazi or not but perhaps it’s much worse.