11900+ entries in 0.117s

mp_en_viaje: bane of my fucking existence, the leds. twenty years ago
i could safely go on greyhound trip around. not anymore -- every two bit blue collar driver thinks the best way to improve his life is add some 10 cent uv leds randomly aroundm.
mp_en_viaje: anyway, the mutantism is that
i apparently see like parrots, ie, well into uv spectrum.
a111: Logged on 2019-05-22 20:08 asciilifeform gently prods mp_en_viaje , the 1 fella
i know to have mutant eye
BingoBoingo:
I don't see why they'd do anything other than rebrand and stop paying licenses
☟︎ BingoBoingo:
I dunno if the "US sanctions" wank is going to survive 2025
lobbes: asciilifeform: that's a pretty nifty color-blindness simulator.
I'ma have to save for later (
I work with someone who is colorblind in meatspace; never sure what is infuriating to his eye)
a111: Logged on 2019-05-22 19:08 lobbes: Long-story short,
I woke up one morning and came to the realization that
I have not been saving and am headed towards ye olde
http://btcbase.org/log/2018-11-29#1875979; panicked, etc. Then
I cooled it for a second and continued reading, came across
http://btcbase.org/log/2019-05-19#1914702 and realized that me running to xyz without any idea of what
I'd *do* is not any better than what
I'm doing now.
lobbes: Whether
I like it or not,
I am currently in a
http://btcbase.org/log/2019-05-19#1914704 situation. Problem is that while
I have been measuring,
I have not been stealing enough nor have
I set any time horizon for escape. It is now clear to me that
I must remedy this before
I can really do anything else.
☝︎ a111: Logged on 2018-11-29 17:10 Mocky: in truth
i do feel like idjit for being old man without the brains to have saved anything.
i don't even have a workshop full of shit like asciilifeform
lobbes:
http://btcbase.org/log/2019-05-19#1914718 <<
I will definitely read, and am still interested in eventually visiting. Though
I will say after reading the various threads re:escape from last week
I have a lot more clarity on wtf
I should be doing in the shorter-term.
I may have to wait a bit before a Uruguay trip
☝︎ mp_en_viaje:
i'd say which is chance. step 1 of the markov process, even balanced, why not. for all the diff it makes, might as well be.
diana_coman: ultimately everything is chance
I suppose so in this sense yes
mp_en_viaje: diana_coman,
i'm saying that the guy who is within the top 1% mathematicians could also have been within the top 0.5-2% historians, dancers or public women, and that what exact words you use don't matter, because much before any substantial skill or craft there's the 5yo's set of choices.
mp_en_viaje:
i have like dozen+ articles dealing with the converse strategy, all them fetlife lulz etc, you know.
i'm fair and balanced!
diana_coman:
I do agree though that past behaviour is very indicative of future behaviour for people in general so in this sense yes, predictive.
diana_coman files this under the "
I don't yet know what it is; work in progress."
mp_en_viaje:
i am well persuaded it's a matter of chance.
diana_coman: myeah, but that was
I thought the starting point of the "differences" precisely that the requirements on the subject's mind are different
i.e. that it's not just a matter of overall flexibility of the mind or whatevers but rather some more specific characteristics
diana_coman: hm, you are basically saying that there is only a... quality/speed of learning of the individual that applies equally to any choice they make
i.e. there is no difference more specific than that?
diana_coman: mp_en_viaje: hm, the "personality/intelligence" part was to my mind related to *how much better does one get at x strategy if they pick it once vs at y strategy if they pick it once"
i.e. sure, everyone gets better at whatever they pick but not at the same rate
diana_coman:
I suppose
I don't grok what the equivalent of the heliocentric system is here, precisely.
mp_en_viaje:
i dunno it gets mired in anything ; obviously if one uses copernican model to discuss ptolemaic astronomy one will end up with a lot of ptolemaic astronomy discussion. doesn't invalidate the heliocentric system tho.
diana_coman: it seems to me that it all gets mired into the current use of "personality" and "stem" and "introvert" to mean nothing at all/anything that is convenient; essentially
I don't think they are what is currently claimed (intelligent -> stem!!! or whatever other nonsense) but
I don't think that there is nothing real otherwise, either (rather:
I don't know).
mp_en_viaje: diana_coman,
i just mean "comes natural to x".
diana_coman: among other piles of nonsense,
I've heard this one too, yess
diana_coman: uhm; why is one un-natural,
I don't get it.
diana_coman: quite; part of why
I don't get it: the former examtake so it's not like they are actually any more reality-anchored as far as
I can see
diana_coman:
i.e. this bunch will do as told, this bunch won't do as told? are they manageable or aren't they?
diana_coman:
I don't quite grasp this invulnerability divide; to me it looks equally well "doesn't give a damn if gets killed"
i.e. not "thinks himself invulnerable" but "thinks himself disposable"
mp_en_viaje: if there is,
i don't see how it'd be defined outside of the invulnerability divide.
diana_coman:
I suspect there is, but - as usual,
I should say - not what it's nowadays "meant" by the terms; pretty much the usual capture-words-and-rend-them-meaningless as with love and everything else; a misnomer at best.
mp_en_viaje: diana_coman,
i did say " there's no such thing as "introvert" or "extrovert"" as my only reference to the terms.
diana_coman: fine but
I don't see what that has to do with introvert vs extrovert
mp_en_viaje:
i don't define, it's human behaviour, what define.
mp_en_viaje:
i'm not, after all, saying whether the invulnerability delusion's reality-adequate or reality-inadequate. like all illusions, it proceeds irrespective of such considerations.
stjohn_piano_2: asciilifeform: this is not deliberately a spam trap.
i had a choice while working: to build an open-access-point to the wider internet, or not to do so.
i chose - not.
a111: Logged on 2019-05-22 11:34 stjohn_piano_2:
http://btcbase.org/log/2019-05-17#1914395 << from logs + mocky's "why ada",
i understand some of the technical merits of ada. however, my perception of the current job market is that trying to make a living at ada leads directly to a hardware sharashka.
mp_en_viaje: THEN!!!
i end up having all of fucking central europe scoured by my mounted slutlegions, which produces "masculan XXL", a german brand.
stjohn_piano_2: asciilifeform:
i did consider both. ultimately,
i decided to stay with identity-based commenting rather than take a sift-the-noise approach.
stjohn_piano_2: in future, this will become easier for established identities, as
i work out how to automate parts of the process.
stjohn_piano_2: 1) until recently, no comment system existed. it is still experimental and manually driven.
i am unsure about its final structure.
stjohn_piano_2: your comment has been published.
i'm pleased that the comment system worked. yours is the first external comment.
stjohn_piano_2:
i understand your point.
i've thought about this quite a bit.
diana_coman: and note that
I would certainly NOT go about providing signed comments wtf
diana_coman: well yes, but think of it: you are effectively making it *hard* for people (with established identities so those you say you do want to hear from) to provide feedback to you on the grounds that you don't want to bother with everyone;
i.e. you are effectively unloading your work onto those who may be able to/willing to help you; doesn't seem a winning strategy to me.
stjohn_piano_2: it's certainly public-facing, but
i have little interest in interaction with speech that does not come from an established identity of some sort.
diana_coman: stjohn_piano_2: but why such high-bar for what is meant as a public-facing
i.e. by definition wider-public-interaction thing anyway?
stjohn_piano_2:
i add comments manually to the data at present. in future,
i may construct an automated system that can accept signed comments.
a111: Logged on 2019-05-22 13:09 diana_coman: anyway, since
I'm not going to jump through those silly hooks now,
I'll leave it here: you can message deedbot/any user privately directly, you don't need to join some channel first; and re newcomers, it's usually safer for themselves to join one of the lords' channels first, really (e.g. #asciilifeform, #trinque, #eulora)
a111: Logged on 2019-05-22 12:51 diana_coman: stjohn_piano_2: re ^ , an OTP challenge is a way to check one's identity; hence, deedbot will not send an OTP in response to !!register but WILL send an OTP in response to ~any other command (technically to any command that is a request of *someone*
i.e. that requires an identity)
diana_coman: anyway, since
I'm not going to jump through those silly hooks now,
I'll leave it here: you can message deedbot/any user privately directly, you don't need to join some channel first; and re newcomers, it's usually safer for themselves to join one of the lords' channels first, really (e.g. #asciilifeform, #trinque, #eulora)
☟︎ diana_coman: stjohn_piano_2: re ^ , an OTP challenge is a way to check one's identity; hence, deedbot will not send an OTP in response to !!register but WILL send an OTP in response to ~any other command (technically to any command that is a request of *someone*
i.e. that requires an identity)
☟︎ stjohn_piano_2:
i'm now trying to restructure myself into a dev in a field in which remote work can become a viable option.
hanbot: "However,
I must add that you have willfully chosen not to incorporate the dynamic nature of polity during the era in discuss."