@sun_the_second's banner p

sun_the_second

could survive a COD lobby and a gay furry discord server

0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2023 October 31 11:26:45 UTC

				

User ID: 2725

sun_the_second

could survive a COD lobby and a gay furry discord server

0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2023 October 31 11:26:45 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 2725

-Like and -lite marks the difference between audiences who want to complete the game eventually through piling on upgrades and those who want to play a game they might never complete.

"Permadeath highly-variable X" and "permadeath highly-variable X with metaprogression" for roguelites respectively? Not sure how to make it not be a mouthful when "roguelike" is already a pretty specific modifier genre.

Never watched any of his content so I don't know.

In case you're trying to lead me into some sort of a gotcha about approving of his death or whatever, I gotta say in advance I do not live in a country that venerates free speech, the lack of free speech is currently not on the side on my ingroup and neither were Kirk's ideas, aside from perhaps being pro-Israel. If he was performing his dunk debates in my country I would see his death as one small step in getting even with the state.

You see, this was meant to demonstrate that an edgy Charlie Kirk joke doesn't owe it to you to be funny, just like nigger jokes are often unfunny and serve as an ingroup signal rather than an expression of wit... will that be enough words?

  • -11

when you kill fascists

lmao bottom text

According to the people on the left, their enemies already have no principles and no qualms about killing them, support for violence or not - the only reason why there's no open Holocaust on the streets is that for one reason or the other directly exterminating the left is not currently expedient for the left's enemies. So I doubt "live by the sword" will deter them.

I do not think it is because being a father means nothing to them. Rather that, because Kirk is their enemy, he is worse for being a father - either he created more evil children or his innocent children were forced to live with an evil father.

Everyone is happy to bite the bullet of being canceled for things they don't do anyway. It's called Just Being a Decent Person.

If they believe something is the unmistaken Word of God yet do not follow it, I think they are not observant.

On the lower edge of middle. My salary is low for my occupation, and working class who hustle a lot can readily earn more.

Most people will learn most of what they know about him immediately after he died. A period of not speaking ill of the dead is unduly biased towards his supporters.

If you're literally at his funeral then it's fair to stop people from dancing on his grave. Not in the world wide web.

Yes, I would sooner prefer my enemies be suppressed from coordinating so that only a small, least inhibited fraction lashes out with random violence. I know it because my side is suppressed in such a way in my country and I would prefer the opposite.

Why would I want the enemy to coordinate violence against me rather than perform uncoordinated violence (and, assuming that people aren't yet persuaded of his point of view, get shut down)?

Now that you mention it, I don't see any surface connection between darts and sacrifice, either.

Going purely by price, a PlayStation 5 is more an adult toy than darts.

I fail to see the deep connection between darts and sacrifice, or the reason for why bashing out a few Mortal Kombat matches with the boys can't be considered mingling the way pool is.

"Video games are for children -> but what about them gaining popularity with adults -> then the adults are childish" is circular. I suggest you find something other than surface aesthetics to classify entertainment as childish vs. mature.

The government enjoys massive political will among all strata of society to prosecute CP with great prejudice, just a bit less than actual child molestation. I think expanding that to arbitrary definitions of coomery will be a bit harder than "no problem".

You could argue that the rich, smart and highly-engaged parents' children are really the only ones who are needed for progress, while the rest can either brainrot themselves or live in digital hothouse conditions until independence, yes. How many schools are there that can prepare children for a life amidst technology while banning it within their walls?

If government simply nuked OnlyFans and Pornhub, then no, I wouldn't say it is damning to progress. On the other hand, if they started cracking down on VPNs, proxies, mirrors, torrents and all other less-easy ways to access wrongthink/wrongfun, that seems like it would negatively affect flourishing, through sheer friction introduced to the infoscape. Not to mention political resentment. I hear the recent riots in Nepal correlated with a crackdown on social media.

I am not talking about freedoms as a broad social system of things being acceptable or not. I'm talking about parents denying their kids access to smartphones or Internet as one of the measures for upholding lacks of freedoms. In order to assuredly safeguard your kid from porn today, to my knowledge, you have to not buy him a smartphone, not connect his computer to the Internet, keep him away from friends who could provide him with theirs and prevent him from saving up enough of his own money through allowance/summer jobs. I do not believe that's how you raise an above-average innovator today. In the past helicopter parenting was merely stifling; now you'd have to go half-Amish to achieve the same result. And Amishes do not launch rockets.

Speaking of the tweet and its comparison of virtuous white "will do" promise and craven black "will try" promise, it strikes me that the latter is more realistic and honest. No one can actually guarantee to a hundred percent that a course of action will be carried out.

I don't think free access to furry porn is the basis of technology. But will a society that limits their sons' access to the newest technology (and especially if it requires either a blanket ban or the parents' active involvement) reach the heights that are equivalent of going to the moon?

It is, actually. Coincidentally I'm not friends with the kind of queer people who insist on different neopronouns for each of vaeir plural headmates. On the other hand I can accept the minor inconvenience of having grace said over my dinner before I eat at a Christian friend's house.

You assume that I'd keep my memories, but wouldn't them being scrambled as well be expected to go along with seeing chaos?

Regarding the big club miniboss: When I realized he can't jump if I lure him into the tunnel, the fight went by really fast. If this was intentionally set up by the devs, kudos.

The fact that you're NOT currently seeing chaos is extremely strong evidence that a Boltzmann-Brain universe does not exist.

But if I were seeing chaos, wouldn't I stop evaluating evidence, thus making the Boltzmann brains where I can read your post the only ones who are convinced that they're not Boltzmann brains? I don't know how to put it in more rigorous terms.

But they also 'knew' that people aren't the kind of stuff that can fly.

"They didn't ACTUALLY transcend nature so it wasn't real vindication of hubris" looks like moving the goalposts to me.

Transhumanist thought, as I see it, lacks the inherent reverence that the religious mindset comes packaged with. (Yes there are Friendly AI worshippers and Roko's Basilisk doomers, but those are not the inherent parts of transhumanist thought.) In the end religion is not about entering Heaven or Hell, it's about using the promises of those states as a tool for society-building. I do not think transhumanism is about society-building first. I think transhumanism is about entering Heaven first (or Hell, according to doomers).