thrownaway24e89172
wrong about everything
No bio...
User ID: 1081
I agree with you that Nvidia made some very savvy moves, but "foresaw the use of their cards for scientific computing when none of their competitors did" is not among them. Everyone saw this coming. What crowned Nvidia was the accessible software ecosystem they built around the cards. AMD has always been really weak on the software side, which caused them to fall far behind. Intel was too focused on their CPU market and the Phi line was a product of that--it tried to be a GPU you could program like a CPU. IBM had similar problems as AMD, though less due to being weak on the software side and more due to being run by lawyers that want to make sure nobody can ever actually use it.
This is not true. Both AMD and Intel saw this coming at roughly the same time (eg, see the Xeon Phi line), but were too focused on CPUs to really capitalize on it. Nvidia's success is less in the foresight and more in the lack of distraction at the time.
Sure, and likewise nothing stops women from learning math in an environment constantly telling them "girls are bad at math".
Right, but your question was why the language was considered "captured", and it is considered captured because of its association with a culture of authoritarian safetyism. Individual usage is mostly irrelevant to that cultural impression.
The exact placement of the boundary between "legitimate tradeoffs" and "unreasonable restrictions" is the root of most culture war issues. From a cultural perspective, rust exists in the "sacrifice expressivity for safety" camp which is why it is considered "captured".
I think maybe a 7/10 can fly under the radar, but is still cute enough to get a guy's attention.
...
I think that's how we see a lot of these chinese honeypots come through with cute looks rather than stunning looks
I might suggest a rather different reason for this. "Cuteness" is very psychologically disarming.
Rust is a language of authoritarian safetyists. It attempts to prevent you from writing "bad" code by design, because it believes that "safety" is supreme over expression.
You appear to be excluding the possibility that it is merely a side-effect of other useful biological changes affecting that area of the body rather than being an end in its own right.
But it applies to tsunderes too. People who have experience with someone similar remember that specific person and all the negative associations that came with that, while people with little similar experience imagine a hypothetical person with all of the positive aspects and few of the negatives.
Really? I'd have thought the opposite--people who have such experience use the fantasy to erase the negative associations with that specific person.
Do you see the issue?
This doesn't need federal intervention assuming the California program attaches appropriate terms to the program. Businesses handle nearly the same issue with various employee incentives all the time.
I started with the Kensington Orbit almost 20 years ago and switched to the Kensington Expert when it died and haven't looked back.
You realize the entirety of human history has already established that precedent, right?
No, the rule exists to be followed when she is not interested. When she is interested, it exists to be broken. That is the crux of the leverage it grants--it incentivizes men to keep her interested.
Rather, there is a social insurance for women nowadays that enables a woman to exert social power over male friends. The rule doesn't exist to be followed, it exists to provide women with leverage so they can more easily control their social sphere.
Probably non-custodial parents.
Yes, but the things the boy has to do are what proves he is worthy--his actions are what earns him the reward. Cinderella's actions merely enable her to accept the reward and aren't used as evidence of her worthiness of it.
Damn, I didn't realize anyone was actually reading these replies in a year-old thread.
A good number of people use the comments feed rather than reading threads directly, and thus don't even necessarily realize the replies are to older threads.
There's no need to detail how much a man pays for it in his personal life: the societal standard is that men are deficient in their personal lives so it is assumed by default even without being spelled out. It is only detailed for Hannah because it is exceptional in her case.
Sure, interpret "beat the shit out of" as "imposing serious fines on" or "giving multi-year prison sentences to" if that floats your boat. It's all pie in the sky anyway given our collective reluctance to actually protect boys and men from harm.
Probably the best bet is to beat the shit out of anyone shaming boys for being boys. Anime and similar media are just escapism for boys who never develop a healthy self-esteem because the culture around them views them as broken girls.
because who's defending someone who would actually rape?
You are, by defending false accusers. The largely ignored part of the false accusation discussion is that threats of accusations of sexual impropriety are used as a means of social control by women over men, including use as coercion to "unwanted sex".
And then the fact that large-animal vets end up both being disproportionately male (relative to the field as a whole) and getting paid more gets blamed on male privilege so women can be "oppressed" even in a field where they are the overwhelming majority...
It was also unrealistic to expect that the men involved will all go on to conspire to carefully conceal the incident from all other women in the same social circle.
In my (limited) experience, men tend not to talk about their sex lives much while women seem to gossip about it constantly. I perhaps wouldn't expect the men to "conspire to carefully conceal the incident", but I also wouldn't expect them to ever bring it up in mixed company.
- Prev
- Next

The semicolon at the end of the line is syntax, not semantics.
Me personally or people generally? Personally I could care less that it is the hobby horse of autistic trans people. That it is the hobby horse of self-righteous pricks who believe all other languages are "unsafe" is my concern.
Right no authoritarians would ever use explicit labeling of "badness"...
More options
Context Copy link