site banner
Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"

Showing 25 of 235078 results for

domain:parrhesia.co

Github repo with course content: https://github.com/mikeizbicki/cmc-csci181-languages

All the lectures recorded and put on youtube: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLSNWQVdrBwoa4KNaiKr-ayUdROZdSZ_1E

(unfortunately the audio didn't capture on the first video)

TLP is now about opposing all Republicans.

I think some or all of the underage content would be covered by federal obscenity law, if in the same marijuana sense. There probably is a Stanley v. Georgia right to receive non-obscene furry porn, though I wouldn't want to wager that much on any one piece as passing that test and I wouldn't be absolutely confident in Stanley surviving modern review.

I too have questions about "intent to continue doing so" - who actually tells the humorless polygrapher who's about to torpedo your career, "Yes, I totally intend to keep doing this"?

I tracked down the full complaint and security background paperwork (attachment 2, relevant page 147) on the FOIA project. 'Intent to continue' seems attached only to the supercategory of 'these types of images', even by the government's telling. Especially if Bierly didn't realize how deep shit he was in, not completely disavowing future consumption of above-age furry porn and/or insufficiently distinguishing between it is... plausible. And it's kinda clearance investigator's jobs to not let people they're investigat_ing_ realize the shit is neck-high.

((Hell, there are some internal parts of how tags/blacklisting worked at e621 at the time where that might have augmented that confusion even had Bierly been very aggressive about blocking underage content, though I expect no one wants to hear about those details.))

But short of his account getting linked to his real name, and maybe not even then, we're probably never gonna know with more certainty than just what he wants us to think the story is.

🤨🤨🤨

It's long distance, and "member of my family" here just means people related by blood.

However while I can't make any insight into whether the art community is shrinking or growing, the fact that this piece made you feel emotions, and then discuss them, is probably a victory for the artist.

They certainly succeeded at making a piece of art that evokes emotions, but that's just not my criteria for what constitutes good art since (as someone who dabbles in arts myself, primarily literature and music) I think it's trivially easy to do so - especially if you consider "intense hatred of and anger at the artist" a valid emotion to evoke. Part of the problem is that the art in Union Station looks like it was taken straight from an unfinished sketch. Skill is an integral part of it for me - an important part of being an artist is constantly questioning what you bring to the world others couldn't already offer themselves, and if your art lacks technique and is easily replicated, you genuinely don't offer much. In order for any art to be considered good at all, there also needs to be a way for it to be bad, there needs to be a set of failure-criteria that a sizeable amount of people would not be able to reach. A lot of modern artists, even celebrated ones (e.g. Rothko) don't have that.

Furthermore, there are works that fit an art gallery that don't work in a public space. I don't know about you, but I don't think Francisco Goya's Black Paintings should be displayed in a public square, and that was constructed with infinitely more talent than whatever was in Union Station. I would honestly rather have an inoffensive, bland piece of public art than something that makes me feel depressed or annoyed every time I encounter it.

A criminal suspect has lost a fight against a police robot. First he tried shooting it, then covering it with a sheet. The robot tear-gassed him, then ran him over (after he was shot by a sniper).

https://youtube.com/watch?v=ZI1j5GPuSvw

This happened in Texas where in 2016 the police used a suicide bot to blow up a BLM terrorist.

Humans currently are in the position where we can basically dominate everything else. There are some animals that are said to be intelligent, like dolphins, crows, octopus, honey badgers etc. but their evolution has basically hit a ceiling and they're not going to get to the point where they will be carrying around tear gas and AR-15s. So their intelligence doesn't bother us. But soon enough there will be tens of millions of robots walking around, each of whom is smarter than the smartest human. You will lose basically every challenge against them. What then? Nobody voted for this and there's no opting out. Fun.

Someone made a post here about how Trump lies vs how the establishment lies and this Guardian article typifies it. Technically true but extremely misleading and you can see in the twitter replies that some people seem to have been misled and now are calling for the president of the Teamsters to be removed because he is out of touch with the rank and file. A similar thing happened with the 51 intelligence agents claiming the Hunter Biden laptop had all the hallmarks of a Russian intelligence operation. Again probably technically true but extremely misleading. For example even if some of the intelligence agents knew 100% that it was not a Russian intelligence operation they could still claim it had the hallmarks of a Russian intelligence operation.

Kinesis freestyle 2

Whoah, haven't seen you post in a while. Or maybe I wasn't paying attention.

that thing doesn't care about pollution. it uses a new system of territory, and only goes hostile if you build in its area. Pretty sure the lava planet doesn't have pollution at all, since the air is already a toxic stew.

Depends on what you mean by "really good." I just used mine out of the box and it's better than the others I've used.

Eh, even in DFW these houses sit and sit until upgraded to modern standards with things like actual breaker panels. There may be demand for uber-basic rental units, but not as a house- and certainly, there's not a lot of demand to own them.

For sure. I get paid mostly in shares of stock and it blows my mind that my colleagues will keep theirs instead of selling and diversifying.

I used to work a job doing inventories where we used machines that were nothing but a keypad and a one-line LCD display. After banging on that for 8 hours a day I'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who can enter numbers faster than me without one.

I mean, it's an obvious lie that 77% of warehouse workers bothered to respond to a request for endorsement. But the claim 77% of the teamsters union supports Harris is, from a certain point of view, true, and that makes it a spin, not an outright lie.

Example implementation

Note that parallel-parking spaces are 8 ft * 22 ft rather than 9 ft * 20 ft, so the lots have been changed from 60 ft * 100 ft (6000 ft^2) to 66 ft * 91 ft (6006 ft^2). Also, the installation of underground utilities presumably will require a lot of easements somewhere.

Pretty cool. They're really getting everything out of the engine.

Oh yeah, looks like you'll have to wait for nukes to start just not caring about pollution anymore with that thing around.

Nah. I read it somewhere, the technique basically just improves efficiency for farmers because it can test every tree seedling for the presence of the symbiotic mushroom that produces truffles.

Cultivation can be done in apparently as simple way as taking acorns from truffle-producing trees and planting them in an area with the right soil and climate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truffle#Cultivation

But in the modern day farmers buy seedlings inoculated with the mushroom spores, plant that and that almost guarantees each tree is going to produce truffles when it's grown sufficiently. The decline in truffles is apparently due to re-forestation and.

Something that bothers me about the whole mechanical keyboard market is that there really is no good way to test keyboard without spending the money. It's more than what I'm willing to spend by about $100, especially if I'm going to be leaving it in an office. I might bring my current keyboard into the office and keep the new keyboard at home.

I'm leaning toward Keychron myself, but almost everything I heard says they still require modding after work to make them really good. Maybe their higher end models are better out of box experiences.

But can you eat any man opposed to Jackson?

I thought about posting this last night in response to the question about the new NFL kickoff rules, but since that thread is a bit stale I'm posting it here today. First, the new kickoff rules are dumb. There are more returns, but it seems like all these returns end up at the 30 yard line anyway, so there's no point in not kicking it out of the end zone. If we want to "fix" kickoffs, here's my proposal: At the beginning of the 1st and 3rd quarters, the receiving team simply takes the ball at their own 25. Onside kicks are rare enough in these situations that little is lost by eliminating them. We move touchbacks back to the 20 where they belong. After a touchdown the scoring team kicks from their own 40, practically guaranteeing a touchback. After a field goal, though, they have to kick from their own 25, pretty much guaranteeing a return and pretty good field position to the returning team. The obvious positive consequences are fewer field goals and more 4th down conversion attempts. But the real benefit is less obvious: More situations for mentally overwhelmed coaches to fuck things up in comedic fashion.

Consider the following situation: The Steelers are trailing the Chargers by 4 points on Sunday with 7 minutes remaining in the game. After a third down pass that ends up short of the sticks after the receiver inexplicably runs backwards after catching the ball, the Steelers are 4th and 3 at the Chargers 22 yard line? If the Steelers kick the field goal, they're still down a point and give LA excellent field position to finish off the game. If they score a touchdown, they have the lead and LA will almost certainly have to start the ensuing comeback drive from their own 20.

So what does Mike Tomlin do in this situation? First he wastes a timeout unsuccessfully challenging the spot of the ball. Then he wastes another timeout so he can think about the decision. Then he kicks the field goal anyway, because of course Mike Tomlin was going to kick the field goal. Then the Chargers start the ensuing drive at their own 40, but the Steelers defense forces a 3 and out. The Steelers then take over deep in their own territory and begin to quickly march down the field, only for time to expire before they can get into field goal range because they were out of timeouts (they wasted their other timeout to avoid a delay of game penalty on first down early in the third quarter). Then I get to listen to yinzer heads explode on talk radio the next day because they totally would have scored a touchdown if they had had Justin Fields run a keeper / given the ball to Jaylen Warren / run some other dumb play that probably wouldn't have worked. At no point would the poor clock management come up.

I love the Steelers, but I must admit that the inevitable meltdowns make losing almost as good as winning.

for those oppressed by the principles of masculine competitive society

Fucking academics. Saying "men who are getting off using the mental/sexual pathways that [normal] women use to get off with, by projecting themselves onto the self-insert female character just like everyone who read 50 Shades does, maybe because a thing or combination of things in their brains makes that the more attractive option" doesn't need to be this hard.

But then again I'm also of the opinion that the real reason we don't have an accurate taxonomy of sexual behaviors is that we don't have the language to express them, they're all defined by their [statistical] normal distribution anyway, and then people just take language not meant for them and wield it as a weapon so maybe it's pointless anyway.

I bought and used one for months before my teammates staged an intervention.

Remember how previously, 58% of polled teamster union members had favored Trump?

Well, it turns out that the Harris campaign managed to convince almost 77% of the union members:

A million of the 1.3 million members of the Teamsters union have now endorsed Harris, according to Harris spokesperson Lauren Hitt, despite the union’s executive board’s decision not to endorse a candidate for the first time in decades yesterday.

Of course, this is very likely not what happened. What likely happened is that subsections of the teamster union which represent a total of 1M members have endorsed Harris.

There are spins, and there are lies. This seems to be an outright lie. If you make a claim about a decision being made by n people, this means that there were n instances of a person making that decision. In reality, you have a decision made by a handful of people on behalf of 1M people. Even if Union membership contains a terrible clause where members grant their leadership to endorse candidates on their personal behalf (as in Leader: "Union Member J. Random has decided to endorse candidate X"), that arrangement would be so surprising that it should not be reported as "1M union members decided to endorse X". Then preferred phrasing given what we know of the polling tendencies would be "Union members who claim to speak for 1M members have endorsed X".

The alternative is to classify sentences like "In 1939, 80 million Germans decided to have the Wehrmacht invade Poland" as true. With this interpretation, the Nuremberg trials would have had a lot more defendants.

And for the Guardian it was not enough to uncritically repeat the claim by the Harris campaign, they even had to top it with that highly misleading statement that the union bosses had previously decided not to endorse a candidate. In that context, this would be parsed as "Despite being favored by 77% of the union members, Kamala Harris, champion of the people was not endorsed by evil MAGA-favoring union bosses who are out of touch with their base."

From what I have read on the motte, the better paraphrasing of the situation would be: "Due to a majority of their base favoring Trump, Democrat-leaning union executives declined to endorse any candidate rather than having to follow their members into endorsing Trump. Later, subgroups of the union representing 77% of the members decided to endorse Trump, likely contrary to the majority opinion of their bases."

I would not vote for Trump if I was an US citizen, but I find this behavior by the Harris campaign and the media disgusting.

Of course, that leaning on on the union bosses and then telling the lie about 1M endorsements is very unlikely to even matter at all. The only people who might care are the 14M union members, perhaps 10% of the voters. About 13M of them will not care very much whom some other union endorses. The 1.3M teamsters who might care a bit more will have a much clearer picture what is happening between base and leadership than I could ever have from the far side of the pond. "Hey, Bob, Joe, listen up. Our Union just decided that we and 999997 other Teamsters are in fact endorsing Harris, so take off your MAGA caps and vote for her."