Dudeman112

>Also, you are calling something out without providing what -you- would do in the situation?

If someone uses 1+1=3 as an argument you don't need to figure out an actual answer to point out their argument is bollocks

>What you're implying is just letting criminals out as the only alternative

I'm implying no such thing. I'm saying that specific moral argument is bullshit if they find the current punishment ceiling acceptable

>If the death penalty had been applied, there's no "undo" button.

There's no "undo" button for wasting away for 40 years in prison either

To me it looks like a glitch of the human cognition to think that losing almost/everyone you love, being dropped into a vastly different world than you knew, having your financial and social prospects thrown in the trash, living in shitty conditions for decades, is oh so much better and moral than killing them

I think you're underestimating just how many True Believers generations of omnipresent Jingoism can create

Absolutely bonkers algorithms that no one can make sense of unless they dedicate time to study and debug it

Also, it will have to be scrapped when anyone wants to tweak it a little. Sure monkeys randomly typing on a typewriter will eventually write the greatest novel in existence... but most of it will be shit

May $entity have mercy on your soul if the business starts bleeding tons of money due to an issue with the code, because the codebase won't

>It is what those words mean. It is literal.

>I'm not sure these were needed

The original wording I was gonna use before deciding to be more considerate was "small children and autists"

If you can think of another short descriptor for "people who obtusely take things literally and are unable or refuse to account for other people's state of mind", I'm happy to use those instead

>I hope you got a nice slither of dopamine out of namecalling though in any case

In fact, it was far more than a sliver!

Upon further reflection, I think I got a lot of repressed anger for never having smacked people who can't behave unless they are explicitly told to do so, who actually need the "within reason" clause everywhere, and who are happy to play with technicalities when it comes to justifying their behaviour

>What does this sentence even mean lmao

>if you say something is unlimited I'm going to take your word for it

The sentence refers to people like you. It doesn't make you incredibly clever to consider those sentences literally, like small children or those with under-developed empathy and theory of mind often do

It just makes you an inconsiderate numpty

>Hacker News would be on the complete opposite

Yes, there are lots of people on the tech scene that just don't get ideas like "don't abuse it", or "considering the consequences for other people"

There's always an individual with autism-level consideration for what one says, isn't there?

No, effectively DDOS-ing a service just because it says it's free and unlimited is a dick move

People like those are a big reason for why we can't have nice things

>There's really no data on that

I find it extremely unlikely that there's no data on how being an outcast affects one's mental health

No, I stand by it

It's literally a button that lets things go the way so many people claim to be necessary and proper. They can press it if they think the alternative is so dreadful

In a world where immortality is a given, being able to off yourself is one of the most important things an individual should have a right to do

You can always say "no" when it asks if you want to continue life, unlike in Lena as some other commenter mentioned

Better than current reality, where "no" is shoved on your throat and most people insist you better be grateful about it

>I don't want to see people die, but on the other hand I fully understand that we must die

Those are not mutually compatible

Well, unless you take some esoteric interpretation where one can be absolved from the immediate implications of what they think are the most desirable states for the universe

If one considers it necessary for people to die, one wants people to die. It's part of the whole considering death necessary

What do you mean?

Looks to me like you are reacting to the title instead of the article

I expected the standard anti-medicine fare from the title, but got neat biological investigation/hacking instead. That was an interesting read

Which cycle of self pity?

I'm a sadistic fuck that's been made to have the caring range of a rock due to childhood abuse

I'm fine being that way. Been there, done the whole "be yourself bollocks" - the results were shit. Pretending to care far more than I do, and constantly suppressing the sardonic and vindictive tendencies has been far more pleasant

'just tweak core aspects of your personality' is exactly the opposite of being yourself

The "be the real you" crowd never quite has a good answer for "what if the real you is an unlovable, broken piece of shit?", do they?

>If it can't even do an NGINX config, what use is it for anything else?

Turn it around. I'm sure there are lots of people around who couldn't do it either, even with a ridiculously high amount of time to do it

Is that solved for American websites?

Whenever people mention the awful state of the industry, I feel an urge to point out that the only thing that matters in a capitalist society is what the consumer votes for with their wallet

Ubisoft is far from bankrupt. EA is far from bankrupt. All the microtransactions, all the stupid "big open world" bollocks, all mind numbing grind-a-thons, the sheer creative bankruptcy that AAA games often show... they are what people consistently vote for, every year

In the last month, the last Carl On Duty has made more money than Ultrakill ever will. By a few orders of magnitude. And the same will happen for the next one

If gamers wanted quality, they should have spent their money accordingly instead of consistently buying shit

You mean the parts of the world where seasonal affective disorders are a blight on their society?

Personally I severely underestimated the effect of large periods of time without sunlight, before going through it myself

"It" can't be normal by definition if only a handful of people were "it" in the whole history of mankind

But then how are you gonna have a one-person IT department if your developer doesn't know Linux?

I'm on mobile. The tabular data did not work, obviously

Ironic

>For some reason newspapers/magazines never provide a good reference to the actual article and you end up having to go hunting

That seriously annoys me to no end

Does anyone know why the heck don't they just provide the damn DOI along with it?

>words do still mean things.

They don't if there's no consensus

And I'm sure you ain't got the authority needed to affirm that those definitions are commonly used in those ways

Ah, the age-old mixing pointing out the reasons for why an individual might act they way they do with morally absolving them

Ever common amongst people who have never seen or felt the consequences of abject poverty

!important is like global variables

Sure they have their place, but goddamnit do some people abuse them and make huge messes with them :(

>Seem you have a very inflated view of the programs... just how much debt are you attempting to justify?

I agree with them and I had 0 debt. Making higher education free was one of the few things I think the government back home actually didn't drop the ball on

Apparently it's done wonders for a bunch of industries

Yes, there's a big overlap between "learning" and "indoctrination". For mysterious reasons we only care about not being indoctrination when it comes to adults or almost adults

People wouldn't learn anything if they had to deeply understand and verify every part by themselves before moving on

Great I guess if you're happy with most of society never moving too far past what's covered in the first stretch of middle school

>There is literally nothing stopping a 20 year old human who lives in Western society from growing their intellectual soul through learning

Except for humans in general being utterly shite at pursuing learning without guidance or an immediate goal, both in regards to the learning effectiveness (i.e. how much you learn per amount of time or effort), and having the discipline to keep the grind

Most people are not, in fact, capable of just going to a library (or using the internet) every day and deeply learning a subject. They need an external force to actually keep grinding, even if they do want to do it by themselves

Yes. Being engineered or not is completely orthogonal to the discussion

>Because the neural networks are much closer to discovered than engineered

So is most code. Programmers in general can't engineer for shit, (half blindly) guided trial and error is the most common development paradigm

That's because AI is an awful expression :|

Should have always been called "fancy algorithms" from the get-go, calling it "intelligence" opens the interpretation up for a world of misunderstandings