PrimeMcFly

7 ms·

1.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> If you are actually amused then you're a bully. Nah not a bully. If someone is acting in a particular way that doesn't really make sense and is kind of embarrassing, and that I can relate to, then amusement is a natural react
2.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> Right. So that's my point. Css is logical. Well, yes and no. It depends on context. You know, nuance. Like I said, it can be technically logical, but that doesn't mean it is logical in the colloquial sense. The point made in
3.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> Literally by definition anything designed in a computer must follow logic. Eh, that's not a particularly useful claim. Just because everything that runs on a computer can be expressed in formal logic doesn't mean the process
4.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> Whether the other side is amused or not is irrelevant. What is clear is that other side is deliberating acting amused Well, no. You're saying that whether or not I am actually amused is irrelevant, because you're just decidin
5.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> These words are stated by you to start a fucking war. Any reasonable person can see this. Eh. Is it a war if only one side thinks so and is fighting, and the other is amused? Your other reply was deleted - I wonder what horrible things
6.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
Look at the amount of coders who can struggle with simple system settings. Some people only learn what they want to or need to learn, the bare minimum.
7.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
This is honesty funny, that you've written this much. Well, let's get into it! > Please do not say things like that here. It is "my" thread. No, it bloody well isn't. The sooner you can accept and understand that
8.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> But you're talking shit about me under my thread which my comment is the parent to my face. So what? I said you were perpetuating a myth and you were. It still not 'your' thread, what kind of childish nonsense is that? &
9.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> Please don't respond to my thread nor impolitely reference me or accuse me of things if you're going to post things that aren't for me. It's not your thread, I replied to someone else and the effort put into that
10.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> Thank you for posting sources, you should have done this in the beginning. It wasn't for you. Instead of saying I should have done that in the beginning, really, you should have done so since you made the claim, and you should hav
11.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
lol, that's the kind of behavior that does deserve legal consequences IMO, and I'm very pro piracy.
12.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> One source has been posted thus far, and it contradicts what you've said. That source is hardly credible now, is it? As far as I'm concerned I'm treating it with the respect it warrants. > Low-quality sources, but aga
13.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> Well no you're the one spreading the myth Sigh. No. Pigs are not more intelligent than dogs. That's flat out misinformation, and you are propagating misinformation, i.e. spreading a myth every time you repeat that false infor
14.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
And maybe the moon is made of cheese :) That aside, if you would stop spreading the myth, that would be better for everybody.
15.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
The source of the myth, perhaps?
16.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> Yes, we are homo sapiens, sapience is fundamentally a human question. No, it isn't. The word may stem from using humanity as a baseline, but it isn't limtied to humans at all. > Hilariously, this is the result I get from M
17.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> The question the turning test was posed to solve is when does a sufficiently smart computer become sapient. Yes, but it's a test for humans to interpret and judge. What kind of nonsense is it to think it should be used for an an
18.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
Looking at least at the US elections, I think there are plenty of people that do. Look at the whole Hillary's e-mails thing for example.
19.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> Octopus' sapience is absolutely not beyond a reasonable doubt: I mean, for the standard definition of sapience it is. > many consider passing the turning test, or an even stronger form thereof to be required for sapience Those
20.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> but people involved with animal rights activism use the term sentience to refer to the capacity to suffer, which implies a sense of self. Yes, I always have had a problem with that. They use it incorrectly, and most don't even con
21.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
If people are going to vote a certain way out of fear or due to having been misled, cutting off communication is a safeguard against those people caning their minds or being convinced by facts. Just for one example.
22.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> They can clearly learn, but seem much less intelligent than other animals that we commonly eat,They can clearly learn, but seem much less intelligent than other animals that we commonly eat, What? You think an octopus is less intellige
23.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> Smarter then dogs. Certainly not. I'm not sure why this myth keeps propagating.
24.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> We know that octopuses and many other animals are intelligent. We don't know for certain if anything nonhuman is sentient. You are mixing up terms. All animals are sentient. Not all animals are intelligent. Only very few animals a
25.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
Because in modern day the only reason to take that action is to manipulate votes.
26.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> Incorrect. lol, called it. > All powers that the Federal government has are explicitly granted in the Constitution. This is just incorrect. As I said, caselaw and legislation grant rights not explicitly in the constitution. That&#x
27.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> Could neurotypical be framed as a disability? No. What is it with so many autists trying to turn things around and act as though they are better in some way and NTs are the 'problem'. It's bizarre and seems like some s
28.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> Please show me the excerpt from the Constitution that gives the Federal government any power to implicitly or explicitly identify anybody. Are you aware that not all rights granted to the government are in the constitution? I can tell
29.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> With this framing you could just as well say neurotypicals lack a theory of mind. Largely we don't do that because there are more neurotypicals than autists. It's because NTs are the default, and Autism is seen as a (sometime
30.
by PrimeMcFly 3y ago
> I really appreciate you taking the time to reply to this, because the argument is crystal clear in my head, I just struggle to convey it to others. No worries! I'm interested in the discussion and really this is meant to be about

More ›