jvmboi

8 ms·

1.
by jvmboi 2y ago
around here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democide
2.
by jvmboi 2y ago
Yeah, thanks for this run of the mill communist bullshit that doesn't have anything to do with what I said. "Oh yeah, pay for work is EXPLOITATION guys, guys, guys, the only ETHICAL way is for daddy government to force people to w
3.
by jvmboi 2y ago
You are entitled to your view but I think it is a little unempathetic to be unable or unwilling to put yourself in the shoes of entrepreneurs when the topic is how attractive a place is for them. Of course, all things being equal, a busines
4.
by jvmboi 2y ago
You might enjoy this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3W2v7LN-88 I, Pencil by Leonard E Read
5.
by jvmboi 3y ago
There was no conceivable version of a road system where that behavior would ever be okay. However, it's not only conceivable but, apparently standard practice in systems programming, to "Try and Fail" instead of "Only Pr
6.
by jvmboi 3y ago
What do they (we?) have to say that you'll believe that we just don't like the puzzle for the non-intelligence related reason we stated?
7.
by jvmboi 3y ago
It's not clear at all and you can read comments here to find that out. I don't know the game designer especially but what I actually think is that the system (ie org+people) that produced this puzzle is much smarter than I am. I j
8.
by jvmboi 3y ago
you have to connect the fork with the goal and then use the curves to connect the rest. https://io.google/2024/puzzle/share/0b110/
9.
by jvmboi 3y ago
No, I don't think it wouldn't seem like that to any reasonable person. What makes you say otherwise?
10.
by jvmboi 3y ago
One unstated rule is that you have to use all pieces. Number three can already be solved with two pieces and that also doesn't count. I strongly dislike this kind of puzzle.
11.
by jvmboi 3y ago
The presentation is nice but the content of the puzzle put me off. I think if you suggest a physical puzzle by presenting it as a rolling ball then you should honor correct physical intuition such that a ball isn't going to turn left b
12.
by jvmboi 3y ago
It makes sense that the engines would be heavy and they are heavy on the launch vehicle. I am not sure how the ratios come out there but I'd still expect the fuel to, by far, take up most of the mass. Then engines for maneuvering in sp
13.
by jvmboi 3y ago
I could easily be wrong and I am very open to learning as what I wrote is just my intuition developed from playing KSP. The Apollo's "lunar module descent engine" weighs a mere 180 KG vs the approx. 4200 KG of the rest of the
14.
by jvmboi 3y ago
Some "insights" from this mediocre KSP player: a) for launch you want your rocket to be slender and tall. For a stable landing you want your vehicle to be broad and flat. b) The engine is at the bottom (moon-wards), by definition.
15.
by jvmboi 3y ago
I don't understand the word "we" in your comment. Obviously, some specific people do the actual work of caring for disabled people. Most people don't do that work. The point of "Zivildienst" which translates to
16.
by jvmboi 3y ago
This was a real test. They have done this 192 times. It failed two times. The last two times. So it's not that this is inherently impossible, it's just that they can't do it anymore. I think, given the stakes, it's proba
17.
by jvmboi 3y ago
well it's very easy for them to say that, right? Because they'll never have to prove this in detail to anyone that could hold them accountable because SECRETS and COMPLICATED TECHNOLOGY.
18.
by jvmboi 3y ago
I don't understand your motivation to type this many words in order to make, what amounts to, generic excuses (1) for people that take a huge chunk of your paycheck in order to balance the world on the knives edge of nuclear deterrence
19.
by jvmboi 3y ago
> The Ministry of Defence said the "nuclear deterrent remains safe, secure and effective". The test that we did to show that it would work, didn't work but that doesn't mean that it wouldn't work. Of course!
20.
by jvmboi 3y ago
I am erring on the side of durability because I'm not really into new gimmicks but it's a daunting proposition to buy the "good stuff". A low stakes example is my Miele dishwasher that I bought when I was outraged at my
21.
by jvmboi 3y ago
> proto-humancentric thinking I think that it's actually your perspective, which I think is essentially a sci-fi perspective, is deeply human biased. You think space is cool because you evolved under an open sky that rotates to show
22.
by jvmboi 3y ago
So the starting point of this conversation is the Fermi paradox. Your line of reasoning has a very long line of necessary assumption. I only show that how they might not be warranted. > Not much more progress is necessary. The more plaus
23.
by jvmboi 3y ago
> See how fast technology is developing, and especially the decreases in the cost of rocket launches. The past century of rapid progress is anomalous in human history. We made do with stone tools for 100k years. In the middle ages basica
24.
by jvmboi 3y ago
If the universe is Einsteinian, I don't think "colonizing" the stars is a thing that makes sense. We might do it once because we are sentimental like that but maybe that's owed to unique psychology owed to unique circums
25.
by jvmboi 3y ago
> But you still have to explain the observation that the night sky is empty of signs of life. It's really not that hard to explain. The last time I looked into this it was the case that we wouldn't be able to detect ourselves m
26.
by jvmboi 3y ago
Do you mean that the landlord is instructing the employees of it's tenants to RTO so that he can keep his income and property value? How does that work? "Hello CEO of Awesome Inc, it's me CEO of Rentalz Co. Your people have t
27.
by jvmboi 3y ago
Twinery looks neat. Thanks for the tip.
28.
by jvmboi 3y ago
That's a good point. For a business owner that has to decide right now, it's little comfort to know that the market will sort it out. I'd guess that big corps are most affected here. SMB owners probably know exactly what they
29.
by jvmboi 3y ago
Real estate is alluded to throughout this thread. I don't really get it. Is the theory that companies do RTO so they can rent out real estate to themselves via a holding? Just looking at profits I don't understand how that would b
30.
by jvmboi 3y ago
Your situation is very tough because you want to encourage this but also you have to be realistic and that's what your kid probably doesn't want to hear. I always try to get across to my daughter of seven that you can't scale

More ›