quantummagic

6 ms·

1.
by quantummagic 11d ago
They are exactly comparable. The concept is exactly the same. We have borders and protected areas, and it is reasonable to make restrictions on other people based on those borders. It is not racist.
2.
by quantummagic 11d ago
That's a completely separate issue (if it is one at all), but I was addressing the specific concerns in the OPs question.
3.
by quantummagic 11d ago
Of course those are real issues that should be addressed. Just like if a factory producing bicycles is running all night and keeping you awake. But it's not something that should be concerning for anyone outside the area. It's
4.
by quantummagic 18d ago
I don't know if you're being intentionally obtuse, or you genuinely believe what you're saying. I was the one saying that a border is a border, and you had better have a good explanation as to why the national border is fund
5.
by quantummagic 18d ago
Misrepresenting the argument is not a good look. The argument is that everyone believes in borders. And that borders aren't racist. The only question is where we personally accept them being drawn. But NOBODY believes they're
6.
by quantummagic 18d ago
Typical response. Defending my home isn't racist. And your willingness to use that accusation is pathetic and not really worthy of a response... but understand that a border is the same concept be it for a home, for a community, for
7.
by quantummagic 18d ago
> border fascism I hope you keep to your principles and make sure not to lock your doors at night, and don't deny anyone the right to live in your house with you for free if they desire.
8.
by quantummagic 29d ago
Why? An argument stands on its own, regardless of origin. If it's poorly written, by someone who is say a non-native speaker, it can still be a VALUABLE and VALID argument. It would be racist to dismiss an argument because it was po
9.
by quantummagic 1mo ago
If the argument is good enough, it worth ignoring who/what the author is.
10.
by quantummagic 1mo ago
You're right, this is the best it will ever be. But there likely will be ad blockers for them -- local LLMs that filter for any brand placement, etc.
11.
by quantummagic 1mo ago
The point is that to the extent it causes certain individuals to lose faith in humanity, or become reclusive, and as a result not reproduce -- it has the effect of altering the overall genetic makeup of subsequent generations. The net resu
12.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
Does it take a human to have agency? Doesn't a cat have agency and desire? What about a worm? Where do you make the cut off, and why? If an AI is programmed with a bias towards creating and following "desires", how is it
13.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
> For example, I recently spent 2 weeks researching Bruce Lee ... [AI] output will just be a reiteration of already common knowledge instead of the actual efforts I made researching all of it. Presumably you researched Bruce Lee by readi
14.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
It sounds like people ruined them for you — it isn't AI calling you out for using them.
15.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
I'm no fan of the current administration, but this particular loss seems to be a failing of military strategy and leadership, not civilian ineptitude. It's not like the Whitehouse would have picked this staging area or directly c
16.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
Seriously. The only way to use it is to be a very religious person. You have to pray every single time you use it that your system doesn't become compromised.
17.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
It could just be streaming the trailer.
18.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
I'm not missing it at all. Whatever the damn price is (of course it fluctuates) the only way you can make a bet that the price will go down further, is if someone else thinks it's going to go up. Therefore for every single short
19.
Heaven's IT Guy – Design Complaints(youtube.com)
2 points by quantummagic 2mo ago|0 comments
20.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
There is pleasure in completing things. In actually producing something, and moving on to the next thing. It isn't enjoyable to have paralysis by analysis... too afraid to take the next step, because you have less than perfect informa
21.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
Pragmatically speaking, a half-assed answer now, is often better than a perfect answer tomorrow.
22.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
> What you're essentially saying is that "every gallon of milk is sold to a person". This is not useful information. Only because you're ignoring the other option, that the gallon of milk DIDN'T sell. It tells y
23.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
> And every (short) sale is proof that the market thinks it's a bad investment at that price, which logically nullifies your point. No it doesn't. It's the flip side of the one you want to focus on, and all i've been
24.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
No, you're just working very hard to miss the point. Nobody can place the pessimistic bet, unless there is someone equally optimistic in the other direction. The fact that you're fixated on the price varying as each side attempt
25.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
People respond to market forces. When they see that there are other people making irrational valuations, they may wait to buy even lower. It's not a judgment about the intrinsic value of the stock at the current price, but of opportu
26.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
Yes, stocks go up and down; hardly revelatory. The point, regardless of the imprecise wording of my alternate title, remains. There are people who think they are getting a valuable investment, at the price short-sellers are willing to sel
27.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
I never intended to imply that the law of supply and demand was nullified. And I didn't say that the price was unaffected, just that there is as much money thinking they're getting a valuable long term investment, as there is as m
28.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
It has nothing to do with the shares being borrowed. That's a separate transaction that comes with a fee. The point is that the share is then sold. It's sold to someone who is taking the long position. The original owner of th
29.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
You're absolutely correct, and I should have been more precise. The value is always identical, but the number of participants, need not be the same for each position. Mea culpa.
30.
by quantummagic 2mo ago
That's exactly the point. The clickbait title wants you to forget that fact and draw an incorrect conclusion. It could have also been, "SPCX is the most purchased new stock", but that wouldn't have fed the desired narr

More ›