valar_m

6 ms·

1.
by valar_m 2mo ago
I'm fascinated by some of the comments in here, that the videos are "awful," "far from good," "embarrassing," etc. This is technology that was unthinkable before just a couple of years ago. Photorealisti
2.
by valar_m 3mo ago
I'm guessing you've never experienced the enormous pressure of needing to find a job to buy food and clothes for your family. That's good, I'm glad that you don't know that feeling. But if you did, you'd know h
3.
by valar_m 8mo ago
> The goal should be to reach as many people, of course, but also to ensure that the method and medium of communication is in the interest of the public at large. Who decides what communication is in the interest of the public at large?
4.
by valar_m 10mo ago
>The positives you experienced are very possible for a homeschooled student as well, and this seems to be a common boogieman. How do you do that? Seems like it would be impossible to replicate the experience of learning to navigate daily
5.
by valar_m 10mo ago
But users like me who hate shorts so much that they want to disable them in the app aren't addicted to shorts because we refuse to open them. And there's no risk of me going to Tiktok or reels because I hate short-form video .
6.
by valar_m 10mo ago
Why would a user who hates shorts so much that they want to disable them in the app be sharing links to shorts with their friends? If a paying user want to disable shorts, wouldn't allowing that ability make it more likely they will co
7.
by valar_m 1y ago
That seems extremely unlikely given the significant global economic impact of tariffs, and the comparatively microscopic effect of transgender athletic participation in the United States. For example, when Kentucky passed their trans sports
8.
Lia Radiological Accident(en.wikipedia.org)
4 points by valar_m 1y ago|0 comments
9.
by valar_m 2y ago
None of this changes the fact that mail-in voting in the United States is objectively and measurably secure, and that instances of fraud are so miniscule that claims of it having an impact on election outcomes are provably false. Those are
10.
by valar_m 2y ago
Direct quote from the source you linked: >>It is unlikely that there has been a significant increase in electoral malpractice since the introduction of postal voting on demand in 2000; available figures suggest that 32 convictions wer
11.
by valar_m 2y ago
What do you mean? There is no evidence at all that Trump won by voter fraud.
12.
by valar_m 2y ago
This is an extremely poor analogy, and it doesn't change the objective fact that mail-in voting is provably, measurably secure.
13.
by valar_m 2y ago
What would your response be to someone who, hypothetically, might view this sentiment as some unsettling combination of elitist and vaguely authoritarian and then decides that maybe you shouldn't be voting? Would you be bothered by t
14.
by valar_m 2y ago
Yes, I very obviously did because I explicitly referred to it in my comment. Nothing in your comment changes the fact that you linked to an anonymously written article full of baseless speculation that relies on an anonymous Tumblr post tha
15.
by valar_m 2y ago
You believe that an anonymously written article full of baseless speculation that relies on an anonymous Tumblr post as its source is credible? It would benefit you to educate yourself on how to evaluate the reliability of claims you read o
16.
by valar_m 2y ago
Excel users can make mistakes, therefore Excel spreadsheets can't be audited? Is that your point?
17.
by valar_m 2y ago
Except that's not at all what the article is talking about: > But the tightwads I spoke with have very real agita—panic, guilt, stress—over their financial situation, even though there’s no real reason for them to worry. They drag
18.
by valar_m 3y ago
Do you mind explaining what your comment means in layman's terms?
19.
by valar_m 3y ago
This is a textbook example of the typical response when someone gets their dog whistles called out. Plausible deniability is a key characteristic of dog whistles[0]. The first sentence is as predictable as the sun coming up tomorrow: > Y
20.
by valar_m 3y ago
> When he talked about Stephen Gould, a widely read pop-sci academic, you zeroed in on his last name's "Jewish-ness". Replying to this separately because I feel like you mischaracterized my point about Stephen Gould, and
21.
by valar_m 3y ago
What do you mean it didn't work on you? You're defending an article written by someone who promotes indisputably anti-Semitic conspiracy theories[0]. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38439602
22.
by valar_m 3y ago
The account that posted the article also posted an explicitly anti-Semitic comment that promotes the conspiracy theory that Jews are secretly in control of the media[0]: > Uh, yes. Elon does not follow the program, and doesn't have
23.
by valar_m 3y ago
> As an aside: If someone reaches the correct answer for the wrong reasons, are they wrong? Personally, I'm pragmatic, and don't care how people reach my ideals on the proper treatment of people. Forgot to respond to this par
24.
by valar_m 3y ago
I'm going to operate under the assumption that you're replying in good faith and truly don't recognize the racist and anti-Semitic dog whistles all throughout the article. I'll highlight some of them for you. Btw, if you
25.
by valar_m 3y ago
What's funny is that the line you thought you cherry-picked as a gotcha actually tells the story: > abandon the idea that the value of people lies in their attributes For anyone reading, the "attribute" that the racist a
26.
by valar_m 3y ago
I can answer what they meant with "does not follow the program." The person you replied to is an overt racist who promotes anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about Jewish people.[0] The line "does not follow the program" i
27.
by valar_m 3y ago
Fyi everyone, this account promotes overtly racist[0] and anti-Semitic[1] content. [0] https://systemstops.substack.com/p/the-smart-apocalypse [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=systemstops#384
28.
by valar_m 3y ago
When I say that they can't file a suit without making actual legal claims, I obviously meant that the suit would be dismissed. Anyone can go down to the court clerk's office and pay the fee to submit a court filing. There is no me
29.
by valar_m 3y ago
> which you can do in courts that do not have anti-SLAPP rules in place. No, this is incorrect. I believe you're unintentionally conflating two things. Not having an anti-SLAPP law just means that Media Matters won't have the l
30.
by valar_m 3y ago
>The lawsuit doesn't allege that Media Matters lied. Incorrect. For example, from the complaint[0]: > As extensively explained above, these statements made by Defendant Media Matters were false. Though to be fair, the lawsuit n

More ›