Lurker > nemu

Nah, we need to get out of this mindset that making fun/stereotyping is inherently a bad thing. It's pretty damn easy to tell when something is disparaging a race and something is a simple caricature. That line can obviously get blurred, but it's a case by case thing.

Seems to be a mix of people. There are definitely blatant hypocrites who changed opinion the second the protests started, but many were just pointing out the hypocrisy. Whether people justify the protests based on thinking the movement is more important than COVID or not, it's still hypocrisy regardless.

It really depends on the circumstances. If she was in there every day, constantly bringing it up and never shutting the fuck up about it, fair. If there were one or two office bullies just fucking with her due to guilt by association, not fair.

It depends on the severity of the accusation, but immediate firing is bad outside of the most horrendous of circumstances.

The whole gaming review sphere is kind of a weird place. We have plenty examples of reviewers being paid shills, and we know there is a unspoken rule about not being too critical. But then you have people who give honest opinions and end up lambasted by the same kind of fans. And on the fan side, you have people who think that reasonable voices are drowned out by the paid reviews, so they think they need to be vocal somehow and downvote shit. But then downvoting shit just reinforces the opinions of those who think they're all just little bitches.

Sadly, I'd be lying if I said yes. I sympathize with how much of the world is currently suffering, but there's little to be done about it. All we have are token charities that likely don't even actually give much, if any, money to the causes. All we can hope for is the governments to reform themselves.

I guess death penalty for taking bribes. Other than that, only systems in which the rich do not conceptually exist, but then everyone gets fucked in those.

Ruvan22 posted...

Which numbers are you saying should be broken down into areas by crime rates? The overall shooting per pop or the police killed by civilians vs civilians killed by police?

Breakdown of police killing civilians/criminals by area, and then relevant statistics to those areas. Basically, if high crime areas account for a the majority of these issues, it doesn't necessarily reflect the whole country. Even removing those, we'd still high on the per capita deaths, but not as high. Such areas are kind of their own thing, where that is just one symptom of a much larger cycle. Solving the issues elsewhere won't necessarily solve the issues in those communities, and solving the issues in those communities won't necessarily solve them elsewhere.

One thing to see would be the areas in which they occur most frequently and the crime rates of such areas. If 30-50% happen in high crime areas, the interpretation of the data is a bit skewed.

marc55 posted...

why not ? isnt this how the UN called it ?

The core of human rights is basically just to exist as an independent entity without having the government inhibit you, up to a point. There are various branches from that, but you don't really have an inherent right to physical things or services from others. You have the right to pursue them without being impeded, up to a point. Those are separate rights come from the collective foundation of a government.

Human right isn't really the term to use, but the government definitely shouldn't allow the privatization of all water sources. Some percentage is fine.

It ultimately seems to be a completely pointless gesture. Regardless of their origins, they have been seen for decades as some mundane brands. This is the kind of activism that makes others look at the whole picture and think they're overreacting, thus hurting the rest of their goals.

I am super confused as to what goes through the minds of such people. Do they really see a living animal as some kind of decoration? Why would you ever make a commitment to spend thousands of dollars on something you don't care about?

I cannot imagine sexual fetishes conform to reality that much. Having unfortunately seen a gore-themed porn suicide topic, I do not realistically think that any of those drawings reflect someone's real life intent. People should definitely be free to heavily judge people's fetishes, but acting as if it's more than that is kind of pointless prudishness.

There's certainly going to be some fuckery with cops, but it's doubtlessly not going to be at all common. Even if it did turn out the milkshakes were deliberate, that's one store out of probably a thousand. They certainly have nothing to fear in general. The worse thing would be if people aren't lambasted for supporting shit like that. That could actually increase the chance of it happening.

No. You can maybe make the argument that being one of the lone non-"white" characters on the show draws more attention to him than if it were more diverse, but his character is based on a completely real stereotype. If it's bad to stereotype anything, then most comedy is dead. I can certainly understand the argument that more care should be taken given past mockery of minority races, but Apu is about as innocuous as you can get.

Only for more simplistic character creators that have like 5-20 simple choices. I don't have the time for 100 damn sliders. I'll generally just find a template online for a look I like rather than worry about trying to sculpt an entire human face.

I am so confused. That sounds entirely like a normal sub-par fast food experience, especially with how swamped they are increasing the mistakes several fold.

I think Story for the GBA was good. Hero on the 64 was fun, if a bit janky.

The easiest way to define a human right would be something you innately possess that can only be taken away from you rather than something that can be granted to you. You have the right to live, but an opposing tribesman can take it away from you. So we join up in the common hope of lowering the chances that right is taken from us. Then within the tribe, services are provided to each other to lengthen that chance. Probably lacking some nuance on the discussion, but that's the most basic.

Oatcakes posted...

If it's a situation that will never happen, then it's a rubbish argument.

The point of that wasn't to affirm the definition, which is solid on its own, but just to show a way in which it could potentially be denied by the people. A more realistic example is the above of a despot not allowing portions of the public to experience it. In that case, it's not a right being taken away, but a service being denied.

Oatcakes posted...

Seems a bit of a pointless thing to bring up then.

The point is the core definition of a human right. If it's something you cannot get yourself and it's something others could refuse to provide under any circumstance, then it's not a right. It's a social contract we form with each other.

Tubba Blubba is definitely the most memorable. Not sure if that correlates to being my favorite or not.

Questionmarktarius posted...

Only the most vile despots forbid healthcare.

Anything that requires the labor of someone else by definition cannot be a human right. If you had a hypothetical group of people where nobody wanted to be a doctor, even with being compensated or at the threat of death, there is no way to provide healthcare. Obviously such a situation would never exist.

Definitely not a human right. Glad to see someone phrasing it differently from the get go.

I'd say there's no such thing as an inherent societal right because it depends entirely on the means of the society. It's up to the people to vote on such things. Whether a country with the means should adopt such a system, I'd lean towards yes, but there certainly could be potential circumstances that make it unfavorable. This is one of those issues where everyone always seems to be strictly to one side or another, so it's rare to see actual nuanced discussion.

InfinityMonster posted...

Read. The. Fucking. Full. Study. Even then you've misconstrued everything from the start, which I've explained several times and you've kept putting words in my mouth. Either you're being disingenuous or just not equipped.

Jesus. Are you this insufferable and annoying IRL?

It concludes nothing relevant to the idea that there are any living beings in this universe currently experiencing 5 minutes for every 24 hours we experience, or even anything much less extreme than that.

InfinityMonster posted...

Bro. I said my piece and am done arguing and going to read that without any success. Imagine getting this anal. When you bring some citations, I might respond later. Otherwise, I already gave you the stfu and have stuff to do.

OK, maybe try actually attempting to refute things next time you argue. Not sure what you even want me to cite when you're not even addressing anything beyond "but they said X," even though they didn't actually conclude anything to match what you were saying and readily admit that within the very articles.

InfinityMonster posted...

I wasn't trying to win an argument. I was wondering why people, not only on the alt-right, but the right in general are so stubborn in seeing anything beyond their understanding of things with nothing backing it up. The guy said his source was common sense.

Lol, bro. How many times have you read that article without citing a single source for anything you're saying, combing to find the gotcha.

You said it was impossible. If you read the study, it lays out how it's possible. Doesn't matter if it's an intellectual excercise. I don't even know where else to go from here when you're being so stubborn.

Yes, neither article proposes the actual life that would live on such a planet, so it's currently impossible. What they do is generate a stage where they can play around with the idea, but both articles readily admit that they're just playing. That a planet can exist alongside a black hole without being destroyed in theory is not the same as saying life can actually grow on that planet and thrive. One of them literally requires there be absolutely nothing other than the single planet and the black hole, which is probably not something that can actually happen.

Yes and no. It's achievable to nearly anyone so long as they are willing to put in the work, but it can be quite a lot of work depending on initial circumstances. The amount of work one may need to put in may not be worth the money they make.

Eh, I don't know if I could stand that voice acting for many hours. The goofiness from their shorts doesn't really seem like it translates well into long form.

InfinityMonster posted...

You said it was not possible. It is and if you read the actual study, it'll give you more information. Own it bro. I don't mind owning shit. I owned that I was wrong with what Tyson said.

Well, at least nemu admitted it that he does have a cop bias in defending them, which is something that the alt right also repeats. So it's hard to separate.

You keep saying study, but "Although Bakala concedes that the study was simply an intellectual exercise, in part to get students thinking about thermodynamics." It's a fun little thing they ran that concluded with massive assumptions just like the other article.

InfinityMonster posted...

Why would this this equal no life is possible? The actual study says yes, it's possible even though there would be issues. You said it was impossible. Are you even paying attention?

I'll leave it to others to bring up your alt-right history. I've seen you defend a lot of the cop shit recently.

If the only argument you have is an extreme hypothetical that they cannot even 100% state they'd back, then you have no argument.

Oh no, I don't agree with the silly notion that all cops are bad. I guess you must be a far left radical using that same logic.

InfinityMonster posted...

"This is not possible"

"Well here's a study saying otherwise"

"Jokey article. Not possible. It's common sense. I know better than astrophysicists"

And yeah, you definitely post a bunch of alt-right talking points.

Again, cite something other than common sense or simply shut the fuck up.

"In any event, Bakala admits, I dont know what sort of life could form in this sort of environment."
Literally in the article. That kind of stuff is what makes it jokey. Articles like that are a dime a dozen. They like to imagine possible extremes without actually accounting for all variables. If the outcome requires five levels of "buts" then it's not actually meant to be taken seriously. If I have actual alt-right talk points, name them.

InfinityMonster posted...

Look, I can't take you seriously till you cite something. I didn't even read any of that because you have zero credentials.

What's with alt-right posters and their aversion and stubbornness towards science?

OK, it's clear you just don't like that your movie-influenced mindset was shattered by common sense. You legitimately believed the movie was accurate. Also, the fuck is with the people around here labeling people alt-right?

InfinityMonster posted...

Lol, cite something or shut the fuck up.

Like, I don't even know how to counter me citing something from experts and you calling it a jokey article. No where did I double down if you're paying attention my anally retentive dude. I've explained it several times.

The difference over close to five billion years on earth would range from 39 hours on the surface to 2.5 years in the center. That is billions of years on a habitable planet. To get anything close to your conception, you'd need something on such a high magnitude that no living being can reasonable exist. I don't think you conceive how close to a dangerous object you'd have to be to experience anything different than someone sitting on an average planet orbiting an average star.

InfinityMonster posted...

As I said, if you're not citing anything, we're done here.

I love how you know so much about the universe and can speak on how everything is everywhere when scientists with degrees that study this shit as a living disagree with you.

Like, I'm not the one the passing anything off as fact. I don't get why you're acting so anal.

It's very simple. Massive time dilation comes from massive speed or massive gravity. Humans or any life we can conceive currently cannot reach either while still living. Without those, the best you're going to get is a few microseconds difference. The way you imagine it to happen is clearly heavily influenced by a hyper exaggerated science fiction. Instead of realizing that, you simply doubled down on it like your initial post was in any way correct.

InfinityMonster posted...

I'm done here. It's an entire fucking study. Not just an article.

You've shown that not only did my OP completely fly over your head considering your unfounded accusations, you'll continue making up shit with nothing backing it other that some iamverysmart response.

No, you just want to defend your original argument to the death despite it being blatantly wrong. There is no life, intelligent or not, that is currently being affected by relativity by any major degree in the known universe unless we're making up some non-carbon lifeform that lives on the very edge of a fucking black hole.

InfinityMonster posted...

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/
could-habitable-planet-orbit-black-hole

Not only does that talk about a possibility of life, here's a fun tidbit.

"1 year passing on such a planet would see thousands of years go by around an ordinary star."

You're simply closing off the entire idea off some failed understanding.

Yes, a jokey article that takes massive leaps and acts under the assumption some kind of super resistant life could even form under such circumstances. Actual hypothetical models work under realistic circumstances. Again, you're going to insane extremes that do not work under any definition of life understood by humanity. Might as well assume there are ascended god races out there if we're going that far.

InfinityMonster posted...

Thank you. I was going by an earlier interview, where he's just like yeah, that the time dilation was real. He didn't break down how extreme it was, but even then. That was years. Something like 24 hours equaling 48 hours would be on the low end orbiting around there, which still doubles everything.

Because I gave a huge range and it was just something to consider. I wasn't trying to push it off as fact other than the equations behind it.

But you're sitting here stating factly that you know how life evolves everywhere.

Because you jumped to a completely unrealistic extreme. You're not even in the realm of theoretical unless you're hypothesizing some kind of wacky alien being that has surpassed its flesh and isn't bound by physical laws.

InfinityMonster posted...

It's not exaggerated. Tyson has spoken about this before and said it's definitely possible. It wasn't even a supermassive black hole.

I didn't propose anything. I gave an example of one of the possibilities and never did I say it would be at any specific locations, but I gave possible locations. Just for starters, black holes are not rare and we have no fucking clue how life could evolve elsewhere.

You got oddly defensive over it and started acting like I'm speaking of knowing what's exactly out there instead of possibilities.

I'm not sure how I come off as defensive simply by stating you have a very weird perception of relativity works in relation to how a living being could ever perceive it. There is likely nowhere in the universe a living being we could conceive would ever experience more than a fraction of a second difference from anywhere else.

JimmyFraska posted...

You really think those are the only two possibilities? How about that researcher and government that supported him were just fucked up, and wanted to damage the next generation?

From the assumption that "He was convinced that sexual contact between adults and children was harmless" is a true statement, yes. That could obviously be nonsense he used to justify selling children into sexual slavery, but nothing from that seems to make that assertion at least.

InfinityMonster posted...

I'm not sure you're understanding the point here my dude. I mentioned how black holes and really large stars/multi systems would have the strongest affect, but nowhere did I say everything is going to be affected on this or that it's going to be large for everybody. I said it's something to consider, especially if it's by Sagittarius A*. Hence saying it's relative and giving a huge scale.

Considering some of the other dumb stuff you've said in this topic, I think it's you who is misunderstanding.

You proposed a difference of five minutes = 24 hours, which is an insane difference when the general scale is clearly based on microseconds. There may certainly be places in our universe that display such insane time dilation, but that would be "standing" on the surface of these super dense phenomenon. There won't be any living things anywhere close enough to feel such an insane difference.

MarqueeSeries posted...

That's only for gravitational force on the scale of say, the Earth. The gravitational force of a black hole or a much more massive star than our sun would have a much more profound effect on time

Maybe in the very event horizon of a black hole, but outside of that I think you've just made some mistaken assumptions.

How the fuck does someone come to that conclusion? There certainly might be some cases where an abused child comes out of it mentally sound with no lasting issues, but that's probably a 1/10,000,000 scenario. He either just made an a monstrous assumption or had some really fucked up data.

InfinityMonster posted...

Watch Interstellar to get a visual understanding of this. The stuff about time dilation in it is real. Gravity slows down time and it's not a few microseconds because some of the stars are several magnitudes larger than the Sun. Especially as you get close to Sagittarius A*.

That's why I said it's relative. 24 hours can be 23 hours for some, and thousands of years for others. And if you're a planet that's falling in, it could be billions.

Yeah, I think you have the whole idea wrong. Gravity affects it, but it's on a micro scale, like a couple years difference in five billion years kind of thing.