Are you being intentionally evasive, or is that just your "thing"?
- Posts
- 2
- Comments
- 1771
- Joined
- 3 yr. ago
- Posts
- 2
- Comments
- 1771
- Joined
- 3 yr. ago
Gotcha, no hard feelings. I think we both appreciate the art and the artist.
but imo it’s important to aknowledge the skill behind something like this.
From my first post that's what I've been doing. I'm not sure why you're taking this thread where I have done nothing but compliment the artist and their skills and try to make it sound like I'm insulting the artist instead. Even with your response here you're doing that again.
Get started with what?
I, uh, I think those are the tires of the car it ate.
This isn't the first time I've been accused of being a bot, nor of using AI. Instead, its the other thing. I'm older. This is just how we talk. Heck, why do you think LLMs talk this way? Because it was trained on people data that talk like I do.
I don't really use LLMs or AI for regular tasks like posting online. I grew up with the skills to do that
Corrected, thank you. Aging eyes and lack of proofreading on my part are to blame.
Okay fine. I've tried to say this 2 times, but apparently I'm bad at communicating. None of my opinions have changed in my posts, this is what I've been trying to say this entire time. I'll spell out what I meant from the very first post:
- These drawings don't look like a photo
- I had thought to communicate these emotions required being able to draw like a photo
- I have learned by looking at this comic that drawing these complex emotions does not require drawing like a photo.
- I have learned by looking at this comic that drawing complex emotions is a different artistic skillset than drawing like a photo
- The artist is clearly very artistically talented.
I'm not bashing the artist at all. I'm not saying they are bad at art. I'm not saying their simply drawing style is simple to produce. I'm saying it doesn't look like a photograph, yet still accomplishes the artists goal of relaying these emotions incredibly effectively.
Good observations, but don’t mistake simplicity for a lack of talent or effort.
I'm saying the opposite. Or rather, the talent in expressing the ideas doesn't require a photorealistic drawing talent. I'm recognizing the talent for communicating these human emotions is separate, but not less amazing. This artist has this incredible talent!
The joke here is great, but what is really striking to me is how the artist, even with their simple drawing style, perfectly captured the affect of each person pictured. The clerk with a bit of anxiety delivering bad news yet with detached indifference, the other mechanic thinking "goddamit, another one of these. I don't get paid enough...", and the patron just
exacerbatedexasperated by the whole thing and having to once again make a bad choice from a menu of worse choices.I always thought it took much more artistic talent/effort to communicate these feelings, but this comic is an eye opener for me for how simple it is drawn, but how effective in communicating.
This one seems very equal to me. Its a usually a tragedy to lose someone of either gender. I’m not upset if a rapist or murderer commits suicide, however, irrespective of their gender.
I don’t really get your point here, but there is something like 3x more men suicide than women suicide, and this is pretty much true everywhere in the world: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/male-female-ratio-suicides-rates
My point is that neither men's nor women's suicide are dismissed. A woman committing suicde is an equal tradegy to a man committing suicide. I'm not aware of any social convention which dismisses men's suicide. This is what I meant when I said they are equal. Society treats men's and women's suicide the same.
I’m not following where this is a detriment to men. Statistically and my own anecdotal observation, women are much more negatively affected by job inequality.
It really depends on the fields, you’re right in most, pretty much all, cases it is a detriment for women, but for example when it is about working with children men get less hired, and even when they get hired they have to be really careful about what they do, they quickly get called pedophiles.
First, you're right on your very specific example, but that is a very very very small representation of job inequality. However, even in the case of male and female elementary school teachers where you're calling out discrimnation, it is men that are out earning women in the same jobs as elementary school teachers.
Further, the scare around male teachers being around young children is a construct mostly from the last 20 to 25 years. Trying to use that as a statement to suggest that there is equal job (and pay!!) discrimination against both men and women would be disingenuous.
I can’t say I see that reflected in society. What I do see are some calling out specific issues (at least one you’ve raised above) as recently negatively affecting men, while the same issue has been negatively affecting women far worse and for far longer and that it had been ignored. It comes off as lack of self reflection and disingenuous where men have allowed women to suffer for years (decades? centuries?), but as soon as men are experiencing it too, its a crisis now!
When you complain about something happening to you as a men pretty much all the time either people tell you to “just man up” and/or they even just laugh at your face.
What you're describing is an example of "toxic masculinity". I see a lot of irony in you citing it here as supportive of a position that would negate the argument of discrimnation against women vs men.
In short, we both agree that "just man up" is a problem and that philosophy should be discarded, but it isn't on women to fix that when its largely perpetuated by men.
Certainly not all, but certainly lots and lots of bad things. Only 13 of the 193 UN member nations have ever had a woman leader of the nation. source I don’t see how anyone can say women are to blame for that, nor the policies those world leaders put into place.
People in power are responsible for most of the bad things in the world, the fact that they are mostly men doesn’t mean all men are responsible for this,
Strawman. I didn't say because men are in charge that all men are responsible. Thats a common strawman on this topic. Please don't introduce it here.
women in power do lot of bad things too(Indira Gandhi, Aung San Suu Kyi, Park Geun-hye, Elizabeth Holmes to name a few), but it’s because of the power and individuals values they have not because of their gender.
You're straying pretty far from the topic here. This isn't "women leaders good, men leaders bad". The point you're replying to is specifically in the context of defining public policy in which discrimination occurs. There have been so few women leaders, and their tenue in modern politics so short that I'm not sure if we can really measure very much impact (positive or negative) on discrimination yet.
Ruby was the most approachable language I found and sheparded me from my limits of bash scripting and Windows batch file scripting into the next level.
The author derides Ruby's easy readability and syntax because it has issues scaling to large enterprise applications. I don't disagree there is a performance ceiling, but how many hundreds of thousands of Ruby projects never rose to that level of need? The author is also forgetting that Ruby had Rubygems for easy modular functional additions years before Python eventually got pip.
I don't write in Ruby anymore, and Python has evolved to be much more approachable than it was when Ruby was in its prime, however if someone came to me today saying they wanted the easier programming language to learn that could build full applications on Linux, OSX, Windows, and the web, I'd still point them to Ruby with the caveat that it would have limits and they would be better served by Python in the long run.
but I think the realistic reading is it was simply a kickback to fortune 500 companies that got these politicians elected.
If there were no legitimate geopolitical reasons, then the "simply a kickback" would be much more plausible. Also, if it was a single source company, then "simply a kickback" would look true. Additionally, if was perhaps just domestic companies "simply a kickback" would certainly be even more likely. Lastly, the Chips act wasn't just about production domestically. It also blocked sales/exports of completed high end chips and chip making equipment to China. If the Chips act was "simple a kickback" you wouldn't do all that other stuff, and you certainly wouldn't allow foreign winners (like Taiwan's TSMC).
Was their rewards because of industry lobbying? Certainly. However, unless you're in a purely communist system of government where all the companies are owned by the state, you're always going to have private companies benefiting from government spending, tax breaks, and subsidies. As to this just applying to fortune 500 companies, there isn't really a "mom and pop" semiconductor industry making handfuls of chips at a time except outside of engineering sample that are used in R&D for fortune 500 companies.
The worst of it hasn’t happened yet. The point where consumers can no longer afford to consume is coming.
Its mostly already arrived.
"As of June 30, the top 20% of earners accounted for more than 63% of all spending"
This means that the other 80% of Americans represent only 37% of the spending done today. If a company is looking to maximize profits the typical path is to do so by marketing to the group where they could earn the most money. That is less and less the bottom 80% of Americans.
The creator in that video seems to think the Chips Act subsidies were to benefit consumers by having affordable memory produced domestically. That wasn't the goal. The goal was to derive drive GDP by having another source of domestic production, and drive job growth/tax revenue from workers working at the domestic facility. Lastly, it was to have strategic domestic production decoupled from other nations so we, as a nation, could not be held hostage by another nation (like we do to so many other nations) for crucial (pun very much intended) resources we need.
Nothing about that is about making RAM cheaper for retail consumers.
Blagojevich had the "D" but was also a bad pardon. Criminals need to account for their crimes and serve their sentence.
Then again, I don’t want to live in Ohio either. Yet here we are.
Well, at least its cheaper cost of living than FL.
I had read October Sky
The book was called "The Rocket Boys". The movie made from the book was "October Sky". (I honestly like the movie name better, though).
The promise of “fiber to the home” is still mostly unrealized, but those trunk lines are out there with oodles of “dark fiber” ready to carry data… someday.
Counterintuitively, I'm seeing "fiber to the home" deployed more in rural an exurb areas. My guess this is because its lower density meaning installing and maintaining copper repeaters becomes more expensive than laying long distance, low maintenance, fiber. Additionally its easier to obtain permits because there is far less existing infrastructure to interfere with right of way and critical services.
We got fiber to the home in our exurb about 4 years ago here in the USA. Its really cheap too. 500Mb/s is $75, 1Gb/s $100, and 5Gb/s I think is $200 per month.
Isn't that convenient! One lesson you learn as you get older is to simple "let people continue to be wrong". That's what I'll do now. You should probably just block me then because I must be AI, right? I think you'll be doing both of us a favor. Have a great day!