4chan, in part, ruined real life. So much of the initial meme buzz around Trump came directly from 4chan - god emperor, etc. /b/ and /pol/ had large coordinated campaigns to boost Trump for lulz and to fuck with people. These made the news occasionally and were sometimes quite wide-reaching. Edit: not to forget Qanon, pizzagate, etc.

Additionally, 4chan is responsible for a massive swathe of meme culture more broadly. Most people don’t dredge its depths or even know “the hacker named 4chan” exists, but it has been a massively influential force.

Really well argued and explained, I hope people read and don’t just reflexively downvote.

They’re only worth that if people buy the shares

I definitely recommend it! Have to be very careful about staying safe, though. People don’t take injuries seriously enough. But it’s great exercise and very rewarding

Guitar: as a kid I just thought it’d be awesome to shred. Now I mostly play acoustic fingerstyle, but shred some. Interest has ebbed and flowed over the years, but been playing forever.

Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu: I wanted a challenge and to get good at something new. It’s hard, but I like it and just keep coming back. Been doing it for a couple years and am a blue belt.

Hiking: did it as a kid, now I do it with my wife who pushes me to hike more than I would otherwise which is good

Tech stuff: coding, piracy, stuff like that. Dad was in IT and taught me to look for solutions with tech. Never stopped. I’m not a fantastic coder, but use it for work and also to solve personal challenges, enter piracy.

That would be a fantastic political ad campaign. Picture of republican politician, “your body my choice”, and maybe a bad quote or bill they sponsored. Dems need to step it up with impactful ads

Yeah it looks nothing like her except sorta similar skin color and hair.

It’s genuinely crazy to me that people don’t use the OC. Not using it creates such a huge amount of needless ambiguity

First you have to ask what gender is. Gender is a set of behaviors expected of people of a given sex.

Then, you have to ask what it means to belong to a given gender. You don’t have to, and can’t, meet all the behavioral expectations of a given gender. Those expected behaviors change over time. People of all sexes have interests that cross gendered lines because gender is not perfectly correlated to specific behaviors - instead it is a broad notion of behaviors that are considered to correlate with a given sex.

Additionally, there exist people who are not really male or female due to genetic differences. But, society typically treats them as the gender typically assigned to the sex they most resemble. So, since they do not have the “correct” sex and may not participate in the “correct” behaviors to belong to a given gender, their assigned gender is arbitrarily determined.

Those 3 things establish that gender is: not biological, not behaviorally determined, and somewhat arbitrary.

Since gender isn’t biological, woman =/= female person

Since gender isn’t behaviorally determined, woman =/= someone who engages in typically feminine behaviors

Since gender is at least partially arbitrary, woman =/= a factual category that can be determined by material features of a person

If women don’t have to be female or engage in typically feminine activities and can’t be defined by physical or genetic characteristics, then what is left? Someone who identifies as a woman - who wants to be treated as a woman by others.

“But that’s circular!!!” It actually isn’t. “Woman” as a category confers societal roles and expected behaviors onto a person, “woman” as a person just means someone who belongs to the category “Woman”. The only determining factor is being a member of the category. It’d be like asking “what is a boy scout?”, getting “a member of the boy scouts” as an answer, and then being upset that there isn’t some fundamental universal law being appealed to when classifying people as boy scouts.

Nah. Obviously, you’d talk beforehand, and no one would be forced to use it. It’s no different than arranged dates through a matchmaker. Now, there’d be valid privacy and ethics concerns - especially if your ML model is racist. But that’s a whole different thing. People are often quite bad at picking good matches for themselves, and computers are great at pattern ID and so potentially good at finding matches.

I’ve seen many more coffee folks who have opinions ranging from “it doesn’t taste different than the local coffee” to “it tastes downright bad”. James Hoffmann has a good video on it: https://yewtu.be/watch?v=pkbuFwHnJQY

Primary thing seems to be the quality of the coffee cherries the civet eats. So if it’s just force-fed coffee cherries, it’ll be no better than normal coffee. If it gets to choose on it’s own, naturally, then it may pick better coffee cherries and the coffee may be better - but not because of the digestive process, most likely.

The problem is that it doesn’t actually taste good. It’s the labor-intensive and “exotic” manufacturing process that makes the coffee so expensive, not its quality.

I mean… maybe in this case? I feel like profile/picture based matchmaking is something an ML model could be pretty good at in theory. Match people based on physical preferences and attractiveness (get head scans and frontal & profile full body shots), basic demographic/location/financial info, fill out a questionnaire with hobbies, political views, sexual preferences, etc.

Do that for groups of satisfied pre-existing couples first to train the model on, then continue training the model on the successful matches from the app. Have it spit out X number of matches that have the highest ratings for all users, limit it to X matches per time period to limit “swiping” behaviors, then let users talk/date and provide feedback to the app about what they did/didn’t like.

Obviously, it would need major privacy protections given how sensitive the info is, but that’d be a way better system than Tinder and the like. Like a super powered robo matchmaker serving up the highest probability matches.

I didn’t realize how cheap the big hdds had gotten. Definitely looking into 2 bays.

You might be right. The Synology products look really good. I didn’t see that they actually have a sub-$400 4-bay NAS… DS423. Not sure if it’ll meet my performance needs. But the $600 4 bay doesn’t look too bad either really.

That isn’t really how the judging worked though. First they had a huge panel of judges - 9 of them. And they judge them on 5 criteria: technique, vocabulary, execution, musicality, and originality. It is qualitative, but it’s a comparative rating system with actual guidelines - so they each simply have to decide who did each thing better:

Maintaining physiological control while focusing on athleticism, form and spatial awareness.

The range of moves that display variation and the quantity of moves, ideally with minimal repetition.

The ability to land and perform moves smoothly, without falls or slips and while maintaining consistency and flow.

The ability to stay on beat, syncing movements to the rhythm of the music.

The capacity for improvisation, creativity and maintaining spontaneity with style and personality.

I don’t think breaking necessarily needs to be in the olympics, but we’re past the point of only allowing sports (looking at you, dressage) and we do have other artistic events (rhythmic gymanstics and synchro swimming). And, the scoring system for breaking was reasonable and able to determine valid winners.

Afaik the IOC did all the standard testing on her and didn’t find any issues (no doping, normal testosterone levels, etc). Idk if they did a genetic sex test - I’d imagine that isn’t standard. Is that correct? Regardless of the Russian-run boxing federation’s intentions, I’d still trust the IOC’s findings over theirs.

Plus, even if she was XXY or something, does that actually have any impact on athletic performance? I’d imagine not

Edi: yep. Looks like it is widely believed that having a y chromosome is unfair, but the science doesn’t necessarily back that up.

“improved understanding about genetic factors that lead to selection in sport should offer reassurance that female athletes with hyperandrogenism do not possess any physical attribute relevant to athletic performance that is neither attainable, nor present in other women.”

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-014-0249-8

I don’t think he’s ever had a plan - so while that’s his schtick, I don’t think it’s like a smokescreen or anything. He’s just some dumbass who wanted to start a show to interview interesting people and smoke weed. But, when you’re interviewing fringe political figures, racists, snake oil salesmen, etc. you have a journalistic duty that Joe Rogan: dumbass, was not prepared for and didn’t understand. Now he’s in over his head. People take him seriously, and he agrees with some of the crazy people he’s brought on because he’s a dumbass

Oh of course. Never meant to imply otherwise

If the strawman fits, burn it when you come to it. That’s what my grandpappy always used to say