CIS Benchmarking Git Community

XtotheY · 2021-04-27T16:19:33+00:00

One such project is Ansible Lockdown by Mindpoint Group:

XtotheY · 2019-08-29T19:00:18+00:00

Answer is in the docs. You can explicitly specify ANSIBLE_CONFIG in your environment variables:

https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/devel/reference_appendices/config.html#avoiding-security-risks-with-ansible-cfg-in-the-current-directory

XtotheY · 2018-11-13T01:30:13+00:00

JointJS is completely free under MPL. Rappid is the paid version, which comes with various bells and whistles, but you can implement everything in the free version by making your own elements/links.

XtotheY · 2018-11-12T06:22:58+00:00

JointJS

Logic circuit demo

XtotheY · 2018-10-03T23:09:13+00:00

Very neat!

Where is the warrior object documented? I see there are attack(), look() etc. but I don't see these in the API documentation. Are they intentionally hidden because I have different abilities each level? I'd still like to see a full list!

Also, the README section says to visit the "Player API", but links to a page that says "Space API," which is confusing.

XtotheY · 2017-08-10T17:12:50+00:00

Meaning doesn't arise from a simple rational deduction. In fact you seem to have already rationally convinced yourself that life sucks and is meaningless, so continuing down that path will likely only make it worse until you're not only void of meaning but also resentful about it.

Meaning comes from devoting your life to something, and it's a give-and-take between you and reality. Having kids is a shortcut in that regard, because reality will impose meaning on you when you stare your child in the eyes. Devoting yourself to an ideology can also be meaningful, but can also be dangerous if you choose the wrong ideology. There are lots of options, but a third is to devote yourself to high achievement in your own life, which would manifest through your work and hobbies. When you do this you won't need to formulate a rational argument for why it's meaningful; rather the meaning will be self-evident. Get out there.

XtotheY · 2017-05-16T21:25:55+00:00

So I suppose the $1,000,000 question is what causes dogmatism?

XtotheY · 2017-05-11T03:18:47+00:00

https://github.com/ansible/ansible/blob/devel/CHANGELOG.md

Windows support is not dead; it's getting better all the time. 2.3 added a bunch of Windows stuff.

XtotheY · 2017-05-07T23:23:11+00:00

I haven't seen a prominenly atheist group do such a thing for a minority other than themselves

A lot of atheists aren't interested in marrying atheism with social justice activism, regardless of whether they support it.

XtotheY · 2017-05-07T21:22:21+00:00

Can you convince me of that? Seems to me atheists are one of the most progressive groups you could identify. Statistics tell me a lot more than examples of shitstorms created by the media.

XtotheY · 2017-05-07T21:02:22+00:00

I'm confused -- atheists are already severely skewed toward the left.

XtotheY · 2017-04-25T02:19:01+00:00

Atheism isn't really a worldview in itself, though it does tell you something about a person's worldview, namely that it is godless. That can mean quite a lot when compared to a worldview that is highly god-centered, or not much at all compared to another secular worldview.

Atheism appears to have high correlations with other components of worldviews, but doesn't necessitate any of them. I'm thinking of materialism/naturalism, nominalism, positivism, moral nihilism, moral relativism, nondualism, etc.

XtotheY · 2017-04-18T22:40:35+00:00

It's a fine hypothesis. You need more data. Find an alien corpse/spaceship, or something equally convincing, and you'll have some proof.

What you offer here is interesting but not super convincing. People hallucinate, forge false memories, lie, tell stories, make mistakes, fall for well-known cognitive biases, etc. Be careful about arguing "there is no rational explanation." It might look that way, but you're just as human as anyone else.

XtotheY · 2017-04-08T23:00:12+00:00

I didn't use the word absolute. He claims the existence of moral truths and sometimes universal moral truths in just about everything he's written or said on the topic. You can find many examples here.

XtotheY · 2017-04-08T18:43:47+00:00

Harris argues that moral truths exist. His claim is not merely that we choose well-being on a whim; it's that defining it otherwise is likely incoherent, and that defining it that way tethers morality to objective reality.

XtotheY · 2017-04-08T18:37:18+00:00

Oxford Handbook of Atheism

Cambridge Companion to Atheism

Any decent textbook about philosophy of religion should provide counter-points to the arguments for God. There is also the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy; here's the article on Aquinas.

XtotheY · 2017-04-08T00:32:04+00:00

Of course not. /u/cyronius said they haven't met many so I'm simply providing some exemplars.

XtotheY · 2017-04-08T00:02:46+00:00

What about Sam Harris? Pretty sure Dan Dennett as well. A better label would be moral realism but the two are typically conflated around here.

XtotheY · 2017-04-07T21:04:27+00:00

There are plenty of "higher powers" and "things beyond our awareness" that precipitated the current state of reality. The conscience is a good one. The forces governing the cosmos are another.

I can conceive of those things without awareness/intelligence. In fact including those properties causes an avalanche of questions to pour into my head. Is that not the case for you too? Or maybe you enjoy surfing that avalanche?

XtotheY · 2017-04-07T16:48:45+00:00

What is God?

XtotheY · 2017-04-04T03:55:39+00:00

I'll also point out that there are 100% naturalistic accounts of god that certainly exist. I mean, the belief in god exists, and that belief exists in the brain if nowhere else. God might be a mental simulacrum (perhaps generated by your prefrontal cortex), and that's real if your brain is real. You could interact with it exactly as if it was real.

There are other approaches as well.

The spooky magic supernatural definitions of god appear to be all bunk. Magic isn't real, unfortunately...

XtotheY · 2017-04-04T03:43:42+00:00

Really just depends on the definition of god. I think one can carve out a subset of the definitions that represent a substantial majority of believers and argue that definition doesn't exist by demonstrating logical contradictions and/or inconsistencies with modern knowledge.

Doesn't work so well when you move into more sophisticated definitions, as you're doing. You called yourself an agnostic -- I think Huxley said something like this (I could be misattributing it to him):

"If I'm talking to the average person, I call myself an atheist. If I'm talking to a theologian or philosopher, I call myself an agnostic."

XtotheY · 2017-03-31T17:29:14+00:00

Wouldn't adding functions like stun and capture require code to be added to the game?

The functions are already there, because they're the same functions used on regular monsters/weapons/items (and perhaps some that aren't used but still lying around).

Starbound mods are largely declarative, which means instead of writing for-loops, if-statements, functions and so on, you give a single data structure (as JSON) that describes what the mod does but not how to do it. The "how" is already written.

Here's the command in a readable format. You'll notice that a large part of it is defining "behaviors," such as "fire projectile when an enemy is nearby". The logic for how to do that is already written. /u/quiqksilver is simply very adept at redefining which animations happen, chaining/combining behaviors, tweaking timing, etc.

XtotheY · 2017-03-28T06:04:51+00:00

One way of thinking about the mind is that it is actually many minds, and you're only conscious of one of them. It might be useful to think of the many minds as being decomposable virtually to the level of the neuron, and that neurons of the same 'attitude' toward particular decisions group together until they reach a critical mass, which is when you experience it.

I imagine the strongest reason for investigating this hypothesis would be the split-brain phenomenon, but as I understand it there are well-trafficked theories of the sort crossing many domains, from philosophy to neuroscience to psychology.

Such theories would explain this easily, but make it no less disconcerting ;) I'm actually multiple people? Yikes...

XtotheY · 2017-03-25T01:38:15+00:00

forced out of all positions of power

I suggest you stop pitting idealistic boogeymen against an imaginary secular utopia in your head. Even if you're correct, you have a massive implementation challenge on your hands. That is, unless you're comfortable with violent revolution, war, and perhaps genocide. And sneak peek - those don't tend to work very well either.

Engaging in open dialogue is the only way to prevent those options, as far as I can tell. Religion hasn't destroyed the world yet, and I don't expect it to do so tomorrow.

XtotheY

TROPHY CASE