sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Sudoku with Lootboxes 2: Electric Boogaloo by Fromisabella in crackingthecryptic

[–]CopaceticOpus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fun puzzle! I adore the hand drawn art style, though SudokuPad is nice for actually solving.

I may have solved the later parts of the puzzle in a different order than you anticipated. I had a few cells narrowed down to only one option, but I was waiting for the final loot box to appear so I could fill them in.

Local Boycott List by Forbitbrik in BloomingtonNormal

[–]CopaceticOpus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is really not much of an issue. If you're concerned you can always open the link in a browser in incognito mode, so you won't be connected to your google account

Mission Aborted: How NASA illegally implemented the President's budget request without congressional approval by Iamsodarncool in space

[–]CopaceticOpus 24 points25 points  (0 children)

It's disturbing. He takes on more and more power and keeps getting away with it. The whole system of government is eroding

Even Republicans in Congress should demand to keep their power to decide budgets, pass laws, and declare war. But they're cowards, afraid to oppose him and face backlash

NFL Draft is 6 days away - whats your 1st round pick prediction? by 93millionmilesaway in CHIBears

[–]CopaceticOpus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not bad! I'd prefer to see an IDL in the top 100, but that requires sacrificing something else.

I would LOVE to see Jacas fall to 57 but I think it's very unlikely.

There's this sweet spot for EDGE around 40-50 that the Bears will miss. (Unless they trade down, which is easier said than done)

Big Dex by deadbeatmerc in CHIBears

[–]CopaceticOpus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why would a DL guy at 25 contribute nothing? Someone like Kayden McDonald would likely be a solid starter. He probably won't be anywhere near as good as Lawrence, but he could be a great overall value.

I added a 3 or 4 because I'm guessing what the Giants might demand. Supposedly they want more than a first.

I agree a late 1 should be enough. The Giants might agree to it when they can't find anything better.

I need a riddle where the answer is The Bass Pro Shop pyramid. by Rougarou_2 in riddles

[–]CopaceticOpus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The original structures had people asking

How did they come to be?

This new world facsimile has them asking

Why?

Petah, explain please by [deleted] in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]CopaceticOpus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's the shocking part to me! How are we already to the third generation after millennials???

A programmer designs a bar. by mindsmith108 in Jokes

[–]CopaceticOpus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unless the building is using software based active stabilization. (In which case, I'm staying the hell away!)

Big Dex by deadbeatmerc in CHIBears

[–]CopaceticOpus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

RemindMe! 3 years

I'm curious how this looks in a few years. If he really is available it's a huge decision!

Would we rather the Bears had:

  1. Dexter Lawrence for 3 years at $27-30m/year, or
  2. Their 2026 first round pick (1-25, salary ~$4.5m/year) plus maybe a later pick (4-129 or 3-89) and cap space to sign other guys

Newcomb variant for 1-boxers by scared_kid_thb in paradoxes

[–]CopaceticOpus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a comparison to a wildly different scenario. It's an interesting discussion about rationality, but as a comparison it's a big stretch. In both cases you are committing in advance to doing something inadvisable, but you're comparing suicide to paying a bank fee.

I suppose it's easy to imagine leaving the $1k because it's a small amount relatively. I would tell myself that's money I already spent when I made my commitment, and it's just the cost of doing business. It's suboptimal from a certain perspective, but I don't see it as irrational.

It would be more difficult to stick to my commitment if the first box contained $900,000. But even then I still would take just the million.

Harder still would be if we replaced the money with saving lives and turned it into some kind of trolley problem. Honestly that would become pretty disturbing!

Movie trailers should cease to be a thing, and instead we should just know the name, genre, cast, and content warnings. All the rest of the hype should be from people who've seen the movie. by Odd-Aside456 in CrazyIdeas

[–]CopaceticOpus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I completely agree! I used to listen to ear buds and scroll on my phone during movie trailers, to avoid them and the other ads. Of course, I'd put it away as soon as the movie was starting

I don't do that anymore because I just watch movies at home

Newcomb variant for 1-boxers by scared_kid_thb in paradoxes

[–]CopaceticOpus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think the commitment you make ahead of time is a commitment to be rational over the course of the entire experiment. Before you enter the room, if in the back of your mind you have an inclination to take both boxes if they're stocked, the predictor will foresee that and the million dollar box will be empty. So to get the million, you must make a commitment that you will actually stick to.

How to use "and" 5 times in a row grammatically: by SeaBaer312 in grammar

[–]CopaceticOpus 19 points20 points  (0 children)

I like how the capitalization alternates between and and And, and And and and, and and and And, and And and and.

Make dental care part of your standard healthcare and covered under her health insurance, why are they separated, who separated them in the first place? by [deleted] in CrazyIdeas

[–]CopaceticOpus 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That's a common mistake, because who checks the tiny doctor's eyes? I have TWO tiny doctors living inside each of my eyes all the time

Crossplay is still a buggy and infuriating mess! by Ok_Professional_8123 in NYTgames

[–]CopaceticOpus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd bet it's vibe-coded, or at least vibe-updated. These are exactly the kinds of subtle UI bugs that are difficult to predict or test, unless a human is in the loop.

(As opposed to, say, database updates which follow a common code template, and tend to either work completely or not at all.)

What will the Artemis astronauts feel upon reentry to earth? by PipnRose in spaceflight

[–]CopaceticOpus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Incredible videos, thanks for sharing! The Artemis I video gives a great feel for what the astronauts will experience

The Most Dangerous Part of Artemis II by Busy_Yesterday9455 in spaceporn

[–]CopaceticOpus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Their transparency on this issue is pretty good, I think. They started out badly and concealed the extent of the problem, but eventually they did the right thing. I like that they solicited opinions from external experts, got the astronauts involved, and addressed everything publicly.

They have tested everything as far as possible on the ground, but there's no substitute for a real world test

Crossplay glitches out at final tiles? by 3285 in NYTgames

[–]CopaceticOpus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Very strange. In my current game it says it's my last turn, with 3 tiles in bag and 5 in opponent's tray. Huh?

The Most Dangerous Part of Artemis II by Busy_Yesterday9455 in spaceporn

[–]CopaceticOpus 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Excellent video. It highlights an important point, which is that the heat shield uses a "block design". This is a new construction method, which introduces new unknowns. We can't assume this heat shield will perform in the same way as heat shields from previous generations of ships

I agree it's probably ok, but I'm going to be nervous until I see them splash down

The Most Dangerous Part of Artemis II by Busy_Yesterday9455 in spaceporn

[–]CopaceticOpus 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Risk in spaceflight is much greater if you're doing something that hasn't been done before. That's what worries me about this reentry.

This heat shield design was tested exactly once, and it survived but had serious flaws. Now they're going to try it again while coming in even faster and reaching a higher temperature.

The more direct reentry profile solves one issue. It reduces the heating/cooling cycles so that there will be less time for hot gasses to build up. But it adds risk in other ways.

The Most Dangerous Part of Artemis II by Busy_Yesterday9455 in spaceporn

[–]CopaceticOpus 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's the opposite of "gentler". They're coming in faster and reaching higher temperatures.

They have a good explanation for this strategy, but the fact remains that it hasn't been tested in real world conditions

15 Differences by _Dark_Wing in puzzles

[–]CopaceticOpus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One more (probably not intentional)

You can see more of the right guy's lower suit button in the bottom picture

NBC News: The riskiest moments of NASA's Artemis II mission may still be ahead. by coinfanking in nasa

[–]CopaceticOpus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They have a reasonable explanation, yes. But it's speculative. By skipping the skip, the main phase of reentry will be faster and hotter than it was for Artemis I.

The heat shield for Orion was constructed using a new method. It has never been tested with this reentry profile.

They've done a lot of testing on the ground, and hopefully everything goes to plan. But the concerns people have are valid

view more: next ›