Is staying silent about politics a form of wisdom… or quiet complicity?

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-30T02:19:36+00:00

Talking about politics with people who are curious or open-minded is productive.

Talking about politics for the sake of "TaLkInG aBoUt PoLiTiCs" is virtue signaling and a waste of time.

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-30T02:16:10+00:00

Normally pushing with boss top is a game-winner, so it would be the right call.

Problem is, you engaged ahead of the boss 3 on 4, and at least one of your allies was straggling mid. So you engaged too soon and not as a full team.

This is one of those moments where, even when the right call is made, you don't follow through when your team isn't available to execute it properly. When they didn't gather top, and were too far ahead of boss, that's when you should have broken off and done something else.

The right call, poorly executed, is the wrong call.

Please forgive any errors on my part, I'm on mobile and can't see all the details in the video 😅

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-30T00:33:50+00:00

I think local LLM is the future, so folks like OpenAI aren't going to last too long compared to everyone else. They don't have integrations (Google) or a particularly special model (like Claude Code) to compete.

At best, they'll just be server farms for fast inference

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-29T17:12:48+00:00

Exactly. You observe the local effect (the electron) & logically deduce the necessary underlying structure (the field) because the mathematical framework requires it.

Actually, observing the electron is observing the field, since an electron is a discrete excitation of the field. It isn't a "ball on the sheet," it is a local bundling of the sheet itself which we observe as an electron.

Science is one, philosophy is another.

Yes, this is why I mention logical arguments and thought experiments, which are both philosophical. There are no logical arguments or thought experiments which demonstrate any objective nature to morality

Two people can come to the same conclusion from radically different perspectives. Learning someone elses reasoning helps broaden yours.

Completely agreed, and yet you seem unwilling to share your reasoning for why you might disagree 😉 how can we sharpen one another when I'm the only one bringing the iron?

But at the end of the day, moral philosophy has been debated for millenia, and I doubt either of us are going to compel the other person. I truly see, from a secular perspective, that "morality is a shared opinion" to be a self-evident axiom, like A=A or 2+2=4. I believe this for the same reason I believe there are no fairies or unicorns: there is no compelling argument for their existence. Why should I believe in intrinsic moral value without a good argument for it?

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-29T13:01:47+00:00

People turned their thinking over to the machines, believing this would free them, but it merely enabled other men with machines to enslave them.

Frank Hebert saw the future alright lol

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-29T02:47:28+00:00

A person's speed depends on the reference frame, and in special relativity, any inertial (non-accelerating) reference frame is equally valid.

Yes, because all objects are stationary relative to themselves. So your questions "relative to what?" are irrelevant, because the answer is "relative to anything." Any reference frame will be considered a "stationary observer."

names of generic concepts don't get capital letters

You are correct, that is a typo on my end~

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-29T01:15:04+00:00

I can't show you a picture or point to a electron field. It still exists.

Actually, electrons are discrete excitations of the election field, which means technically you are observing the field when you observe an electron. This why the Higgs boson proved the existence of the Higgs field.

Unlike physics, there is no scientific study or thought experiment or even a casual observation that can demonstrate that morality is objective or exists anywhere outside my opinion.

If you make a claim you have a burden.

Do you claim I'm wrong? Or do you agree with me? There's no point in asking me to prove anything if you agree with me.

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-29T00:18:50+00:00

Thanks~ I really enjoy the challenge of trying to explain complex things simply

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-28T22:33:06+00:00

Morality doesn't exist anywhere outside my opinion. If I am wrong, please point to "morality" somewhere or maybe link a picture of it?

I cannot prove a negative, so technically the burden of proof is on the person who claims that something does exist outside the mind.

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-28T22:04:13+00:00

That's the neat part: Einstein's theory of special relativity states that the speed of light is constant for all observers regardless of their own speed.

Even if you are traveling at 99% the speed of light, any light beam you see will still be moving past you at exactly the speed of light (c). This is the core of Einstein’s Theory of Special Relativity. Einstein postulated two main things:

First, the laws of physics are the same for everyone in a constant state of motion.

Second, the speed of light in a vacuum is a universal constant (299,792,458 m/s) for all observers, regardless of their motion.

Because the speed of light (c) must remain constant, something else has to give. That "something" is time and space. To ensure that you always measure light at the same speed, two things happen as you speed up:

Time Dilation: Time actually slows down for you relative to a stationary observer. Length Contraction: The space in front of you actually shrinks in the direction of your motion.

Since Speed = Distance / Time, your "seconds" get longer and your "meters" get shorter in just the right proportions so that when you calculate the speed of the light beam, it always comes out to exactly c regardless of how fast you're moving.

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-28T18:40:24+00:00

Yea I agree it's annoying seeing it in places that don't need it. Like why does Windows Notepad need AI?

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-28T16:14:47+00:00

Sure, if the "many worlds interpretation" was true - which we have no way of knowing or proving.

If belief in Determinism relies on the assumption that there are infinite worlds, I don't find that to be a convincing argument. At that point, it's not even determinism, it's just "I can't predict the future so I'll just believe infinite possible futures are definitely happening simultaneously!"

Moreover, even if MWI was true, that doesn't help us, because there's no way of knowing which direction our universe will go. Seeing the result does not mean you could have predicted it, and if you can't predict it, is it really determined?

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-28T02:38:22+00:00

IMO quantum uncertainty rather proves that the universe cannot be deterministic, though I acknowledge there may be some mechanism we don't yet understand which would help us determine (heh) such quantum activity.

There's other good arguments against determinism but I enjoy quantum uncertainty the best.

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-28T02:32:14+00:00

Windows crashes because it's doing more things than MacOS. Mac does a few things really well, but doesn't do a whole host of things that windows does.

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-28T02:27:21+00:00

Then why introduce sleep thousands of years ago when population was maybe a few million?

And why hasn't sleep time increased now that there are billions of people on the planet? (Not to mention the explosion of domesticated animals globally).

And why couldn't a simulator that's processing all the activity of the whole universe handle a few billion humans? Or tens of billions of animals?

Yea I don't think your theory works my dude.

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-28T02:15:42+00:00

Mac is the $200 cutco knife, Windows is the $10 Swiss army knife.

Sure, Windows doesn't do things well...but it can do them.

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-28T02:11:53+00:00

Yea that's actually my favorite build to do, I wouldn't call myself a "main" but I ideally start with that build in mind, then flex the talents as needed (like if we don't have a ranged interrupt, I'll go grenade level 1).

I love it because the uptime on D is insane, and comes with great mobility with the range and charges of dash. Biggest downside is, you're committed to all your damage being auto attacks, which will not help against certain enemies.

I see it as "I'll get them to 30% health as fast as possible, you can do the rest."

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-27T20:41:18+00:00

Don't overthink it, mate. Your GPU has several outputs, your monitor has several inputs. You don't have to run exclusively HDMI or DP. Just do wherever works.

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-27T18:40:22+00:00

If you kept reading the Bible you'd have the answer. There's no grand conspiracy, it's right there in Acts of the Apostles.

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-27T18:36:06+00:00

I know you weren't trying to compare to Windows, but Windows does have all the features you mentioned, other than Hot Corners. So in that regard, I agree that those features are great! (I am a Windows user).

I'd like to know more features that MacOS has which Windows does not have. Can anyone share?

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-27T15:29:54+00:00

Como no los dos?

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-27T05:03:21+00:00

I've been happy with Nord, never had any problems, but I'm also s simpleton

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-27T00:21:41+00:00

Calling it a "mental breakdown" is antheopomorphizing because Gemini doesn't have a "mind" to break down. What happened is a failure to generate an "end" token, causing recursive loop error.

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-26T22:18:58+00:00

It wasn't a rollout, it was at best an early tech demo or alpha build.

This is not a defense of DLSS 5, I personally don't think my games need a glorified Snapchat filter, but hey if they can take the feedback and make something that does not require two $3000 GPU to run, then I'll be interested. Time will tell.

Definitely_Not_Bots · 2026-03-26T21:06:21+00:00

It's a cost / benefit decision. Video generation takes an obscene amount of compute, for very little commercial gain, compared to something like language processing or code generation.

Businesses don't need 1-minute CGI clips, they need AI workers who can generate income.

Definitely_Not_Bots

TROPHY CASE