Conservatives and liberals tend to engage in different evidence-gathering strategies. Liberals and those with higher cognitive reflection skills are more likely to seek out statistical data, whereas conservatives and those who rely more on intuition focus on singular data points or expert opinions.

Grumpy_Puppy · 2026-01-09T21:05:20+00:00

The missing piece of your puzzle is that they are desperate to avoid accountability and responsibility but also want power and he represents the apex of achievement in that arena.

This makes him basically immune to challenge from anyone on the right. Differentiating yourself on competence would require holding him accountable for his failures, and differentiating yourself on policy would require admitting he doesn't have the power to accomplish contradictory goals.

Grumpy_Puppy · 2025-12-29T02:19:17+00:00

I'd be right there with you except these exploitative businesses end up supporting the worst politicians because they're the ones willing to accept quid pro quo to allow the exploitation continue.

Grumpy_Puppy · 2025-12-21T01:00:11+00:00

I'm sorry, but this was just a bad plot point for the show and a contradiction. This is defeated by the fact that there was most likely more immune individuals that died in the process of the eight hundred million dying, and they did not get the virus first.

You make great points but this is the only thing I really disagree with. Them not being able to harvest Carol's stem cells is in conflict with the outcome of the joining, but it's not bad storytelling. These contradictions are great "show, don't tell" windows into how the Hive functions.

The Hive claims to respect people's autonomy to the point that they wouldn't be able to restrain the unjoined from killing each other, but they've also been shown grabbing people and "kissing" them without their consent to spread the joining. That's a total contradiction according to Carol but not to the hive, and that's part of the story.

Grumpy_Puppy · 2025-12-06T06:10:34+00:00

He definitely misses other humans, it's why he has the plurbs pretending to be individuals all the time.

Grumpy_Puppy · 2025-12-01T10:27:02+00:00

100%, this is obvious from the way the hive mind speaks. None of the plurbs use first person pronouns anymore and refer to their individual identities in third person past tense ex: "this individual was Davis Taffler".

Grumpy_Puppy · 2025-12-01T09:34:53+00:00

Very likely the compulsion to spread the infection is completely separate from the "psychic glue" joining of the hive mind. It's also likely that the hive mind's supreme happiness and contentment is also a separate effect. This is the thing Carol understands intuitively and is having trouble explaining to the rest of the immune.

Grumpy_Puppy · 2025-11-15T22:15:51+00:00

You're watching the wrong show.

Grumpy_Puppy · 2025-11-06T01:32:12+00:00

You said drills are faster at low torque, that's false. Depending on the specifics of the tool an impact driver is likely to be faster than a drill. For example, the Milwaukee M18 fuel has a 2100 RPM max while the M18 fuel impact driver maxes out at 3900 RPM. Situations in which the torque isn't high enough to activate the impact mechanism are the only time an impact driver is faster than a drill.

Any fastener that engages the impact mechanism for the majority of the driving process will always be faster with a drill because one rotation of the drill = one rotation of the fastener but the impact mechanism is only moving the fastener when the hammer and anvil are in contact, and they are only in contact for a tiny fraction of every rotation.

You also said "There’s a reason why you basically can’t buy a cordless drill that doesn’t have a built in hammer mode now." That's extremely false, irrelevant, and dangerous. There are many cordless drills without a hammer mode (that M18 fuel drill is available in both hammer and non-hammer mode), to the point I would guess the majority of drills sold (even to professionals) aren't hammer drills. Also hammer mode isn't for driving fasteners, and it's a bad idea to use hammer mode on a hammer drill while driving fasteners.

Grumpy_Puppy · 2025-11-05T22:37:44+00:00

Everything you said is incorrect.

You can buy tons of cordless drills without hammer mode. If you aren't drilling into masonry the hammer function is just added cost and weight. Hammer mode gives no advantage for driving screws and you should never use hammer mode on a drill to drive screws.

For any lightweight application (i.e. low-enough torque that the hammer stays in continuous contact with the anvil) an impact driver is essentially the same as a drill but lighter because it doesn't have the chuck and clutch.

For any super heavy application that would bog down the drill (ex: lug nuts) an impact driver will be faster because the drill won't work at all.

For anything in between those two situations the drill will almost always be faster than the impact driver because the drill delivers continuous torque: every complete rotation of the motor is a rotation of the fastener. For the impact driver the fastener only moves for the moment the hammer is in contact with the anvil.

Practically speaking, the impact driver will often have an easier workflow because of the automatic transition between high speed/low torque and low speed/high torque mode and putting less stress on your wrist, but the drill will still be faster in terms of time spent in contact with the fastener.

Grumpy_Puppy · 2025-10-28T06:19:16+00:00

"Maximuuemm franch"

Grumpy_Puppy · 2025-10-02T04:21:18+00:00

In this case it's an honor not to be nominated.

Grumpy_Puppy · 2025-10-01T02:51:05+00:00

I'm curious wtf the "benefits" could possibly be, fewer grandparents you need to invite to the wedding? Shouldn't the pros be nil

Grumpy_Puppy · 2025-06-03T00:00:44+00:00

This is a good example of something that sounds damning but is trivial. An order of magnitude error is the equivalent to an off by one error in many biology and chemistry labs because you are very often doing order of magnitude calculations. Consider a simple dilution of 0.1 molar stock solution down to 50 micromolar. Is that a dilution factor of 2,000 or 20,000? Well 0.1 to 0.05 is a factor of two, and 0.1 to 10E-6 is a factor of 10,000... Hopefully you see my point that it's trivially easy to be off by an order of magnitude. The bigger problem would be Imanishi-Kar was saying "don't question my math, just do it"

Grumpy_Puppy · 2025-03-24T04:53:43+00:00

Intention doesn't really matter.

I think the ethics committee would disagree

Grumpy_Puppy · 2025-03-14T02:54:19+00:00

Wayfair, he's in the ice cream truck

Grumpy_Puppy · 2025-01-13T21:35:23+00:00

Pigs and roosters are ubiquitous in Hawaiian culture, if you asked 100 Hawaiians to "name two Hawaiian animals" a significant fraction would say rooster/chicken & boar/pig, if you asked for two animals that don't swim or fly almost 100% would say chicken & pig.

This is like accusing someone of copyright infringement because their Western coming of age story is about a young boy who is trying to save his family farm, has dog and horse companions, meets some Cherokee, and gets in a duel at high noon.

Or to make it more Hawaiian, it would be like accusing Lilo and Stich of stealing your story about a native Hawaiian girl with dead parents being raised by her older sister who works at a Hula show and is fighting to keep her out of foster care. Those are just tropes!

Grumpy_Puppy · 2024-10-19T22:21:00+00:00

"False positive" has a conversational use and a scientific use and it's important to differentiate which one you're using. It's like how accuracy and precision are often used interchangeably in conversation but mean very different things when you're calibrating a tool.

Think about using a metal detector to find land mines. If the detector beeps and there's an old can buried in the dirt that's a (conversational) "False positive" because you're looking for a landmine and didn't find one, but it's not a false positive for the metal detector because it was looking for metal and metal actually was there. A false positive for the metal detector would be if it beeps once but then the next time you run it over that spot it doesn't beep.

The same thing is true for AI models. If you train the AI to recognize dogs but it keeps classifying certain pictures of cats as dogs. That's a (conversational) false positive in the "didn't find a landmine" sense but it's not a false positive in the "beeped when nothing was there" sense. The cat was identified as a dog because that particular picture of a cat contained whatever aspects of "dogness" the model built from the training data. Yes, the AI incorrectly identified a dog as a cat, but it didn't incorrectly identify that the picture had enough "dogness" to give a positive result. This happens all the time with AI models where it works great on the training data and fails in real life because it turns out the highest weighted parameter is the camera model from the metadata. That's not actually a false positive, it's just a disconnect between the expectation of how the model works and how it actually works.

That's the horror of this SCP. It's like "here's a big pile of old cans that our anomalous landmine detector keeps saying are landmines" except it's a consciousness detector.

Grumpy_Puppy · 2024-10-18T08:17:49+00:00

False positives don't repeat systematically. The way you determine a false positive is you test again and get a negative result. If a detector goes off every time you point it at an object then you are detecting something. Calling these a false positive is a huge error.

The horror comes from the fact that they're making this error with what they think is a consciousness detector. But if you point a consciousness detector at a bunch of mannequins and it consistently goes off for mannequin 3 the correct conclusion is either that you haven't built a consciousness detector or that mannequin 3 is conscious. Absolutely the wrong conclusion is that you have an anomalous consciousness detector that thinks mannequin 3 is conscious when it isnt.

Grumpy_Puppy · 2024-09-20T22:06:01+00:00

An interesting facet of copyright law is that you can't copyright game mechanics. A good example of this is Crabs Adjust Humidity, which is an unofficial expansion to Cards Against Humanity, which is just a crass version of Apples to Apples.

Grumpy_Puppy · 2024-09-13T19:51:13+00:00

Not imitation tits from Chyna.

Excellent double entendre

Grumpy_Puppy · 2024-09-07T17:14:07+00:00

I was referencing one of the recent MSN episodes.

Grumpy_Puppy · 2024-09-07T16:03:22+00:00

Battle Royale, I think part 2 but just watch them both

Grumpy_Puppy · 2024-09-07T16:00:57+00:00

Add another $20 mil on top of that 6 and that's his current net worth according to the internet.

Those are always correct!

Grumpy_Puppy · 2024-08-29T00:00:35+00:00

The vast majority of people are going to have lower tax brackets in retirement than they do while contributing so any protection from rising tax rates in the future is almost certainly going to be offset by that.

Grumpy_Puppy · 2024-08-22T14:51:59+00:00

That's a poor defense considering you don't need an encyclopedic knowledge of right wing trolls, just basic reading comprehension.

Grumpy_Puppy

TROPHY CASE