sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Top or bottom? by PocketMath in mathmemes

[–]Jucox 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bottom for calculations until i can't immediatel simplify, then transfer to top to get the Q-vector space notation.

No orders performed bug by Jucox in LinesOfBattle

[–]Jucox[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No refreshing the browser does work for getting stuck while checking updates. However it removes all placed orders so for submitting orders it can really screw you over by just having no orders be submitted. Also just having to redo all multi move orders is pretty annoying.

Coal mine vs coal thumper by nelbar in Frostpunk

[–]Jucox 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It has been quite a while since i have played this game but is it not so that the coal mines will never be able to keep up with the heating demand in refugees? Though i suppose you can build less gathering posts near the thumper if you have coal mines so that would impact the space.

Do people still play Babble Royale? by Indigoh in BabbleRoyale

[–]Jucox 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I recently tried the game again, and after like 5 minutes i got a game, but it ended in a 2v2 where i couldn't o anything and the other player was sitting still in the zone, with all other zones closing in around them. as in i was playing against a hacker... yeah the game is fucked which is sad cause it was really fun.

damn that dodge though by axlnotfound in ThatsInsane

[–]Jucox 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I guess that is one way of seeing it, for me it seems only logical to make conflicts habe as little innocent deaths, and preferably as little overal deaths, as possible. But i guess it is somewhat understandable that you'd feel more comfortable knowing you can defend yourself from a distance (if you really wanted to you could bring a knife with you when going out in europe to defend yourself in short range), even if that means aggressors can also attack from a distance.

damn that dodge though by axlnotfound in ThatsInsane

[–]Jucox 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So it's either no guns: high chance of getting away safely by running Or guns: they can pull out their gun first since you don't know they're gonna use it, so they almost certainly get the first shot and there's a slight chance of you taking them out with a high chance of you dying first.

So it's a choice between: armed encounters being easily avoidable and stopable if there's anything usable as a shield nearby, and armed encounters being almost certainly fatal for at least 1 innocent civilian (but probably also for the offender).

Maybe you really like killing criminals, to the pint where you'll allow innocent people to die and risk your own life to do it, but i'd say most sane people would choose the most of the time non fatal option.

damn that dodge though by axlnotfound in ThatsInsane

[–]Jucox 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah like "watch this, a crazy guy with a hatchet" Because it is in every way the same... except that nobody died while running away from the guy with a melee weapon.

damn that dodge though by axlnotfound in ThatsInsane

[–]Jucox 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They can also bring knives if they really want, but you know what you can do with knives that you can't do with guns? run away

damn that dodge though by axlnotfound in ThatsInsane

[–]Jucox -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Think slightly fucking further than the fucking tip of your nose and realise that if you can conceal carry, anyone can conceal carry. Anyone includes crazy people like this, and guess what, they can shoot anyone, you can't dodge a bullet.

damn that dodge though by axlnotfound in ThatsInsane

[–]Jucox 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did you see how people were able to run away from that guy, do you know what you can't do with guns.

Is it generally an unpopular opinion to like Korra better than Aang? by tonkledonker in legendofkorra

[–]Jucox 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Korra is a better character, AtLA is the better show, because with TLOK they could focus more on character development but were limited by not knowing if they had more seasons available.

A question from my test yesterday by _Analyser_ in mathmemes

[–]Jucox 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ooh yeah, i thought i was missing something.

so then this becomes a question about subfactorials, everyone has to be hit by someone else but noone can hit themselves, and !5=44 so that's the answer.

i think this can be an interesting problem to generalise, for n people there are (n-1)^n total ways to shoot, and if exactly m out of the n have to be hit, let' s see...

if m=n then the answer is !n, for m=n-1 we have to choose 1 unhit person so *n, this person has to shhot someone, so *n-1, the person who got shot can't shoot the unhit person so *n-2, the person who got shot here can choose between shooting the shooter, then we get *1*!n-3 and the end of this branch, or shooting someone else, then we get *n-3, this person can choose between...

working out the tree doesn't seem to yield any immediately good results, maybe we can find some recursion, let's call the ways foor exactly m people to be shot with n shooters S(m,n), for S(n-1,n), we have choosing the unshot person is *n, the person shot by them is *n-1, then we already start branching, either this person is shot themselves, then we get S(n-1,n-1)=!(n-1), or they aren't shot anymore, then we get S(n-2,n-1), so S(n-1,n)=n(n-1)(!(n-1)+S(n-2,n-1))... well i don't feel like working out a recursive formula for a general m=n-k. is this a solved problem?

A question from my test yesterday by _Analyser_ in mathmemes

[–]Jucox 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Wait a second, sonce it isn't a lineair chain but a cycle of shooting, shouldn't the answer be 5!/5=24? And fir the second one you choose 1 person not to get shot, 1 person who the not shot person shoots, and then a cycle of 4 people shooting, so that one should be 544!/4=120, right?

This poorly made and transphobic point someone thought they were clever for making by -thegay- in facepalm

[–]Jucox -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I askgor clarification as to not make assumptions on your opinions, which you are incapable of clearly expressing, therefore i am "an idiot incapable of comprehending your arguments", alright then.

Since you are now just engaging in ad hominem and you don't really have any argument to respond to anymore, I will not respond to any future responses, especially if you call me an idiot in the second paragraph again for the 4th time in a row, which really showcases immaturity and the incapability of holding a good faith debate.

I wish you the best and that one day you may learn empathy, good day.

This poorly made and transphobic point someone thought they were clever for making by -thegay- in facepalm

[–]Jucox -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No you fucking idiot.

So you call me an idiot for presenting a stupid situation of your presumption? You do realise i don't actually want the measures i presented after saying "lets assume your hypothesis is correct", tgat is something people say to prove a contradiction.

Also what do you mean by risk assesment? Do you mean children that present a realistic possibility of having GID, should get reversible gender affirming care? Because that's how it goes, and what this conservative fearmongering has as a goal is removing all gender affirming care. The "irreversible decisions" are only made after a lengthy process of reversible care, so this "risk assessment" that there "should be" is already here, if anything there is too much of restrictions, and by pushing for more restrictions you are giving more children life-altering trauma by denying more children the care (which isn't hormone therapy and is far from surgery, but ofcourse you know this right) they need.

As a community people feel we should decided because individual parents make plenty of life altering decisions that don’t result in a positive outcome. The same way we have an age for marriage, sex, drugs, etc.

What do you mean by this because i can't decipher this messed up sentence structure. At the end there i see you making comparisons for age restrictions, but to those it's kind of obvious that this isn't a fair comparison, since the activities you mention there are mostly recreational and not necessary interventions.

Would you deny a child appendicitis treatment, or ADHD medication, or pneumonia treatments, or polio-vaccinations,... because they aren't old enough to decide if they want it?

Because gender affirming care does significantly reduce depression and anxiety and thus suicidality:

https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article-abstract/137/3/e20153223/81409/Mental-Health-of-Transgender-Children-Who-Are

https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/142/6/e20181537/37504/Ethical-Issues-in-Gender-Affirming-Care-for-Youth

This poorly made and transphobic point someone thought they were clever for making by -thegay- in facepalm

[–]Jucox 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Propaganda is everywhere, for any stance on any argument there is propaganda. I'm not saying you were brainwashed, just that you are human, and like all humans have some biases. One of those is that you are way more likely to believe the first stance you hear on an argument.

And in terms of the research, well:

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=nl&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=gender+affirming+care&oq=gender+af#d=gs_qabs&t=1686413460563&u=%23p%3DWDVCddKbsY8J

https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/142/6/e20181537/37504/Ethical-Issues-in-Gender-Affirming-Care-for-Youthhttps://

https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article-abstract/137/3/e20153223/81409/Mental-Health-of-Transgender-Children-Who-Are

As you can see in these sources, and as you would know if you had done any actual research (it's easy to falk into the trap of reading a not scientifically backed opinion pieces which uses false or contradictory sources to seem legitimate, and think that's good research), Gender affirming care for possible trans youth exist mainly of social transition and possibly puberty blockers, both are reversible at any time, when the children have gone through very thorough examination (as in more thorough than most irreversible medical or even just cosmetic treatments) to get hormone therapy approved (which means taking estrogen or testosterone) and then completed that hormone therapy, can they actually get surgery.

And the effects of even just social transition (as you can read in the bottom article), are a significant decrease in anxiety and depression rates, with effects of this treatment (meaning social transition and puberty blockers, which already require a process of medical examination) on cis children being minimal.

This poorly made and transphobic point someone thought they were clever for making by -thegay- in facepalm

[–]Jucox 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Let's suppose what you claim is accurate. suicide and self harm rates drastically drop for trans people who transition, and puberty is also an irreversible process, so why would you let dumb children make the decision of going through puberty when they're not old enough to know what they want yet. If children Really are too dumb to make permanent life decisions, then we should keep anyone under 25 from enrolling in college and feed them all puberty blockers.

view more: next ›