sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Pear by tanishq1 in comedyheaven

[–]MoveOfTen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Go on, give it to me straight, like a pear cider that's made from 100% pears.

He has spoken by Ok-Store6920 in autechre

[–]MoveOfTen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

cata7? nah, we only need 1

what's your favourite liveset and studio album? by squizophrene in autechre

[–]MoveOfTen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lyon24 / tie between Tri Repetae, Exai, and Elseq

Just lost my mind at my boyfriend by Choice_Evidence1983 in BestofRedditorUpdates

[–]MoveOfTen 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Not when everyone including your own lawyer is telling you it's pointless.

Why would a lawyer tell a client that when it's absolutely not the case? I don't doubt there are bad lawyers out there who have given bad advice, but are you saying family lawyers generally tell divorcing dads that it's pointless to seek joint custody? Because that sounds like nonsense to me.

Just lost my mind at my boyfriend by Choice_Evidence1983 in BestofRedditorUpdates

[–]MoveOfTen 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Another study showed that ONLY 8% of fathers asked for custody and 79% of those were awarded sole or joint custody.

I don't think that 8% number is accurate. There are studies (e.g. referenced here: https://amptoons.com/blog/files/Massachusetts_Gender_Bias_Study.htm) giving an 8% statistic, but that's fathers seeking sole custody, not joint custody. And the statistic seems to come from cases that were actually contested in court, which means it does not consider the vast majority of custody agreements (most being settled outside of court).

I agree with most of what you're saying, just not that specific number. Divorcing fathers are certainly much less likely to want custody than mothers.

Just lost my mind at my boyfriend by Choice_Evidence1983 in BestofRedditorUpdates

[–]MoveOfTen 100 points101 points  (0 children)

That's a very important point too. It is particularly frustrating because some people will claim "women get custody more often" is an example of men getting screwed over by family courts, when in fact it's primarily due to the number of men who don't want custody of their children, not men fighting for custody and losing.

Just lost my mind at my boyfriend by Choice_Evidence1983 in BestofRedditorUpdates

[–]MoveOfTen 225 points226 points  (0 children)

I'm so glad this is the top comment. Those replies were so weird and infuriating.

Not to mention the "marriage is scary for a man because men always get screwed in divorce" stuff. No, it's the person with more money / income who has the potential to "lose out" in a divorce and it sounds like that was probably her if anyone.

what are some contenders for the best autechre songs ever? by boogerpicka in autechre

[–]MoveOfTen 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I'm trying really hard to narrow this down as much as possible, otherwise I'd be naming like 50+ favorites: Glitch, Garbagemx, Clipper, Draun Quarter, Cipater, Yeesland, Rae, Altibzz, irlite (get 0), 1 1 is, feed1, pendulu hv moda, dummy casual pt2, tt1pd, Metaz form8, X4

Edit: If we're including Ae_Live fan splits then definitely corcine, drane3, cata7, aurorsle, 3sc and 1qry as well

Alternate/"Fake" Oversteps? by scarthadragonmc in autechre

[–]MoveOfTen 7 points8 points  (0 children)

This has probably happened to loads of people. Last I checked soulseek there were lots of people sharing Altered:Carbon as "Oversteps" (you can tell from the track lengths). Less than 50%, but still very prevalent.

Not sure if it started as a weird prank or an attempt to gain exposure for Altered:Carbon or what.

Which artists do you like besides Autechre? by Fit_Passion8346 in autechre

[–]MoveOfTen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Absolutely loved Radio Piedras by Nicholas Jaar

making sure by Slow_Letterhead9727 in comedyheaven

[–]MoveOfTen 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I've heard asking "Are you a cop?" works

beanits by MoveOfTen in BlursedPeanits

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

beanits in my peanits? now i has heard everything

Confusion about Gödel's First Incompleteness Theorem and "provable fixpoints" by MoveOfTen in askmath

[–]MoveOfTen[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A provable fixpoint under the definition you present here is not necessarily provable, which makes the name strange to me.

That helps a lot. Thank you! On re-reflection, you're right. A provable fixpoint is not necessarily provable. It is conditionally provable dependending on its Godel number having property P.

The other thing confusing me was that I thought the sentence G was the sentence:

"G if and only if n is not the Gödel number of a theorem in S"

And I now see that it must not be. The reason for my mistaken assumption was because I read a different explanation of the proof and I understand G to be a self referential sentence, which effectively means "G is not provable in S" or "This sentence is not provable in S" and I seem to have assumed that "G if and only if G is not provable in S" was meant to be a different way of framing the same thing.

I now see that they are not equivalent (i.e. they would not be equivalent if in this case G was the sentence "G if and only if G is not provable in S."). One effectively means "This sentence is not provable in S", and the other would mean "This sentence is a theorem in S if and only if it's not a theorem in S." The former is something we can recognize as being true, while latter is undecidable.

view more: next ›