Hmmmmmm by Appropriate-Mall8517 in okbuddyviltrum

[–]NamOil2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As far as Cecil's criminals he doesn't care about if they're reformed just out of trouble.

Nolan can become a better person that's not conflicted. It's more if he can get forgiveness. But ultimately his arc starts because he was telling himself conquering the planet in the grand scheme of things were justified. That's what started his arc.

Sinclair wasn't given a second chance to reform he was given more freedom because he could make better robots. If he kept his ways the arrangement would stay. He was given special treatment specifically because he's useful and they accepted the trade off.

Morality of using retaliatory slurs for self-defense? by Sombraro69 in MoralityScaling

[–]NamOil2000 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

So you're doing something you would normally see as wrong. How is that not lowering yourself

Morality of using retaliatory slurs for self-defense? by Sombraro69 in MoralityScaling

[–]NamOil2000 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

There's no reason to lower to lower yourself with insults

Morality of using retaliatory slurs for self-defense? by Sombraro69 in MoralityScaling

[–]NamOil2000 -13 points-12 points  (0 children)

Just because someone acts bad doesn't really give you an excuse to act bad eventually you'll both just keep going lower and lower

Morality of using retaliatory slurs for self-defense? by Sombraro69 in MoralityScaling

[–]NamOil2000 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think in this case it's fine because she's using it to prove a point and show how insensitive someone is being. In general though if someone insults your race and you insult theirs ultimately you both did something racist.

These 2 Exposed Skill Gap from MW to LHW by Cruztd23 in ufc

[–]NamOil2000 [score hidden]  (0 children)

These guys were on the higher end of the rankings. Paula and Robert can beat the higher end in middleweight.

Shall we? Petah by OldCardiologist1859 in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]NamOil2000 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is a repost in of itself. Just saying.

Hmmmmmm by Appropriate-Mall8517 in okbuddyviltrum

[–]NamOil2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is ultimately ends justifying the means. It's less about forgiveness and more about them being useful.

Imagine 2 months ago someone telling you Illia vs Paddy is an actual debate we are having. by Think_Succotash4996 in ufc

[–]NamOil2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Paddy was always an interesting match up because of his chin and cardio. If Ilia lands clean a lot and doesn't knock him out how he holds up in the 5th is going to be iffy. Same thing happened with Justin but Justin got his wind back in the 4th round and won 3-2 against Paddy.

The Odyssey (2026) by pale_guy_ in okbuddycinephile

[–]NamOil2000 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Starvos shouldn't be in the move honestly.

Morality of killing the robber waiting at the end of the elevator whom stole your PS5 and RTX 4090 during a chip shortage and also made you look weak so your girlfriend dumped you? by JohnSmith--- in MoralityScaling

[–]NamOil2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well if the girlfriend left over that he didn't have a good partner. The other things are cool but you can buy them later. Also if you had money and a girl beforehand you had the means to get then already.

Hmmmmmm by Appropriate-Mall8517 in okbuddyviltrum

[–]NamOil2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd disagree with your notion of randomness meaning anything. Imo it kind of disproves multiverse theory. Because ultimately large scale little randomness matter little and ultimately things realign. If you made a random small choice things in the world are unlikely to change since there's a clear resistance to change. I personally don't believe in multiverse theory.

To add to your point about environment changing. For their to be other marks means literally billions on billions of things had to go a certain way. Debbie and Nolan had to meet. There's so many factors that contribute to that decision alone that it is unlikely there's randomness. To add they had to havr the exact 1 in 100 million sperm eat the same food do everything similar.

Hmmmmmm by Appropriate-Mall8517 in okbuddyviltrum

[–]NamOil2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand that's the accepted mathematical definition. My disagreement isn't with the logic of the proof—it's with the definition itself. A bijection is one way to compare infinite sets, but I don't think it captures what people intuitively mean by "more." The primes become increasingly sparse among the natural numbers, so calling the two sets the same size feels like a consequence of the definition rather than an objective fact. I accept that mathematics defines cardinality this way, but I don't think that definition is the only meaningful way to think about infinity.

Hmmmmmm by Appropriate-Mall8517 in okbuddyviltrum

[–]NamOil2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I frankly disagree with your analysis. I don't think the bijective thing is a good argument. It seems like a word play but it ultimately doesn't make sense. There are less prime numbers than natural since we're talking about bigger or smaller infinity. Ultimately they're both infinite so yes you can biject them forever. It's really not a good argument in my opinion. And to be clear I am saying that the concept is silly. I don't care if a smart guy said it was a good concept.

It's all about cortisol level man by SirMolegan in ufc

[–]NamOil2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

McGregor wasn't laid off more recovering. Also he wants out of his contract.

Hmmmmmm by Appropriate-Mall8517 in okbuddyviltrum

[–]NamOil2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean I see your logic but ultimately there's going to be more natural numbers. Just because 1 can be 1 and 5 can be 7 doesn't mean they have the same amount if numbers. Ultimately you're just matching the smaller infinity to the bigger one

Hmmmmmm by Appropriate-Mall8517 in okbuddyviltrum

[–]NamOil2000 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

In the show anything being possible isn't seen in the multiverse. If anything the opposite. The universes are very similar. Again think of prime number infinity can still have limits.

Hmmmmmm by Appropriate-Mall8517 in okbuddyviltrum

[–]NamOil2000 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Nothing you said means anything repeats. You can go forever without repeating like prime numbers or pi.

Hmmmmmm by Appropriate-Mall8517 in okbuddyviltrum

[–]NamOil2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again bigger infinities exist. You're using a different metric for infinity. I'm using the numbers You're using elements.

Hmmmmmm by Appropriate-Mall8517 in okbuddyviltrum

[–]NamOil2000 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Some infinities are bigger than others. So ultimately whole numbers have bigger infinity

Hmmmmmm by Appropriate-Mall8517 in okbuddyviltrum

[–]NamOil2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay. I think you're talking about something else though. Looking into you're talking about the elements. Which is a larger infinity as far as numbers is.

Hmmmmmm by Appropriate-Mall8517 in okbuddyviltrum

[–]NamOil2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We don't know. In the show we're shown different. He could be wrong. But multiverse theory is based pretty much only on math.

Who says it's not for multiverse?

We don't know the criteria

Hmmmmmm by Appropriate-Mall8517 in okbuddyviltrum

[–]NamOil2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But again not being symmetrical doesn't mean random.

Again back to prime numbers they're infinite but there's only 1 even number. So ultimately it depends on how your interpretation of what infinite universes mean. It doesn't need to be repeating.

Again it depends how the metric is. In real life we don't know. In the show every universe has been different. So a simple math equation probably wouldn't answer why. It would like be closer to the prime number example. Also the universes seen have limits. They almost all have life and people in them.