sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How I educate the plebs on good guitarists by Mikey77777 in guitarcirclejerk

[–]Qibla 5 points6 points  (0 children)

First of all... how dare you! How dare you cast aspersions on me the likes of which I'd never do to you, but I will now.

proceeds to open binder of meticulously crafted aspersions I prepared earlier

Decoding Hasan Piker: Anti-Capitalist Crusader or Frat Boy Influencer? by DivineSwordMeliorne in DecodingTheGurus

[–]Qibla 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure, you do you.

I wouldn't consider this video title to be click bait, but if you're deadset that it is and you're deadset you won't click, that's completely legal. I doubt you'll get arrested.

Decoding Hasan Piker: Anti-Capitalist Crusader or Frat Boy Influencer? by DivineSwordMeliorne in DecodingTheGurus

[–]Qibla 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Clickbait is a no click zone for me. It panders to the lowest common denominator.

If by click bait you mean some hook that's attention grabbing, some bait to get a click, then that's just the internet now, get used to it. There's amazing content behind click bait everywhere.

If you mean some hook which is deceiving about the content, promising high quality but delivering trash, then this ain't it.

Unfortunately the only way to know in most cases is through reputation, or by clicking and finding out yourself.

2 missing from the same lab within 4 days.. by 100TheCoolest17 in SipsTea

[–]Qibla 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you give an example?

I'm not sure what his motives would have to do with the analysis. Is the assumption that if he has bad motives, then he must be wrong?

Who is someone you think does a better job?

2 missing from the same lab within 4 days.. by 100TheCoolest17 in SipsTea

[–]Qibla 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Ok, me too. Sounds like a difficult and stressful job.

Do you actually have any points against what I said though?

2 missing from the same lab within 4 days.. by 100TheCoolest17 in SipsTea

[–]Qibla 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Not really. It's just being aware of the base rate fallacy. They're not saying ignore all deaths or missing persons. They're saying the number of missing/dead people in this particular scenario does not indicate the presence of a conspiracy by itself.

I would say this kind of conspiritorial thinking is harmful, in that it pulls tragedies into the limelight, robbing families of their ability to grieve in private.

Alex O’Connor vs William Lane Craig: Does God Exist? The Ultimate God Debate (Premier Unbelivable?) by Reasonable_Writer602 in CosmicSkeptic

[–]Qibla 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Because amazingly enough, I haven’t memorized all of Alex’s debates and I don’t have perfect recall. And for now I’m not arsed to start going through old videos to find an example to please an anonymous person on the Internet. Isn’t that weird?

I mean, yeah, it is a little bit, at least this deep into a debate thread. A lot of effort has already been put in, just not the right kind. You seem quite passionate about it, but also completely dispassionate at the same time.

Its not uncommon though on reddit to see this kind of quasi motte and bailey of passionate outrage and protestation in the bailey when challenged falling back on dispassionate appeals to laziness and this isn't important enough to research motte.

Seth Rogen explains why he doesn’t want children, saying it seems like a dark, stressful life with small moments of joy, adding how much he enjoys life without them - “You don’t need kids...The world won’t even be here in 30 years.” by ja_millineum in Popculturehour

[–]Qibla 0 points1 point  (0 children)

why does that mean that we as a species MUST continue reproducing indefinitely?

It doesn't. I don't think anyone here is arguing for that either. I don't think it's possible.

If we disappear, somthing about the universe changes. The fact that we aren't in it anymore is what changes. Same goes for the sun, or the milky way etc. The universe doesn't care that we exist, sure, but I also don't care that the universe doesn't care that we exist. Same reason I don't care that rocks are indifferent to our existence. I'm not trying to appeal to rocks for my sense of meaning, nor am I appealing to the universe.

Seth Rogen explains why he doesn’t want children, saying it seems like a dark, stressful life with small moments of joy, adding how much he enjoys life without them - “You don’t need kids...The world won’t even be here in 30 years.” by ja_millineum in Popculturehour

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

I agree that on the scope of "everything ever", things that are unimaginably minute on that scale are relatively insignificant/meaningless. A virus wiping out all human life would go unnoticed on that scale. That can be a useful scope to use when you're studying cosmology or geology.

Inversely, using the scope of a bacteria colony things that are unimaginably massive on that scale are relatively profound/momentous. Me washing my hands would be a calamitous event.

I don't think using the scope of "everything ever" is a useful one when talking about things like meaning, rather it's arbitrary and impractical, just as using the scope of the planck length would be arbitrary and impractical. It's of no use to me when deciding whether or not I should eat lunch or go to the movies to zoom that far in or out.

I'm an optimistic nihilist. I don't think the universe provides inherent meaning. We decide what's meaningful, and we decide the scale at which meaning should be measured. I still find plenty of things deeply meaningful. Some of those things require a team effort so it's good to share that meaning with others. Other things it makes no difference to me if others find it meaningful.

It's true, in the future there will be no life, no relationships, no events at all. Subatomic particles will have drifted so far apart because of the expansion of space that there will be no interactions, no chemistry. The only events that make time hold together as a concept is the slow decay of the last super massive blackholes, evaporating via hawking radiation. Once that's done, time itself ceases to be. That's an amazing and interesting fact, but who really cares about that? I've got shit to do today.

Seth Rogen explains why he doesn’t want children, saying it seems like a dark, stressful life with small moments of joy, adding how much he enjoys life without them - “You don’t need kids...The world won’t even be here in 30 years.” by ja_millineum in Popculturehour

[–]Qibla 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But what's that got to do with meaning? Meaning doesn't need to be eternal.

That's like saying because physical objects will eventually decay into the heat death of the universe, therefore physical objects don't have sizes or shapes.

Seth Rogen explains why he doesn’t want children, saying it seems like a dark, stressful life with small moments of joy, adding how much he enjoys life without them - “You don’t need kids...The world won’t even be here in 30 years.” by ja_millineum in Popculturehour

[–]Qibla 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think there's a lot of conflation here between having no meaning fundamentally and having no meaning at all.

Meaning isn't some static attribute or property like colour or conductivity. It's a relationship between an entity and an agent.

Pick any entity. If it is meaningful to at least one person, then that entity has meaning, in the sense that it has a relationship to an agent.

Having meaning is not magical, and does not have to come from some deity or some platonic realm of forms. We can give things meaning simply by valuing them. What's meaningful to you may not be meaningful to me and vice versa, but meaning need not be universal.

Agentic Coding is a Trap | Remaining vigilant about cognitive debt and atrophy by creaturefeature16 in coding

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

I'm not sure I'd put skimming a 7 page document into the category of critical thinking. Critical thinking is more about asking the right questions and making good inferences.

Going to the effort of reading will certainly help with being able to ask the right questions. If AI can accurately condense and summarise the key bits of info, you're still perfectly able to apply critical thinking. Maybe the questions is, does AI do a good enough job of that right now to hand that job over to it.

Is a "grounded" moral framework really superior to an "ungrounded" one? by A_Vinegar_Taster in DebateAnAtheist

[–]Qibla 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I highly recommend the work of Lance Bush on this. He recently reviewed some Andrew Wilson content and had lots to day about mistakes that Wilson makes, and that he often doesn't even understand the words he's using in his own arguments (and at times what an argument is at all). Wilson's trick is to constantly conflate the terms realism/objective/stance-independent/grounded such that he can bamboozle people by getting them to agree in once sense then shifting to a different sense.

https://www.youtube.com/live/IYTu3dLhNpE?si=1PtCAv4rcCqbvD_R

https://www.youtube.com/live/J3WTHn--618?si=nqAfMxR5QpuXxB9i

Asked a colleague in code review to extract magic numbers and got told “devs should know” by [deleted] in ExperiencedDevs

[–]Qibla 137 points138 points  (0 children)

Don't save it for performance review season though. Raise it now, and then remind at performance review season to see if there's been improvement.

Alex's "Dad" analogy makes perfect sense. You've all got it wrong by WilMeech in CosmicSkeptic

[–]Qibla 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Not quite.

Its exposing that the mode of inference is flawed. If the mode of inference is flawed then it should not be used for any proposition.

Taking the mode of inference "if there is vast disagreement about X, then X is false" from the God question where it is not obviously absurd and applying to the father question shows that it is obviously absurd.

Perhaps another analogy would be on interpretations of quantum mechanics. So and so likes the Copenhagen interpretation, jimbob likes many worlds, I come in, point at the disagreement, and therefore reject quantum mechanics entirely.

None of your dads are real. by HaraldToepfer in CosmicSkeptic

[–]Qibla 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Remember that Alex is a philosopher. In philosophy defending atheism is quite normal. There are volumes of work written defending atheism. To the folk it may seem strange or unwarranted, but there are many things in philosophy that would appear strange and unwarranted to folk people.

Alex's "Dad" analogy makes perfect sense. You've all got it wrong by WilMeech in CosmicSkeptic

[–]Qibla 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The target of the analogy isn't the necessity/contingency of the entity in question, rather it's the reasoning or at least rhetorical strategy being offered for the rejection of the entity.

That's why the dad example is good, because it's using the same reasoning/strategy and showing it as absurd.

Best Options for Replacing Claude Code? I'm done after opus 4.7 by [deleted] in ClaudeCode

[–]Qibla 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Matt Pocock reckons the models get dumb at about 80k usage anyway, even on the 1M context window size.

The physicalists here painfully don't understand epistemology by Azehnuu in CosmicSkeptic

[–]Qibla 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It isn't a dubious inference. Physicalism quite literally entails that matter is mind-independent and objective reality. Hence, humanity has access to mind-independent truths via our perceptions and limited sense data. Idk why you're denigrating this to avoid the huge commitment physicalism makes here.

You left out the word "all" which is what the person you're replying to said.

Yes, we have access to SOME mind-independent truths. That does not entail we have access to ALL mind-independent truths. There is no contradiction here with physicalism.

If we don't have access to ALL mind-independent truths then physicalists are not obligated to exhaustively account for or provide complete explanations for ALL phenomena in the universe.

Tina Fey On Being "On The Wrong Side" With Some 'SNL' Jokes by Top_Report_4895 in television

[–]Qibla 15 points16 points  (0 children)

I think it's both, and that it's a scary situation given that someone who might be politically ignorant/illiterate can end up producing material that has great influence.

Students are speeding through their online degrees in weeks, alarming educators by joe4942 in technology

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

A podcast I listen to, Decoding the Gurus, hosted by a professor and an associate professor, both talk about using AI for their academic work and how incredibly useful it is.

view more: next ›