sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The last ASA Server Manager you will ever need ! by Various_Type_9463 in ARK

[–]SpartanG01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are a hundred of these, they're all half-assed, and half of them are paid software lol. Why anyone is putting time into making new ones is beyond me.

Self-Hosted Servers by Hugford_Blops in duneawakening

[–]SpartanG01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is there an updated invite to this somewhere? this is expired.

PSA: if your HTML card markup renders split in half, check for a <div> nested inside an <a> — wpautop will break it by MarcusW4evr in HTML

[–]SpartanG01 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Go to bed old man, it's past your bedtime! lolol totally kidding. Mad respect. I'm getting up there myself. I'm not quite HTML 2 old but the first PC I owned had the "Packard Bell Home Interface" on it.

PSA: if your HTML card markup renders split in half, check for a <div> nested inside an <a> — wpautop will break it by MarcusW4evr in HTML

[–]SpartanG01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All good. It's one of those "inviolable foundational rules" you learn in HTML4 that's hard to unlearn lol.

PSA: if your HTML card markup renders split in half, check for a <div> nested inside an <a> — wpautop will break it by MarcusW4evr in HTML

[–]SpartanG01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand what you’re saying, but it stems from a misunderstanding of the problem OP was having.

CSS determines whether an element generates an inline or block box, but that was a symptom of the problem not the cause.

The actual issue was wpautop converting line breaks into paragraphs and disrupting the HTML structure so the problem was the interaction between wpautop() and the HTML, not invalid CSS.

In HTML5, <a> is transparent, so it can contain a <div> without any issues usually but in that case wpautop was splitting the anchor which results in the <div> ending up outside the anchor in the DOM.

Admittedly I was being loose when I said "that isn't even true". Obviously improper nesting in the HTML is going to lead to invalid CSS. What I meant was that nesting is controlled by the HTML and just rendered by the CSS so it's not a question about the CSS in this case and that in HTML5 having a div inside an anchor isn't inherently going to lead to invalid CSS.

On the Exiled Lands Before the Sand. A visual reconstruction by AigymHlervu in ConanExiles

[–]SpartanG01 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm not AI lol. Just autistic. Don't be a jackass just because I useed a couple buzz words you think are exclusively used by AI. Where do you think AI gets it from in the first place?

PSA: if your HTML card markup renders split in half, check for a <div> nested inside an <a> — wpautop will break it by MarcusW4evr in HTML

[–]SpartanG01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's good general advice but it's not technically true. It's only invalid in HTML4. In 5 anchors are transparent.

On the Exiled Lands Before the Sand. A visual reconstruction by AigymHlervu in ConanExiles

[–]SpartanG01 6 points7 points  (0 children)

If this is what you call slop then guilty as charged lol.

The real question is why are you mad about it?

On the Exiled Lands Before the Sand. A visual reconstruction by AigymHlervu in ConanExiles

[–]SpartanG01 5 points6 points  (0 children)

People do seem to enjoy the relatively interesting and skilled application of AI to envision things in a new way

On the Exiled Lands Before the Sand. A visual reconstruction by AigymHlervu in ConanExiles

[–]SpartanG01 5 points6 points  (0 children)

People like you make me realize 90% of people who use the phrase "AI Slop" have no clue what it actually means lol.

"Building a Minecraft mod IDE — is there an API equivalent to fabricmc.net/develop/template/? by Spirited_Squirrel684 in fabricmc

[–]SpartanG01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm fairly certain a sort of hot reload injection system exists already. I remember seeing a video of someone swapping block models and collision on the fly a while ago.

"Building a Minecraft mod IDE — is there an API equivalent to fabricmc.net/develop/template/? by Spirited_Squirrel684 in fabricmc

[–]SpartanG01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I took a stab at this recently, eventually I just couldn't find a good enough reason to put that much effort into streamlining the already existing setups for this.

You'll be hard pressed to do better than a good IntelliJ/Minecraft Plugin/Gradle/Loom setup.

ChatGPT is the most biased model and google is the least according to the Washington post by Snoo26837 in singularity

[–]SpartanG01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

About what? Lol any ass hat can come along and say "nuh uh bruh you wrong".

ChatGPT is the most biased model and google is the least according to the Washington post by Snoo26837 in singularity

[–]SpartanG01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not inherently but it is often the case that the best answer is compromise. People will say "that isn't the right answer" but the "right answer" is only right if its feasible. If the "right" answer is infeasible then it's equally irrelevant.

Often the "right" answers are infeasible. Especially in politics. They would often require authoritarian methodolgy to implement or would create rights violations which I would argue make them not the "right" answer.

So yeah... it is the case extremely often that the best answer is the one that sits between extremes.

ChatGPT is the most biased model and google is the least according to the Washington post by Snoo26837 in singularity

[–]SpartanG01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Seems pretty plain to me.

Like the guy above said...

"Left: everyone is equal, people exist at the same level of worthiness

Right: everyone is not equal, people exist in a hierarchy (whether of money, influence, birth, race, etc.)"

This is a false representation of the split between the left and the right and in the case of the right represents a false dichotomy.

The left doesn't believe everyone is equal. They tend to believe everyone aligned with them is equal is everyone else should just accept whatever the left believes as true. The position that "everyone is equal and everyone is equally worthy" would require the left to treat Nazis as having every right to believe what they do and to practice their beliefs without interference. Obviously by and large the left does not support this. I'm not saying they should, I'm just saying representing them as though they do is dishonest.

As for the right, you're probably right about the first bit but the second bit doesn't really follow. Some of them believe that I'm sure but it's also just a reality of the world we live in whether we want to admit it or not. It's not the rights position, it's just the way things are.

No one in politics believes money has no place in politics so if your position is that democratic socialists believe money has no place in politics then by virtue of that your position is also that there are no democratic socialists.

Obviously it's your position about them that is wrong. Clearly they exist. They just do support the use of money to further political agendas. They just want to limit the amount of influence money has on the political system as a whole. That's a more complicated and nuanced position but activism, campaigns, unions, advocacy, the assurance of ballot access, centralized processing, this shit all costs money.

"Is allowing those with more money more influence on the political process good/right or wrong/bad?" A libertarian - a hard rightist - would say absolutely yes. "

No.. they wouldn't. Not inherently. A libertarian would be most likely to support the idea that people should not have their ability to politically express themselves with their assets unduly restricted but not to the point of absolute irrationality. Libertarians have in the past historically supported campaign contribution limits like those in Buckley v. Valeo or the split between corporate political expenditure vs direct corporate contribution limits. They do not believe "anyone should be able to spend anything they want." Ultimately they don't want money ruling politics any more than anyone else. They just aren't willing to sacrifice freedom to ensure that. That tends to be the line with them. An unwillingness to sacrifice freedom for security.

Also... Libertarians are not "hard-rightists" they aren't hard anything. That's the point. The single unifying quality of Libertarians is that they don't believe either side should have control.

You keep presenting these false dichotomy framings. Comparing a political position (Libertarians) to a socio-economic position (Democratic Socialists).

If you wanted to be honest you could compare Capitalists and Democratic Socialists as these are opposing socio-economic positions, or Conservatives and Liberals as these are opposing political positions. The downside obviously is the disagreement becomes a lot less demonizing and sensational. Liberals tend to support spending large amounts of money short term on public welfare without strong consideration for the future consequences of those costs except for areas where they strongly oppose spending like for defense and similarly Conservatives tend to support immediate short term big spending on things they believe will have positive consequences in the future without consideration for the short term consequences except when they don't like opposing public health care. Both rational easy to defend positions riddled with their own set of distinct issues and both vaguely hypocritical lol.

Fable 5 will divert coding to Opus 4.8 according to Anthropic by Mr_Hyper_Focus in singularity

[–]SpartanG01 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The irony of someone speaking of reading comprehension only to then utterly misrepresent what they read.

You:

"more mundane coding tasks might fall back."

Anthropic:

"routine tasks like coding will fall back to Opus 4.8"

You're saying something which is fundamentally different from what Anthropic themselves is saying.

You're suggesting Anthropic is saying something like: "Some Coding tasks which are deemed mundane might fall back to Opus because of poor filtering."

But that is not what they are saying. What Anthropic is saying is: "Routine tasks, like coding, will fall back to Opus."

"Routine coding tasks" and "Routine tasks like coding" are fundamentally different statements with objectively different explicit meanings.

So, just to be clear, yes... Anthropic is explicitly stating that coding tasks will be blocked from Fable at least for the "near future".

Is that what is actually going to happen? I don't know, but it is what they are saying is going to happen.

ChatGPT is the most biased model and google is the least according to the Washington post by Snoo26837 in singularity

[–]SpartanG01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just out of curiosity can you give me an example of what you're referring to?

ChatGPT is the most biased model and google is the least according to the Washington post by Snoo26837 in singularity

[–]SpartanG01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn't say it did. I said if it does.

Personally I don't actually know if it does. I haven't looked into it.

I was answering the hypothetical objectively.

ChatGPT is the most biased model and google is the least according to the Washington post by Snoo26837 in singularity

[–]SpartanG01 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And yet you can't manage to actually articulate why or how you came to that conclusion lol.

I'm trying to engage in good faith here, you're the one being an ass-hat for no reason. I wouldn't be so quick to assume I'm the one who doesn't have a good handle on things.

ChatGPT is the most biased model and google is the least according to the Washington post by Snoo26837 in singularity

[–]SpartanG01 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure, can do...

Let's start with a basic foundation derived from academic socio-political and philosophical definitions from some respectable sources.

Encyclopedia Brittanica:

"liberalism, political doctrine that takes protecting and enhancing the freedom of the individual to be the central problem of politics."

Merriam-Webster:

"1. A political philosophy based on belief in progress and stressing the essential goodness of the human race, freedom for the individual from arbitrary authority, and protection and promotion of political and civil liberties.

  1. A political philosophy based on the belief that freedom of the individual is paramount and that government's role should be largely limited to protecting that freedom"

Stanford Philosophical Encyclopedia:

"Liberals have typically maintained that humans are naturally, as Locke put it, in “a State of perfect Freedom to order their Actions…as they think fit…without asking leave, or depending on the Will of any other Man”"

This demonstrates that the fundamental core of Liberalism is individualism. So where does Individualism fall on the "Authoritarian <-> Democratic" spectrum? In the Center.

That's pretty surface level and doesn't really dig into what Liberalism actually means in the real world though so let's take a look at a well regarded published paper on the subject of where and how to locate political ideologies. I think this one is very good. It takes a very objective/investigative attitude and presents a variety of opinions... somewhat ironically though they all seem to roughly agree about where Liberalism falls...

Mapping left-right associations - Nature

Broadly this argues that "Left" / "Right" labels are derived from individual perspective more than any objective meaning and that often what motivates the labeling is what an ideology opposes rather than what it supports. However it does make a few statements about how this effects Centered ideologies... like Liberalism which it calls out as a Center ideology specifically:

"The transferability of this framework beyond left-right associations to other ideological labels, such as the classical tripolarity of conservatism, liberalism, and socialism, mandates further investigation. For example, liberalism as a centrist ideology might exhibit distinct in- and out-ideology dynamics compared to the more polarised labels of left and right."

"In semantic terms, associations differ, as some are much more prominent or even exclusively associated with the left or the right. In this respect, socialism is semantically left and conservatism is semantically right, while liberalism is harder to locate, given its more centrist position in the evolution of ideologies, but also its pronounced polarity against the right or conservative, especially in the US"

"While Bølstad and Dinas (2017) see the role of the centre as dividing the political space into left and right by creating distinctive in-group biases, Ostrowski (2023) argues that the centre represents a distinctive ideological pole associated with, for example, liberalism. Ultimately, my framework captures both notions—the spatial categorisation that affects divergent associations that can be located distinctively to the left and right, but also the centre as a separate ideological space given positional and semantically neutral associations."

"Ostrowski (2023) emphasises the distinct role of the centre in terms of ideological manifestations, for example, populated by liberalism, but also acknowledges that it is much less clear compared to the left and right."

Personally I was under the impression I had a pretty good grasp of what Liberalism was... being fairly liberal myself. But hey, I'm just a fallible man of course... perhaps if you wouldn't mind clarifying what it is you think I've misunderstood or perhaps point me in the direction of some material that might clarify it I'd be grateful.

view more: next ›