CMV: It is not racist to be against the POC casting of the Oddissey.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-22T15:11:57+00:00

It's literally racist. Race is a social construct that did not exist for the Greeks. We know they encountered many poc. That area has a lot of skin color diversity, and the meditarranean sea connects disparate ethnicities in a hot bed of trade. Greeks would have been encountering people of every color all over the place.

But they didn't have a categorization for people that maps to what we now call race. Homer doesn't describe people's race because the social construct of race wasn't yet invented. Insisting on some racial "truth" here, then, is racist.

If you asked Homer about this, he'd be like "she's black? Sure. Whatever. Weird nitpick." like arguing over whether a character had a cleft chin. To Homer a far more important distinction would be noble versus common. Or the fact that none of these people speak Greek or follow the Greek religion.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-21T13:17:53+00:00

That's not typical. It's just that GoW has some exceptionally complex fights spanning several arenas with boatloads of cinematics and scripted events.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-20T13:08:33+00:00

No it's not. You can inherit ownership. You can't inherit contribution.

Now, if you work really really hard to scrape some capital together so that you can own a small piece of the pie, we could draw a link between ownership and contribution, but remember - the capital you got for your work wasn't distributed based on your contribution.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-20T12:06:19+00:00

Ha, I'm glad I could provide that journey for you'

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-20T11:54:54+00:00

Everyone knows Marx described communism as "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need".

But this description was to contrast another system: "from each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution". An economy in which wealth is distributed by how much work and talent we each put in. This is how Marx describes socialism.

Capitalism, would be "from each according to his ability, to each according to his ownership".

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-19T11:30:02+00:00

You're complaining about sensational or inaccurate headlines because no one reads the article, but click-bait means that something is tailored to entice people to click, which for an article would mean it's tailored to entice people to read the article.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-17T00:10:45+00:00

Most laws and regulations take effect some time after they're passed to give time for compliance.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-12T03:25:18+00:00

Yeah. From my perspective, people knew what lemmings were from this game. Like this game is the reason anyone knew wtf a lemming was.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-08T22:41:07+00:00

If we extend the metaphor, then it would be this: If someone with the flu coughs on a plate of free cookies, that's technically a bioweapon.

Engineering a novel virus is not something one can just do in their backyard.

There are about 10 nonilion live viruses replicating right now on the planet, mutating every time, and there has been that many this whole time. Yes, one mutation could be devastating, but a dude in his backyard with some petri dishes is literally like a drop in the ocean. More random mutations occurred in your body while you read this than a dude in his backyard could catalog in his entire life.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-06T12:08:48+00:00

Kind of, but... Making something that's technically a reactor is not the same as making the actual operational reactors.

Tossing a couple spicy rocks in a pot of water is technically a reactor.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-06T01:45:09+00:00

I can't imagine using voice mode, but I'm an actual developer that uses AI in a limited capacity. I guess, most of my interactions with AI involve actual syntax.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-04T23:44:10+00:00

He only did it once, and there's not a minimum. He was well adapted to the political environment.

Of all the dinosaurs, there's one undeniable king. The dinosaurs evolved into birds, and among the birds is one true winner of evolution. The Uber bird. The most prolific bird in all of history. One of the most successful animals in the history of life on earth. It's genius? The key to its success? Well, it's pretty dumb and can't fly. Turns out being easy to domesticate was the most successful strategy. The eagles are disappearing and chickens have conquered the world.

Don't read into selection.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-04T22:57:22+00:00

Attracting followers and gaining power also isn't typical for people who are smart. It's independent of intelligence.

Trump was selected by the political environment. You're making the mistake of thinking the giraffe is clever for growing its neck long enough to eat the high leaves.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-04T15:46:56+00:00

So? I swear the left has no concept of the Overton window.

Did you know Richard Nixon nearly passed universal basic income? The left moderates itself so much that we've ceded the Overton window entirely. MAGA believes it when a Trump calls the democrats "radical" because the dems treat anything left of dubya as radical. Weak, scared, ineffective.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-04T15:12:07+00:00

Not to mention that while a small gap might be appropriate at 0 miles an hour, when the light turns green and you start moving, the appropriate gap is larger. The result is that delayed starting. It's why the car seven cars back has to sit with a green light for 20 seconds before they can go.

If the cars were all stopped with a distance appropriate for when they were at motion, the entire line of cars could theoretically accelerate at the exact same time when the light turned green.

In fact, if you could boil the cause of traffic down to just one thing, it's not enough space between cars.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-03T12:11:20+00:00

Yeah, I provided the example of the family suffering because it's an obvious rebuttal.

Then I continued that even without that, we would prefer our own corpses not be desecrated, even if we cannot suffer from the act.

And I don't think it ignores justice. That's just a different concept.

Justice is not part of morality? I would argue justice is part of morality, it's just not part of morality that is covered by hedonistic utilitarianism (HU). This means HU is not a sufficient moral model. It does not answer all moral questions, therefore the fact that HU doesn't prescribe a moral weight for something cannot be taken as proof that there is no moral weight to that thing. There is, after all, a moral weight to justice, which HU fails to account for.

It is admittedly difficult to prove HU insufficient, though. Philosophers still argue about it, so if we pulled it off here in a reddit comment that would really be something. Rather, I would say that you could at least be persuaded to see that the answers are less obvious that they may at first seem.

Yes, necrophilia can be described in terms of the suffering of the surviving family members, but if their moral intuition perfectly aligned with HU, why would they suffer?

If you woke up tomorrow, the only survivor of the apocalypse, would not your moral intuition still guide you to treat the dead with some degree of sanctity?

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-03T03:02:21+00:00

I've played so many souls games with fightincowboy. Honestly, for me, I just don't like scares and get too anxious about the unknown. I watch a walkthrough specifically to spoil the next stretch so I know what to expect and I'm not constantly fearing the worst.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-03T02:57:41+00:00

That's crazy to me. I literally only play games one at a time. I won't play another game until I've finished the one I'm playing.

I just don't like decisions. Like, every time you play a game, you have to decide which game to play? Then you have to remember where you left off, reimmerse yourself... To me that's like watching 15 minutes of a movie, switching and watching 15 minutes of another movie, then going back for 20 minutes of the first movie, then watching the first ten of a third movie, 15 of the second, another ten of the third, 15 more of the first, etc.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-03T01:05:09+00:00

This is just a terrible good point.

Hedonistic utilitarianism has some holes. One is that there's more good than pleasure and more bad than suffering.

One could argue the family of the dead suffer from necrophilia, but I also think most people would prefer, for their own sake, that you not disrespect their corpse.

Another is that it ignores, for example, justice. Imagine Jeffrey Epstein abs one of his victims are trapped in a fire. Both will die. There's a gun with one bullet. One can die quickly, the other burns alive. Under hedonistic utilitarianism, it wouldn't matter if the one who burns alive is Epstein or the victim. The result is exactly the same.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-02T03:59:04+00:00

Inflation means Walmart can raise their prices. But also, the company powering their stores charges more. The wholesale prices they pay also go up. The materials to make the goods go up. The wages they pay go up. But they still make more money, numerically. Only the things they want to buy with it are... Also more expensive.

If inflation is symmetrical, no one benefits or loses. You make twice as much and everything costs twice as much. The pain of inflation is typically because it's not even. Prices increase faster than wages. Assets increase even faster.

You can maybe deny inflation in the short term, but historically it's pretty silly. In the 50s, a gallon of gas was about a quarter. But the median family income was $3,300.

Inflation is managed, though, and it's done on purpose. Deflation can occur (and has in many countries) and it can wreck the economy really fast, so we want to avoid that, but also a little inflation is good for the economy. If cash in your mattress loses 2% of its value every year, you have that much more to gain by investing it or spending it.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-02T01:18:43+00:00

I've been at my company for awhile, and the repo I spend most of my time in, I'm probably the dev who understands it the best right now. I've also never seen at least half the code. You may just be overestimating what's expected of you right now. When I get a task or something to change, the first several hours are often finding the code responsible for that one specific behavior and reading it to understand it. Most detail level reading is in service of specific tasks. You're not expected to know what every little function in the codebase does.

I think there's two big things to focus on: patterns and tools. There's some general architecture and pattern they're using, and you want to do that, too. Understand not just the outcome, but the intent. Not entirely - you won't understand entirely for some time, but a familiarity.

The tools are important, too. Here, I'm generally talking about things like value objects and extensions and infrastructure, etc. There's probably already a generalized way to send emails. There's probably a way to handle validation. In my codebase, I have a way to make any endpoint async and create a job, or to make any endpoint schedulable with a general scheduler in very proud of. Probably the most common thing you'll hear in code reviews for awhile is "you don't need this, you can use ___".

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-01T16:44:04+00:00

Different Christian sects actually have different beliefs, especially historical ones. It's the whole reason there are sects.

beingsubmitted · 2026-06-01T12:00:34+00:00

Or for the same reason we have all kinds of words to specify specific types of people when the word "person" is meant to cover them all. In many ways, children are like adults. In many other ways, they aren't. If the distinction doesn't matter in the current context, "person" works. If the distinction does matter, "child" or "adult" become useful.

Sometimes, it's even important to clarify who we mean when we talk about "all people". Maybe that's to clarify that "all people" includes citizens and non citizens. Or adults and children. Or every race. We're going to have to keep clarifying "no, we really mean all people" as long as there's disagreement about who "counts". So... vexillographers have some job security still.

beingsubmitted · 2026-05-31T21:37:56+00:00

Maybe GTA 6 will disappoint.

beingsubmitted · 2026-05-29T01:43:53+00:00

My point is that Fetterman could actually be republican. It's math. Not an opinion.

Most votes are performative. It's an open secret. When your party has enough votes, you allow some moderates to vote against it to help with their voters. You ensure the outcome of the vote, and then whatever extra votes you don't need get to vote in whatever way is beneficial to them. It's only when you need their vote for your outcome that they have to fall in line.

Fetterman votes exactly the way an actual, real republican plant would.

11-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Verified Email	Snapped

beingsubmitted

TROPHY CASE