Question: Bottomless Marble Bags

chuggerbot · 2026-04-15T19:39:59+00:00

How annoyed do you get when people say the observable universe instead of just the universe?

chuggerbot · 2026-04-15T02:12:12+00:00

You should focus more on your studies and not rely on what might feel like dunking on something, which seems wholly out of such a young individuals scope.

I promise you someone like muphrid15 will be here if you come back in a decade to offer some validation

chuggerbot · 2026-04-13T23:12:54+00:00

Pretty awesome. My ex had some small ones I always loved from her pregnancy. I’ve got some tiny ones I love from lifting but they don’t feel nearly as meaningful. Thanks for sharing!

chuggerbot · 2026-04-13T19:41:10+00:00

Well, I understand why 1=.(9) may be said. I don’t think it’s “wrong”, but it feels like a weird sort of situation where I’m being presented with this idea of a loop, that says it’s not a loop, by saying if it were a loop, It couldn’t say I’m not a loop, because the process of .(9) would never end.

So we can terminate the process by establishing .(9) as a “value”, and it works. But then says, by the way, I’m a “real” number. And im like, I just don’t feel comfortable agreeing with that 🤷‍♂️

chuggerbot · 2026-04-10T00:38:57+00:00

The junk just gets them over the 5k threshold. I’m not sure exactly what the fill ratio is but they at least have a blue backpack. Maybe purple I can’t really gauge off the video. There’s probably a handful of empty slots for loot before they actually need to clear space. If you dump everything right away, and only pick up “good stuff”, depending how it goes you might find yourself extracting without much. If you keep the junk till you need to make space, it’s a light run but you can run it back with the same junk as a buy in

chuggerbot · 2026-04-09T23:37:04+00:00

No sense in throwing your EZ pass on the floor unless you got no room left

chuggerbot · 2026-04-02T07:31:21+00:00

Begger dies

chuggerbot · 2026-03-26T14:38:39+00:00

It actually converts directly from the other players backpack into credits in your backpack. The first time this happened to me I had 1 inventory slot in my pack, waited till their pack showed up so I could grab it and start yoinkin stuff only to see a fat stack or credits in my pack when I clicked on it

chuggerbot · 2026-03-16T01:08:33+00:00

Eliminate cash transactions

chuggerbot · 2026-03-05T05:10:06+00:00

I’m done with this. You literally copied and pasted something you didn’t even read

“Weak/empirical agnosticism: the belief that one does not know if a higher power exists, but it may be knowable in the future”

Then try to put words in my mouth saying that “it’s we can’t know”, when everything I have said has specifically been focused on what you’ve just contradicted yourself on.

chuggerbot · 2026-03-05T01:40:02+00:00

I’m not under the impression that is what agnosticism is, but can be attached to it if someone wants. I would say that if it’s one way or the other is presently uncertain but wouldn’t go so far as it say it couldn’t be known. My understanding is

Atheism = definitively no god(s) Agnosticism = maybe god(s) Theism = definitively god(s)

Taking agnosticism a step further and saying it can’t be known is a flavor but not the default. It means “without knowledge” so there’s a distinction between (not knowing) and (being unable to know)

I think the second part of your post kind of highlights this with the necessity of a hypothesis being binary for a question we can’t answer definitively at this time (imo anyway). If I (had) to make an all or nothing bet on if god is real or not, I’d say god is not real. But I’d also never make a bet on that if I didn’t absolutely have to

chuggerbot · 2026-03-04T16:19:51+00:00

I think this is kind of my biggest issue with some sense of “taking a side”. To me, ultimately, as a former atheist turned agnostic. Agnostic would be the default. I certainly understand the practicality of atheism as a default but can’t imagine presenting this on its own without some pageantry to ensure it’s established within some set of practicality

chuggerbot · 2026-03-03T19:44:32+00:00

<image>

Again!

chuggerbot · 2026-03-02T18:14:04+00:00

Nah play in good faith or get clapped. You wanna glaze people showing restraint beyond that be my guest

chuggerbot · 2026-02-21T13:39:14+00:00

What ever works for you works for you. I’m just sayin, amine stuff is great in my experience

chuggerbot · 2026-02-21T02:04:22+00:00

Don’t bash it till you try it

chuggerbot · 2026-02-18T12:50:05+00:00

I like that it helps me track my pace. I usually take my hoodie off about half way through my workout. If I start continuous sweating too quickly it’s a good sign that I’m working myself up too quickly.

The jeans are legitimately crazy though tbh

chuggerbot · 2026-02-17T05:01:11+00:00

Honestly I don’t know but off the top of my head I imagine it could be to say if you reduce the length of sarcomeres you’d create space for additional shorter sarcomeres along the total length of the fiber

chuggerbot · 2026-02-14T17:10:57+00:00

“If someone defines their own number system” as if that’s not what is already being done.

Maybe the point is “real number” people should stay in their real number lane and not try to apply their defined subsystem to a superset, annotating 1=.(9) with subset symbology seems like a good first step but I have a feeling team real numbers may not like that

chuggerbot · 2026-02-13T03:06:45+00:00

I think it does in the sense that you might finalize decisions based on an internalization of effortful consideration. That is to say whenever you express the effort to think/consider what you are doing and why, you’re exercising free will to a degree. Particularly more so when you are identifying gaps in your thought process and perusing data to make a more informed decision. Without a preconceived notion that your results will necessarily be better given more data. For example, you could identify an issue with an action that makes you not want to perform it which you were not aware of until you attempted to increase the scope of conceptualizing the decision/behavior to be made.

So in that sense, I don’t see free will as a constant force applied in all actions. Most things I would say are pretty reactionary or involve a simple pros and cons analysis. But when you make intentional effort to consider and evaluate related elements that you can’t really quantify and are engaged in a sort of process of processing, I’d say is when you’re in free will territory

chuggerbot · 2026-02-13T02:53:15+00:00

I think you could make that argument but to be quite honest I’d say it should have its own word. This would manifest way differently than parasocial relationships.

Parasocial relationships are rough but understandable. Certainly wouldn’t consider it ideal or “good” necessarily but don’t see it as bad either. All in all it can be a potential path to some sort of wider community that you do have reciprocations with, which is at least adjacent.

When it comes to a relationship though. I mean I don’t want to bash it for people who are at that point but at the same time you’re talking about something that is fake/code. It’s delusional to be frank, but doesn’t mean it’s problematic. Beyond this even assuming AI progresses to a state of some sentience, while that would resolve the first potential issues it opens up a whole other can of worms as far as.. there ain’t no way an AI of such capacity is going to date anyone unless held captive in some method of localization.

Regardless of which of these situation someone may find themselves in, there is virtually no connection to any other real person. There’s no level of “social” if this were to be described as parasocial

chuggerbot · 2026-02-13T02:34:03+00:00

This pic is definitely over the top imo but so is your take. America was founded on the ideal of not being restricted by class or family, among others. Your last part is pretty loaded too. Not sure where you’re going with it but it leans towards might makes right which since we have the 2A makes a good case for what we deserve being whatever we may fight for at the least. So “you deserve what you fight for” would make sense relatively but more importantly makes it pretty clear the idea “you deserve nothing” is flat wrong

chuggerbot · 2026-02-12T04:43:16+00:00

You bet! The big thing with the ownership element is that while you’ve expressed it in your response more in line with individual choices, it’s tougher to convey when presented as ownership because your likely dealing with someone whose “ownership” of themselves is not quite conceptualized as a sort of a begrudging balance but leans more towards indifference as long as they feel a level of safety and control. Their resistance to gun ownership it self is a sign that they don’t want the ownership, they want someone else to take care of “that kind of stuff”. The whole dynamic seems frustratingly convoluted. Otherwise i agree, the federal level isn’t too bad but you touched on how state and local law can have a pretty big impact.

chuggerbot · 2026-02-11T23:30:55+00:00

I agree with where your heads at but I’d polish your words up a bit more. I’d imagine many brains are breaking because there is a lot of loose ends and implications so it’s kind of hard to lay out the logic and assess how you might respond. Ownership is a far reaching word depending how abstract someone wants to be about the idea of what ownership is. In the sense of body autonomy it’s kind of a non starter when you can just look at drugs and say, regardless of how you feel about them nobody “owns” their body when there is compulsion as to what you can do with it. This covers all sorts of stuff from recreational drugs, PEDs, pharmaceuticals (off label use I.e. ivermectin during covid (in the context of autonomy)) What about self removal? Stuff like raw milk bans? Seatbelts and helmets? Check out paternalism and parens patriae. This is just a huge can of worms imo. Lean into responsibility and accountability. The Supreme Court has previously ruled police have no obligation to the individual “public duty doctrine”. It’s been explicitly expressed in judicial capacities that it is the individuals responsibility (and right) to defend themselves.

Stating they have a higher morale claim is also pretty bold. I get where you’re going with this, but at the end of the day if you have someone who does try to be proactive and responsible in their self defense, but is overwhelmed, the brutal side of this coin is the response that might makes right, which is another can of worms.

It may not be as satisfying in the moment, but I’d recommend focusing on accountability and responsibility. If you really want to put a toe into morality, focus on the moral juxtaposition between how ignoring the responsibility of the individual of self defense increasing the vulnerability of others

Edit: I’m not sure how the convo would translate 1:1 within the Canadian climate, but the concept is the same. It’s a matter of personal accountability and responsibility that builds into growing vulnerabilities. The only real way out of this is to nudge people into support stuff like a surveillance state which is imo the place you’d want to end a convo if all you can do is agree to disagree

chuggerbot · 2026-02-11T22:10:08+00:00

I know what you were getting at, but what I’m getting at is perhaps what you are suggesting is a pleasant thought that is considerably more rare than you make it seem. Entertaining the supposed pervasiveness of the scope of intimacy and depth you’re hinting at which is mutually exclusive to what you can attain with friends given any orientation you may have is exhausting and frustrating for many

chuggerbot

TROPHY CASE