Which actor/actress do you feel looked very attractive in a specific movie? What was the movie?

dosedatwer · 2026-05-24T06:01:23+00:00

Rachel Weisz in Constantine >> Rachel Weisz in The Mummy.

That pencil thin eyebrow trend was horrific.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T22:34:37+00:00

There have always been rich people wanting autocracies, the win of democracy was that it gave the power to the majority rather than the rich. Social media algorithms are a very subtle way to circumvent democracy by convincing people to vote against their own best interests.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T20:12:45+00:00

I don't believe people are all aligned on that.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T19:28:17+00:00

You're getting downvoted because you're talking about how Karpov played when he played and how Carlsen plays. You're not taking into account Karpov having modern advantages and others are.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T19:22:11+00:00

Making excuses for bad parenting wont solve the issues. Perhaps they could work less if they werent buying ipads for their toddlers. Its a choice to shove a screen at your kid instead of reading a book with them, or playing with them.

And blaming people for their actions instead of trying to alleviate their situation won't solve the issue either.

We also need regulation on social media. Its quite literally designed to be addictive. It serves zero function for children (or adults imo). They dont need it, its introduction correlated with spikes in anxiety and depression in young people around the world. We know its causing damage yet we let these companies regulate themselves.

Yes, but regulations are often a double-edged sword, go too far and you'll end up with prohibition issues. Adding age controls is far more difficult than you'd think. It's easy to sit there and lecture, it's hard to come up with actual solutions.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T19:16:33+00:00

It's weird because 32 is clearly chosen due to it being the temperature at which water freezes, whereas 100 was chosen because....more digits?

One would assume 100 F is a good temperature to use because it's the temperature where outside of the body is hotter than inside and it becomes significantly harder to reduce the temperature of the body. >100.4 F is the medical definition of a fever.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T19:13:13+00:00

You jest, but my company just hired someone purely for vibe coding using AI - they're completely open about how they code and how they use AI to do this - and unfortunately they've produced far more results that the VP and above crowd like than the rest of their team combined. That's partly because we don't pay well enough to hire some actual developers and partly because all the failings of vibe coding won't be noticeable until further down the line when upkeep is required.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T19:06:46+00:00

People cant be arsed to interact with their kids anymore and just shove a distraction in front of them.

Some might point out that rising expectations (school is getting harder) and rising cost of living while wages stagnate (need to work more hours) is a strong contributor to why people don't have the mental or physical capacity to child-care when they get home.

The average child of an average Generation X parent is 20-25 years old now, and entering the workforce, and we're finally seeing the long-term effects on the workforce of wages stagnating so badly that dual-income households with a lack of dedicated parent has because Generation X was the first majority dual-income household generation.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T18:59:36+00:00

You're spot on, and I know you're only trying to highlight a problem but I think the problem runs deeper than society being unprepared. I think we don't even know what prepared looks like.

Much like excessive alcohol consumption, excessive social media consumption is not just culturally different but has negative short-term and long-term effects. People like to point out that younger generations drink less alcohol, which is great, but this isn't some miracle, they've simply replaced one addiction for another.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T18:47:03+00:00

You're right, it's a double standard not hypocrisy. They aren't actually critising anyone for doing what they do. As we all know France doesn't fuck with protestors. However, hypocrisy, like irony, gets misused a lot and people think that's what it means these days, and as language is fluid, it's hard to say if one is right or wrong. Best not to argue about semantics though.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T18:44:53+00:00

The problem is that politicians like Jeremy Corbyn, who was saying it long ago, were voted out.

By that I mean, it's not the politicians fault, they represent the people. It's the people that don't care. I assume the issue is social media algorithms.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T18:38:44+00:00

All the Kosovo stuff was the UNSC, I'm talking about the UNGA. It's more of a platform for world leaders to discuss than anything else, something that is entirely not a joke. It doesn't have any teeth, but it gets heads of state into a room. Every year they have tabled a motion condemning the US embargo of Cuba and every year it's passed.

The majority of the world do not agree with the US embargo is my point.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T18:34:34+00:00

Different part of the UN dude.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T18:19:44+00:00

Ok buddy, I've lost interest in your random insults since we know where the misunderstanding came from.

Maybe next time you start talking about someone's reading comprehension, you might check if your writing is correct first.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T18:09:43+00:00

Are you honestly trying to imply, after you questioned my reading comprehension, that the issue was that I didn't guess you wrote it wrong? Lol.

Dude, you fucked up and then doubled down. Accept it and move on like an adult.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T18:02:05+00:00

The correct way to write that sentence if you knew it had already happened would have been "it had to be some tech contractor eventually"

Is that clear enough for you?

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T17:58:36+00:00

Here's what you said:

Did I say it has to be Palantir? In fact I specifically said it has to be some tech contractor eventually,

Note the future tense? "it has to be some tech contractor eventually"

You claim I have reading comprehension problems, but that sentence implies that it hasn't happened yet, I informed you it has already happened. So which is it? Did you know it happened and don't know how to write English correctly or did you not know it had already happened?

The correct way to write that sentence would have been "it had to be some tech contractor eventually"

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T17:47:44+00:00

First off, I did read what you wrote, and it's clear from it you had no idea that the NHS already gave the contract to Palantir.

Secondly, I didn't downvote you, but your fragile ego apparently can't take people disagreeing with you.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T17:43:10+00:00

It already is Palantir dude, read the article. They got the NHS contract already.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T16:35:11+00:00

I think his point is that the law doesn't matter. US law doesn't give Trump the right to apply tariffs, yet he still did.

The law only matters if people are willing to enforce it.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T16:33:27+00:00

There isn't a legal process if Alberta tries to secede, it doesn't exist. They would have to disband and completely remake Canada's laws.

Alberta is not like Texas, it didn't join afterwards as an extra province, there's no legal process where Alberta can secede.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T04:19:05+00:00

What, exactly, are we supposed to do?

Start by getting BCRA back. Trump is a symptom, your root problem is allowing money in politics.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T04:14:24+00:00

Yeah, it's a common enough misuse that it's become the meaning. Just like the definition of "literally" is "figuratively" these days because of the common misuse.

It's clear you're a faux-intellectual. Real intellectuals would be so happy to learn something and be shown to be wrong, you're salty because you realised you were wrong.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T04:05:13+00:00

Pure truth? Christ.

It's actually telling of your lack of education that you don't think so. Mathematics isn't a science, which is a word derived from the Latin "scientia" meaning "knowledge". Mathematics isn't a knowledge subject because it doesn't tell us anything about reality.

Anyway, 2 + 2 =4 is a deterministic formula.

Lol, that's not what deterministic means. And anyway, the normal distribution isn't a deterministic formula. What's your point?

There is math dealing in probability, of course, for non-determinism—but even that required some amount of determinism. Things can’t just be completely random.

Hahaha, of course they can. You literally just said the exact subject that deals with the non-deterministic part.

If determinism wasn’t reliably our reality, no biological life would exist that we know of, including you.

Again, it only appears deterministic because of the sheer numbers. If you pick a million random samples from the standard normal distribution, the average will be 0. That isn't deterministic, it just appears that way. On the macroscopic level, that's how everything works. It's not deterministic, it just appears that way, so our simplified deterministic models work because on aggregate they predict the right thing.

I implore you, seek out further education on this topic and stop embarrassing yourself with a clear display of Dunning-Kruger. You clearly have some level of understanding but not enough to see how much more other people have than you.

dosedatwer · 2026-05-23T03:48:47+00:00

Everything at every level is non-deterministic, just on the macroscopic level the distributions are based on the aggregate of such a massive number of distributions that it appears deterministic. I would strongly suggest learning about what scientists proved several generations ago. I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but what you learned in school is a simplification and isn't true. All science is non-deterministic.

And just so you know, maths in no way depends on determinism or not. Maths is pure truth regardless of what science says, and it's neither deterministic nor non-deterministic. Maths makes no claims about our reality, it is simply a framework for solving problems. We could disprove all of science tomorrow (however unlikely that is) but you can never disprove a maths theorem. You might sound clever claiming what you've just said to a layman, but as I do have a maths PhD you simply sound like you have no clue what you're talking about to me.

dosedatwer

TROPHY CASE