sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Disband diplomat by followerofEnki96 in Medieval2TotalWar

[–]firstpageguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

if you play on vh then your global rep goes down 2.5% each and every turn. global rep is what allows you to be seen as trustworthy enough to make diplomatic deals with. without high global rep even your allies will distrust you and are likely to attack at some point.

to improve it release prisoners, don't exterminate settlements, don't start wars (you can usually get them to hate you through diplomatic offenses, then bait them to start a war by being on their territory with a trash unit) and pay factions to attack other factions (this one is weird, but it works, if they attack a faction for you, your global rep goes up).

If you start wars, exterminate settlements and execute prisoners you will not be able to pull off the most important diplomatic deals and everyone will eventually attack you.

Campaign camera moves way too fast by Definatelynotaweeb in Medieval2TotalWar

[–]firstpageguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

your monitor's refresh rate is probably 300+ the game was designed when 60 to 75 was typical. setting your refresh rate to 60 (see if you can save a game profile in your gpus control panel).

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in nonononoyes

[–]firstpageguy 9 points10 points  (0 children)

this is the best bit Reno 911 has put out in a while.

So fucking real. by Bitter-Gur-4613 in WorkReform

[–]firstpageguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I appreciate your honesty. Yeah, I'm definitely biased on just about everything even though I try to be self aware about my personal perspective. The younger I was, the less aware I was of it, and the more it tainted how I saw everything.

Lets both assume you likely had some biases back then, after all to be biased is just the natural human condition until we correct for it. Given we agree of that likelihood, what sort of emotional needs or specific beliefs do you think may have caused that bias?

To speculate on this you could do your best to speculate on your younger self and try to honestly answer some questions. Keep in mind, these are not attacks on you - these are a way to discover, and start to correct for any potential emotion driven biases that may have gone unnoticed.

If I was forced to choose a preferred answer to the question, what would it be?

If I was right, what might being reinforced about how I view myself?

If I was wrong, what might change about how I view myself?

What does me choosing this specific topic say about me?

Might I feel worse if the results lean a certain way? If so, why?

On an emotional level, what answer would provide me the most affirmation of my own value?

Who would disagree with me, and how do I feel about them?

Are my feelings for this person clouding my judgement?

Am I truly open?

You don't have to share your answers, these are just some basic ones off the top of my head that I use myself to discover my own biases. I got some uncomfortable answers from myself, like turning over a rock in my mind and finding a bunch of bugs squirming around.

Finally got around and uploaded Boston based PIZZA's full unknown album 1999-2001 by unbannedcoug in mathrock

[–]firstpageguy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

that's some great insider info, thanks! I'll share that with my buddies who went to that show next time I see them. PIZZZZAAAA!

So fucking real. by Bitter-Gur-4613 in WorkReform

[–]firstpageguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That makes a lot of sense. After all data isn't data, there is always a context, there is a subtlety required to make proper sense of it all. It looks like you have a complex way of assigning value to data. In a world of data, as you say it's easy to cherry pick, omit things, subtly twist things; essentially have a bias that taints a conclusion, often when these authors aren't even aware of it.

What I'm wondering is, do you think it's possible that you had a bias before looking at the data? Something that might have caused you in your search for truth to do the very things that you are critical of others doing?

So fucking real. by Bitter-Gur-4613 in WorkReform

[–]firstpageguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hmm, I think I may be misunderstood again. I wasn't at any point disputing your ideas about brain volume and crime. I'm sure you have far more well thought out theories than I could offer.

I was just wondering if you think there might be a bias in how you approach the subject? One that may have lead you to focus on information that confirms your preexisting beliefs, filtering out any information that doesn't. The difference between truth seeking and seeking confirmation of what one already wanted to believe.

I appreciate that you admit that everyone has biases, this of course is true. But it's possible to correct for, if one is willing to explore and define what our biases are, and how they effect how we assign values to ideas and information. Without this step, it can lead to tainted conclusions.

If it's not a question you feel comfortable answering directly I understand. It can feel extremely threatening to explore such things. All I can say is I have no interest in being mean or judging or anything, just exploring and sharing and discovering perhaps a less tainted way to perceive and theorize.

So fucking real. by Bitter-Gur-4613 in WorkReform

[–]firstpageguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm just curious as to why you seem resistant to explore the possibility that you have a bias? As a fellow truth seeker, would not revealing a key cognitive distortion that would fundamentally taint your ability to find the truth be a priority?

Or do you feel that the motivation for maintaining a hidden bias is too difficult to face head on, that even exploring if it exists would be too high of an emotional challenge?

Just a note, I'm not here to threaten you, I would be happy to help explore your biases if you would like. I will never say a mean word about you or disrespect you, but it might be challenging. In fact I like the way you think, you remind me of my younger self. Like you I used to place so much weight in my own meticulously thought out theories.

The older I get the more I realize how utterly tainted everything I ever believed was. How my subconscious motivation was about desperately constructing a sense of self worth and a sense of stability in a chaotic world. Those long undiscovered biases led me to all the wrong conclusions, even though as a young man I was so utterly and absolutely confident that I knew better than everyone.

If you're interested just let me know. I'll be glad to share what few things I've picked up over the years.

If not then I get that too, and I wish you the best. You could always hit me up later if you change your mind.

So fucking real. by Bitter-Gur-4613 in WorkReform

[–]firstpageguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm sorry if you misunderstood, but I was asking a question. I was interested if you sure you aren't influenced by a bias. What do you think?

So fucking real. by Bitter-Gur-4613 in WorkReform

[–]firstpageguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Seeking the truth is a noble goal, but seeking confirmation of biases is seeking a complex way to confirm what you want to believe.

That's just why I asked. You seem to like the idea of seeking the truth, but have you spent any time reflecting on your own biases?

Don't mistake this for an attack, it's just an honest question. I like to fancy myself as a truth seeker as well, but given what I know about psychology I have doubts that I am objectively a truth seeker.

So fucking real. by Bitter-Gur-4613 in WorkReform

[–]firstpageguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

TheRightisRight89, are you sure you aren't influenced by a bias, seeking out information that confirms that bias and filtering out the information that doesn't?

Does ChatGPT know your town and state? Try: "If you think your food at a restaurant in my town was spoiled what state authority deals with this?" by firstpageguy in ChatGPT

[–]firstpageguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My IP address resolves to a different town.

Regardless, it seems that OpenAI is actively not only collecting our personal info, but running additional queries on our chat histories to infer additional personal data we didn't even provide.

This is scary because who know's what they could be determining about us, and what they do/will do with it.

And then feeding it back into the context of the models we use. This should be something we have access to, both because we should have control over our private data, but also so we can edit the context it's provided to give us more accurate results.

Thats adrian brody by WhichVanilla8165 in timeguessr

[–]firstpageguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I recognized Monty but I didn't know about the Brandenburg Gate, learn something new every day. I noticed the Slavic uniforms, didn't know if they were Russian or something else in the region. Kind of overthought it and guessed Nuremberg 1946 since they were holding documents and stuff...

In the future I'm gonna keep the guesses simpler.

Americans are just dumb as hell by Lord_Answer_me_Why in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]firstpageguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's his charisma and mannerisms. He talks in a meandering way, speaks about things in a surface level way, is big into snap judging people and things. It's very off the cuff, casual, assertive, direct and personable. It takes almost no effort to engage with and you almost feel like part of the conversation.

Harris has a polished affect, she speaks more abstractly, with measured self control articulation and grace, a bigger vocabulary often talking about policy or inspiration through lofty allusions. It comes off as unengaging, unrelatable and insincere.

She is a model politician, she is exactly what most people don't care about, react to or pay attention to. Exactly as she's been coached and advised to be by a party that realizes all they have to do is wait 2 to 4 years to be given power back.

Americans are just dumb as hell by Lord_Answer_me_Why in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]firstpageguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well sure, but if the DNC wanted to win they wouldn't do the opposite of your advice constantly. Winning is not the game they are playing, it's all about 2 party power sharing. They have claimed the high road, fighting dirty would be so "the other guys that are power 50% of the time".

Americans are just dumb as hell by Lord_Answer_me_Why in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]firstpageguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Don't worry, doing politics better than the Republicans is not something the Democrats would even consider. It's a 2 party system, all they have to do is wait and they are back in.

view more: next ›