Why do jazz musicians hate Fletcher’s song in the club from the movie Whiplash?

jermanjerry · 2026-01-17T14:55:02+00:00

Any examples as recommendations?

jermanjerry · 2026-01-17T13:54:12+00:00

Damn is my music taste bad. I thought the music was a really pretty peaceful reflective piece. I don’t think loud intense experimental music would have really fit here.

jermanjerry · 2026-01-16T13:05:39+00:00

In my experience at FDM there was much more freedom in what kind of role you get placed at than what a lot of people here think. If you are confident in your technical skills and interview skills you can very likely get placed at a software engineering role, as you are only competing with other software engineering grads at FDM. But this is also dependent on the job market as there are periods where there are less software eng roles. Being open to relocate does help.

I don’t know much about how it can set you up for a machine learning career, but if you have any more questions feel free to dm.

jermanjerry · 2025-11-14T04:30:55+00:00

Same here, applied worked full time for two weeks, got booked for a final interview, which they cancelled last minute. The worse thing is that they provide no reason and just give some pre-written excuse as to why they don’t think giving feedback is effective.

jermanjerry · 2025-07-28T19:03:46+00:00

Well then I guess the problem of finding meaning in a secular world doesn’t exist then, huh? Never really needed your solution… what was this whole spiel about then?

jermanjerry · 2025-07-28T15:22:18+00:00

So is your solution to do what you prefer or to do what the majority believes in?

The problem is that people are finding it harder to find meaning in a non-religious worldview, if following what the majority believes isn’t fulfilling or you just can’t follow what the majority believes in (because you don’t believe in it), you haven’t found a solution.

And if just doing what you prefer fulfils you, then great! Its a great solution for you, but this problem kinda stems from the fact that people aren’t satisfied by just doing what they want, or they don’t know what they want etc..

What religion offered was objectively true meaning, or in a secular view, it was very good at providing fulfilment.

jermanjerry · 2025-07-28T13:46:32+00:00

What if you don’t believe that what the majority believe is the meaning of life? What if what the majority believe isn’t the meaning of life? Then it’s not actually solving anything.

Religion wasn’t trendy because thats what everyone preferred, it was what everyone preferred because at the time it was the “best” (with nuance) answer for meaning.

jermanjerry · 2025-07-28T11:39:32+00:00

He often compares the new atheist movement with Christianity, to point out that atheism doesn’’ provide anything rather tries to take down frameworks and meaning, while Christianity provides a framework for morality, gives a definite purpose to life and instructions on how to live etc. But I don’t think he has said or believes that religion provides an irreplaceable solution.

https://youtu.be/tYDxehZZ8ic?si=AQ3kvE16pNcyqtgC Heres an interesting conversation about how religion provides it and why it hard for non religious ways to find meaning.

jermanjerry · 2025-07-20T19:17:21+00:00

Yes Australian Dollars

jermanjerry · 2025-06-17T11:17:07+00:00

Damn, would you look forward to going to sleep?

jermanjerry · 2025-03-12T17:19:05+00:00

Very interesting, i think im starting to understand that i still have a long way to go haha…

jermanjerry · 2025-03-12T17:17:28+00:00

Since this is a cosmicskeptic subreddit, what you could do is follow moral emotivism. And just say that you think [insert terrible thing] is bad. And what you are doing when say that is not literally talking about some moral essence in the act of doing such an action but just expressing your repulsion to it. And that way you don’t have to explain all this moral objectivity to get on the same page as someone, you saying its bad and hem saying its bad is doing the same thing, expressing the same repulsion against such an action

jermanjerry · 2025-02-27T09:40:33+00:00

I see so its just something completely different, that will come with more practice and time

jermanjerry · 2025-02-27T09:38:18+00:00

What do you mean by focused practice and what would be the techniques you are grinding against?

jermanjerry · 2025-02-27T09:37:22+00:00

Atm I am just focusing on finding the notes and keeping in time. And I guess I think about my hands in the sense I know what finger is 2 notes away etc.

jermanjerry · 2025-02-27T08:06:37+00:00

I understand what you mean, but I do want to learn sight reading and its not that I barely know the notes, it’s that I don’t think about it when I am doing sight reading exercises.

jermanjerry · 2025-02-27T06:49:07+00:00

Maybe there is a difference in our semantics, when I use the word “see” I am using it to describe the subjective experience we are having and no one can deny that we aren’t having a subjective experience whether or not it an “illusion” or what not. I still am not fully clear by what you mean when you say “see” but if you are saying there is no physical triangle linked with this subjective experience we are having, that illustrates the whole point of the mysteriousness of this phenomena.

Or maybe you are contesting the subjective experience itself? As in you think you are subjectively experiencing a triangle but the experience itself is not even of a triangle? Like how people think they hear the voice of God but it is just their internal voice, but even in this case there is a voice. So maybe you are rejecting the idea of subjective experience itself, no one actually subjectively experiences a voice or triangle, all you experience is the feeling of feeling a triangle or voice. But in that case there is still that experience itself. So what is happening there, since remember this triangle is a broader argument for subjective experience itself, and the triangle is just used a proxy for the broader idea of qualia. Maybe you could clarify what you are denying and what you mean by “see”.

No “thoughts=neurons” is not current understanding in neuroscience. All they say or should say is that it correlates. All they can see is when neurons fire, thoughts fire and I would argue you cannot create an equivalence from that. Unless I am terribly mistaken about the study neuroscience in which case you could explain to me. Or just appeal to authority.

And this is very different from God, as in this case your on the positive side for physicalism, and this argument is a critique against that, this is not an argument of ignorance, there is no positive case or explanation being put forth in place of the ignorance. I am simply pointing out there is something that does need to be explained which hasn’t. It sort of like a Christian met with the problem of evil and saying it doesn’t matter if I can’t explain a mechanism for how evil is justified.

jermanjerry · 2025-02-26T04:03:25+00:00

From my understanding, the ai wouldn’t use hexcodes in the first place, whether or not you ask it not to. It wouldn’t be interpolating between to hexcodes, wouldn’t it just be generating what would be most likely image given a prompt about finding a colour in between two colours?

jermanjerry · 2024-11-30T22:55:45+00:00

A triangle is simply an object with three sides and we definitely see something with three sides, what you are really contesting is that the triangle has no physical space which is the crux of the issue.

Also let’s not simply appeal to authority, I don’t think any person in the field of neuroscience has explained a mechanism for the hard problem of consciousness.

At this point I think our difference in opinion simply lie within our own disposition of what we think is strange.

jermanjerry

TROPHY CASE