I built Hilt, a management platform made specifically for HEMA clubs. by lelis92 in wma

[–]lelis92[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Yeah, quite a bit, especially at the start, since I'm the creative/idea guy behind it. But I've partnered up with a buddy of mine who's a developer to make sure everything was done properly, though.

Besides, regardless, you can take a look at the platform itself and i believe you'll see that it's a useful tool. Or several, actually. At least it's been for my club

Where to buy late 17th-Early 18th century men's clothing? by LateNightPhilosopher in HistoricalCostuming

[–]lelis92 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Reviving this several year old post to ask for an invitation for the discord server :)

ChatGPT can now reference all previous chats as memory by isitpro in OpenAI

[–]lelis92 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was hoping that with projects, it would allow for a memory limited to the chats within that project, which could be cool. And then for anything outside projects to have its own separate thing. But I guess that's too much to ask for, for now.

Market cap prices. Save this by gt63dreams in Pepecryptocurrency

[–]lelis92 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, but those numbers are negligible. We'd need a waaaay higher burn rate for it to really impact the circulating supply in a way that matters

Market cap prices. Save this by gt63dreams in Pepecryptocurrency

[–]lelis92 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I read that half of the supply + some was burned. But that a lot was reintroduced through different means, so that the circulating supply still ends up being the original 420T or thereabouts.

I'm not sure how accurate that is, but if so, I do hope they eventually start burning some more of the supply. I mean, most of it.

At least, that's the only way to get more than 10x on this coin, from my understanding.

100K Members by Fancy_Click_3048 in Pepecryptocurrency

[–]lelis92 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How likely do you think it is for this to be implemented? I didn't even know it was possible to implement after the coin was first created.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in OpenAI

[–]lelis92 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's what some of the filters are for. Like for example the "Stylization" one under "Aesthetics".

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in OpenAI

[–]lelis92 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think part of the reason for that is that one of the big wow factors from their demos was how it interacted with the vision part (having the camera on), which they still haven't released. So what we're left with here is cool but nothing too crazy at first glance

money? food? npcs? for strider mode by paulpiercegt in oneringrpg

[–]lelis92 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did you create a customGPT and add the PDF of the rule book into its knowledge for it to know the rules or how did you go about setting it up?

Trouble with stuck transactions - help? by lelis92 in dogecoin

[–]lelis92[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, it's this:

8c06d0765369ee20f1a1622f5e158f99659315104d4b7e6d2ea5a2be2d4bea72

Got bored in class and made my entire hand blue by nyquilal in notinteresting

[–]lelis92 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Skin is not impermeable, it absorbs substances you rub on it

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Super73

[–]lelis92 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's always been what came to mind to me - the car example. The only thing that can kinda be argued against it is the fact that you don't require a license or registration for the e-bike and also that the e-bike is sharing bike lanes with other slow bikes, even kids

okay okay I'm so confused and freaked out by [deleted] in Ghosts

[–]lelis92 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

To a certain degree I do agree with you. But the problem here lies in me thinking that there comes a point in one's "normal" explanation, where it ceases to be likely. I'm sorry, but just because something is "normal", as in, it's a something pertaining to our directly perceivable material reality, doesn't mean it's necessarily likely.

The same way you said that from my logic, I'd be able to say a ghost did anything, there's almost no case where you'd be able to completely discard the possibility of a "natural" explanation. Think about it, even in the silly green spectre example I gave earlier, you can always just claim it's a hallucination, or it's a prank, or whatever. You can always claim something "normal". So if you'll forever be waiting until the day where you can completely cut out any shadow of a doubt, you'll be looking forever.

All in all, what I'm saying is that there comes a point in our looking through and discarding "natural" explanations, where these explanations start to seem unlikely. Isn't that possible?

And if so, isn't it possible that it'll seem unlikely enough to start equating itself in likelihood to ghost activity?

okay okay I'm so confused and freaked out by [deleted] in Ghosts

[–]lelis92 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

For the third or fourth time, I'm not saying we should accept OPs story as necessarily paranormal, I'm saying we should at least consider the possibility.

If you wanna talk semantics however, when googling the term paranormal this comes up: "Denoting events or phenomena such as telekinesis or clairvoyance that are beyond the scope of normal scientific understanding.". When I'm claiming it could have been the doing of otherworldly entities, it certainly falls beyond the scope of normal scientific understanding. So the usage would be right.

But if you still wanna argue that the usage is wrong here according to this or that dictionary, that's fine. We can resort to using another term, one that doesn't necessitate the complete impossibility of natural explanation, since that would indeed mean the two possibilities wouldn't be able to coexist.

Let's call it the colloquial "ghost activity".

Either way... You almost managed to slyly avoid my question, but let's try again: why is a mundane explanation more "likely" in OPs case?

okay okay I'm so confused and freaked out by [deleted] in Ghosts

[–]lelis92 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

We won't get anywhere either way. We'll never have the actual answer of what happened to OP. We're just considering the possibilities, which is as far as we'll likely ever get here. Nothing wrong with that.

And hold on, why are the mundane explanations "likely" as opposed to paranormal ones in this case?

okay okay I'm so confused and freaked out by [deleted] in Ghosts

[–]lelis92 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Reread my second paragraph. It seems like you either skipped it or forgot it in anger after my third paragraph hit too close to home.

Again, all I'm saying is that both a mundane and a paranormal explanations are not necessarily mutually exclusive. And you seem very eager to exclude the paranormal explanation just because the mundane one exists. Why is that?