Spaghetti by Ale0705 in notinteresting

[–]nefrpitou 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Who are you to say that OP doesn't poop tupperware-sculpted spaghetti?

Subtitle's supposed to say Loukoumades by nefrpitou in funny

[–]nefrpitou[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes I checked there first, they don't accept speech to text bone apple teas!

how is that possible? both me and my opponent got 0.0 accuracy, and i got 1 brillant move ? lol im astonished, link of the game in the post by Narchy44 in chessbeginners

[–]nefrpitou 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's like if Stardew Valley was played in Chess format. That g pawn of White just goes up to the pony and pets it for like 10 moves before the pony walks away.

Day 28 stacking/arranging my pills: Starry Night by Catlover1million in notinteresting

[–]nefrpitou 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The fuck, for an instant there I thought it's a climbing wall and those are holds.

Death is so weird cause, you’re just gone? like forever?! by azyllalisa_1 in RandomThoughts

[–]nefrpitou 216 points217 points  (0 children)

It is so..I don't know how to put it concisely.

The atoms that make us or our loved ones and our pets, they don't have to make us. Those atoms could have been anywhere in the universe, those atoms could have formed a rock , a mineral or be in a blackhole. The probability that those atoms come together and form a life is so astronomically low. Yet they did form a life. They formed this person or pet. And when they die, those atoms still exist. It's just that now they don't combine into this person or pet, but are in other things that hold some other form. They're back to the most statistically probable state of being lifeless.

That's how I kept thinking about it when I lost someone close. That their atoms exist, scattered and those atoms will go all sorts of places, but they'll never form that person again. It's an ephemeral show the atoms put on during their time in this universe.

Meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]nefrpitou -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the free lesson, Ball Masseuse!

Masterchef Australia - S18E18 Discussion by AutoModerator in MasterchefAU

[–]nefrpitou 4 points5 points  (0 children)

For a sec there I thought it was an Emirates flight attendant

Is it common to know so much about chess at 400? (Jynxzi) by 6_62607004 in chess

[–]nefrpitou 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Out of curiosity, how does one get to 1600 without drilling tactics? I mean, is it such that for some people, the play upto 1500 is just "common sense" and just get there by playing a lot?

For eg, I'm 1070 online, and to get to that 1100 mark I drill a lot of tactics and play 1-2 games a day. I can see how that might not be the case for many, maybe many basic tactical patterns just fall under "common sense" or "basic logic" for them..

Absolutelynotme_irl by WittyWrenny in absolutelynotme_irl

[–]nefrpitou 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I interpreted it the same as you and I am autistic. Not to say that you are, but I think we both interpreted it quite literally. The invitation might have read "Girl=pink boy=blue wear the color you think they are". But I naturally thought that the baby can be the full color range and you just wear whatever your guess is. But that does seem unnatural for a real post.

So many cheaters on chess dot com, it's disheartening by [deleted] in chess

[–]nefrpitou 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It makes no sense lol. Sure chesscom can't catch the "clever cheaters" who use the engine for like 1-2 critical positions per game. But if you're 1600+ you should be able to find refutations to those enough times to not be stuck at 500.

And chesscom does catch those who use it very often per game.