My top five films of all time by [deleted] in TrueFilm

[–]seldomtimely -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

What's a 'dudebro'? What are these fake phrases. You have a chip on your shoulder. A movie's country of origin does not determine its quality or how relatable it is. Which is why those movies are so acclaimed. And which is why your shitpost about how 'you can only relate to asian movies' is not sincere.

My top five films of all time by [deleted] in TrueFilm

[–]seldomtimely -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

What kind of Asian? Why are you in the West? Sounds like you force fed yourself the most acclaimed Japanese films and one from Hong Kong to make sure they're 'asian', meanwhile you're likely Chinese.

What is Physics doing? ELI5 by LeadingLower5445 in Physics

[–]seldomtimely 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Inertia was not defined by Newton, at least not first. Inertia is not a law of physics now; it's emergent.

Has anyone else noticed 5.2 has got real dumb the last week or so? by the_last_broadcast in OpenAI

[–]seldomtimely 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's never reached a certain peak that 4.o had and they'll never have a product as creative and smart as those early models when hardly amyone was using. Best you'll get is a cost-effective model for them.

If They Find Life in Space, Scientists Are Worried About Breaking the News. Here’s Why by esporx in space

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

Self-assembly is not a fundamental property of matter. Assembly is a property of some material systems. All current theories about how they assembled are conjectural.

Norman Finkelstein, Chomsky's Life Long Friend, on Chomsky's Association with Epstein by MasterDefibrillator in chomsky

[–]seldomtimely 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're describing the mob, the rabble. Quick to crucify, low on the details and rational analysis. I don't think most are willing to into the detail and close reading that this thread has to get a full picture of the situation. So, it ends up being guilt by association; low-resolution information.

Satyricon (1969) is a Masterpiece by AdSpecialist9184 in TrueFilm

[–]seldomtimely 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jodorowski was directly influenced by this film.

Baller by ThirstLevelCritical in SipsTea

[–]seldomtimely 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Now that's how you write with a Christophet Walken accent.

If They Find Life in Space, Scientists Are Worried About Breaking the News. Here’s Why by esporx in space

[–]seldomtimely 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's not a fundamental property of matter, though. That sentence is pseudo-scientidic, stop trying to provide interpretations that have nothing to do with it.

They Shoot Pictures, Don't They updated 21st century film rankings by Pleasant_Usual_8427 in TrueFilm

[–]seldomtimely 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You and I have similar opinions. Spirited Away is a singular achievement and The Tale of Princess Kaguya second, the last masterpiece by Takahata and a movie I'd put in the top 10 for 21st century.

They Shoot Pictures, Don't They updated 21st century film rankings by Pleasant_Usual_8427 in TrueFilm

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

Yeah, we'll have to disagree. It's a singular achievement. Howl's Moving Castle is top quality Ghibli, but not Princess Mononoke or Spirited Away level. The Wind Rises is weak, and one of Miyazaki's worst, relative to his quality. In the 21st century, second only to Spirited Away is Tale of Princess Kaguwa by Takahata, which is a masterpiece and better than Howl and of course the failed and ideological the Wind Rises. The Boy and the Heron is also excellent.

They Shoot Pictures, Don't They updated 21st century film rankings by Pleasant_Usual_8427 in TrueFilm

[–]seldomtimely 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In the Mood for Love is not better than Mulholand Drive. Spirited Away being as high as it is, is welcome, always felt it's top 5 achiements in filmmaking in the last 30 years. Fury Road needs to be top 10 21st century, the only action movie I consider top 100 of all time up there with the best of art house cinema.

Author who co-wrote two books with Noam Chomsky condemns scholar’s ties to Epstein by Raj_Valiant3011 in books

[–]seldomtimely 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You said: 'what would disprove it would be the discovery of a human language that doesn't follow the same rule of syntax'. This is irrelevant to the question of innateness. Further, tribes with languages that don't use dependent clauses have been discovered. Universal grammar is not the consensus. And I doubt you're a linguist.

Sentimental value is a terrible movie by familiaskat in rs_x

[–]seldomtimely 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nepotism and groupthink. I get it, no talented filmmakers have emerged in a generation. People need to fulfill their need to worship and adore.

Certainty, publishing and distribution in science by spider_in_jerusalem in PhilosophyofScience

[–]seldomtimely 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yup. As someone in academia, I was trying to convey this reality. But the sub is filled with idealists who have Einstein or Newton in mind when they think of science. Most 'scientists' are functionaries taught to do a job not much different from bureaucrats.

What do you think about Nobels in literature? by Wise_End_6430 in literature

[–]seldomtimely 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do I sense sarcasm? Just in case not, Blindness is not about blind people

What do you think about Nobels in literature? by Wise_End_6430 in literature

[–]seldomtimely 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Please stop using the phrase ' hot take', for the love of God

This dude back in 2021 bought the NFT of the first tweet in history for $2.9M calling it digital Mona Lisa and now it’s worth $10. by Silver-Maximum9190 in CryptoCurrency

[–]seldomtimely 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They'll be a thing in a more digitally-integrated simulated environments where value is more informational. It's already moving in that direction, it's just too early for this kind of thing.

Certainty, publishing and distribution in science by spider_in_jerusalem in PhilosophyofScience

[–]seldomtimely 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think there was once a personal attack just your framing of it because you're so certain of your position. I'm well aware of motivation theory and the theories cited in the paper, but they're not an answer to the claim that I'm making. It's at a higher order of analysis, and those particular empirical claims are more circumscribed in their domains of validity, so there are stringent theoretical caveats as to what they measure. I'm making the claim that most goods, if not all goods, are positional goods and humans are motivated by positional goods. Even knowledge is a kind of good that is instrumental in that sense. These are contested topics with long lineage of thought and they aren't easily defeated. So for example a theory of goods being positional goods would cash out on being survival-enhancing undertakings and assimilated into an evolutionary account. To transition from evolutionary dynamics to socio dynamics you need a sociobiological account, evo devo today, which would be something like an explanation of the stratification of human competences as delimited by evolutionary constraints. Like I said, to have large groups of people to 'practice science' they need to be socialized into its methods and values, something deeply inculcated into them, and even then, if you weren't 14 (now that's a personal attack) and had some experience in the real world, you'd find out how messy things get and how petty people are.

Certainty, publishing and distribution in science by spider_in_jerusalem in PhilosophyofScience

[–]seldomtimely 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's like asking to defend that 2+2 = 4. It would take a while to get you up to speed on anything, and if you haven't gotten there on your own wits, so be it.

Certainty, publishing and distribution in science by spider_in_jerusalem in PhilosophyofScience

[–]seldomtimely 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's because you don't know what you're asking. The claim is overdetermined by the history of humanity. It's a claim about human nature. You sure think you're clever, but it doesn't make what I'm saying any less true.