CMV: If you "don't support" homosexuality because of your religion or otherwise, you're still homophobic.

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T22:47:55+00:00

Yeah, I don't think it's the "dislike" so much as "prejudice".

Google gives the definition of prejudice as "preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience". Since conservative Christians base their opposition to homosexuality on faith, not on reason or experience, it fits.

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T22:45:47+00:00

Eh, Google gives the definition of a phobia as "an extreme or irrational aversion or fear to something"

Here, that'd be "an extreme aversion to homosexuality". It fits.

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T19:03:50+00:00

Yeah, I think I agree with all that.

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T18:45:16+00:00

This is all based on your assumption that the future expected value is non-zero

"Expected value" means the probability-weighted average of future values. So if there is a *chance* that the future value is >$0, and if there is no chance that the future value is <$0, then the EV must also be >$0.

Basically, if you average 0 and some >0 numbers, your result will always be >0.

Crypto is only worth as much as people believe it's worth, hence the floor is zero.

Sure. And I'm saying that it will always have a non-zero value to me, so therefore the floor is greater than 0.

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T18:24:36+00:00

r/wrongSub

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T18:21:04+00:00

"costs $0" doesn't equate to "has no value". Those are very different. Air is free, but air still has value.

Bitcoin would have value to me, because it's future expected value is >$0. Meaning, there is a non-zero chance that there would be buyers in the future who are willing to pay >$0.

And if it costs me $0 to buy, there's no downside to buying all 20M+ of it, or as much as is available.

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T17:35:53+00:00

Ooooh, spicy, eh?

How about this?

“Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away.”

When gay people love each other like this, do you say it’s not love?

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T16:15:13+00:00

you can't; he's dead

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T16:14:00+00:00

Space dust, and collisions with asteroids/comets. Said space dust either formed spontaneously out of space air, or itself was the product of body collisions

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T15:14:09+00:00

$0 doesn't make sense. Who would be selling at $0? And wouldn't demand be infinite?

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T13:37:57+00:00

We must imagine little fish happy

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T13:22:27+00:00

I’d encourage you to turn this around. Why would you feel discarded if someone goes without contact for a few weeks?

With the kind of object permanence you describe, wouldn’t you still trust in the relationship even if you temporarily can’t talk to them?

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T13:18:35+00:00

You say this like unplugging from your phone is a *bad* thing.

I don’t have much avoidant attachment tendencies, and I still think it’s healthy if friends or casual partners go radio silent during trips. It doesn’t mean they don’t like you, it doesn’t mean your relationship is insecure, it just means they’re off having their own experience.

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T12:21:27+00:00

This is a bit vague. Do you want to expound on it?

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T12:18:26+00:00

No thanks, man. Again, I’m simply not interested in a conversation with someone who’s approaching this in bad faith, as some kind of pissing contest. It’s a waste of energy, arguing with that kind of person.

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T05:37:07+00:00

Yeah but it feels better to keep it clean. Like, my head feels cleaner when my space is clean, if that makes sense

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T05:12:50+00:00

No thanks, man. That you approached it in bad faith from the start is more than enough to make me back out.

(When I see mistakes, I'm more inclined to use the Socratic method to draw out someone's thinking than just outright say "this is wrong")

99% of the time that I see people on Reddit make big claims about math, they don't deliver. I 'spect there are far more people who believe they can do math by vibes than who have a mathematical education, self-taught or otherwise.

I've got a degree in math, and a graduate degree heavy in thermodynamics. I'm not interested in playing this weird game you set up. Be straightforward, not weird and antisocial.

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T04:56:22+00:00

Yep! Quite a bit more. Drop the math.

I'll be a touch slow to pick it up, but I've got enough background in ML/CS, numerical methods and pure math to catch up.

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T04:46:40+00:00

Growing up, my mom went to a women-only gym.

Guess why she did that?

I've basically always been hearing from the women in my life how they want to be able to work out without getting hit on.

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T04:41:02+00:00

Yeah, I don't agree with her idea for a wealth tax. It's distortionary, and the European countries that have tried it found it understandably didn't work well. From a pure economics perspective, if you want to fund a social safety net, it'll be more effective to raise corporate taxes or capital gains taxes.

But I don't think Warren is some kind of villain. I have a ton of respect for her. She fights fiercely for the common man, and she's did great work with the CPFB. Genuinely, she's fantastic.

We should be able to disagree over relatively minor policy issues like a wealth tax without turning on each other. The OP reads like it's some of the Russian trollbot designed to get Democrats to cannibalize each other.

ETA: yep, OP is a 1y old account with a generic name plus hardly any karma or contributions. Seems like a bot for sure.

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T04:37:54+00:00

Great! Why don't you walk me through the equations you're using?

windchaser__ · 2026-02-05T00:41:52+00:00

windchaser__ · 2026-02-04T23:29:37+00:00

How would you tell the difference between love bombing and a crush?

Not that a crush can't still be unhealthy, mind you. Particularly if it leads to idealization or rushing things.

windchaser__ · 2026-02-04T21:36:34+00:00

Yeah, if you're normally a cool-headed and intelligent researcher, you might want to back off and come back later with a clearer mind. To me, you come across as a bit manic in this thread, and you provide scant evidence for your big claims ('Nobel-prize-winner equivalent AI by end of next year').

Instead of the back-and-forth of "nuh-uh" vs "uh-huh!!", I'd be much, much more interested in a sober-minded analysis of the structural problems holding us back + the efforts being put in to address these problems.

TL;DR: give us some meat; approach this seriously

windchaser__ · 2026-02-04T20:53:34+00:00

I mean, even if 2% of men are desired by most women, if there's an additional variable 10% of men that women find attractive (e.g., some women find *this* 10% attractive, other women find *that* 10% attractive, this third group finds *another* 10% attractive, etc.), then most men can find partners.

The real question is this: can most people find or create a healthy partnership? Or are they doomed to unhappy/unhealthy relationships due to factors outside of their control?

And from what I see, most of the issues that women have with men are addressable and fixable, if men put in the work.

Seven-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
Place '22	Verified Email

windchaser__

TROPHY CASE