58008

joined 2 years ago
[–] 58008@lemmy.world 6 points 18 hours ago

I can tell by the flavour that a new love interest will come into your life imminently.

[–] 58008@lemmy.world 62 points 2 days ago

Say what you will about Musk, but you gotta hand it to the man; for someone who has sired so many bastards with so many different women, he has somehow remained the world's biggest virgin.

[–] 58008@lemmy.world 45 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realise loving the white race and wanting a secure future for white children makes me a BIGOT.

/s

 

For example, in English, you might type something like:

r u going out 2nite?

Instead of:

Are you going out tonight?

How does that sort of thing work when texting in a logographic language? Is it just emoji city, or can they mix and match characters to make things more compact?

And similarly, is there a formal journalistic shorthand system that gets used when jotting down comments in real-time, e.g. in China, Korea or Japan?

Thank you kindly!

[–] 58008@lemmy.world 24 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Believers: God exists, look at the wondrous complexity and beauty of life!

Snails:

[–] 58008@lemmy.world 13 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I'm convinced Epstein killed himself, but I'm also convinced that MAGA's top ~~brass~~ pewter are overrepresented on those lists.

[–] 58008@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

The first time I ever heard or saw Mastodon (the band), it was a live performance on Letterman that genuinely sucked balls. It put me off the band for about a year before I gave them a proper listen (they're now in my top 5 bands of all time). Anyway, on that first clip I saw on Letterman, I thought the bassist was Keanu Reeves and that this was another of his weird side projects. I remember thinking "stick to acting bro, this sucks".

This is the clip in question:

https://youtu.be/ktw9XCpDS2M

Fucking awful performance. But tell me that's not Keanu's twin brother on bass, perhaps after a stint of sleeping on Oscar the Grouch's couch 👀

[–] 58008@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

I could never 😭 my heart sinks when I look in a mirror, I don't need a mirror that specifically highlights and exaggerates my flaws.

I wish I had the balls and emotional security of the people who get this done and then laugh about it! They're inspiring, in a way. Something to try to emulate.

[–] 58008@lemmy.world 30 points 5 days ago (1 children)

"Won't somebody PLEASE think of the ~~children~~ devs!?"

The last refuge of a dying argument 😴

[–] 58008@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Potatrick Tuberman

[–] 58008@lemmy.world 76 points 1 week ago (29 children)

I've been reading about the Holocaust a fair bit of late, and it's interesting to see the debate around the functionalist/intentionalist view of how it happened. OP's story seems to lend credence to the former version, in that the Nazi state was a patchwork of warring factions that were each trying to take power for themselves and in an effort to do so, tried a little too hard to do what they imagined Hitler wanted of them, namely more and more murder and ruthlessness and general mayhem, eventually culminating in plans for wholesale extermination. This is the functionalist view, where things happened almost in a bottom-up fashion, whereas the intentionalist idea is one where Hitler planned the Holocaust from day one in a top-down approach. I personally think it's more likely to be the former though, at least from what I've read about it anyway.

Growing up in the '80s and '90s, I never really learned much about the Holocaust aspect of WWII. I knew the broad strokes, of course, but the finer details of the Nazi state's operations are where the true horror lies. Even without WWII or the Holocaust, it was one of the purest examples of a nightmarish dystopia run by corrupt, amoral, incompetent, petty, narcissistic lunatics and sociopaths. The parallels with certain modern governments is terrifying...

 

I've been hoodwinked too many times by well-reviewed pop-sci books which I later discovered to be hated by the actual scientists who do the work. Quantum Supremacy by Michio Kaku was the final straw 😆

Cheers!

 

At least 68.8% of the time, I'm right the first time, despite the universe telling me otherwise.

Seriously. how often do you try to plug something into a USB port, find it doesn't fit, switch the orientation, still doesn't fit, switch back to the original orientation, now it fits? 🤷‍

Have more faith in yourselves!

[–] 58008@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't really care? Is that allowed? 🤷‍

I'm old enough to remember when computers started to be used for art, and how traditional artists were complaining about how soulless the end product would be, and how unskilled people could 'fake' being good artists because the computer does most of the work for them. I mean the undo function of a computer on its own is putting incredible creative power into the hands of even the most useless digital artist, power that da Vinci himself would have creamed his little loincloth over. And the copy & paste function - and all of the other everyday functions all PC users depend on - cut down the production time by orders of magnitude compared to traditional painting/drawing. This isn't even getting into the incredible transformation tools on offer in Photoshop (or even MS Paint 1.0).

Remember matte painters who painted incredible photorealistic chunks of the screen in films? Do Photoshop users of today feel any qualms about having extincted the fuck outta those people? Would they have even entertained the woes of those artists if they were around at the time? Would they have been calling for government intervention to prevent non-traditional matte painters from taking those jobs?

What about sculptors and stop-motion pros? Movies have been riddled with worse-looking CGI replacements for those things for half a century. Any shits given about those artists who spent their lives perfecting their craft only to be supplanted overnight by a cunt with a Pentium who produces objectively worse results?

AI is just the latest sabot-magnet disruption, and it won't be the last, despite the apocalyptic language around it. Either find a way to live with it and exploit it, or lay down in the Artists of Christmas Past mass grave and pull the clay in over yourselves. Or, you know, go ahead and try to uninvent it or whatever it is you're proposing 👍 And if you really wanna go hardcore, uninstall all of your digital art tools, get yourself an easel and see what you can do in the "real world" with your "real talents" without recourse to time-saving, labour-deleting, instantaneous bespoke-brush-manifesting technology.

[–] 58008@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

I bet it'd also cause a huge comeback for those rub-on tattoos you used to get with bubblegum.

 

If I wanted to ensure that my land would never be used for a shopping mall or sports stadium, but I nevertheless wanted rid of the land, could I sell it in this almost 'crowdfunded' piecemeal manner and get my money, while also making the red tape involved in consolidating all of those 1-meter-squared chunks too costly to be worth doing?

Obviously no one would want a 1m piece of land, but maybe if they were doing it for activist reasons (like how the Cards Against Humanity people bought land to prevent Trump building his wall), or even as a novelty where they could buy it for their friend as a joke gift, it might be enticing. People could have annual parties where they go to their land and place a little deckchair on it and drink beers with their 'neighbours'.

 

If it were truly undetectable, I don't think they'd bother. They want to look like one of Trump's lumpen-faced groupies or a washed up Las Vegas magician. Their Hellraisered faces are like a meat-based country club membership card.

 

That's obviously an exaggeration, but why don't manufacturers of basic cars just put a fancy-looking exterior onto them? Aren't you mainly paying for the engine and electrics and upholstery and sound system with fancy cars? Why is it (seemingly) only Lamborghini and Ferrari that look like Lamborghini and Ferrari? Is chassis manufacturing more difficult than it seems to a numbnut like me? I assume it's just pressing sheets of metal into a mould, so I'm probably way off the mark.

It's like when you see a computer mouse that's named something like GamerStealth eXtreme Zero Pro, and it's the worst piece of shit you've ever used but looks like it came from Area 51. Same for PC cases, actually. Alienware rigs look a million percent better than they actually are. Why is this not also the case for cars?

Full disclosure: I know nothing about cars. I just know that when I see a fancy car, and check the make, it's BMW or something high end, and when I see a pygmy hippo lookin' motherfucker, it's made by one of those "buy one, get one free" type manufacturers that appeal to meth head soccer moms. And by "fancy" I don't even mean "luxury", just obviously high quality. Most BMWs and Rolls-Royce don't look like spaceships, but they nevertheless look really impressive. Again, I need to stress that I know nothing about cars.

Cheers!

 

I would blast my asshole out with an illegal Mexican firework to destroy the haemorrhoidal nightmare that is my chocolate bunker and then take a sip of health potion and have it grow back normal so I can resume my once-excellent shittings.

 

Shouldn't it be the default and not require the suspect/subject to actually ask for one? Has there ever been any attempt to make that the norm in any countries? I think the only question should be "do you have your own lawyer you like to use, or are you happy enough with the court-appointed one?"

I'm not even sure opting out should be allowed, but I'm open to hearing reasons why that would be a bad system, or indeed a worse system than the one most countries seem to have now. So many miscarriages of justice could have been easily avoided.

 
 

Often when I'm playing Scrabble, I'm testing every normally -ed word with the -t variant to see if I can make it fit, but only a small percentage of them gets accepted or is in the dictionary. Some seem self-explanatory, but others seem arbitrary, and feel like hangovers from an old mediaeval version of the language.

An example of a self-explanatory variation would be "burned" and "burnt". One is the past particle of the verb to burn, the other is a description of the quality of having been burned. Although interchangeable, one generally feels more appropriate than the other in specific circumstances. I'm ok with that particular t/ed switcheroo. It's stuff like the following that I'm confused about:

  • Vexed/Vext
  • Fixed/Fixt
  • Flocked/Flockt
  • Picked/Pickt
  • Skinned/Skint (borderline case, "skint" has another meaning)

Those are all in the dictionary, but these aren't:

  • Backed/Backt
  • Racked/Rackt
  • Packed/Packt
  • Fucked/Fuckt

I can't for the life of me figure out the rule, if such a rule even exists.

Cheers!

 

Bonus points if the person saying the offensive thing thought they were being complimentary.

view more: next ›