colin

if you're arguing that violence is a poor way by which to shape a society, preach that to the police. it's literally what they do for a living.

they probably meant 512 Gb per IC, not per DIMM (which usually has 8-9 DRAM chips).

you're right about that last part though.

i think "autistic" would be perfect, as there's a reasonable case that Frieren is neurodivergent (at least by human standards).

anyway @jerkface@lemmy.ca, i will tag my posts more once Lemmy has better tagging. right now at the post-level it's just NSFW or not NSFW, and the sidebar's pretty clear IMO on where that line's to be drawn. at the comment level, there's only block-level spoilers, with no way to spoiler individual words. my honest advice if it bothers you is to get in contact with the devs and discuss better features around that. this isn't meant as a dismissal: the nice thing about stuff like Lemmy v.s. reddit is that you actually can speak with the devs just by searching the software on GitHub and then joining the chatroom(s) linked from the readme.

i keep my music organized on-disk so that each song is placed at <artist>/<album>/<track-number>-<title>.flac. then i just use any file browser (e.g. rofi, or portfolio) to navigate it, and when i select a song it opens in mpv. i installed the playlistmanager mpv script so that when i open any song, mpv queues everything else in that folder (so if i open track 01, the default behavior is gapless playback of the whole album). i also installed the uosc script, which provides a UI that's much friendlier than the default IMO.

i find i prefer configuring just one media player and then using that for everything (music, audiobooks, videos, podcasts, etc). then for example when i decide i want to cast music to my TV, i only have to solve that once, and not separately for casting youtube, local videos, etc.

i want this to be true.

but it's probably just the TA who's using it.

My head cannon

intentional or not, the image fits 👍

if it read "what's the problem", i'd agree. otherwise, i'll toss it to whoever's well-versed in Chicago speech styles. perhaps the passive-aggressiveness of Seattle is coloring my view 🙃

half of the clergy said "what's your problem", which would usually mean "the answer to whatever you just asked is so obviously 'no' that you're a bad person just for asking it: what's your problem". i have to respect that some topics are simply off-limits for some people: if you're going to someone asking for advice about a moral quandary and their convictions are strong enough they don't wanna discuss the topic beyond "hell no", i don't fault them for that.

in my head, there's a direct causal chain:

1. the court presents me with the accusation and the evidence.
2. i declare if the evidence supports the accusation.
3. the judge declares a punishment in response to that verdict.
4. law enforcement delivers the punishment.

if i believe (3) and (4) will function as stated, then it's equally accurate to say that in step 2 i am deciding whether or not to confiscate $250,000 from this mother and cancel her home internet connection.

but a huge number of people i present this to refuse to admit that equivalence. there is some question about whether weakening the norm might cause more damage than mistreating the mother, but does that even weaken the point? the common answer from those who bring it up is "there's too much uncertainty to say": build a complex enough machine, and people are eager to deny the downstream effects of their actions.

(you can overcome most of the degradation-of-norms issue by making this a secret hearing, and still a lot of people will hesitate to admit the equivalence between their verdict in step 2 and the effects of step 3/4)

i've had better luck illustrating the point with a less abstract case: the 2000's called and it's your turn for jury dury. the case for today is that of a single mother who downloaded some Disney movies off Limewire for her kids to watch so she could get some time to herself to take care of chores.

should the jury find her guilty, you suspect that the judge will fine her $250,000 and cancel her home internet connection. you think such a punishment would do more net harm than good. but you don't get to decide the punishment (that's for the judge to announce after the jury deliberates), you just decide the guilty/not-guilty verdict.

you look at the evidence: the mother definitely downloaded those files. what verdict do you deliver the judge?

ourethra

oh god, Cybertruck culture is just incel culture applied to a different topic. different groups, maybe, but the same culture.