My personal line in the sand is, “do I feel like the developers wanted me to use the solution that I used?”

In my opinion, developers can design multiple solutions to a problem and it still may not count as an immersive sim. Because the key characteristic of an immersive sim is that there must be sufficiently complex interacting systems and mechanics that you can come up with your own solutions, independent of what the developers intended

There were a couple more steps in between, with most of them ranging from “awful” to “sickeningly awful.” But yeah, acknowledged that the initial intention was noble. Unfortunately, that’s not what ended up being the vast majority of the revolution

When I think of guillotine, I think of the French revolution, which is about as far from a common man protest as you can get. It’s a good example of minority rule and authoritarianism

I’ve tried Soylent and Huel. I definitely prefer Soylent. Huel has a strong flaxseed flavor, which makes it taste strongly like a protein shake. In my experience, though, Soylent isn’t that good for chugging. It’s pretty thick and is better drank in sips over a long period of time

Been liking keychron. Somewhat expensive but also nowhere near as expensive as it could be, especially given its quality

The n from “an” transferring to the other word is always amusing to me and what’s more amusing is that it’s not the only time this has happened (a napron -> an apron)

Ok but, like, have you actually seen a frog hunt? It’s a miracle they even survive a week in the wild. They’re cute but also incredibly stupid. Frogging would be the least efficient way to debug your code, I would imagine

It’s not a matter of semantics, it’s a matter of drawing a distinction between 2 emotions that are often confused with each other. Call it whatever you want, but what OP calls love is clearly not what a regular person would consider to be love. This distinction, which has been made by several other people in this thread as well, is important because people will and often do justify being a creep as that they’re “in love.” See how already so much of OP’s argument hinges on the idea that he is in love? To be clear, he is very explicit that he is not just attracted to her - he is very clear that he believes he feels what a regular person would consider to be love.

Granted, in hindsight and given his responses so far, it seems unlikely that drawing this distinction would make a meaningful practical difference. But I fail to see how addressing one of the core parts of OP’s arguments can be considered as meaningless argument over semantics

Not top brass, but I’ve been in/am in mentorship roles. Not leadership in the strictest sense of the word, but I might as well pitch in. I think a big factor in what makes or breaks a good mentor/mentee relationship is acknowledging that your mentees have different goals than you. You may want a project to finish on time, but not everyone does. You need to cater to your mentees to make sure they’re getting what they want out of the relationship - you’re kind of working for them just as much as they’re working for you. It’s a lot of work to be a mentor

Whatever you say, brother. We’re only here to provide advice. And so far, everyone’s advice seems to be on the same page. It’s your decision whether to take it.

I will however point out that, in fact, the modern consensus is that Romeo and Juliet were not in love and that it was, at best, a hormone-driven highschool crush that lasted less than a week

This person’s advice is comprehensive and correct. You need to accept it. What you’re feeling is not love. Love is something that is built up over years of being in a relationship. No relationship, no love. If what you’re feeling is as strong as you claim, then the correct word would be infatuation, or possibly obsession.

You’re going to come off as extremely creepy to her. Let it go.

I’m confused now. Do you genuinely think dogs are a natural species? Because… that might explain a lot about this entire post

Purple carrots have a better taste, in my opinion. Not perfectly interchangeable with the standard orange ones, so having the option for both would be nice

Humans will survive. Civilization will survive. That’s almost guaranteed. That was never really up for debate. The debate is whether civilization will survive in a form that we would consider to be dignified. Will we have political rights? Will we have privacy? Will we be in a democracy? Will we live as serfs in a technofeudal society? These are the questions that we need to ask.

And they are important to ask because these are things that we can do something about. In my opinion, the elite intentionally promote doomerism, because people are more unwilling to fight back if they feel like the fight has already been lost. I believe that things can get better. I believe it despite everything going on because I have to. The worst thing you can do is to cede the future to the enemy.

For the most part, yes. But also, I think if you dig into the details, it’s less that bacteria have the upper hand, and more that we’ve reached a truce with the bacteria.

A lot of bacterial species need us to provide the environment for them to live, and our immune systems are pretty paranoid with our gut bacteria, especially if they getting too close to the intestinal walls. Also, our bodies are pumping out bacterial-killing compounds constantly.

I would describe the situation as that our bodies can’t kill every bacteria, and bacteria can’t kill us (not easily, anyways), so we’ve reached an agreement that as long as the bacteria stay in their lane, they can stay, and we might consider doing some trading at a distance

Morally: never. It’s built off stolen property and destroys the world with its ecological consequences.

Practically: as a placeholder. A real human will always outperform an AI, but if the intent is not quality but to just get the gist across, then it works in a pinch.

To be clear, it’s not just the quality of the final product that matters. An AI-generated product is unmaintainable and uneditable. You can’t make variations of a generated product. It’s technical debt at its most fundamental

I’m not saying that what you’ve said is intrinsically problematic. I’ve said variations of “baby [object]” as well, there’s nothing wrong with that. The issue is that context matters, and in this context it’s condescending in a way that prevents open discussion.

Any reasonable person would read what you wrote and interpret it as “do you think the show is bad, or are you inexperienced and like baby things?” In this specific case, I do happen to agree with your opinion on the material. But if there exists someone who does happen to like the show, they are now discouraged from commenting and sharing their opinions, because you have pre-emptively denigrated their views.

Starting a discussion (it’s a discussion community, after all) requires more care than usual to ensure that you are fostering a fair and open discussion. With the way that the post is currently structured, I don’t foresee a way that a fair and open discussion can be had.

His response was not condescending, it was a constructive critique and solid breakdown of why you sound condescending.

There are several things wrong with what you said:

1. You don’t need to be serious to be condescending. On the contrary, your admittance that you view it as a joke is interpreted as a willingness to use “teenagers/young adults” as the butt of your jokes. Which is condescending.

2. I acknowledge that you did not intend to be consciously condescending. But even ignoring that you openly admitted to it (see point 1), that does not mean that other people won’t see it that way. Just saying “I disagree with your opinion” doesn’t automatically cause everyone else in the world to change their interpretation of your words. There is a reason we are telling you that this is a real interpretation of your words, and refusing to accept it also reflects negatively on you.

My advice: do what the other comment said. It’s an easy edit, and we won’t need to be having this conversation at all.

It was alright. Not bad, not great. But your post reads as unusually condescending in a way that prevents open discussion, so I’ll have to downvote

It’s not just about being in the right folder. You need to specify the path. If you just do python file.py or pip install whatever

It will try to use system components, regardless of what folder you’re in. You’ll need to explicitly say, “use this specific venv version of python or pip.” If you’re in the bin folder of the venv, you’ll need to use ./python file.py or ./pip install whatever