Except there are competitors by now with equally good tolerances and overall part quality that still cost half as much, so that can’t really be the reason
Except there are competitors by now with equally good tolerances and overall part quality that still cost half as much, so that can’t really be the reason
Well, the problem with that is that a completely dead smoke detector does also not blink
Pineapple is pretty common in curries, the jump to apples and raisins isn’t that far tbh
it means you’re getting fucked by them and not in a good way
So anal sex is a not-good way to have sex? Yeah sorry but that does sound pretty homophobic to me.
without lube
Ah, well that changes things. Anal without lube is a pretty universally bad experience, so sure, use that. But just framing being the receiving end of anal as bad without further context, we can do better than that, that’s all im saying
And Romans can’t be homophobic for some reason, or what’s your point?
Maybe we don’t need to resort to casual homophobia though to criticize corporates
I’m German, and I would not want that. German grammar works differently in a way that makes programming a lot more awkward for some reason. Things like, “.forEach” would technically need three different spellings depending on the grammatical gender of the type of element that’s in the collection it’s called on. Of course you could just go with neuter and say it refers to the “items” in the collection, but that’s just one of lots of small pieces of awkwardness that get stacked on top of each other when you try to translate languages and APIs. I really appreciate how much more straightforward that works with English.
Fortran is Proto-Indo-Germanic or whatever it’s called again
the argument that “being selfless is selfish” is not useful
Yes, that’s my entire point.
and provably false
Depends on how you define “selfish”. Again, that’s exactly what I’m trying to demonstrate here. Reducing the definition of selfish to mean “getting something out of it” makes it meaningless because every decision is made in the hopes of getting something out of it in some way, even if it’s obscure. To make it useful, you need to look at what someone is getting out of it in order to get to a useful definition.
That would be an extremely reductive definition that doesn’t really tell us much about how caring for others is actually experienced and how it manifests in the world.
Exactly, that’s my point.
How would this for example explain sacrificing yourself to save another person, if the very core of caring is to create positive emotions in yourself?
In this case it would be about reducing negative emotions, choosing the lesser of two evils. Losing a loved one and/or having to live with the knowledge that you could have saved them but chose not to can inflict massive emotional pain, potentially for the rest of your life. Dying yourself instead might seem outright attractive in comparison.
this idea that caring is in its essence transactional
That’s not actually how I’m seeing it, and I also don’t think it’s a super profound insight or something. It’s just a super technical way of viewing the topic of motivation, and while it’s an interesting thought experiment, it’s mostly useless.
Well, but what does “caring” mean? It means that their well-being affects your emotions. At its very core, you wanting to help people you care about comes from wanting to create positive emotions in yourself or avoiding negative ones (possibly in the future, it doesn’t have to be an immediate effect). If those emotions weren’t there, you wouldn’t actually care and thus not do it.
Edit to clarify: I’m not being cynical or pessimistic here, or implying that this means that everyone is egotistical because of this. The point I was trying to make is that defining egotism vs. Altruism is a little bit more complex than just looking at whether there’s something in it for the acting person. We actually need to look at what’s in it for the acting person.
I mean, you’re not wrong, but your point is also kinda meaningless. Of course, you only ever do things because there’s something in it for you, even if that something is just feeling good about yourself. If there was truly nothing in it for you, then why would you do it?
But that misses the point of the “people are inherently selfish” vs “people are inherently generous” discussion, because it’s not actually about whether people do things only for themselves at the most literal level, instead it’s about whether people inherently get something out of doing things for others without external motivation. So your point works the same on both sides of the argument.
The meme only says “if … then …”. It does not imply the reverse relationship of “if not … then not …”.
Sand won’t do anything because the fire is self-oxidizing.
From my understanding the recommendation to have a bucket of sand around when handling lithium batteries is not to put the fire out with it, but to have something to throw the battery into that’s not gonna catch fire as well, and then to carry the whole bucket somewhere where the battery can just burn out on its own. Is that wrong?
Not really. Timezones, at their core (so without DST or any other special rules), are just a constant offset that you can very easily translate back and forth between, that’s trivial as long as you remember to do it. Having lots of them doesn’t really make anything harder, as long as you can look them up somewhere. DST, leap seconds, etc., make shit complicated, because they bend, break, or overlap a single timeline to the point where suddenly you have points in time that happen twice, or that never happen, or where time runs faster or slower for a bit. That is incredibly hard to deal with consistently, much more so that just switching a simple offset you’re operating within.
To be fair, it’s still hit or miss, you need to do a little research to know what you’re getting, but it has gotten sooo much better in the last couple of years. At this point, any brand that uses pieces made by gobricks is going to give you excellent piece quality rivaling or even surpassing that of Lego in some aspects. My recommendations if you want to check it out are Pantasy and Funwhole, both make great original sets with high quality prints, the latter even with fully integrated light kits. Those are not the only options, but the best ones at the moment in my opinion
Edit to add: as said a lot has happened just in the last few years, so to get a good picture of the current quality landscape, even with the brands I mentioned it’s a good idea to stick to their newer sets for now, since you might still get earlier generations of bricks that are not quite as good with the older models that have been sitting on shelves for some time