Skip Navigation
InitialsDiceBear„Initials” ( by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (
Posts 1
Comments 354
  • I don't want to argue with you and I admit that my phrasing wasn't ideal but I assumed that it was obvious that i was talking about everything that would be executed on the machine. Apparently it wasn't.

  • crowdStrikeIsAVerbNow
  • Basically, crowdstrike wrote bad code that run as a driver, windows doesn't like bad code in their drivers. Kernel level code is generally expected to run properly. crowdstrike's kernel level code was really bad. Embarrassingly bad.

    If the host creates a playlist and everyone can add their favorite song to the playlist, the host won't be blamed if you add "erika". People rightfully think you are an ignorant weirdo or a bad person, not the host.

  • See This Red Area? This Is *Sand*
  • I don't think it is relevant.

    The xkcd points out distribution and population.

    The second map highlights how much more democratic the us is than republican and that is it obviously a broken system that republican's have a chance of winning

  • The Paradox of Tolerance
  • To be fair there is more than 1 definition.

    I think it is fairly obvious that the "inventor" of the paradox of tolerance didn't use the term with the meaning that it is self-contradicting and therefore wrong but rather the alternative definition of "a statement that is seemingly contradictory or opposed to common sense and yet is perhaps true". And the peace treaty/social contract solution is assuming that you can't be tolerant to the intolerant, so they agree on "yet is perhaps true" part. And the first section is obviously true.

  • The Paradox of Tolerance
  • The paradox is about being "obliged" to be intolerant to protect (and maximize) the tolerance.

    If you don't actively act against intolerance, you allow the intolerance to exist, allowing intolerance will result in more intolerance.

  • The Paradox of Tolerance
  • I don't know what your issue with the paradox of tolerance is. Even in your "solution" it is ultimately true that there is the paradox of tolerance.

    The paradox is that a maximally tolerant society has to be intolerant to the intolerant.

    Breaking the social contract would make you intolerant and the tolerant people who follow the social contract would have to be intolerant towards you to protect the social contract as just removing the necessity of tolerance towards the intolerant wouldn't create a deterrent as the tolerant people mostly would treat the intolerant decently as they aren't bad people and wouldn't inflict unnecessary harm. So you need to communicate to the tolerant people that they have to be intolerant towards the intolerant to protect the social contract, so the tolerant would inflict the necessary harm to the intolerant to create a deterrent.

    So to maximize the effects of the social contract, the social contract would require intolerance from the tolerant.

  • How dare he
  • Don't know what idea I like more,

    1. He is doing the weirdest troll
    2. He is mistaken
    3. We are mistaken to think that he means Epstein and he is totally right and on the money. (Geoff made have a vacation love Affair with his wife or something)

    I can't choose

  • These are the jobs that AI can’t replace
  • Please don't tell "manual laborers" that they can't lose their job. That might not be accurate long term (think, auto industry or 3d printed houses) but also it turns the working class against each other. "It isn't my issue, I am a manual laborers" wouldn't a position that other laborer would like and it is wrong because who is going to support all those jobless people... What will they be doing? Maybe working in manual labor???

  • They just walking outside now
  • Oh so the path of action is, you have guns to defend your home while they try to overtake your government and society, then when they are in power and they march into the homes of the minorities, society wishes the minorities good luck with their weapons. Good to know. Foolproof. Thanks for telling me.

    Also totally not missing my actual point.

  • They just walking outside now
  • I am against violence while I have no illusion about the fact that it seems necessary because bad humans need to fuck up everything for good humans.

    But I want to stay that this is not a call for violence or an expression of my support for it.

    But why the fuck does everyone and their grandmother have guns in the us and these people are alive? Isn't the point of the guns to protect the public from tyranny? I mean I don't think it works but that is the reason no? How are tyrannical forces allowed to have openly political activity? You guys don't have guns to fight for your "freedom🦅" it seems but to shoot your child when they sneak back into the house.

    In my opinion, it is good that you guys don't murder each other but like... What is the point of those guns if not fighting literal Nazis?

    Drop the gun bs or actually fight for your freedom or be honest why you want guns, it is fucked up that you want to be shot by your toddler but you do you, i guess.

  • this really happened.