jojojaf

Can you only add adjacent integers?

So like, infinity, infinity-1, infinity-2, etc.?

Basically the same as contacting Australia

"Robot"er defensive

I say go the Slavic route and lose all the articles; "Man who coined word 'Robot' defends himself"

Fits with the 'robot' theme

This comment uses 'X' as a variable, which I found confusing to parse given the recent rebranding of Twitter to X

Any infinite combo is of this form?

Like, if you have an infinite mana combo, you can just keep running the steps of it to block gameplay instead of playing your fireball

It's like watching our supreme overlords descend into madness, in a kind of scarily literal sense

It's exactly 340 days until Halloween

I didn't read the article but, small numbers are more immediately useful. Larger numbers are needed for describing more complex phenomena, and their construction relies on smaller numbers. So I find the explanation to the title of this article to be intuitively obvious; I don't see how it could be possible for a brain to evolve to perceive large numbers better than smaller ones

Tutanota is cheaper and allows as many custom domain email addresses as you like. Proton had some restriction like 5 or 10 or something

Oh I didn't realise I could just do that myself.

Well, thank you so much for all of your help

Oh I see, that makes sense.

Just to check I understand correctly, I need to clear my caches on any internet apps I use like the browser and YouTube etc., and I will also clear the cookies on my browser. Then I'll ring my ISP and ask for a new IP address, and then I'll repeat the cache clearing. Did I miss anything?

I tried to search for 'bot profiling' so I could try and read a bit more about this but I didn't really find too much of interest so far

Wow ok that is pretty scary. From what I understand credit scores are pretty strictly regulated and this definitely needs to be too.

Is there some way for me to run my IP through a bot detection so I can check if what I'm doing is making a difference?

Ahhhh I see thank you I will definitely do that. I didn't realise the profiling would be on my devices I thought maybe some company makes a list of 'bot scores' a bit like experian or something

Thank you I will look into this. I changed ISPs in March and some of these things happened before that and one happened afterwards. Would my IP address have changed when I changed the ISP?

What you're telling me is a more explicit part of the capitalist promise. My statement is absolutely part of it too.

Governments predate capitalism. They don't predate wealth inequality. Part of the purpose of the original formation of governments was to tackle wealth inequality in a feudal system.

One of the things that stops people at the lower end from innovating and forming for example small businesses is lack of resources. Redistributing wealth would allow mean more resources available to wider range of people. I'm sure improving bureaucratic processes for small business startups is also great thing to do.

I have a PhD in particle physics and I think that cold fusion is basically completely unviable in any situation. I may be proven wrong. I agree that taxation is a complex problem to solve, which is why I was advocating allocating more resources to this earlier on. 'Rich people who have far more resources than they have any need for and live wildly extravagant lifestyles don't need to redistribute any of their wealth because one day we'll crack a high yield problem and everyone will be able to be wealthy' is a very dangerous viewpoint as far as I'm concerned. It's clear that the current stable climatic state that our planet sits in is becoming strained by human economic activity, and the capitalist promise of 'there will always be more' is becoming more complex to fulfill. There is a clear solution which exists now, and it is to redistribute wealth.

I don't think we'll likely to come to any kind of agreement about these topics so I'm going to leave this conversation here.

The capitalist promise is something like, 'you don't need to enforce social responsibility on us because when we get rich enough there'll be enough wealth and we will just share it anyway of our own accord'. Maybe in the 1800s or earlier then it could have been reasonable to believe this, but in the current world climate it hasn't happened. Wealth inequality is at the highest it has ever been. The purpose of the existence of government historically was to combat this problem.

If you don't see why wealth inequality is a problem then look at biodiversity for example. It's generally accepted that wider biodiversity is better for everyone, and efforts to conserve a wider range of diverse species rather than a smaller number of better adapted species are encouraged. Now apply this reasoning to businesses. If wealth were redistributed better that would mean more chances for people of the lower end of the spectrum to innovate and produce small businesses which would lead to wider diversity and resilience in the economy. Which ties in with your small team example.

As for 'capitalist propaganda'; for example, considering higher wealth tax rates for the top end as 'crushing those who generate wealth' is pretty clearly capitalist doctrine to me. It's the kind of narrative that wealthy people in positions of power sell so that they don't have to redistribute that wealth. I agree with you that people at the high end should have incentives to innovate and I am not advocating communism. However as far as I can see, with properly globally enforced taxes at a higher rate for top end wealth there would still be plenty of incentive for these people to innovate.

I'm not advocating any specific high-end wealth tax rate, but I think at the moment they are very low. I think it would be interesting and relevant to future policy making to have historical data about which such tax rates have worked in the past. Wealth inequality is currently a huge problem in the world, and as far as I can see any kind of arguments against tackling it such as 'we'll miss out on innovation' are capitalist propaganda. This is why it would be good to have accurate historical data to respond to these kind of arguments.

I've reread my post that you responded to and when OP says 'tax rates are meaningless signaling to low income voters because no one pays these rates', my response is 'taxes should be better enforced so that people do indeed pay the stated rates'.

Yes ok, my take on left wing media's spin here is that it often boils down to 'right wing media are only interested in identity politics and racist dog whistles'. I don't entirely disagree with this, but it doesn't go very far to address the legitimate concerns of the people who live in affected areas.

Nice to see an example that there can be a positive outcome with allocated resources. I'm not sure how it would affect their electability among affected populations, but (I'm in the UK and) I'd like to see Labour addressing this problem by proposing solutions like you're suggesting.

I understand that this is the argument being pushed primarily by right wing media and politicians, I think it's quite universal and not only in Sweden in Germany. Are you aware of any data that either supports or refutes this claim?

We're not doing great at the moment but I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that we're becoming a failed state. Also it looks very likely that we'll have the right wing government that caused a lot of these issues in the last 10 years out at the next election.

I think the fact that they are generally well fed and well cared for compared to wild animals makes a big difference as well

Thanks, I was trying to find the the tldr

I saw some analysis by a Pokémon YouTuber that they thought Niantic were doing it intentionally because they're planning to launch their own competitor soon which they could make more money on because doesn't use the Pokémon IP

Well sure it's a bit of a game between the employers and the union. Countries with more extensive labour laws will restrict a wider range of unethical behaviour from employers, giving the workforce more clout in negotiations.

Phyrro supposedly travelled to India, but he was later than Socrates I think