soiler

Weird, I've never had an issue except with trying to open updates from the notifications dropdown.

Sending an email several hours later to fact check someone is not even in the same ballpark as pulling out your phone at the end of a discussion and looking up the fact together. Honestly, I think most people would consider that malicious or at best kind of arrogant.

You will actually find that the vast majority of Spanish grammar is untouched by this change. The only change, actually, is that it will now be possible to acknowledge the existence of nonbinary people. Or do you think that binary gendered pronouns already do that job?

Ok cool, they get to exist. And they speak Spanish. What word do they use to refer to themselves?

Oh, no, how did we get back here...?

> The eternal outraged youth will always find a few hobby horses to ride. Sometimes they lead to good things. This is a particularly smelly one, unfortunately.

Nonbinary people face real discrimination, including but not limited to the dismissal of that fight as pointless outrage.

> it’s also musically ugly (language is a song of sorts)

This is ridiculous. Ugly-sounding words will always exist.

> and culturally insulting ... How about actual younger people developing another, more beautiful, culturally acceptable, word to achieve the same objective

What does any of this even mean? Real Spanish-speaking nonbinary young people did come up with a working solution. If you think it's too ugly sounding, fine, you get to have an opinion. If you think it shouldn't exist because it's too ugly sounding to you, honestly, fuck off. That's not a valid complaint.

> https://www.asale.org/la-asociacion

I am aware of La Asociación. I understand that they literally make the rules. I need you to understand that they do not actually make the rules. Language is how people communicate. New words happen.

So on the one hand: 1. You don't like the sound of the word 2. An intrinsically conservative body hasn't yet recognized the word

On the other hand: 1. Nonbinary would simply like a word to refer to themselves because one doesn't exist.

But, I will concede that it was pretty rude of me to write "mildly confused". I shouldn't have been so uncharitable.

So, in your example of the Irish word, that's exactly how misinformation gets spread so easily. I doubt anyone is in danger from thinking a certain Irish word exists which doesn't actually exists. But the exact same scenario can be used when people drop a "Did you know <group I don't like> is doing <bad thing>? They're so awful." And then that gets carried to the next conversation each person has.

I think we do benefit a little bit from curiosity to know the truth behind the bullshit people say to us.

And there's a compromise, too. It's actually possible to finish a train of thought or conversation and then look up the facts, keeping everybody on the same page. It's even more fun that way.

It's the same for me. I want to work from home, at least most days, but then it's quite difficult to actually get out and see people. Past jobs have provided the bulk of my social interaction, unfortunately. Now it's kind of lose-lose, because commuting by car 4+ days/wk is horseshit and intolerable. But my friend group has shrunk significantly and I keep coming up empty-handed when I try to create regular hangouts that I actually enjoy.

There's an extra layer of post-colonialism in this situation, but it's otherwise almost identical to the discussion happening in English about gendered pronouns. I think the following can both be true:

1. It's bad to tell people that they're using their native language badly if you're not a native speaker (especially in a scenario where there's a social power dynamic at play, like Spanish speakers trying to navigate discrimination in the US). People making things harder for immigrants without compassion for their challenges are probably making a mistake.

2. It's bad to say "this whole thing is just stupid" about a radical shift in language that's being deliberately embraced by younger people to break down discriminatory gender traditions, just because it's new and you're mildly confused about it. People making things harder for gender-nonconforming people are probably making a mistake.

How can you say it's informed consent if the obvious outcome is that more people click "yes" than actually want to click "yes"?

Well, tracking users by cookies or fingerprinting or whatever can tell you that by combining data from different sources. Now we've looped back around to being in favor of the most intrusive methods.

Thanks for responding. Yeah, I don't use the 1st gen. The drowsiness is a deal breaker, since I'm already on the edge of drowsiness most days. I only use loratadine, and it doesn't do a lot. But I probably don't need to be using it every day anyway, since it doesn't do a lot.

> It could stabilize with extreme income inequality creating a permanent underclass

That should would be a frightening and radical departure from today.

> (Antihistamines being linked to dementia and steroids being linked to membrane damage amongst other things)

Oh, cool. I guess I should stop

I'm severely allergic to dust mites as well. I get weekly allergy shots and while they've had a great effect on itchy eyes, runny nose, extreme stuffiness, and other seasonal allergy symptoms... my nose is still congested almost all the time.

I got a dust mite-proof cover for my mattress, tried vacuuming + cleaning more. No improvement.

I got two different nasal procedures to open my airways. First a turbinate reduction - no benefit. Later "vivair" or something... it was non-surgical, basically "radio" treatment or something. I don't think it makes sense that it was radio waves that burned my flesh since, y'know, that's not how radio waves work. Maybe microwaves or something, but the nurses and doctor couldn't explain it. As you can see, I was desperate enough to try it. Anyway - it didn't help. My nose is still clogged almost all the time. YMMV

So how do you pay your rent? Most of us aren't working for others because we like it.

It could be all of the above. I was diagnosed with "mild" sleep apnea and a CPAP hasn't really made an improvement on my day-to-day.

The main difference is that occasionally I used to wake up feeling completely hung over and near death, and now that no longer happens if I'm using my CPAP.

Most days, I am still tired - I am learning that is probably due to depression/anxiety (working on treatment now), ADHD (can't treat it until the former is stable), and poor stress management (undiagnosed autistic kid with zero social/emotional support).

Purchasable is also (usually) silly, but here we are.

Fortnite might be a bad example. I could actually see it happening there; Fortnite is big on cross-IP content. I can imagine that buying a skin in Fortnite or a Marvel game and then using it in both could be a selling point. (This could get someone to buy that Marvel game when they might not have otherwise.)

People may be downvoting because I stuffed my comment with opinions they dislike more so than my calling out the title being irrelevant to the article.

Hm, you're right that there are digital situations where it does make sense. And that's exactly what the article is about: Does it make sense in your game? In most cases, no.

This isn't about cryptocurrency at all. It's about the obviously bad idea of transferable digital in-game goods [sold for cryptocurrency]. You don't need the crypto part to see why it's not a good idea, although the model described here (selling loot to other players?) is not the extremely silly one I've heard more often (buy a CSGO skin and wear it in other games!).

No. Hijacking emotional/biochemical triggers in our brains is not the same as giving us what we "want". It is the exact same problem as with clickbait/ragebait titles on content (which... often get shared to Facebook).

People ruin their lives doing things that feel "good" in the moment all the time. Facebook is a machine for that.

I've been using their app for years, it's pretty helpful. I really wish they used a different name, though.

Do you think that's what Facebook is? Are you not aware of their content sorting algorithms?

> I imagine for a lot of people they, unknowingly?, subscribed to a lot of things they don't end up caring about

Driven largely by being forced to give an email address for almost any online interaction/transaction, and then being automatically placed on a subscription list with no notice or opportunity to opt out. I thought that had become illegal, but either I'm wrong or there's no enforcement. (I suppose the fact that I don't know how to report these offenders indicates why enforcement might be low.)

Fair enough, if they in fact didn't gain any money from their illegal actions then the fine is less problematic.

If the fine is less than the profit of committing the crime, then it is now de facto legal, taxed profit. There is no incentive not to continue committing the crime.

Perhaps $5mm is a valid fine on top of repaying the illegal profits. But on its own? It is an endorsement.

Certainly they know every company's tech stack(s) at least.

> The AI can not have a goal unless we somehow program that into it.

I am pretty sure that's not how modern AI works. We don't tell it what to do, we give it a shitload of training data and let it figure out the rules on its own.

> If we don't, then the question is why would it choose any one goal over any other?

Just because we don't know the answer to this question yet doesn't mean we should assume the answer is "it won't".

Very cool. Here's a thing though - not everyone is a student who wants you to take their location for a service they haven't asked for yet.

> You're saying the game isn't playable because it was too different to real life? Did you notice the Superhero who arrives to fight natural disasters or the giant aliens who can invade?

So, all bets are off when a fantastical element is introduced? We should no longer expect any internal consistency, and the work is entirely above critique?

Why didn't Frodo take down Sauron in his X-wing?? I saw the walking trees, so I know that anything is possible.

The answer is because we expect internal consistency. Ok, so there's a superhero in this game system. Doesn't change the fact that it's supposed to simulate traffic, and that this is one of the fundamental systems the game is built upon. Oh, it doesn't actually simulate traffic? Yes, this is a problem: it's a traffic simulation with superheros.