Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)B
Posts
5
Comments
457
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Guns

    Jump
  • Idk sounds about right to me, 8%-8%. What do you expect, 8% of people carry so 50% of people have a gun on them at any given time? No, more like 8% of people have one at any given time, therefore 8% chance. Your figures seem off to me considering there are none, “nuh uh” isn’t a rebuttal.

    I'm saying that if 8% of people carry guns and there are 20 such people at a particular location, then the probability that someone in the group has a gun would be 1-(1-0.08)^20 which is around 80%. For 1 person, it's 8%, for 2 people it's 15%, and so on.

    But whatever. I can see you are firmly in the camp of 'we need good people with guns to stop bad people with guns' - a view that basically only exists where gun-violence is endemic.

  • I don't speak for the person you are asking, but for me the reason is that google is evil, and huge. They don't need my money, and I wouldn't pay them for any reason.

    I expect that if the workplace officially needed to use YouTube, then that workplace would be paying for that subscription. But if its just that sometimes someone wants to include video from YouTube in a presentation or something - then probably not.

  • But in Lua, goto is just a table with a bit of syntactic sugar.

  • Guns

    Jump
  • Hmm.. If you say 8% of people carry guns, then surely there's a much higher than 9% chance that someone will have a gun at the scene. So something seems a bit off there.

    I'd suggest that instead of just imagining how the percentage of people carrying guns might effect these stats, it might be better to try to measure that effect by looking at similar stats for other countries where gun carrying is far less common.

  • Guns

    Jump
  • Oh, I see. You're only counting the times when a bystander successfully intervened. (And now you're being snarky about it, rather than just saying that's what you did.)

    In my interpretation, the 113 times where the attacker left the scene are also relevant.

  • Guns

    Jump
  • Where did you get that "65%" and "34%" from? It doesn't match the information in the graph you are responding to.

  • Yes. The GamingOnLinux Forum is shutting The forum.

  • I assume Steve was also making a joke. But who knows, in this topsy-turvy world?

  • Yeah, but the original message sounded even more like BS. Like surely no one would think its a good idea to post on social media that you are firing your stressed employees to make a 'supportive' workplace. That makes no sense. So yeah, the explanation is bad - but I don't think its untrue. It's just that the original post was a bad idea.

  • This sounds like an antitrust legal problem...

  • I've been happily using RSS feeds for many years. I mostly use them for webcomics. I've got a bunch of different webcomic feeds. But I also use RSS to follow a bunch of low-traffic sites that I care about the content of but don't want to have to manually visit just to see if there's an update.

    Also, I don't have a google account, but I use RSS to follow a couple of youTube channels that I find interesting. (Again, stuff that rarely updates. eg. hbomberguy.)

  • I've found that a lot of blogs do have RSS feeds even if there is no visible link or mention of RSS anywhere on the website. I often just throw the blog URL into the 'add feed' box on The Old Reader, and it turns out there is feed info hidden in there somewhere.

  • Funny joke. But yeah, the creation, distribution, and disposal are not free - even if they are created from trees. Using two sheets isn't a big deal, but why use double what you need?

    Anyway, I'm not trying to say we need to be super-frugal with our paper towels. I'm really talking about people who just keep grabbing more and more of them until their hands are dry. I'm sure we've all seen bins overflowing with barely-used paper towels. We don't need that.

  • I just wish people would know how to use paper towels so that they don't end up wasting huge piles of them for nothing. 1 sheet is enough. You don't need 5. Do it like this:

    • After washing your hands, brush excess water off each hand using your other hand. Your hands should not be dripping wet when you reach for the paper towel.
    • Take a single paper towel. Don't scrunch it up, and don't just clasp the towel. Use all parts of the paper towel to deliberately wipe your hands. The paper towels are quite absorbent. They don't need to be 100% dry to remove the water from your hands.

    The end. If you do this, your hands will not be wet. You will not need a second paper towel.

  • My guess is that the needle is actually in front of her, but not visible due to the low quality image. The joke is basically an optical illusion.

  • I've recently discovered and made heavy use of xournal++; for stylus-based note taking.

  • I'm still using Windows 10 on my personal work laptop, and I've got to say that what you've described sounds pretty appealing. Windows 10 with most of the crapware removed, and extended support. That sounds like a good deal...

    But on the flip side, I think it's a bad idea to get an OS from a piracy site. Maybe it's all genuine and tickety-boo, but being a reputable 3rd party source is a fairly high bar. I certainly wouldn't trust a site I've never heard of to give me a legitimate copy of a better-than-standard version of Windows. Their offer to verify their own files is less than convincing. I think I'd need to be an active part of the scene to be able to trust something like that - because it certainly smells like an easy way to get back-doored.

  • I like the explanatory drawing you provided.

  • Being influenced / tricked / conned has surprisingly little to do with being 'smart' or 'educated'. Smart people can still be tricked.

    A way to manipulate people is to give them plausible (mis)information. What counts as 'plausible' depends on a person's education and interests; but there is always an area of vulnerability at the edges of a person's understanding. That's why there are so many different layers to misinformation campaigns. They are targeting different groups of people. And it is highly dangerous to start believing you can see through them all - because in reality, you only see through the ones that don't target you.

    One of the propaganda powers of algorithmically controlled social media is that it is if a user gives up enough of their person info, it makes it possible to automatically target that person with misinformation that is specially suited to their interests, circles of trust, and level of understanding.

    ... anyway, my point is that although education is always good; it doesn't defeat propaganda outright.