Did they fix the problem where for some reason, on steam deck you can’t do local multiplayer? You need to provide a command line argument to turn on local multiplayer and I can’t begin to comprehend why they did this.

I agree with this philosophy, but it does require you to admit that before civilization we were all slaves to nature. I think this is true, but some people might object that this meaning of “slave” is different from the conventional meaning.

I’m curious if anyone has any credible sources about recent political violence from the left. I’m skeptical of that all of the last 31 political attacks were from the right.

I’m sure OOP works for big AI. /s

You sound like the people in my chemistry class who say things like “don’t describe subatomic particles as happy when they’re in low-energy states.”

It’s true, I fear AGI, not the current state of AI if it were to remain frozen and not improve at all. I am also not terribly afraid of climate change if the climate were to remain fixed at this point. Sure, we have lots of forest fires, and people are dying of heat, but it could get much worse.

I think maybe the root of our disagreement is that we’re appraising the current state of AI differently. I’m looking at AI now vs AI five years ago and seeing an orders-of-magnitude increase in how powerful it is – still not as good as a human, but no longer negligible – but you’re looking at both of these and rounding them to zero, calling it snake oil. Perhaps, in the Gartner hype cycle, you’re in the trough of disillusionment?

I don’t want to be a shill for big AI here, but I reject the idea that AI in its current state is useless (though I would agree it’s overhyped and probably detrimental to society overall). It’s capable of doing a lot of trivial labour that previously was not automatable, including coding tasks and graphics, and while it can’t do it with great reliability, or anywhere near as well as a human expert, and it’s much worse in some areas than others (AI-written news articles are much worse than useless, for instance), it’s still turning out to be a productivity benefit (read: reduction in jobs) for those who know how to use it to its strengths. I think the “snake oil” aspect is when lay-people are using it expecting it to be reliable or as good as a human – which is basically how big tech is pitching it.

I think we’re looking at this from completely different angles if you are "hope"ful that AI will improve.

Also, you’re looking at AI completely wrong if you’re analyzing its performance on traditional CS problems in terms of time complexity. Nobody credible is hoping that AI is going to be solving NP problems just by feeding the problem into its context window like a quarter into a vending machine.

I don’t think it’s ready to put anyone out of a job. But if you’re not worried about AI, then why bother being in the fuck-AI community? Like, why agitate about AI at all if you think it’s all snake oil.

why does the existence of larger things have any bearing on our significance?

bigger than I thought, tbh.

meanwhile, the elected officials are also Nazis :/

Cute but this wouldn’t work for this obvious reason – conservatives would be like, “sure buddy. If you say so.”

OTOH, we made the rainbow work so… I guess?

God’s rainbow has 7 colors (ROY G BIV), the LGBT rainbow has 6. Guy doesn’t even know rainbows.

No, I’m not saying that. I think I clearly indicated that I approve of your coping mechanism with the my first sentence, “I think that’s great.” I meant that genuinely.

I’m saying I don’t think your coping mechanism reflects a deep linguistic truth.

That’s okay, it doesn’t need to be linguistically precise to help with pain. If it works as a coping mechanism for you, it might work for others. But because I don’t think it reflects a deep linguistic truth, I don’t think this coping mechanism is likely to be widely useful for everyone with chronic pain, and I don’t think this is likely to be helpful for many non-chronic-pain-havers to better understand chronic pain. Or perhaps it might help some people understand better, but if one’s not clear that this is a coping mechanism that helps psychologically, and instead presented as linguistic fact, I think it will actually be on net harmful to the credibility of people with chronic pain.

The OP does not claim that all barycenters are outside of the sun. OP correctly claims that Jupiter & Sun orbit a certain point, and that point is known as the “barycenter,” and that point is outside the sun. I’ll admit they could have gone further to convey the additional curiosity that for other planets the sun-planet barycenter is within the sun, but then it might not be facebook-tier anymore.

I literally do not understand why you think I’m being pedantic here. The OP text is short and contains no obvious errors that I can see. Perhaps to someone who has made a mistake and doesn’t want to admit it, attempts by others to point out this mistake must resemble pedanticism.

yes, the posessive in english indicates many things, and one possibility is ownership. It can also indicate a link or relationship that is not ownership – as a child I never thought I owned “my father.”

Just bugs me when people look at one meaning of a word or grammatical construction and then assume that’s the only meaning.

I agree that we are not our emotions, and I think that’s a useful idea to conveny. But I think OOP’s take on English grammar is gravely misinformed. Imagine if she had a similar take about a language she didn’t know well; she’d be rightly criticized by native speakers.

If it helps you to view language this way, then I think that’s great. But you should also recognize that yours is not a universal understanding of what’s connoted by this grammatical structure.

I really sympathize with chronic pain, as I also suffer chronic pain. But for me, I don’t think changing the words I use would really help me.

Personally, I wouldn’t use “regarding” for “ga” as you did. I think that’s more for “wa.”

yes it means that.

Fundamental misunderstanding of English.

“I am sad” – am here is a copula. It indicates a link between the subject (I) and subject-complement (sad). In this case, it’s saying “subject (I) has property (sad).” It does not equate the subject and subject-complement.

Not all languages work like this. In Mandarin for instance, 我是伤心* (wǒ (I) shì (am) shāngxīn (sad)*) would be seen as grammatically incorrect or at least weird. This would literally mean “I am sad” (adjectives in Mandarin operate as stative verbs, so the correct way to say this is without a copula – i.e. 我很伤心 (wǒ (I) hěn (_quite/very) shāngxīn (sad)). (You could drop the 很 (quite), and just say 我伤心, but the connotation in this case is that you’re setting up for a juxtaposition, e.g. “I’m sad, you’re not sad.”))