Veiva

There's two "no U-turn" signs at the main entrance to my neighborhood. Every few months the one on a concrete divider (added to make U-turns harder) is knocked down by a car making a U-turn and crashing into it. I don't know how much clearer the indications against U-turns can be, but it seems a lot of people don't listen. Not to mention how incapable people are at slow intersections... There was road work near this same intersection. The cars would not wait until there was enough room to cross, so when they had to stop, they stopped in the middle of the intersection. Is the car behind you going to someone overtake you?!

Well first of how dare you

Laptop for me is more of a bonus for when holidays/vacation comes up and I can be more mobile. I don't think I would use it in class as I have to have an iPad as my program uses CompTracker. CompTracker looks funny. On their site: The whole site is like that; strange usage of emphasis to highlight buzzwords. E.g., CompTracker being 'greener'. I doubt that. Any digital device produces more pollution than all the paper you'd use in a decade. They are built from certain materials that are toxic to the environment (during collection/processing/manufacturing/etc), are of ethically dubious origins (like most products we use, sadly), and/or hard to recycle. Paper is easy to recycle and comes from a practically renewable source. And are their servers hosted in a datacenter that uses clean or renewable energy sources? Do the CDNs they use, if any, do so as well? ...Why did I even bother this analysis of how 'green' CompTracker is?

If you dual-boot, use OpenBSD or FreeBSD instead of Ubuntu so you can learn to hate how Linux-centric the non-Windows world is like me! I'd like to echo Ring_World and Hedgehog. If you need power, get a small, cheap laptop and a decent desktop. You'll be able to build a better desktop and get a cheap laptop for a much better price point than an equally powerful laptop.

I also hate cars. As a pedestrian, cars are dangerous and driven by oblivious people. As a bicyclist, cars are dangerous and driven by oblivious people. As a scooter-er, cars are dangerous and driven by oblivious people. Though on reflection car drivers probably hate me, since I'm only ever a pedestrian/bicyclist/scooter-er. I follow the laws very strictly, though... Namely using turn signals at all times and stopping at stop signs, which seems difficult for others. They are also terrible for the environment. I could only justify an electric car, in honesty.

Haha. Reminds me of a game based on around the lives of 'pixels'. Unsurprisingly, it looks similar!

I instinctively discredit arguments where one party tells me to search (usually with Google) for the evidence myself, rather than they provide sources themselves. In part because it appears incredibly pretentious and shows some sense of unfounded superiority. I also don't like Google and have stopped using Google's services for anything relatively personal because I don't like mass data collection, so it's a pointless gesture against Google as well (haha). For the record, I also instinctively downvote posts (when applicable, such as Reddit) that complain about downvotes regardless of the quality of the post, especially when the reply has -1 karma or higher (i.e., positive karma). Also, I return shopping carts to the proper place inside the store when possible. I hate seeing carts strewn across a parking lot, or disorganized carts in the outside 'corrals'; it's incredibly agitating, so I refuse to contribute. I'm such a rebel. In other news, Game of Thrones season finale tonight. Excited. The last episode (Battle of the Bastards) was simply incredible; from the beginning portion Mereen to majority in he North, mmm.

The financial benefits seem to be worth staying in the EU, but I know very little at the end of the day. And unless I'm reading the site wrong, the United States and North America is only a portion of import/export; by region, European countries are the UK's largest importers/exporters http://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/gbr/#Destinations

Only took 12 years to get a partyhat.

And that's not the default now? I'm pretty sure most people think they are in control of their consciousness and therefore their actions. For example, the US legal system is completely about personal responsibility and our justice systems in most part rejects social influences. There are no attempts to address what causes crimes, only punish those who have done so. The restorative services are a joke. And yet we ridicule European nations with great restorative systems, like Norway, because criminals aren't tortured indefinitely (life without parole) or murdered by the state. Why?

A processor is not to blame when a piece of software malfunctions. Or when creating unwanted outputs from poor inputs. And not when it develops a hardware fault. And even when an engineering flaw is noticed. Would I get upset in most, or all, of these situations? Definitely. Would I irrationally place blame on the processor? Probably! And in all these cases, there is a distinct solution to each problem, from simple (using different software, providing proper inputs) up to the nuclear option (replacing the processor, using a different processor). For humans, the problems are much more difficult to identify even under optimal conditions, and the solutions are even harder to implement. It's easy to toss out a faulty processor, but the same can't be said for people (even defining 'fault' is difficult!). We could eliminate the social influences that cause people to commit crimes. We could properly restore criminals into society. We could develop the means to eliminate the genetic flaws that result in undesirable behavior. It is possible, even if incredibly unlikely. However, rejecting how the incredible web of influences determines the events and outcomes of each of our lives, or reducing its scope to a superficial afterthought, is most definitely the wrong way. And yes, personal responsibility is currently a necessary abstraction over the incredibly complex natural processes that guide us. There must be mechanisms to reduce the social damage from undesirable social influences for the 'greater good'. Rejecting free will doesn't permit us to hurt others, nor for such deeds to be allowed unhindered. For example, that's why I believe there must be a justice system, and those who cannot be properly rehabilitated must remain isolated from society. I'm not denying 'personal responsibility' is currently a necessary concept. But I am rejecting that any action can be washed of social influences. And I am also rejecting the notion that any person has complete control (i.e., free will) over any part of the decision making process. In the near future, given the progress of data modeling, increased processing power, and mountains of personal data, it is not far-fetched to think our lives could be incredibly predictable. Much of our behavior--where we go, who we talk to, what we like, what we believe, who we support--can already be predicted with accuracy useful enough for private companies and governments alike to gather and utilize the data in all kinds of products, services, and agencies. Will these predictions be infallible? No, but our existence is based on predictions created from simulations, including weather, physics simulations, etc; each of which, depending on the situation and data and period and whatever else, vary from accurate enough to incredibly accurate. To deny the same could be said for human behavior is simply hubris. So unless you believe free will exists--and I can't possibly see how it exists outside of supernatural mechanisms with no rational explanation--then we are all essentially thinking machines subject to deterministic forces. We, as individuals, do not exist in a vacuum. At the end of the day, the only difference between me and a rock is an arbitrary one created by the organic processes that enable consciousness. I like the fact I can think, though the rock has it pretty nice, too.

Not exactly relevant, but I couldn't refine my point properly. Rather than delete the post, here's some ramblings about personal and social responsibility: I believe humans are 'thinking machines' and personal responsibility is a flimsy, but arguably necessary for now, 'illusion' (or, with less rhetoric, abstraction) that enables society to function. The various internal and external influences, natural (genetic, nutrition, disease, etc) and 'nurtured' (i.e., the complex behaviors that result in society from natural processes) events completely determine the eventual behaviors of any person. Even if the universe is non-deterministic, we are subject to the effects of the non-deterministic events with no ability to change said events outside of existing deterministic mechanics. Requiring an individual to adapt, if it works, is only good for that individual. This is not ideal. Iterative changes to society, assuming social causes are the primary pressures on prejudism, would be required. This is why I believe criminals are also victims, by some measure, and only restorative justice is any good. For the better of humanity, personal responsibility is a necessary abstraction in this case (among others).

I was reading a piece on NPR ("It's OK for boys to cry, but only if they do it in the right way") and it reminded me of the discussion about negative terms. In particular: I thought it was pretty good.

Unless I'm misunderstanding you guys' points... Do you both agree that getting murdered is worse than not going to the bathroom where you desire? If so, you're in agreement. Do you both agree that the bathroom bill is an issue worth discussing? If so, you're in agreement. Do you both agree that members of the LGBT are discriminated against in the US? If so, you're in agreement. Statements are used to support an argument. Agreeing with independent statements does not mean I agree with a conclusion. Your indication of our agreement in these summarized statements is also wrong (1. is the equivalent of 'a bad outcome is better than the worst possible outcome' so it's no more useful than agreeing that a 100 watt bulb is brighter than a 75 watt bulb and 2. the 'bathroom bill' is a minor issue so I do not agree). Furthermore, I am sick of hearing about the bathroom bill because it is a single issue out of many, and in North Carolina's case, was used as a distraction to cause incredible damage to worker rights. I believe using third-world countries as an example where LGBT have greater grievances to reduce the importance of grievances LGBT face in first-world countries is dishonest and counter-productive. The 'x is worse' argument is more often than not worthless in situations like this.

4. I don't agree with obfuscator.

You don't provide any sort of stance for me to judge. You create fragmented, poorly articulated arguments that require constant clarification. To be frank, I don't know your views. All I know is many of your statements are vaguely conservative-libertarian. But it's pointless. You'll never clearly present any of your beliefs, so there's no point. Reading or replying to your posts is like me using vim on Linux to read Ulysses, except without any sort of benefit.

What makes you think that? He's having fun with my previous words saying the bathroom bill was an annoyance. However, I also qualified that by saying "compared to literal murder", so the comparison isn't really fair. But yes, insults directed at anyone (including straight white males) are an annoyance compared to murder. I was mocking you for saying most transgressions against the LGBT community by the majority group are an annoyance at best. Here's your words: Specifically, "western/white/christian transgressions against the LGBT community" are much more inclusive than your singular fascination with "the bathroom bill". Which itself is one of countless transgressions throughout the history of oppression and prejudice against LGBTs in America. By the way, is your response to Black Lives Matter something like "What about white lives?" or "All lives matter!", by any chance? You dance around on any issue and never clarify any sort of stance so you're only some vague conservative-libertarian sort-of-trope to me, sorry.

Insults directed at straight white males are only an annoyance at best.

Please learn what negative connotation is, what makes certain words profane, historical prejudice and oppression of minorities, and social etiquette, and then ask that question again. You're free to call some a [bleep], or [racist term], or whatever, but please don't try and pretend the words don't have a negative connotation, and don't be surprised if--or when--there's consequences, social or otherwise, for using such words outside of certain settings.

The downvote/upvote system makes reducing bias impossible regardless of moderation. Admittedly, this is more easily the case for news than discussion.

I have all politics and news subreddits blocked because they're all toxic, some much more so than others. When I want news I'll fire up my news reader with several sources of various bias. I'm not getting extra-filtered bullshit based on a popularity system. It simply cannot be a reliable source of any sort of news or discussion. Relying on Reddit for news is worse than watching a 24-hour news station; perhaps only better than getting news from Facebook. Also /r/the_donald is not fine. I have it filtered on RES and refuse to visit Reddit unless I can filter it. It's the worst subreddit that hits /r/all regularly. It's a bunch of hypocrites, and often a bunch of hypocritical bigots.

How do anti-LGBT policies in Middle Eastern countries have anything to do with American citizens being suppressed by anti-LGBT policies pushed through by American legislators? I understood Alg to be talking from an American perspective. Hate attacks by Muslims against gays are statistically non-significant in the United States. She is right in saying that the American right are the greatest threat to LGBT, if we are speaking about America. By the way, anti-LGBT policies in the United States are not "an annoyance at best." I just want to say you're absurd. That's all.

it hit 90 a few weeks ago. Nothing unusual for the time of year though Oh, ok. I was just confused by Saq's comparison to Egypt. It must be very cool in Estonia.

What temperature was it in Toronto? It seems it's been in the 80s at most? That's only warm...

Today I changed passwords and security questions to the 50-some accounts I have across the web. Tired of hearing about large sites getting hacked. Now all passwords are definitely unique and secure. Security questions are all gibberish as well. To generate the passwords I pipe some data from /dev/random to base64 and extract the first bunch of characters. Works nicely!