myxi

myxi , 2 months ago

There's a "the' in the quote.

The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.

>>> sorted(set("The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog"))[2:]
['a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e', 'f', 'g', 'h', 'i', 'j', 'k', 'l', 'm', 'n', 'o', 'p', 'q', 'r', 's', 't', 'u', 'v', 'w', 'x', 'y', 'z']

myxi , 2 months ago

Which instance? We should maintain a list of these instances to ensure we don't lose our data due to idiots like them.

myxi , 2 months ago

Installed 22.04 few months ago, did my configs, and then subscribed to Ubuntu Pro (free for five devices). Now I can enjoy a stable experience for at least a decade.

myxi , 2 months ago (edited 2 months ago)

I concur. It is also very hard to make a rationale for whether your date is ghosting you, is just busy, or is not in a good mood. Obviously, if she is not in a good mood or is busy, she would prefer not to reply to me (because she might unintentionally ruin the bond), but what if she's just not interested in me and thus is ignoring me?

If you like this person a lot, your feelings will likely corrupt your rationale. Your hopes won't let you move on; you will keep suffering, deciding whether to move on or not.

myxi , 3 months ago

That just attracts certain creeps even more. They like nudes of unattractive people because it is its own kind of a validation that her boyfriend entirely demolished her trust for him (and that's a big kink of them), because there's no way she's couldn't tell she's not attractive and therefore wouldn't want everybody to body-shame her and that's why she shared the pictures with utmost trust.

I have seen such degenerates. They make incredibly disgusting and disheartening comments on the victim.

myxi , 3 months ago

Having to learn a programming language to get things working there makes it a distribution only for nerds.

myxi , 3 months ago

I doubt Microsoft is that dumb, though.

myxi , 4 months ago (edited 4 months ago)

https://i.imgur.com/MHtjbpR.png

https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/9vztge/wizard_of_the_internet_king_of_the_data_centers/
https://www.reddit.com/user/bluedude54/submitted/
proof: https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/5vvy64/my_version_of_kitty_roo/

myxi , 4 months ago (edited 4 months ago)

[---]

myxi , 4 months ago

I actually meant Group Policy Editor. Sometimes I make mistakes like that. I will not dive into how precisely I made the mistake.

Coming to your second point, of course it is vulnerable, but I meant it in a practical sense. I am not here to waste time debating, so I am leaving it at that.

myxi , 4 months ago

I don't think they would make a model like this uncensored.

myxi , 4 months ago

stract.com has their own indexer, fully open-source.

myxi , 5 months ago (edited 5 months ago)

We have estimated the carbon footprint of our AI chatbot and according to our first estimates it does not significantly increase the overall carbon footprint of Ecosia. The estimate takes into account that Ecosia searches are already 200% carbon negative,as we produce twice as much energy as is consumed by our search engine. We are currently working with two universities to refine our carbon footprint assessment.

Unfortunately the more important issue is that the leading language AI model providers are still not transparent about the energy consumption of their models, so without this clarity we can only make rough estimations of our impact. We will continue to monitor our energy usage and urge leading AI companies to do the same and be transparent about their impact.

(https://ecosia.helpscoutdocs.com/article/534-ecosia-chat-ai)

I am not against it. I don't want to miss out on AI to support this search engine. It's quite helpful to me, and I assume many others. I think this search engine should compete with other search engines so that more users use it. I am already a fan of their Ecosia Chat; the interface is fast and the responses are even faster. Bing Chat is just awful; it's slow both in terms of interface and text generation

myxi , 5 months ago

No one has any Idea what happens after death

What happens after is that brain stops functioning, as a result of that, your body starts to rot. Nothing else happens. Your brain, that I argue is the real you, stops functioning.

which religion is taking away your freedom?

My parents circumcised my penis when I didn't know what they were doing, they permanently stole a part of me; and as a result of that crap, my sex life is ruined forever. They took away my freedom because of you shitheads who are ruining our world by influencing people into accepting religion. You guys have the audacity to claim that people have a choice after indoctrinating children of religions so that once they are adult they follow your religion.

If you are so about choices, then make sure your kids don't get to know about superstitious beliefs until they are an adult and only then tell them about your fantasies that you believe that a bearded man is watching us from the sky. I bet your kid is going to think you've gone crazy.

myxi , 5 months ago (edited 5 months ago)

The core similarity of both beliefs is that the universe is intelligently designed

The hypothesis of simulation does not address intelligence. Intelligence abstractly is something that exists inside the simulation, it may value nothing outside the simulation. You thesis is lacking evidence.

myxi , 5 months ago (edited 5 months ago)

It's an observation of similarity. Both beliefs presume some kind of external motive force behind the universe's existence. I never made any argument about the intent or abstract values of whatever that thing may or may not be or how it perceives the universe it "created."

The universe just getting created by an external force, and your phrasing that it is "intelligently designed" has no similarity. You are just escaping from what you had stated. You yourself assumed that the core similarity is intelligent design. There is nothing to observe here. The only one lacking in reading comprehension is you, or you are probably trying to find the little ounces of loopholes you think you can find because you're just so disappointed by your thirty-day-old opinion but you also just can't admit to it, or whatever else the situation may be.

Simulation theory does not share any core similarity with creationism. Just simulating a universe does not mean it is intelligently designed.

myxi , 5 months ago (edited 5 months ago)

You're getting caught up on phrasing and nothing else. Let it go. "Intelligent design" as an ideology and describing something as "intelligently designed" are not the same thing.

They are different things, and I am not taking the phrasing in an ideological context. Something being intelligently designed and just being designed, are not the same thing either. Your previous reply elaborates the phrasing of yours that I quoted in a broader way that only you can come up with, because the phrasing simply had an entirely different meaning. I am also uninterested in having any discussion with somebody who throws up words on the internet, expects to be taken seriously, but is bereft of the mental competence to even phrase their words correctly.