🙅 THE BAD IDEAS THREAD
-
Maybe so.
I guess there might be a few kinks to work out.
You can argue about SJWs and SSJs until I'm done.
-
@created_just_to_disl said:
Can't we all just agree on the following facts:1. Killing children is bad.
Yes.
@created_just_to_disl said:
2. Killing people who kill children is good.
No.
@created_just_to_disl said:
3. Killing people who kill people who kill children is bad
No. I mean Yes. Bad.
@created_just_to_disl said:
4. Killing people who kill people who kill people who kill children is good
No.
@created_just_to_disl said:
And so on.
And so on.
-
But it was a hidden test of character all along.
The Yes-No-Yes-No pattern labels you a SJW3
The No-Yes-No-Yes pattern labels you a 'murican
Other patterns label you an indecisive dolt.Also, nice use of the deathcourse list numbering bug.
-
@created_just_to_disl said:
SJW3
SJW3?
Not approving of humans killing other humans gets me labelled an SJW? It's becoming so easy to earn that label it's completely meaningless.
@created_just_to_disl said:
Also, nice use of the deathcourse list numbering bug.
I got that for free, it was too awesome to try to fix.
-
@created_just_to_disl said:
Can't we all just agree on the following facts:1. Killing children is bad.2. Killing people who kill children is good.3. Killing people who kill people who kill children is bad4. Killing people who kill people who kill people who kill children is goodAnd so on.
You left out the first term in the series:
0. Children are good.And I'm not sure how many people would agree that term zero is self-evident.
-
Oh look, an attempt at causing an abortion discussion.
An "it depends" to 1, a "NO" to the rest.
-
Where do we stand on children who kill people? (Or children who kill children who kill people...)
-
Wouldn't that be chaotic neutral?
What if the children who were killed did bad things like torture animals?
-
How about this argument:
- Killing people is bad
- Killing people who kill people is good
- Killing people who kill people who kill people is good
- Killing people who kill people who kill people who kill people is good
- Killing people (who kill people)n is good.
-
How about:
- Killing people is bad
- Killing people who kill people when the former killing will prevent the latter killing and when there is not an alternative approach with a comparable effectiveness is... not good, but is much less bad than the alternative and a necessary evil
- For "killing people who kill people" in other situations, see #1
-
Stop being sensible! This is a Discodebate!
-
Bad Idea: try to open a bunch of SharePoint views in one go for some serial editing ...
-
Sometimes these problems are temporary. The law is sophisticated enough to attempt to sort all this out. You, being a simpleton, don't understand any of that and simply call "bullshit".
How do you know they're really temporary? When the problem results in things like dead kids, I'm less willing to take a chance on it being a temporal bug in their brain. It's not just about punishing people who do bad things, but also protecting the rest of us from them.
-
Killing people is bad.
Locking up people that kill people usually prevents them from killing more people.
-
Internet Explorer werkt niet meer.
I want to translate that as "Internet Explorer works no more". Is that even close?
-
-
It's not ok to let people die if there is a simple solution that involves jeopardizing the well-being of persons other than myself.
It is ok to let people die if there is a simple solution that involves taking money from me to protect other people's well-being.
-
It is ok to let people die if there is a simple solution that involves taking money from me to protect other people's well-being.
The usual position on this is “it depends on how much money”. Impoverishing you so that some rich asshole who is already over 95 can live for another few weeks would be not very acceptable, whereas asking you for a dollar to keep a family alive for 30 years (hyperbole alert!) would probably be reasonable. There's a continuum between these extremes; different people set their limits in different places.
-
In ancient Rome
There was a poem
About a dog
Who found two bones
He picked at one
He licked the other
He went in circles
He dropped dead
-
-
Sorry it was the only Devo lyric I could think of that was even remotely relevant.
-
Trochaic dimeter
Trochaic dimeter
Trochaic dimeter
Trochaic dimeter
Trochaic dimeter
Trochaic dimeter
Trochaic dimeter
Molossus
-
That reminds me of a tweet I sent to Intel about the x86 architecture optimization guide, this line in particular:
When programming in assembly language, try to schedule your instructions in a 4-1-1 μop sequence, which means instruction with four μops followed by two instructions each with one μop.
that actually, the technical term for it was dactylic meter, could they please fix that?
Didn't get a response.
-
Also I suggested that it would be really epic to make a processor that had 5×4μop instruction decoders and 5×1μop decoders. They didn't seem to appreciate that, either, but whatever, I'm just gonna keep on hoping that eventually someone will realize that it's a good idea to develop a processor that has to be programmed in iambic pentameter.
-
Iamb othered by your jokes.
-
mutton I do any more then?
-
That's a bit of a stretch just to make a sheep joke.
-
Trochee
-
-
Bad idea: puns
-
In our initial listening tests, I couldn't discern any tangible difference in sound between the two hard drives. Harris thought the Hitachi sounded very ethereal, almost out of phase, and rated it lowest; the Seagate was sharper with a more thumpy bass, slightly brighter with a slight tendency to sibilance. Both lacked much drive in presenting the Madonna track, and were certainly 'mushy' compared with the best sound quality we'd heard from the QNAP stable.
-
Is it really possible that the sound quality of bit-identical audio files' is influenced by their storage medium before being delivered to the hi-fi system's DAC?
WHUT?
-
I can imagine the audio quality being affected if you play the audio with the speakers next to the hard drive.
-
WHUT?
i'll second that. reading that article made my brain hurt....
failure to connect to reality detected.
-
I bailed here:
For example, we had no idea if we were hearing differences in the processor architecture or between the hard-disk (or solid state) drives.
One of them is a PR person for a high end audio company - I assume they sell gold-plated SATA cables or disks with gold-plated platters or something.
-
i read to the end. it was hilarious!
-
Aren't audiophiles notorious for imagining minute perceived differences in audio setups where none actually exist? (e.g. difference between a $10 and a [i]$100 gold-plated[/i] HDMI cable...)
-
have wine snob friends? try this. acquire three bottles of wine. one expensive and two (identical) cheap.
drink the expensive.
put one bottle of cheap into the expensive bottle. open but don't drink the other cheap one.
have someone who does not know you did the switch ask the wine snob to critique both wines.
laugh!
-
I don't hang out with people who critique wine any further than "this is nice" or "this is nasty".
It is sometimes good to buy a decent bottle of red but not all the time.
-
drink the expensive.
I'm with you there. Or you could make a nice beef stew with it. Those are definitely better with a good wine than a bad one.
-
-
a brain-dead moronan Apple fanboyRedundant: The latter is a proper subset of the former.
-
have wine snob friends?
I have a friend who knows a lot about wine but I wouldn't say he's a snob. Actually, thinking about it, he's a bit of a snob but he doesn't bang on about hints of lavender, south facing vineyards and all that.
He did say that, generally speaking, you get what you pay for up to $50 AUD but after that you're paying for the wank factor.
His most important criterion though is: if you like it, then drink it.
-
nice. let us know how it goes.
bit of cognitive dissonance between what you quoted and the post you replied to....
i like it!
-
He did say that, generally speaking, you get what you pay for up to $50 AUD but after that you're paying for the wank factor.
Paying for someone to wank over your wine is certainly, IMHO, an idea that belongs in this topic.
-
And paying someone to do the same over someone else's wine is for the Evil Ideas Thread?
-
I won't disagree. There is much overlap between bad and evil.
-
How do you know they're really temporary?
I don't because I'm not a psych. I am able to admit that there are many things I do not possess the expertise to evaluate and leave it to the experts.
It's not just about punishing people who do bad things, but also protecting the rest of us from them.
The recidivism rate for murder is low. Very low. You're allowing your emotional responses (OMG killing people! I might be next!) to dominate and ignoring reason.
-
I can imagine the audio quality being affected if you play the audio with the speakers next to the hard drive.
What about playing the music by moving the hard drive heads? Requires spinning disks, no SSDs allowed.
-
But SSDs can make noise too. Surely there's a way to turn that into music.