That’s also pretty much an aesthetics thing. I don’t see how any aesthetic could have a downside over another. For example, being caught in a machine can come with the industrial aesthetic as well.

All I know is it compresses memory. The mechanism mentioned here for ZIP bombs to crash bots is to fill up memory fast with repeating zeroes.

sus

macOS compresses its memory. Does this mean we’ll see bots running on macOS now?

Firstly there’s still a gap between Rome premiering and Netflix having TV shows.

Secondly, even before Rome, you had Firefly, Thirtysomething, The Sopranos… Just look at primetime instead of daytime.

in a vacuum

This is doing a lot of the heavy lifting here. In essence, you’re saying that it would be better if all our material problems didn’t exist. “Yeah, these are essential processes, but it would be better if we didn’t need them, and so we wouldn’t have their problems. Who wants problems?” This is nearly a truism.

Besides that, what’s rest is that you abhor the aesthetics of nature in favor of that of the industrial. That’s also reasonable but not anything we can discuss.

PS: No idea why these comments are so hostile. I see a ton of people ardently defending nature aesthetics and flaming industrial aesthetics for some reason. Also please don’t take in what they say about you.

For the US: The Democrats, since they have a billion in funding, hundreds of millions more than the Republicans?

This is what happens when you use a war chest to ring the doorbell of every American a second time instead of campaigning on economic populism.

You can have an agent that simultaneously has “personal” conversations with a ton of people.

We don’t surface downvotes. I find no issue with surfacing upvotes. If someone would want to snoop through every comment looking for some upvote from a specific user, that unfortunate victim would’ve gotten some other and easier harassment directed at them from that someone anyway.

FOSS is so big you may as well challenge the entire human race. And even then, that day was Saturday.

deleted by creator

You’ve got some balling to do, Lain.

“of” is only allowed when followed by a determiner or pronoun; it is required in the latter case, and even though “the” is a determiner, I would omit “of” here and would only add it if it was just “both of the words.” full stop. You can omit the “one” if you want to if it is obvious and you’re lazy/artistic; this is called https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellipsis_(linguistics). (I would also change the first “extremists” to “extremist” to maintain parallel structure as adjectives; not that it’s not grammatical to use two objects of different parts of speech.) No need to combine the “heck” sentence into the preceding one; in fact the combination’s a run-on. It should be separate sentences.

Having subordinate clauses—those that begin with subordinating conjunctions like “even when”—stand alone is common in transcribing speech. Your edit makes it seem less impassioned, less angry. (Though it would’ve been a good edit if it was not immediately repeated one or two sentences later, “actually” is not a grammar issue.)

This changes the meaning. The original sentence didn’t necessarily say we should term “laws” using the term “unacceptable”. It said we should find wording/rhetoric/a term for laws that are unacceptable so that we may get people to speak out.

“Or actually are religious extremism” uses “are” in one of its modern senses: embody. The sentence means “Or that restrictions from unacceptable laws embody religious extremism.” Though this sentence is grammatically correct, I agree that I would’ve changed that sentence to be more clear, like “Or actually are religiously extremist.” Since “or” is a coordinating conjunction, my statement above about subordinate clauses also applies to this coordinate clause. See also https://www.grammarly.com/blog/sentences/starting-a-sentence-with-a-conjunction .

You do not need “Let’s” here; this is a normal imperative. The act of putting “that” after a verb before an embedded clause is completely optional and whether to keep the “that” is a matter of great debate; in formal writing, some say one should replace such "that"s with a comma, which is also grammatical. IMO omitting the “that” is better for the pacing and more powerful here. You changed the meaning in your edit of “20 or 30”: the original sentence emphasizes the recentness of this treatment and gave an approximate date as “20 or 30”. “20 to 30” has a very subtly different meaning that in the end has little difference, but again both are correct, and the original form with “or” emphasizes that this is an approximate guess. Finally, there’s no need for your new “with…” here; that meaning is implied and concision is often more powerful. In fact I’d argue this edit ruins the flow.

This sentence does have serious grammatical errors but you missed the meaning of “at all”—which is quite a bit more extreme than “in general”—and the “also” part, which I would rectify by adding an “either” after “with”.

“opposed to these things” is unnecessary and flow-ruining, though I wouldn’t say the same of your next (and last) edit. I like that one (and the ones I didn’t comment on). I’m not sure why but even though it’s grammatical I think it’s good to clarify/emphasize “a significant element in what?”. Maybe it’s my looking-for-a-thesis-statement-in-the-conclusion thinking? There also is another grammar error here: you can’t put “a very small % of” and “any” at the same time since the latter “evaluates to” a single entity/person out of those opposed; “any of” should be removed. It’s also technically correct but very awkward to refer to people with “those” in its pronoun sense (fine if it’s a determiner). Would’ve replaced with “them”.

“Extream” is an archaic spelling found in dictionaries, so I wouldn’t be surprised if this was just autocorrect/swyping. It also seems like 90% of the usages come from HumanPenguin or 1984.

Someone saw that guy who wrote the overlay to feed interview leetcodes into GPT, and was inspired to make a similar video about having a real-time deepfake answer all interview questions.

Well counterpoint look at LGBTQ rights in the 70s.

OSS licensing just needs enforcement, especially with the libogc attitude towards the GPL.

The major problem here is stealing code from not just Nintendo but also another GPL project.

“The authors of libog didn’t just steal proprietary Nintendo code, but also saw it fit to steal an open source RTOS and remove all attribution and copyright information,” continues the statement. “This goes far beyond ignorance about the copyright implications of reverse engineering Nintendo binaries, and goes straight into outright deliberate, malicious code theft [and] copyright infringement.”

It is claimed that the developers of libogc are “not interested in tracking this issue, finding a solution, nor informing the community of the problematic copyright status of the project” and that when the team behind The Homebrew Channel filed an issue on Github, it was “immediately closed” and met with “verbal abuse” before being “completely deleted from public view.”

what does the astrology thing mean

you should probably watch that video and see what it’s about