Yeah usually it’s a question of does this pass the smell test, “every expert and sanitation workers who actually see it firsthand are saying one thing, but we tested it and they’re all wrong!” is like hmmm…

I would be wary of things that purport to be plastics recycling, as the two main issues are 1. It’s still cheaper to make new things rather than recycle 2. The recycled plastic is generally less versatile, which is why you’ll see it in things like Frisbees and knick-knacks.

Not to say it isn’t something we should be doing when it’s feasible, but it’s sort of like going from ICE cars to electric cars, where we’re putting a band-aid on the problem instead of switching to something that isn’t as destructive.

Based fact-checker

Now this is the kind of technically right I can get behind.

I mean there are evolutionary reasons most humans feel disgust towards things, in this case mainly the spread of disease. If none of these were problems, there isn’t really a good moral case to be made against it unless you believe in some sort of afterlife.

“joke candidate” usually implies someone who enters with no chance of winning just to make a joke. The implication doesn’t match in this case because he has a nonzero chance of winning.

I have had it break my bootloader when I was dual booting, if it wasn’t my main pc then I might risk it but I’m not rolling the dice on if windows decides to break it again.

There should be a basic test of “are these actual problems” for voting, i.e. do immigrants actually hurt the economy, and most white people(who voted) would fail that test.

Same with being disabled, growing up I thought disabled people just got helped by everyone in society with everything. Turns out most of the time it’s “do what you were doing before except harder.”

True actually I forgot they’ve normalized it so much to where a headline of “trump caught defrauding the government of billions and giving hundreds of millions to israel” is sort of a “yeah that’s just what he does.”

Paying with credit raises your credit score which is required as a check for getting rentals or apartments unfortunately.

It’s one of my biggest issues with lemmy, it’s like the democrat that gets us some actually great policies, who does have some big problems, is treated the same as the Republicans passing racist transphobic climate damaging research canceling (also canceled funding for cancer research for children…) legislation.

Democrats seem to be useless because they have to spend 4 years undoing the trainwreck caused by Republicans, but the American people have the memory of a goldfish apparently so we keep getting more Republicans.

The line is arbitrary but “have things that sound like explosions for 2 weeks that might happen at any point for 24 hours a day that causes massive stress to animals and some people” should be crossing that line. Same for the animal industry and supporting AI when the data centers are causing huge issues.

I think almost anyone would agree if there was a set firework show, that lasted 30 minutes to an hour, and no other explosive fireworks outside the show (sparklers etc are totally fine), you would have 1/100th the people complaining. I am not personally massively affected by fireworks but I don’t think that’s an unfair compromise at all.

Yeah I would say it’s pretty good at catching most mistakes the majority of the time, it’s just the few times when it does make a mistake that I’m not sure is a mistake or not, it’ll argue in a way that seems plausible and forces me to rethink and verify the code that was already correct. I probably still save time with it, but it can be incredibly annoying and time consuming when it fails.

This is called the nirvana fallacy. Yes you can go forever and you should reduce your consumption as much as possible. That doesn’t mean I have to buy the specifically really loud animal-terrifying cabinet shaking wake people up who have work tomorrow variety of fireworks, and that doesn’t give my neighbor carte-blanche to do whatever they want no matter how much it bothers me. It’s possible to do better without doing perfect.

They said can we stop over dramatizing it, which is minimizing other peoples experience of being startled, scared, or in cases of ptsd actually terrified. It’s like if I said “I was in a car crash and was fine, can we stop the dramatization of car crashes?”

This is a great article on this topic

https://issendai.com/psychology/estrangement/when-the-missing-reasons-arent-missing/

It sucks because it’s like sitting there holding up a leaning pile of bricks, and you know as soon as you move it’s falling, but you only have 1 life and you deserve to spend it doing more than fixing other people’s mistakes.

It’s only really good if you are totally confident in what is and is not a mistake though, as it’ll do things like replace a struct with an int and be like “use a vec of indices and access the actual array with that since it’s smaller to copy and pass around!” when you have no need to copy and pass it around, and it basically created a layer of indirection for no reason.

It’ll then make up some reason as to why you DO need to pass it around and copy it, so you have to be REALLY sure about what the code should be doing.

I’m always curious what the differences are between this and balanced annihilation, they both seem very similar but BA feels a bit more polished

I think people forget a lot of the people who work on it are still super passionate people so it’s still gonna be good.