Dudeman112 (u/Dudeman112)

Dudeman112 commented on Texas man sent to death row over junk science denied US Supreme Court appeal theguardian.com/us-news/2... · Posted by u/rossant

lost_tourist · 2 years ago

You're taking a worst case. Also, you are calling something out without providing what -you- would do in the situation? Maybe we could let them choose death if a lifetime sentence is the decision. What you're implying is just letting criminals out as the only alternative and that's never going to fly. If you're going to criticize something, it's good to propose your solution.

Dudeman112 · 2 years ago

>Also, you are calling something out without providing what -you- would do in the situation?

If someone uses 1+1=3 as an argument you don't need to figure out an actual answer to point out their argument is bollocks

>What you're implying is just letting criminals out as the only alternative

I'm implying no such thing. I'm saying that specific moral argument is bullshit if they find the current punishment ceiling acceptable

Dudeman112 commented on Texas man sent to death row over junk science denied US Supreme Court appeal theguardian.com/us-news/2... · Posted by u/rossant

oldbbsnickname · 2 years ago

Illinois had to abolish its death penalty after they discovered that they likely executed a dozen innocent people.

Arkansas executed an innocent person. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/07/us/ledell-lee-dna-testing...

By contrast, someone innocent where DNA evidence was available but untested for 21 years and was left to languish in prison. If the death penalty had been applied, there's no "undo" button.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/l-man-wrongly-imprisone...

Dudeman112 · 2 years ago

>If the death penalty had been applied, there's no "undo" button.

There's no "undo" button for wasting away for 40 years in prison either

To me it looks like a glitch of the human cognition to think that losing almost/everyone you love, being dropped into a vastly different world than you knew, having your financial and social prospects thrown in the trash, living in shitty conditions for decades, is oh so much better and moral than killing them

Dudeman112 commented on Texas man sent to death row over junk science denied US Supreme Court appeal theguardian.com/us-news/2... · Posted by u/rossant

user3939382 · 2 years ago

Yeah they’re willing to help destroy our rights and shred the constitution so they can play James Bond.

Dudeman112 · 2 years ago

I think you're underestimating just how many True Believers generations of omnipresent Jingoism can create

Dudeman112 commented on ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants d3.harvard.edu/navigating... · Posted by u/bx376

awestroke · 2 years ago

And what's the harm in that? That's how I first started out programming decades ago.

Dudeman112 · 2 years ago

Absolutely bonkers algorithms that no one can make sense of unless they dedicate time to study and debug it

Also, it will have to be scrapped when anyone wants to tweak it a little. Sure monkeys randomly typing on a typewriter will eventually write the greatest novel in existence... but most of it will be shit

May $entity have mercy on your soul if the business starts bleeding tons of money due to an issue with the code, because the codebase won't

Dudeman112 commented on 418 I'm a teapot developer.mozilla.org/en-... · Posted by u/SirAllCaps

corobo · 2 years ago

> Yes, there are lots of people on the tech scene that just don't get ideas like "don't abuse it", or "considering the consequences for other people"

It's not abuse if you say it's free and unlimited and someone uses it freely and unlimitedly! This is why sites have acceptable use policies and terms of service. This is why most sites don't say their tool is free and unlimited.

It is what those words mean. It is literal. If I read an acceptable use policy and then went on to use it in a way that is not allowed that would be silly.

> The sentence refers to people like you

> It just makes you an inconsiderate numpty

Speaking of "like small children or those with under-developed empathy and theory of mind", I'm not sure these were needed. Can we just discuss things? I promise my mind is open whether you insult it or not, I'm just not convinced by the argument at this point :)

I hope you got a nice slither of dopamine out of namecalling though in any case, haha

Dudeman112 · 2 years ago

>It is what those words mean. It is literal.

>I'm not sure these were needed

The original wording I was gonna use before deciding to be more considerate was "small children and autists"

If you can think of another short descriptor for "people who obtusely take things literally and are unable or refuse to account for other people's state of mind", I'm happy to use those instead

>I hope you got a nice slither of dopamine out of namecalling though in any case

In fact, it was far more than a sliver!

Upon further reflection, I think I got a lot of repressed anger for never having smacked people who can't behave unless they are explicitly told to do so, who actually need the "within reason" clause everywhere, and who are happy to play with technicalities when it comes to justifying their behaviour

Dudeman112 commented on 418 I'm a teapot developer.mozilla.org/en-... · Posted by u/SirAllCaps

corobo · 2 years ago

> There's always an individual with autism-level consideration for what one says, isn't there?

What does this sentence even mean lmao

Autism-level consideration for what one says or not, if you say something is unlimited I'm going to take your word for it. If it's limited, tell me the limits. If it's free to a point, tell me the point. If I need to bust out the CC, tell me I need to bust out the CC.

Don't say your thing is free and unlimited if you can't handle unlimited traffic for free..

Hacker News would be on the complete opposite end of the anger scale if this was an ISP telling their users they can't actually use the "unlimited" they promised, haha

Dudeman112 · 2 years ago

>What does this sentence even mean lmao

>if you say something is unlimited I'm going to take your word for it

The sentence refers to people like you. It doesn't make you incredibly clever to consider those sentences literally, like small children or those with under-developed empathy and theory of mind often do

It just makes you an inconsiderate numpty

>Hacker News would be on the complete opposite

Yes, there are lots of people on the tech scene that just don't get ideas like "don't abuse it", or "considering the consequences for other people"

Dudeman112 commented on 418 I'm a teapot developer.mozilla.org/en-... · Posted by u/SirAllCaps

nitrammm · 2 years ago

Explicitly telling some junior software developer in China that he can call an API for free an unlimited number of times, then afterwards calling it abuse and him and a-hole dev is definitively a bit of an a-hole thing to do in my view.

Dudeman112 · 2 years ago

There's always an individual with autism-level consideration for what one says, isn't there?

No, effectively DDOS-ing a service just because it says it's free and unlimited is a dick move

People like those are a big reason for why we can't have nice things

Dudeman112 commented on Kids who get smartphones earlier become adults with worse mental health jonathanhaidt.substack.co... · Posted by u/civeng

tgv · 2 years ago

> Which totally won't affect her mental health.

There's really no data on that. If anything, the data in the article suggest the opposite, although it may come from different groups with different patterns in social media usage.

Dudeman112 · 2 years ago

>There's really no data on that

I find it extremely unlikely that there's no data on how being an outcast affects one's mental health

Dudeman112 commented on Welcome to Life: the singularity, ruined by lawyers (2012) [video] youtube.com/watch?v=IFe9w... · Posted by u/nabla9

newswasboring · 2 years ago

> You can always say "no" when it asks if you want to continue life

You should reconsider that statement. I mean, this is literally "at gun point" kind of situation.

Dudeman112 · 2 years ago

No, I stand by it

Right now you are already forced to pick 'no'. It's a button that lets things go the way so many people claim to be necessary and proper. They can own up to deliberately choosing our current reality if they think our current reality is so much better

In a world where immortality is a given, being able to off yourself is one of the most important things an individual should have a right to do

Dudeman112 commented on Welcome to Life: the singularity, ruined by lawyers (2012) [video] youtube.com/watch?v=IFe9w... · Posted by u/nabla9

DanHulton · 2 years ago

Well, if you have empathy for others, it's still scary.

Dudeman112 · 2 years ago

You can always say "no" when it asks if you want to continue life, unlike in Lena as some other commenter mentioned

Better than current reality, where "no" is shoved on your throat and most people insist you better be grateful about it