Mnemnosyne

joined 2 years ago
[–] Mnemnosyne -1 points 1 year ago

Well they're right...they live basically in the middle of the west.

[–] Mnemnosyne 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This would probably be too volatile, and also lack the ability to make deals and compromises. You really need to know that this guy brings this number of votes for at least a certain amount of time, otherwise it becomes very difficult to make deals in a political system.

It would also eliminate the secret ballot nature of the system, because you would have to keep active track of who voted for who, so that that vote could be reassigned at any time. This is an inherent protection against political persecution, so a group in power can't look up the rolls, see who voted against them and move against them. As voting information, it would necessarily be public in order to prevent fraud, at which point other people could look it up. Imagine people in...certain areas...which vote for the 'wrong' party, now their vote can be known by their neighbors.

[–] Mnemnosyne 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The one that can still be enabled is still not the original version that had the tools I'm thinking of; I've tried several guides to re-enable it and it does give me an older photo viewer, but never quite the one I had back in XP.

[–] Mnemnosyne 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I've long thought that instead of having representatives count their votes in Congress, Congress should be restructured thusly:

Instead of each representative having one vote, each representative instead is simply considered to be giving the proxy vote of everyone who voted for them. So if the representative is elected with 230,000 votes, then when that representative votes for something, it counts for 230,000 votes.

Then, any candidate who gets at least X amount of votes (X may be a flat number, or perhaps it's a percentage) is seated. This would mean that even those not in the majority in a particular area still get a voice (as long as they're not in an extreme minority). You could have several candidates, from the same place, voting together or against each other depending on the issue, and the weight of their votes would be directly determined by the number of actual people who voted for them, rather than simply because they represent a geographical area.

[–] Mnemnosyne 30 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I've actually tried to do that with pictures/art, but none of the tools I have to do so make it easy. The Windows photo viewer from Windows XP, which I can't seem to get anymore, was actually pretty okay at it.

But the truth is that even then it required more effort than I was willing to put in, and I was never able to anticipate every tag I would eventually want. If I didn't feel like tagging something the moment I saved it, it generally never got tagged.

At this point an AI to do it would be amazing. I have thousands and thousands of pieces of potential character art, but when I want something with specific features it's not easy to find.

[–] Mnemnosyne 80 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Anything and everything that politicians propose to protect children, I am automatically against. It doesn't matter how good it sounds, if they say anything about protecting children, I'm opposed to it.

This is because they know that 'protect children' are magic words that let them get away with almost anything, and that's genuinely about the only time they say that anyway. Basically nothing the government does is actually to protect children.

[–] Mnemnosyne 7 points 1 year ago

Snotty's been beaming her too much...

[–] Mnemnosyne 5 points 1 year ago

Back in the day they used to do similar things. I have disassembled, with tools, some hotel mountings and such, so I could hook up my Super Nintendo or PlayStation back then.

[–] Mnemnosyne 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well, framing it as 'this is the currently accepted way of doing it, and according to current norms your use is wrong' seems correct enough to me; someone can certainly be speaking incorrectly according to a certain set of norms.

It also increases the 'friction' somewhat, causing those who want to change things to actively push against current norms rather than argue from their own position of faux superiority, citing the changing nature of language to insist no use can ever be wrong.

And in any case it is also likely to slow down the change, which I at least think is a nearly entirely good thing. I want to still be able to read things from a couple hundred years ago, and I would similarly like those who come after me to understand the things I write without translations or aid, at least for a couple hundred years.

[–] Mnemnosyne 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

It's not necessarily worse, I suppose. I think it is worse in this example, perhaps you don't, and I think we can acknowledge this as a reasonable difference of opinion.

I primarily object to the seemingly common attitude acting as though it is unreasonable to consider a change in language usage bad and be opposed to it at all. The attitude that anyone objecting to a language change has the same sort of ignorance as those who don't want the language to ever change from whatever idealized version they have. These people are ridiculous, but not everyone who opposed any particular language change is one of them.

[–] Mnemnosyne 28 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Deer can cause serious damage even to a real truck hauling 70000 pounds; in order for one to explode into red mist like this guy says you'd need to hit it with a speeding train.

[–] Mnemnosyne 12 points 1 year ago

Yep. This post is largely mixing up cause and effect. The popular programs are like that not as the cause of people not learning underlying logic and such, but as the effect of it.

The only thing that would happen if popular GUI based interfaces had never come along would be that computers in general would still be something only a tiny amount of people use.

view more: ‹ prev next ›