Total posts: 3,954
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Except you proposed that Elon Musk has better advice of getting to where he is, at the same time as telling me how getting where he is is unrealistic and he knows that. Which one is it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
I don't know, but most of his actions are considered understandable to most Chinese, as opposed to some of the stuff my city has done(such as labeling people as COVID-positive out of the blue and lockdowning the entire building containing them, etc).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Well, not exactly. The central government cannot get so corrupt that people can notice it as so, at least it hasn't happened yet. The local levels can hide that with a higher proficiency as most people don't care as much.
It is hard to be corrupt when everyone is looking at them. Surely they could just twist their words so it seems like no corruption was there, however, the current degree of twisting, if any, is acceptable to most citizens, at least comparing it to for example the local governments.
Created:
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
These rich guys often forget where they were before becoming rich and focus on what they want and regret now.
I would argue that Steve Jobs did it MUCH better than some of the other rich dudes, namely Elon Musk. At least he dedicated more of his life to Apple products than money itself compared to some of the other guys. Surely, Apple has turned itself into a money extractor by the end of his life, but it is that after he died, the money-extraction degree skyrocketed then.
Created:
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Ateve jobs said "do what you love". The guy did some rather boring grunt work to get where he was. Stuff he certainly didn't love. One of his employees pushed him on it at one point and he said "look we can't just do what we love, we actually need to do the shit work also" or something along those lines. So really the guy is just giving bad advice.
You need to do the shitwork in order to achieve what you actually love, and the shit-work is a part of achieving what you love. Suppose you love a singer and would like to attend his concert that is 4 hours drive away, and your car breaks down in a gas station 2 hours away. Refueling your car and repairing it is the shit-work in the process, but having your car refueled and repaired is needed for what you actually want to do, which is goint to the concert. That is obviously better than nothing at all.
Only having yourself doing what you "love" is unrealistic, but having your shitwork contributing to what you love is realistic and essential.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bibliobibulimaniac
Responding to #1:
The second one, because given what they are, the reason why the second person sent the Jews to die was not due to race, but for other reasons, such as crime.
Given that the first one thinks jews are intrinsically sinful or something, the quality on average by A would be the average Jewish person as he discriminates against every Jew. The second one would have sent people on average with less quality, including for example such as evil capitalists, criminals, etc. Unless the problem isn't clear, there is no reason why B would send innocent Jewish citizens to die, but A obviously could and would.
Created:
Posted in:
I don't know what is up with y'all in the US, but the current norm in China is:
- No one would actually donate anything if it were just normal tax dollars. Selfishness cannot be eliminated entirely.
- In fact, it is expected that if it were a policy, those that donate more will be seen as more favorable socially, at the cost of themselves being poorer. The upper middle class(such as the entry-level millionaires) would donate tens or hundreds of thousands just for views and social impression, and the poorest levels would donate nearly half(or even more) and get no attention socially.
- Everyone wishes what was being said by the national government is being enforced by the local levels. In that case, people would offer money so the regulations are being maintained more strictly, but it is likely the corrupt ones the sums are intended to change are the most likely to absorb a considerable part before any part can go to being used for actual productivity.
- Since the evil capital is richer than the average person, their offers with intended bias would probably outweigh everything summed of ordinary citizens. Essentially, this would turn into a bribery fest.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
That is the problem. It is easier to get in harsh prisons in North Korea than in the US.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Get thrown in prison for saying something out of surprise mindlessly and starve for months until death, and then the next thing you know is that you actually don't want to be born in North Korea.
Created:
Posted in:
Well, taxes are mandatory in China for everyone who has a home. To be fair, I want that every single penny of tax money from my family to be straight to the central government - NOT city, NOT provincial government. Taxpayer money would be corroded by corrupt officials on the lower levels, which they stay that way, considering the people's congress, let alone the chairman, undergoes much stricter examination than even the US congress or executive branch elections.
Although I don't know if it is possible that the money can be handed straight to the central government without being taken away parts by the lower levels, I would do that.
Created:
Well, sexualities are not chosen, they are discovered. To be fair, we are all atheists(or agnostics) before our parents teach us about God(and stay that way if the parents, like mine, never told me about why God is true). We are probably all aces before we turn 10 as the hormones causing us to want sex hasn't secreted yet, and forcing children to be "gay", "straight" or "transgender" wouldn't make sense before that.
I would say the youngest someone would have to be to discover their sexuality is whenever they enter puberty.
Created:
People are literally gathering on rooftops to jump down. Hope they don't actually do it.
Created:
I am not a large sports fan but the groupchats with my friends that clearly are show that this is in fact something intriguing and remarkable.
A meme has sprung up. It goes like this:
China 1:1 Saudi ArabiaSaudi Arabia 2:1 ArgentinaTherefore, China>Argentina
Let the other sports fans that clearly care more than I do talk here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mharman
Nevertheless, Google IS a calculator. Is it only a calculator? No, it is also an online shopping junction, dictionary, web search engine, etc. Google is capable of doing anything within the range of elementary mathematics. Even if you try to scare it off with the integration sign and the matrix models, a few websites capable of being accessed by Google will suffice in handling those.
If Google "replaced" calculators, it is already one. If we inject a chip into our brain resulting in us being superpowered and can calculate even the most complex definte integrals in miliseconds, we are calculators then. It is not calculators themselves entirely that are being replaced, only the older generation with the newer gen.
Created:
-->
@Bones
This then implies that the definition is insufficient. It may have well been argued that trans women are human.
No, if so, we would get a definition implying that all biological men are trans women and vice versa with the entirety of the two sets being the union and intersection. That, although would look a pretty solution, is not accurate factually.
Or trans women aren't human, why?
Created:
but every fucking choice you make from 16 and up at school and from then on should be geared to getting jobs that pay well, point blank period.
Umm... Most 16 year olds like me are preparing for College unable to predict what jobs in the future pay well.
I remember Steve Jobs has said that you can only connect your dots in life backwards after you have been through all, but not forwards. How are we young people supposed to know? Guesswork?
Created:
-->
@Bones
P ->Q implies ~Q -> ~P, not Q -> P.
If you are a biological male, it does not make you a trans woman. However, if you aren't a biological male, you aren't either a trans women, assuming that the biological states for any human beings to choose are either male or female.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
I hardly believe that is all the issues you can think of. Let's try,
What do you think is the best example to demonstrate Maxwell's Equations in the field of classical mechanics?
Created:
The title is self-explanatory.
I would guess Pyongyang. The capital of a state where possibly all international sports are government-funded lives some of the rich from the poor that are actually rich enough to care about what their leader is doing as opposed to how these actions may lead to their death.
Created:
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
There are borderline at least 3 genders. Male, Female and Other. The first two options encompass the majority of humanity, so most telephone networks would probably opt for these three choices on their websites unless they are deliberately pitifully trying to appeal to the poisoned woke culture of the modern left.
Something that I don't know how productive it is is the effort of dividing the "other" group into infinitesimal subsections. Well, Bigender and agender may have somewhat intuitive ideas(I don't know if it is clinically possible to define, I am just ignorant because I have better things to deal with), but then the subcategories become so specified that to separate it becomes seemingly futile. Some people define themselves as "adamasgender", which is a gender that is undefined and cannot be categorized. Somehow, this is different from agender, even though I don't know how different they would be in utility. The division results in internet users speaking out of attention for a group that is hardly of size due to their volunteered division. With their logic, might as well categorize transgender male as a completely distinct gender from cisgender male.
Still, some of the genders people made up is self-defeating to me to say the least. If you have a dragon in your garage that is invisible, indetectable and breathes indetectable fire by anything, what makes it distinct from having no dragon at all to anyone else? If you have a gender that is so complicated not even You could clearly and distinctively define it by essence(rather than define to just be different forcefully) making so that people could comprehend that it is in fact a separate branch of thought to anything else on this matter as opposed to just a branch or combination, then that is akin to the gender perhaps not even existing.
Well, how do you identify as an attack helicopter? Surely, you can twist by redefining what an attack helicopter is, but how would that benefit in your actual proof that your distinctive gender is distinct?
Created:
Posted in:
Transgenderism is a thing, I am sure of it. The worse-case scenario is that we don't know what this term represents, but the fact that some idea corresponds to some respective word implies that such idea possibly exists.
The fact that you proposed an idea(or if you used an idea that already existed, which is even more absurd) then negated the existence of the idea is in itself an oxymoronic claim.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mharman
Yes. Pretty sure Google is wealthy enough to purchase Texas Instruments for their own.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Because Vici is supposed to be intentionally satirical. Pretty sure that his arrogant attitude is intentionally built so we are supposed to hate him in a comedic fashion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
I wonder why violence, conflict occurs so much in games,I suppose it's because how many see or is life,Interactions, comparing, defending, defeating, outdoing,Even a game like Farmville, I'd imagine be about competition for some people.
Because people cannot afford to do so in real life so they choose to unleash their desires on something else, namely video games.
Created:
Very poorly. I haven’t spoken fluent English outside myself for months.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
Umm no. I am a 11th grade High school student and I plan on going to a top 30 university.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Fine, if so then disregard my vote then.
Created:
Posted in:
Remember back when we all thought it was a Wuhan lab leak? Great job American Intelligence agencies, no, terrible job.
Created:
But seriously, some western journalists are possibly mad in the background when people like me are ok with what I am(I still thrive in school, even though I am used to having close to 0 social life: That is why I am here). They want Chinese citizens to be mad about the policy so they have something to write about, idk, something something China bad or something something something bla bla bla.
You know what is the funniest part? We think it is too strict too. And the policy isn't loosening up. What are we gonna do? Wait faster? I don't know either, hope they don't reprimand me for saying it.
I know there is a blank sea of Chinese viewpoint on this already small site and my response isn't anyone else's. Either way, it is not my fault that I have something to say about it.
Created:
I don't genuinely think people are afraid of covid. They're just accustomed to their 2020 lifestyle of staying home on social media and video games.
Correct, but I do not use COVID as an excuse not to do things...at least not me, when the "impact" is nationwide.
To be fair, I do. The local law requires me to stay at school even in weekends because my parents all have ties to government-related entities, and they absolutely cannot afford to go visit me with actual risk. I cannot go out freely, except for the free PCR test once a few days. To be fair, of course you are describing me, except it is not my excuse to be a homebody of one sort, it is up to the government that I can do anything or not.
Needless to say these dang Americans must be secretly smart when they got choice and not do anything, as staying at one place still decreases the infection rate. IDK. Maybe they are lazy. I don't know if I am jealous or glad in respect to them.
Created:
Posted in:
"Is College Worth It"
I definitely do not recommend a naturally talented mathematician into a professional liberal arts college.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Not following the talk, here to comment on the topic itself.
To be fair, we follow logic all the time, but logic is not to be blamed as it is not sentient. The only "downside" is that it is unforgiving and everlasting, which is in many cases an upside as well.
In fact, reality is built upon assumptions. What you "deeply believe" are just assumptions. One can act according to the present by detecting assumptions and using them as the boundaries. To be fair, can you remove them?
To the assumptions that enable me to believe there is a society here like this, all the "logic zombies" either are geniuses writing books, are in a ward, or should be in a ward. That is my impression. I do not believe one can live without subconsciously having assumptions in the worldview model.
Created:
To be fair, the earliest Christians, including such as Jesus and Joseph, would consider Andrew Tate and most conservatives heretic and misinterpreted.
Does "converting to islam" even mean anything today? We know some of the times all they mean is attention-seeking and riding the wave, provided by tools of the politics, such as cancel culture and political correctness
Created:
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
It should keep. Away more users than it draws in. However I have argued why it would grow the user base.
Given the number of Esperanto speakers vs. English, pretty sure the net flow is external.
That's why I have advocated people familiarizing themselves with the language. I think it would take the average user here 6 months to learn enough to debate using it, assuming one hour of active learning per day.
What is your sample? Control? I genuinely do not believe that I can debate like Intelligence_06 in English in Esperanto in 6 months of learning. My level of debating was thanks to me learning English since I was little, not rushing for 6 months.
If you think you are that smart, you are a genius. If you think we should be smart like that, oh sorry, we are stupid. At least I am.
A lot actually, but it isn't necessary. Just provide citations to publications in your native language and translate the portion of text you are using into esperanto. Your opponent is free to use Google translate
That defeats the entire purpose. Most sources are written in English. If you have to translate sources that are English anyways, and the majority of the user base uses English, why not just keep using it?
Created:
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Except...this will keep away more users than draw in. Almost no major site deliberately talks in Esperanto, not Facebook, not Youtube. Most people aren't here to learn a language, they are just here to talk, to hang around.
More than that, using an unfamiliar language will make logic more difficult to be accurate in arguments, votes, etc, effectively halting progress. I can learn fluent English in 2 years, but it is not until much much later that I read works by philosophers. More than that, exactly HOW MANY PHILOSOPHICAL WORKS ARE TRANSLATED INTO ESPERANTO?
Accept it. This site is already habitually English. Given our site is already unpopular AF, changing the official language will do nothing but to be an impedance to our goal to be popular.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
I am not joking?
Created:
What I am saying is that the “roundness of earth” can only make any sense after “flat” is defined.
If we define Earth’s surface as flat, earth is flat.
Created:
-->
@Shila
Our plane of reference is one in which the curvature of Earth in respect to it is a spheroid. This reference made calculation easy so we kept on using it.
However, we COULD define the Earth’s surface as flat and every other point in space would be morphed, distorted in some way, to say that it is not impossible albeit futile.
That is why you are using the first kind of plane described above.
Created:
-->
@K_Michael
Well, not far away. Plot the Mercator map on a XY-coordinate graph, then transform it to polar plot with the arctic North Pole being the origin, it becomes the “flat earth model” in which what I think many actual “flat earthers” believe in. That is where I started. We could unfold space like the Mercator projection and it becomes another “flat earth” as the entirety of Earth is a plane that is a reference frame of position, but then again, anything with size that is directly on top of the north or South Pole(directly in line with the pole on the surface and the center of the “round earth”, in the core) would be on either side of their respective poles. The Mercator projection is relatively useless at polar exploration, That is why we have better maps.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
As generally, you are the one making assumptions about what I am trying to talk about(that is what I get typing the first paragraph in #1, lol).
I am not contemplating the “traditionally accepted” flat earth but actually what I would think a “flat earth” would be like given the earth that we have accepted as round and spherical and merely folded space unwounded from the South Pole so it is made to be flat as a reference to the rest of known space. You know what? I think your “flat earth model” is scientifically wrong, but that is another story.
Let me just say, having the moon or anything else spherical but Earth a plane is absurd to me. In my “flat earth model”, they would just be distorted but still be a closed 3D shape, as we are looking through space in some kind of polar plot, I guess.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
About #5:
No, I didn’t say the flat earth model is theoretically incorrect. It is theoretically possible, but it is useless as a map.
Why would you use a flat earth disk map when we could use a globe or at the least the Mercator projection?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
I strongly suggest writing a book. Sometimes(which is just an alternative to saying 100% of the time) I lost track of what you are saying because some of your theoretical basis are your previous forum posts which I happen to NOT know what it is even if I scroll for hours.
Created:
There are still some of y'all unvaxxed? C'mon, it is just a needle. If you are afraid, just go to a therapist!
Created:
What are you expecting entering this topic? I don't know. Either way, let me explain.
Heliocentrism isn't wrong, but inefficient: In that case, both the moon and the sun will orbit around the earth, while planets such as Jupiter and Saturn, with themselves many moons around them, are calculated to orbit a center that is closer to the sun than the earth. This would mean to calculate about Ganymede, you first have to calculate about the Sun's motion, then the motion of Jupiter, then Io. That is super inefficient. Instead of that, why don't we set the reference at the Sun?
It is the old religious who fixed the reference at Earth and accepted nothing else, not Galileo nor Copernicus. Galileo, Copernicus, Kepler, etc... just provided new references that made calculation and observation more efficient.
In reality, we technically can define the Earth's surface as flat and anything tangential to the Earth "above it". The problem becomes that if some object flys directly above the south pole, the position for that object on the "flat earth model" would teleport from one side to another. All constellations would be on one side of "earth", the other side being what is "underneath the Earth", which we will have a mantle and core as wide as the surface of Earth itself. We can just fold space enough so that the Earth's curvature matches the morphed space so the Earth is flat according to that system. In that case, the earth is flat.
Due to astronomical, geological, geographical(continents in the South will be disproportionally enlarged), physical, and maybe even archaelogical inconvenience, we pretty much discard this model the moment it is being formed in one's mind. That is why this model wasn't being thought of before with great depths, hmm, I guess.
Created:
Posted in:
Does the leaderboard MEAN anything?
Not really. All it means, at least it seems, is how willing or ambitious one is to gain points and to achieve that by any means. To be fair, at this point with all the involution and stuff the top spot belongs to someone who can debate full-time and has an environment to do so. Elo in chess and pretty much anything signifies both how good you are and how often you play but you have to play often in order to be good in the eyes of the Elo. Surely, how much you play and how good you are have a positive correlation, but the Elo treats the "playing often" condition as possibly one necessary to measure skill itself, especially in the later stages where every good player is grinding wins.
As an 11th grader typing this inside a dorm with 7 people whilst simultaneously preparing for my AP Statistics exam, I have collected data about how fast my growth was back then in June-September. I don't remember the exact number but I believe the data concludes that I am able to topple Oromagi in about 4 months if the growth is linear. June-September is the time where all the big exams are out and school is not so important anymore and the time is all on the table for me --- a jerk with no life --- to spend, likely on something like debating. That is when the rate skyrocketed. I remember gaining 10 points in 24 hours in the 1750-1800 range. Now that I don't have enough attention as before to type responses this long nor do I have a concentrated environment long-term, I simply stopped going up. For people with a job or with a "life" in general, it is entirely understandable that the "top debaters" may even be outside the top ten.
We have enough people grinding wins enough so that it is needed in order to gain a considerable position on the board but also enough people NOT grinding wins despite also being good(such as 3ru7al, whiteflame, Bones) so that we don't just look at the leaderboard. In fact, we probably arrived at a point where we can conclude that the top debaters noobsnipes for sure. Top 10, maybe nah; top 3, I think the answer is affirmative.
My opinion? It doesn't matter. Were "yes" or "no" mandatory, I would say yes. The previous post by Oromagi clearly illustrates that even the present top-1 barely grinds anymore. Does gaining positions make you intrinsically better? Not exactly. Despite being at #3(#2 formerly) I would say my current form is MUCH WORSE than what I had in August, when I was still just like 6th or so. I don't think either Oromagi nor Novice will intrinsically get better apart from marginal additions of experience, but neither of them need any anymore as they are skilled in such extents. That is what I will say about it.
Created: