[-] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 weeks ago

Lol at the way you conceptualize evidence. Also lol at the way that you don't know what genocide is.

[-] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

That's not how suburbs work. Suburbs aren't about municipalities - they're about zoning and proximity to an urban area. You clearly don't know what you're talking about and want to disagree with people who have first hand experience, so I'm not going to argue with you about this. Have a good one

[-] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

~~Yes. Long Island is New York City. I lived there and my address said New York, New York.~~

I brain farted. I lived in Staten Island, but the point stands. Staten Island is a suburb of New York and is in New York. My current living situation is identical with respect to my current major city. I live in a suburb, but my address says the name of the major city.

[-] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

What do you mean? Almost every major city has suburbs (at least in my country). I live in one of the top ten most populous cities in the US and I live in the suburbs.

[-] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 3 months ago

Something has already happened and they didn't touch my rates. I've been saving hundreds of dollars a year. I've saved well into the thousands of dollars at this point. I'm not saying the insurance companies are my friends and while I am better off using the tracker than not using it, that wasn't even my point. My point was that the trackers all function differently and some are better than others.

[-] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 7 months ago

Of course! I'm always excited for an opportunity to discuss these sorts of things, so I should be thanking you instead.

[-] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

In discussions about intelligence we're always talking about the ability to acquire knowledge, not knowledge itself.

I'm not talking about either of these things. I have already stated that I'm not referring to knowledge. Additionally, I do not agree that intelligence is merely the ability to acquire knowledge. Intelligence is famously difficult to define - but I'm working with a definition akin to a capacity for problem solving and pattern recognition. If we can't see eye to eye there, then we're clearly talking past each other.

Thanks for the interesting conversation. I wish you well.

[-] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I don't see how this could be true. It would be analogous to observing a species of bone-thin weaklings that becomes interested in body building over the course of a few hundred years, gaining more muscle mass on average with each passing year, and making the claim that the strength of this species has not changed. Maybe if one of the early weaklings decided to take up their own interest in body building, they may have reached a similar strength to that of their descendants (though even that is debatable since that specific individual wouldn't have access to all the training techniques and diets developed over the course of its species' future); however, it seems like an awkward interpretation to say therefore the strength of the species has not changed.

This is similar to the situation we find ourselves regarding intelligence in the human species. Humans gain intelligence by exercising their brains and engaging in mental activity, and humans today are far more occupied by these activities than our ancestors were. This, in my view, makes it accurate to claim that human intelligence has changed significantly since the advent of religion. Individual capacity for intelligence may not have changed much, but the intelligence of humans as a whole has changed.

Note that my argument does not conclude that human knowledge or understanding has changed over time. These attributes certainly have changed - I'm sure not many would doubt that. It also doesn't conclude that every modern human is more intelligent than every ancient human. Instead, it concludes that human intelligence as a whole has changed as a result of changes in our culture that influence us to spend more time training our intelligence than our ancestors.

[-] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 10 months ago

My superiority complex is stronger than your inferiority complex.

[-] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 11 months ago

I like this one

[-] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 11 months ago

My point is that someone made the decision for it to do that and that the software works just fine as is. It's not a bug, it's just a weird quirk. The fact that they made the enhancement you requested doesn't make the old behavior buggy. Your post title said "it's not a bug, it's a feature!", but the behavior you reported is not accurately classified as a bug.

[-] CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 year ago

As I already mentioned, I'm not talking about situations where your windshield is suddenly obstructed since that situation is especially rare, so if you can see clearly enough to drive safely in the first place, then you can see clearly enough to evaluate your surroundings.

It seems obvious to me that spraying your windshield with soap obstructs your view for a moment, but I'll admit that the occlusion is likely variable depending on the make and model.

I stand by the claim that it is safer to not use your wiper fluid while moving when possible. If you disagree, that's okay. It's a pretty minor point - there are many other driving habits that are far worse in my opinion.

view more: ‹ prev next ›

CompassRed

joined 1 year ago