[-] palebluethought@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

Sorta. I mean everyone expects there to be actual pumpkin, but that'd be gross. It's just all the stuff you add to the pumpkin in a pie to make it delicious

[-] palebluethought@lemmy.world 14 points 6 days ago

I mean, it's basically just cinnamon, cardamom, and clove. Yeah, it's great. One of those "ruined by its fans" things

[-] palebluethought@lemmy.world 42 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

In 4chan parlance that just means she's calling herself autistic. Which in 4chan world may or may not be literal

[-] palebluethought@lemmy.world 53 points 2 months ago

Idk, most navigation would be along or close to the ecliptic plane of the system, wouldn't it

[-] palebluethought@lemmy.world 62 points 2 months ago

I've seen this a hundred times now and it annoys me every time -- there are still separate digits, they're just attached to a central line. I can invent another way of writing 1-9999 with a "single symbol" too, here we go:

~~0001 0002 0003~~ ... ~~0099 0100~~ ... ~~9998 9999~~

[-] palebluethought@lemmy.world 52 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Everyone is talking about dominant and recessive genes, so I just want to clarify a couple things.

The way your body directly uses genes is as a blueprint to construct proteins. Your cells are always producing proteins from the genes in all your chromosomes. It has complex ways of regulating how much of each it produces, but your body doesn't care what chromosome it's coming from. Once an embryo is fertilized, there's really no distinction between "mom" chromosomes or "dad" chromosomes, as far as the embryo and its protein machinery are concerned.

"Dominant" and "recessive" characterization is about how those proteins affect your body at the macro scale, not whether your body actually uses the gene and produces its proteins -- it always does that. For example, brown hair is a dominant trait, and blonde is recessive. But this is because producing any amount of brown pigment will make your hair brown, regardless of what other pigments you're making, simply because it's darker. Literally the same as combining blonde and brown paint. It has nothing to do with whether the genes are actually being expressed -- the brown hair gene doesn't stop the blonde hair gene from making its pigments.

[-] palebluethought@lemmy.world 64 points 2 months ago

I just don't understand how people can get so sucked into gacha games. All the art design, the game world, all the other stuff they try to use to camouflage the slot machine, none of that stuff works more than a few hours. Once you see the "seams" of the skinner box, once it becomes blindingly obvious there's nothing to find at the "end" of chasing higher DPS or whatever, why do people continue? It loses any sense of fun the moment it happens.

[-] palebluethought@lemmy.world 47 points 3 months ago

Cypher was right

Except for the killing everyone else part

[-] palebluethought@lemmy.world 77 points 4 months ago

In addition to what others said, the way you perceive light intensity is not linear. Between your eye adjusting to changing light levels and just the way your brains visual centers work, it's closer to logarithmic. Indoor lighting at night probably feels like, what, 10% of the brightness of daylight? In reality it's less than 1%, sometimes closer to 0.1%.

[-] palebluethought@lemmy.world 77 points 5 months ago

It's wildly under-taught. It explains like half of all problems in the world. Education: "teaching to the test." Economics: optimizing GDP at the expense of non-material well-being. Maximizing shareholder value by selling out employees and enshittifying your product. Software: "data-driven decision making" optimizing short -term gains over long-term because they are more measurable. That's just off the top of my head.

[-] palebluethought@lemmy.world 89 points 6 months ago

Other than maybe a few very rote, boilerplate types of development, all this shit about replacing coders is almost entirely noise made by either the wishful thinking of oligarchs or credulous repetition of that wishful thinking by clueless journalists.

But it's still a pretty rough time to be just getting into tech, just because of the state of the job market.

20

First of all, thank you so much for all your work! This is definitely a way better experience than the web client. And thanks for adding community blocking, so now I don't have to go back for that feature.

I like to keep pretty huge categories of communities out of my feed entirely. But, I also want to be aware of what other communities of interest might be out there, especially now while the Lemmy landscape is evolving so quickly. So the strategy of only ever browsing subs and foregoing All entirely doesn't really work.

But, as I've seen other people highlighting in other posts, federation also means that the number of redundant communities across instances is huge. I don't just have to block all the political communities, I have to block them everywhere we're federated with. My block-list is already gigantic and I don't anticipate the need to block communities going away soon.

It'd be a much smoother experience if Block Community was an option directly in the three-dot menu of an individual post, instead of having to leave my feed, go through another menu, and go back every time.

[-] palebluethought@lemmy.world 121 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

So, let's put aside for a moment the rather shocking number of people casually advocating for murder in this thread.

I want to talk instead about how everyone here is just talking for granted the notion that removing the billionaires, Republican politicians, or whatever "they" you care to think of, would be a solution, or even a positive step, for modern social ills.

There's a big undercurrent in almost any political discussion online, this implication that every one of the world's problems actually has a super simple solution, that The Powerful could just snap their fingers and make it happen if they wanted to, and it's only because of their greed etc that we have any problems that all. Obviously we live in a time of huge inequity and we'd be a lot better off if we found a good way to improve it.

But many (most?) of our biggest problems are inherent to the challenge of keeping 8 billion people alive and happy in a hostile universe, and in fact nobody has ever had a perfect solution. Throwing the entire planet into chaos by causally throwing away human beings' rights and leaving an enormous portion of the world's capital in uncertain hands, ready to be seized by some other set of psychopathic opportunists who happen to be in a position to do so, certainly ain't it.

view more: next ›

palebluethought

joined 1 year ago