Search Results - SC2 Mafia
Register

Search:

Type: Posts; User: yzb25

Page 1 of 40 1 2 3 4

Search: Search took 0.22 seconds.

  1. Replies
    6
    Views
    57

    ►►Re: Non-leading title about speech◄◄

    On a serious note, we've had a lot of these threads. I have lost count, but this is probably at least the fifth. I don't mind reading a debate, but can't we at least discuss something new?
  2. Replies
    6
    Views
    57

    ►►Re: Non-leading title about speech◄◄

    I have thought about this issue at great length. After thorough introspection, I am still not sure whether we should have the free speech. In fact, I am not sure whether we should even have the free speech to discuss whether we should have the free speech. But after extremely careful consideration, I am ready to commit myself to the view that we should at least have the free speech to speak of whether we should have the free speech to discuss the free speech. So I wish to pull the conversation back to there, then gradually consider how we proceed.

    Due to my immense study of this topic, my thoughts may prove too profound to follow... but do not be afraid to ask for clarification.
  3. Forum:General Discussion

    Thread:My Perma-Ban on MU

    Thread Author:Helz

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    54
    Views
    717

    ►►Re: My Perma-Ban on MU◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by OzyWho View Post
    If people could stop giving support's on blind faith, that'd be great.
    First there were 100+ posts on discord+forums agreeing with the MU mods, a witch hunt after Helz and his supporters.
    Now there's witch hunt after MU mods.
    On both sides most didn't bother looking into anything, just taking the word of whomever they're supporting.

    I myself need the case to be put under scrutiny before I support either.
    My own interpretation is in #7, however I said I don't understand most of what was even said.
    Now as it stands, thanks to #18+#19+#20, it seems that even the people here share the same interpretation as the mods on MU? Which atm is the majority of people looking into it themselves?
    Combine that with Helz not replying to them, and it's objective to support the ban?

    I can't agree with the aftermath of it all though - that lost the MU mods credibility for me.

    I wish Helz to take care of his mental health.
    I wish others to not go on blind faith witch-hunts. Though I suppose that's what communities do, judging by both MU and SC2Mafia?
    I'm not advocating for "cancelling" or "witch-hunting" anyone, nor do I have the power too, if I'm who you have in mind here. I'm not taking it on blind faith, I've read the chat before. I suppose I don't have "evidence" helz didn't actually receive an e-mail address and SJ needed to poke for it. Is that what you mean by "blind faith"?

    Yes, people should make an effort to speak clearly to avoid misunderstandings. And Helz shouldn't have had an argument while drunk. I think that's reasonable. But a ban with no recourse for appeal is clearly not a proportionate response. Both of those things can be true, and the dude isn't crazy for thinking he's been shafted here lol.

    If I seem too hardline and am just adding fuel to the fire, I'll stay out of it, because I'm evidently exacerbating your concerns regarding a "witch hunt" here. But I must say I think your concern for the mods is extremely misplaced. We're a tiny community lamenting an injustice. We couldn't witch hunt a cucumber.
  4. Forum:General Discussion

    Thread:My Perma-Ban on MU

    Thread Author:Helz

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    54
    Views
    717

    ►►Re: My Perma-Ban on MU◄◄

    That treatment is gross as hell. As someone who appears so passionate about mafia and the mafia community, getting thrown under the bus for short term convenience like that must be terrible. It seems they purely care about silencing the issue and avoiding any kind of conflict. I sincerely wish you the best in finding a resolution to this, or at least some way of making the situation better than it is right now.

    I don't see why people are diverging so heavily away from the conduct of the mods into the specifics of the opinions actually being discussed. Unless you believe the views Helz shared actually are racist, grotesque or violate their Ts and Cs in some way, it's not really relevant. The judgement doesn't become more or less fair if the opinion is "correct" or "well-argued".

    Whether the views can be feasibly misconstrued as racist is somewhat more relevant, but still only matters to the initial judgement. The subsequent denial of an appeal and lying to the community about giving Helz the e-mail is extremely cynical and clearly implies the community isn't just oversensitive but genuinely callous to the contributions of dedicated members, with no serious respect given to those who fall out of the "clique". Their "process" seems more about keeping up appearances than addressing misunderstandings and brash judgements or rehabilitating raucous members.

    I know this has been going on for many months now and I don't think you (Helz) pursuing this for so long is good for your health. You may hate to hear this, but pragmatically it doesn't make sense to keep fighting unless you think you can achieve a different outcome. But it's your life, and I wish you the best of luck whatever you choose to do.
  5. Forum:General Discussion

    Thread:texas

    Thread Author:oops_ur_dead

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    31
    Views
    503

    ►►Re: texas◄◄

    from your wording... ah...
  6. Forum:Site Discussion

    Thread:New mod Lag

    Thread Author:OzyWho

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    26
    Views
    564

    ►►Re: New mod Lag◄◄

    Congrats my guy!
  7. Forum:Serious Discussion & Debate

    Thread:covid 19 vaccine

    Thread Author:oops_ur_dead

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    42
    Views
    1,257

    Poll: ►►Re: covid 19 vaccine◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by OzyWho View Post
    Ahh, those Google numbers are heavily misleading.
    This weekly updated statistic says that: "For over 5% of these deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned on the death certificate. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 4.0 additional conditions or causes per death."

    For every 100 deaths by COVID-19, only 5 are caused solely by the virus. The other 95 have had other health conditions in addition, with an average of 4 additionals.

    Looking at Causes of death and comorbidities in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (Comorbidity is "the presence of one or more additional conditions often co-occurring with a primary condition."
    The common additional health conditions upon dying from COVID-19 seem to be such as these:
    I will just paste the first 10 patients off the table:

    Case1: Active smoking, COPD, HIV-infection, obesity, ventricular fibrillation
    Case2: Diabetes II, heart failure, hypertension, obesity, OSAS
    Case3: Asthma, COPD, hypertension, mesenterial infarction
    Case4: Asthma, atrial fibrillation, hypertension, sinus node arrest
    Case5: Hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, obesity, OSAS
    Case6: Atrial fibrillation, chronic renal failure, COPD, dementia, hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, liver cirrhosis
    Case7: Hemiplegia, pulmonary embolism
    Case8: Dementia, diabetes II, hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, rheumatoid arthritis, stroke
    Case9: Alcohol abuse, heart failure, obesity
    Case10: Active smoking, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, hypertension, ischaemic heart failure, obesity


    Now, assuming that the statistics that google gave me that I mentioned in my previous post include every death that includes COVID-19 as a cause - I feel like I want to reduce that ratio to 5% of it's size, because if it included all the Comorbidity cases with an average of 4 additional symptoms and those symptoms are such that I listed; that's like being surprised a 90 y/o dying after getting sick tbh.


    Got this idea to look for comorbidities in this podcast. That's a sad podcast tbh, because the podcaster looks more informed than the Doctor.(?)
    The entire comment section seem to be against COVID-19 vaccines. I guess influencers really are influencing, lol.
    Just in case there is a misunderstanding here, the vast majority of these people would not have died when they did if it weren't for COVID. The study is not disputing this. Their cause of death is COVID.

    You might look at an obese man with heart disease and high blood pressure and think "they may only have 5-10 years left. Covid has statistically made little difference to their lifespan in such a case". But I am sure the man in question regards those 5-10 years to be highly significant. And if you had a loved one with those conditions, I am sure you'd think very differently.

    Furthermore, if you wish to disregard covid deaths where people seem to have a high chance of dying soon, you would need to specify how many years left are considered too few to be regarded as significant, so we can accurately quantify how many should be disregarded.

    I don't think it's completely unreasonable the line of thinking you have fallen into here. If someone is going to die in 2 weeks, morbid though it may be, perhaps it matters little if they die in 1 week instead. But I think you're massively overapplying that principle here by disregarding every case where people had at least one secondary condition. The number you disregard should realistically be far less than 95 if you have a soul =P.
  8. Forum:General Discussion

    Thread:Withdrawal from Afghanistan

    Thread Author:yzb25

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    37
    Views
    870

    ►►Re: Withdrawal from Afghanistan◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperJack View Post
    You just want a show don't you?
    That couldn't be further from the truth. I've been trying quite hard not to contribute to threads that seem toxic for quite a few months now, albeit with a few hiccups. If this devolves into people shitflinging I would PM Aamirus or MM and ask them to close my thread as soon as I could.

    In particular, I don't have as much patience for interpersonal feuds as I used to. If you're just looking for an argument, kindly piss off lol. But I think people have been (somewhat?) better for a couple weeks, and I am genuinely very curious to hear people's takes on this. So I want to give it a shot.
  9. Forum:General Discussion

    Thread:Withdrawal from Afghanistan

    Thread Author:yzb25

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    37
    Views
    870

    ►►Withdrawal from Afghanistan◄◄

    Really surprised noone started a thread about this. I was wondering about people's take on the withdrawal and the conflict in general, in retrospect. Particulary intrigued to hear what the Americans think, but the rest of us are certainly entitled to an opinion! :P
  10. Forum:Serious Discussion & Debate

    Thread:covid 19 vaccine

    Thread Author:oops_ur_dead

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    42
    Views
    1,257

    Poll: ►►Re: covid 19 vaccine◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by OzyWho View Post
    Ftr, I did re-visit the aforementioned paper and it did predict a vaccine within 12-18 months, so that's cool.



    Yah, looking at the current death per case ratio for different countries, it seems that it's around 2%. Which is surprising because in the early 2020 the estimates were 2% only if you're over 70 years old. (which I suppose even then was reason enough to do herd protection of the risk group?)

    2% is a really high number wtf...
    yeah, it's not really something I can wrap my head around honestly.
  11. Forum:Serious Discussion & Debate

    Thread:covid 19 vaccine

    Thread Author:oops_ur_dead

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    42
    Views
    1,257

    Poll: ►►Re: covid 19 vaccine◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by OzyWho View Post
    Frankly, I don't know why you would want to put something in your body you can't get any info on, it just sounds absurd to me. Maybe there won't be hundreds of thousands of heart attacks like it was with Vioxx for example, but we're talking about taking something on nothing but blind faith. Even your own doctor is giving you your vaccine on blind faith.
    Well, for me, it's not simply about whether the vaccine is dangerous. It's about whether it's so dangerous it would kill more people than if covid was left to rampage freely - because realistically that's the alternative. Even after accounting for all the covid deaths, you also have to consider the number of people that would die from lack of care due to hospitals surpassing capacity.

    So yeah, unless it actually is causing "hundreds of thousands of heart attacks", and you think death statistics are being systematically overstated by entire orders of magnitude, from a utilitarian perspective it seemed like a no brainer to me. If I get a blood clot or something as a result, then fuck my luck lol.
  12. Forum:Serious Discussion & Debate

    Thread:covid 19 vaccine

    Thread Author:oops_ur_dead

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    42
    Views
    1,257

    Poll: ►►Re: covid 19 vaccine◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Lag View Post
    how do i vote in this poll? im confused
    I think these sorts of polls close quickly after opening. You gotta get your democracy in fast to be heard
  13. ►►Re: Infinities being bigger than others, "countable" and "non countable" infinities◄◄

    It might help to bare in mind when we talk about the "size" of these infinite sets, that is a very informal way of referring to something called their "cardinality". In the popular culture, we've gotten very used to talking about "cardinality" as a measure of "size", but it may be slightly more accurate to think about cardinality in terms of "information".

    For example, if you consider the set of positive whole numbers (1,2,3,4,5...) vs. the set of even numbers (2,4,6,8,10...) the first set seems strictly larger than the second set (in some sense, it has literally double the stuff). However, from the point of view of "cardinality", they both have the same amount of information. I can label every positive whole number with a unique even number like so, in a well-defined manner:

    2->1
    4->2
    6->3
    ...

    And when we say the real numbers have a higher cardinality, we are somehow making a statement that the real numbers are simply too complicated to be encoded in terms of positive whole numbers. There is no way of labelling every real number with a unique positive whole number.

    If we could label every real number with a unique positive whole number, that would be kind of revolutionary for our notation. We use these garish "infinite decimals" to encode real numbers... but no matter how many decimal places you write down, there's still so many possible numbers you could be referring to when you write the next digits! If we could encode every real with a natural, we'd have a way of finitely expressing every real number at once. Can you imagine?! Well, we literally can't, but still!
  14. ►►Re: Infinities being bigger than others, "countable" and "non countable" infinities◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Marshmallow Marshall View Post
    Uncountable, but any real number between 0 and 1 is comprised anyway, so the real number you would "create" technically already is part of the infinity. What you're proving is that uncountable and countable infinities are different (and that the integers infinity is countable, while the [0, 1[ infinity isn't), but not that one is bigger than the other, since both can go on forever. There aren't "more numbers" in one set than in the other, even though it's impossible to pinpoint a rank in the real numbers list unlike in the integers list. You seemed to be debating the fact that the real numbers infinite set is uncountable... which nobody disputed, as far as I know.

    I'm totally making you all waste your time on explaining this to me XD
    As a matter of fact, you have given our hollow lives purpose!
  15. Forum:Archived S-FMs

    Thread:?KRC Reboot Gravity Falls Edition

    Thread Author:AIVION

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    2,932
    Views
    27,081

    ►►Re: ?KRC Reboot Gravity Falls Edition◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by FM-Mabel Pines View Post
    The identities were posted in the post-game Discord.

    ===

    Anyway, made up my mind
    -vote FM-Candy Chiu
    Oh yeah, I forgot to nominate MVP (ppl still do that?)

    It would 100% be mabel for me. All of the mechanical information at the start of day 2 suggested it was highly likely they were scum. If it weren't for their extremely calm and tactful breakdown of the situation, they would have surely gotten lynched. That play was extremely mature and impressive.

    Also, recognizing the threat of Robbie on the last day was also very impressive. Not to mention their reads were generally extremely on-point. And their posts were very insightful, along with candy's.
  16. ►►Re: Infinities being bigger than others, "countable" and "non countable" infinities◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Plotato View Post
    this is misleading

    the set of integers will always have a bigger number, this is an approach but never reach argument which implies the set of integers is uncountable, but it is. cantor's diagonalization demonstrates by contradiction that you can generate more real numbers than a prescribed infinite number of integers, therefore making the set of real numbers, not countable by mathematical definition.

    personally, analogies that try to "list" or "count" infinities will always end up being confusing because the verb implicitly ascribes a mathematical countability (i can count +1 everytime) or uncountability (i can go on forever, can't count forever) to it, depending on whoever's interpretation. some infinities will be smaller or larger in size, or the number of elements contained in them, but the only thing defining countability infinite is whether there is mathematical indication that you can map one-to-one from the infinite set of integers to whatever.
    I didn't mean to suggest in the forever-list you're missing a number because you haven't reached it yet. I meant even "after" completing the forever-list, you still wouldn't have every number. You could list every natural number given "forever", by writing the number n at second n, or every integer by alternating between writing a negative and a positive each second. Understand? This is a legitimate way to think about it. If the thought is clearly conveyed, the forever-list is no different from a function from the naturals.

    I agree it might be better to let go of the forever-list stuff if it's derailing things and just work with a function from the naturals. I just like it because you can explain it without giving explicit formulae. >.>
  17. ►►Re: Infinities being bigger than others, "countable" and "non countable" infinities◄◄

    If you do not necessitate that the numbers are being written down, one at a time, once per second, forever, then perverse things can happen. For example, if you allow god to take the pen, maybe god is capable of instantaneously producing a vast list that includes every such number. Maybe he uses his long line for space to do it (lol) but that is neither here nor there.

    As Plotato is repeating, the list needs to be countably infinite, which I suppose for our purposes is the mathematically formal way of ruling out the possibility god took the pen. It restricts you to either using a numbered well-defined list, or some kind of scenario where you only get to write down one entry per second forever.
  18. ►►Re: Infinities being bigger than others, "countable" and "non countable" infinities◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Marshmallow Marshall View Post
    Anything between 0 and 1 not only can be added to the list, but is on it. That's the assumption I'm making. If it's just an arbitrary list of some stuff between 0 and 1, then sure, it works, but isn't that... not infinite?
    Hm... Maybe it would benefit both of us for you to be more cautious with how you phrase these things. An arbitrary list of some stuff may very well be unending (which is exactly what the word infinite means). What I assume you mean is, "clearly that list isn't complete".

    What I am asserting is there is no complete list of all the numbers between 0 and 1, whether it's unending or not. By virtue of merely demanding that you have to write each number down, one by one, you have already imposed a subtle restriction on your ability to account for every number. Even if you write down one entry per second from now until the end of time, you will still be missing a number. That is what the proof illustrates, and that is what makes it profound.
  19. ►►Re: Infinities being bigger than others, "countable" and "non countable" infinities◄◄

    Maybe the problem is how you're thinking about infinity, as you say. You have an infinitely long list, therefore you can include everything between 0 and 1. Because you have "endless ammunition" anything not on the list can be added to the list. Is that what you're thinking?
  20. ►►Re: Infinities being bigger than others, "countable" and "non countable" infinities◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Marshmallow Marshall View Post
    To be clear, I have more doubts about my understanding of maths than about maths themselves lol. But anyway, I misspoke and meant infinity comprises everything between 0 and 1 in this case. I thought it was clear at first, but now I see how it isn't. Whoops.
    My issue is more that the infinitely long operation is forced to result in a number between 0 and 1 still (else you'd be out of the specific infinity set, which would be "cheating" and wouldn't prove anything). How is a real number between 0 and 1 not comprised in an infinity of real numbers between 0 and 1? Shouldn't everything between 0 and 1 be in there, thus including the result number?

    As for your "do it yourself" suggestion, it doesn't solve my issue because I know it's going to give a different number, that's obvious. My issue is with the exact concept of infinity, I guess. It's what aamirus said here:


    Also thanks for the walls and fuck you plotato
    hmm, maybe there is a misunderstanding about what this infinite list represents exactly. This list is just some arbitrary list of numbers between 0 and 1. The list does not necessarily have the infinity of numbers between 0 and 1. Indeed, we are about to prove it doesn't. The list could be something dumb like this:

    1) 0.1
    2) 0.01
    3) 0.001
    4) 0.0001
    ...

    Or it could be a more earnest attempt to hit every number between 0 and 1:

    1) 0.110100110001...
    2) 0.110001111111...
    3) 0.101010110101....
    ...

    It doesn't matter. The point of the proof is that, no matter what infinite list is given, we can apply the construction to get a number between 0 and 1 not on the list.
  21. ►►Re: Infinities being bigger than others, "countable" and "non countable" infinities◄◄

    oh also MM, if you have doubts about the veracity of modern mathematics, you might get a kick out of this --

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_line_(topology)

    Wikipedia doesn't have a picture for that one lmao ^^

    "Intuitively, the usual real-number line consists of a countable number of line segments [0,1) laid end-to-end, whereas the long line is constructed from an uncountable number of such segments."
  22. ►►Re: Infinities being bigger than others, "countable" and "non countable" infinities◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Marshmallow Marshall View Post
    Some context:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantor...gonal_argument
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeQX2HjkcNo

    I've been randomly looking into this and... I don't believe Cantor's argument! I'm not great at maths, though, so it's very possible I'm just being dumb, but I think that the argument is flawed (and that the conclusion is too). Here's why: it's impossible to add one to x rank of each number on an infinite list without getting to a number of the list, because... the list is infinite! The result obtained through this cannot be unique, as infinity necessarily comprises everything. Thus, isn't the proof based on a misunderstanding of the concept of infinity?

    And yes, it is very ballsy of me to attack something that apparently was proven a century ago, and I dare hope you're gonna prove me wrong or tell me I misunderstood something, O you knowledgeable people :P
    Well, it might be better for you to flesh out your understanding of this and us to then reply to you. Because this reasoning:

    "because... the list is infinite! The result obtained through this cannot be unique, as infinity necessarily comprises everything."

    Sounds like an argument for why the statement itself must be wrong rather than any issue with the proof itself. As lag said, you can certainly have infinitely many things without having everything. You just need to have a never-ending amount.

    Nonetheless, this discussion is very fun so I'll say a few things --

    The proof simply constructs a new real number from a list of other real numbers which is not anywhere on the aforementioned list. Do you have an issue with some aspect of that process? Do you have an issue with the idea of applying an "infinitely long operation" to construct the new real number? Or are you unconvinced that the new real number will necessarily not appear anywhere on the list?

    The following advice may help you to think about it:

    Rather than trying to grasp the entire infinite process at once, try to think about what's happening at each entry. You can't possibly grasp the new real number this construction generates, because changing the n'th entry on every n'th row will take infinitely long. However, you can ask me about any of this new real number's digits - ask me what the 50th digit is, ask me what the 100th digit is - and I can run 100 rows down my list and 100 entries along and find the digit and tell you "ah, the new real number's 100th digit is a 1!". This is no different from how you understand any other real number. You do not know every single digit of pi, but given enough time (and enough motivation ^^) you can find the 100th digit or the 200th digit. And that's enough to satisfy you that the number exists and makes sense.

    The same is true for the process of checking whether this new real number is different from every entry on the list. You can't possibly check every number on the list to see if it's different from your new real number. Attempting such a thing would be foolish. But, give me any row. Ask for the 1000th row even. I can go to that row, and verify for you that our new real number is indeed different from the number on that row, by plodding along to the 1000th entry and checking that our new real number does indeed have a different digit.

    It may sound daft, but maybe try literally carrying out this construction for just a few numbers. Write out 5 or 6 real numbers to 10 digits, then reverse the n'th digit on the n'th row, and stare at the resulting construction until it makes sense how it would work exactly the same in an endless list ^^.
  23. Replies
    9
    Views
    1,043

    ►►Re: serious story about a bad break up i had in high school◄◄

    Glad someone cut through all the nonsense and trolling on this site lately and gave us something straight from the heart. Thanks for sharing this.
  24. Forum:Site Discussion

    Thread:If there was a upvote/downvote system

    Thread Author:OzyWho

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    6
    Views
    689

    ►►Re: If there was a upvote/downvote system◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Marshmallow Marshall View Post
    If there were an upvote/downvote system here, I'm pretty sure the site would devolve into an unhealthy climate of either conflict or forced consensus for the reasons you stated. It's a bad thing, and I think that beyond sc2mafia, it has a significant impact on society as a whole by strenghtening echo chambers and the feeling of normality and uniformity.
    It got me thinking about how you get those crazy subreddits like incel subreddits that espouse views that would have to be extremely carefully defended in the real world, but on those subreddits those views are bandied about like it's common sense. And I think a lot of it is probably due to the fact these subreddits are all compartmentalized and then have these upvote/downvote systems that basically allow every niche opinion to exist in total isolation, totally unchallenged.

    It's like that game ozy (or me? I don't remember) brought up in the other thread where ppl guess how many jelly beans are in the jar. Reddit is a world where all the ppl who guessed numbers wildly high can segregate themselves from society and circlejerk eachother about how based their estimates are. It totally violates the natural triangulation process nature probably intended.
  25. Forum:Archived S-FMs

    Thread:?KRC Reboot Gravity Falls Edition

    Thread Author:AIVION

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    2,932
    Views
    27,081

    ►►Re: ?KRC Reboot Gravity Falls Edition◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by OzyWho View Post
    How was geim?
    I kinda want to bring myself to read a game at some point. Potentially this game. Though, honestly, I feel like my brain would fry. Idk how anyone can keep up with a game like this..
    I seem to not be able to read a game, including when I'm playing them, for like forever now. :/

    Was there an actual cult? I remember some random posts that I checked out gave me that impression.
    Well, of the 15-20 or so FM games I've played this was definitely the most fun. There were some insanely hype moments in it, especially on day 2 and day 3. I'm not sure if they'd be fully captured when you're just reading it, but holy crap.

    Also, the neighbourhood chats and jailor chats eventually get pasted into the game thread. So you can discover them at the pace the players did if u want :P.
  26. Forum:Site Discussion

    Thread:If there was a upvote/downvote system

    Thread Author:OzyWho

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    6
    Views
    689

    ►►Re: If there was a upvote/downvote system◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by OzyWho View Post
    If there was a upvote/downvote system for posts, like on Reddit, do you think the earlier days of Sc2mafia would still have given the same impression of expressive freedom as it did?

    That's a very good point, I don't think it would. Indeed, an upvote/downvote system directly incentivizes people to match their opinions with the consensus view, or at least tailor your views to the consensus view.
  27. Forum:General Discussion

    Thread:The meaning of Intelligence

    Thread Author:Helz

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    20
    Views
    1,471

    ►►Re: The meaning of Intelligence◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by aamirus View Post
    i think everyone adopts a definition of intelligence that puts themselves highest

    Some people will say that knowing the most things makes you the most intelligent
    Some people will say that being able to learn new things the most quickly makes you the most intelligent
    Some people will say that doing the best thing all the time makes you the most intelligent (IE an intelligent person would never drink alcohol or turn in an assignment late, would get all As)

    and then there are further qualifications for each, for example a "knowing the most things" person could say "oh but knowing a lot about some video game characters is stupid. Knowing about history makes you smart"
    With how the term gets applied in practice, I understood it to simply mean "good brain" and mean whatever the speaker happens to define as good... so basically this.
  28. Forum:General Discussion

    Thread:Make SuperJack A Sig Competition

    Thread Author:SuperJack

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    58
    Views
    4,407

    ►►Re: Make SuperJack A Sig Competition◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by HentaiManOfPeace View Post


    I just wanted a friend because this pandemic made me lonely and mentally unstable.

    PS: you can have a good time if you fold a tissue, rip a hold, and go to town on it than just using your hands. It feels pretty good
    you should maybe begin by saying sorry to helz then lol. You were kind of a massive cunt, plus he probably didn't even write that rep message you attributed to him.
  29. Forum:Circlejerk

    Thread:it's coming home

    Thread Author:yzb25

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    2
    Views
    174

    ►►it's coming home◄◄

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJqimlFcJsM

    OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG

    Spoiler : :
    lol jk i dont give a shit. lmk when they win starcraft
  30. Forum:General Discussion

    Thread:Our hero, our orange, our zz

    Thread Author:SuperJack

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    103
    Views
    5,561

    ►►Re: Our hero, our orange, our zz◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by WrathCyber View Post
    That was literally me. Except it didn't taste like soap (Idk maybe I'm an animal)? But it did burn the back of my nose.
    yeah I can't taste it either. I just feel the burning in my throat and nose. Maybe if I dilluted with more soap...
  31. Replies
    137
    Views
    2,916

    ►►Re: Ye atheists by name, lend an ear, lend an ear◄◄

    In the Netherlands, 42% of the members of the Protestant Church in the Netherlands (PKN) are nontheists. [...] A minister of the PKN, Klaas Hendrikse has described God as "a word for experience, or human experience" and said that Jesus may have never existed. Hendrikse gained attention with his book published in November 2007 in which he said that it was not necessary to believe in God's existence in order to believe in God.

    from wikipedia XD
  32. Replies
    137
    Views
    2,916

    ►►Re: Ye atheists by name, lend an ear, lend an ear◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Helz View Post
    A bit off topic but I was working on the house and rolling some stuff around in my head and came up with this off topic and totally unsubstantiated
    Spoiler : atheist conspiracy theory: :

    So I was thinking about power structures behind groups and how they push growth of their group because it expands their power. Then I thought about Atheism and the categories included. It occurred to me if you had the belief 'There is no God' you pretty much have a very specific pool of the population that would be included in such a group. This greatly limits group growth and therefore- the growth of your power structure. So how do you grow?

    Expand the belief pool. If Atheism were able to swallow agnostic's it can hit a much wider pool of the population. But after that how do you grow? You have excluded a huge portion of the population which is every person who holds a religious belief.. Well, now that you have swallowed Agnostics you can include any religious person who also adds the "But who really knows" at the end of it.

    Such an evolution of an organization matches up what little I have looked at and satisfies my cynical outlook on power structures.


    Like I said.. Totally unsubstantiated assumptions and pretty off topic but I might not be wrong given that it does explain the direction of growth while establishing motive..

    -edit

    I wonder if religions will ever attempt to include gnostic individuals to expand their power group
    I don't really see that. I think if anything atheists are likely to feel superior and smug and form exclusive cliques like you get with (some) feminists. I think that's reflected in the rhetoric. Marketable atheists that make lots of money through their atheism are "intellectuals" and edgy and non-mainstream. While modern christians are gentle, polite and as innoffensive as humanly possible (I'm thinking of the pope). That's the behaviour of a group trying expand... or at least stop contracting.

    Jewish atheists are a thing because jewishness is also like an ethnicity, afaik. Even if you don't really subscribe to the religious views you can still be closely affiliated with the community and be "ethnically jewish". This christian atheism thing is pretty wild tho. I had no idea this existed and i've got a big shit eating grin on my face now
  33. Replies
    137
    Views
    2,916

    ►►Re: Ye atheists by name, lend an ear, lend an ear◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Marshmallow Marshall View Post
    Somebody around actually knows that! xD

    Ever since a crazy Muslim literally decapitated a teacher in France for talking about Muhammad in a way he didn't like or something like that, there's... a lot of tension, let's say. It absolutely isn't a non-existant mentality. I'm a bit surprised it seems foreign to some people.

    @ helz wallpost: Same experience about people describing themselves as agnostic first and foremost, not as atheists when it's what they actually mean. Didn't expect to face disagreements about that, honestly.
    I've of course seen people be extremely anti-religion, but I've never heard anyone oppose religious expression here in the UK ("showing your religion should be illegal"), so my experience is like ceko and banana's.

    I also generally hear the word agnostic used that way, and respect people don't have to use words the way a dictionary tells them to. I apologize if I gave a different impression due to my pedantic interjections lol
  34. Forum:General Discussion

    Thread:who needs goals

    Thread Author:theoneceko

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    32
    Views
    1,823

    ►►Re: who needs goals◄◄

    well at least your taste has improved =P
  35. Forum:General Discussion

    Thread:who needs goals

    Thread Author:theoneceko

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    32
    Views
    1,823

    ►►Re: who needs goals◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by WrathCyber View Post
    Is that gundham in the background on your profile pic
    looks like a gothic take on the elric brothers
  36. Replies
    137
    Views
    2,916

    ►►Re: Ye atheists by name, lend an ear, lend an ear◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by theoneceko View Post
    i have never heard an atheist say that.
    I think there are actually people who say that in the francosphere tho. (I can't tell for sure because they're all speaking french) France has been edging towards banning hijabs in public for a long time in the name of "secularism". They take their secularism very far over there. So mm isnt pulling it out his ass when he says it like an american evangelical is
  37. Replies
    137
    Views
    2,916

    ►►Re: Ye atheists by name, lend an ear, lend an ear◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Marshmallow Marshall View Post
    I said assume because we don't have to think it's true, just to use the possibility of its truth as a basis. I guess if we don't believe in it, we're believing we're doing something utterly useless though lol.
    All our well-founded scientific theories can be taken as assumptions of convenience by the same rationale. That removes any kind of belief from science, if you see things that way
  38. Forum:Forum Mafia Discussion

    Thread:Gambits

    Thread Author:Helz

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    70
    Views
    1,692

    ►►Re: Gambits◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by LagAttack View Post
    Those all involve 1. e4 e5 lines, which I do not play at all
    based
  39. Replies
    137
    Views
    2,916

    ►►Re: Ye atheists by name, lend an ear, lend an ear◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaCucho View Post
    Except for that observable evidence and the scientific method doesn't require faith or belief to trust. It's not like someone is just telling us "the earth revolves around the sun, yo, trust me". There is actual observable evidence to support it. Saying that anyone who says the earth revolves around the sun is stating a belief based on faith because no one can really know for sure is kinda an ignorant statement.
    well it requires trust in the people who understand it in the cases where you do not, it requires belief that the current model doesn't just happen to work for the small subset of cases we've tested it on and, more trivially, it requires trust in the accuracy of the instruments and experiments. It may seem pedantic, but all of these things have lead scientists to incorrect assumptions at one point or another. The earth revolving around the sun case is a bit extreme tho. Nonetheless, you might find this video interesting --

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqTGYzLXziU
  40. Replies
    137
    Views
    2,916

    ►►Re: Ye atheists by name, lend an ear, lend an ear◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Marshmallow Marshall View Post
    You just made me dismiss the existence of these things at their very mention, that is correct. But strictly speaking, you made me discover constructs that were not present in my mind before and take a stance based on that. I did not believe that those things existed or that they did not exist before, but now, I do. You certainly didn't change my perception of reality much through that, but the element "lava lamp with wings" was not present in my mind before, and thus I could not believe anything about it.

    About the Earth revolving around the Sun, I'm sorry to tell you that it is a belief based on faith for most of us (and all of us, speaking very strictly, since we cannot know for sure whether or not what we perceive is somewhat close to reality; that is pointless to say though, so we should probably stick to saying most of us). This belief is based on the faith in the people who told us that the Earth revolved around the Sun and on the belief all of this isn't just a giant conspiracy. The only people who have evidence are those who calculated it themselves. The rest only believe. Of course, it's a very solid and justified believe that looks like it's 99.999999999 % true, but it's a belief nonetheless. Saying the Earth is flat also is a belief in a pretty similar way (faith in those who told you that it's flat); you can even say there's evidence that the Earth is flat: look outside, is the Earth turning upside down at some point?? Duh! The thing is, those two beliefs are not equal because the credibility of the elements we have faith in to believe the Earth revolves around the Sun and the credibility of elements we have faith in to believe the Earth is flat is very different. Same goes for almost every belief.
    I agree with Oberon's last post (#83). Your definition of belief seems consistent, it just seems a bit nebulous due to its breadth. It appears to include "literally every statement we cannot know for certain is true". It also doesn't really seem to align much with how people use the word informally. I'd be more interested to know what you don't define to be based in belief lol. Would mathematical statements also be belief?

    Maybe we'd benefit from different terminology, but not believing in an abrahamic god and "disbelieving" in an abrahamic god are clearly not on the same level in terms of number of assumptions you need to make about reality and how you perceive / interact with reality. Hence, one requires a hell of a lot more "belief". For example, even if you reject the existence of an abrahamic god, you can just believe in some other kind of supernatural being that forces you to live in a certain way or validates your existence by some other contrivances. In that sense, nonbelief includes realities very similar to realities with an abrahamic god, as well as ones that make far less assumptions about reality. On the other hand, believing in an abrahamic god necessitates many unfalsifiable things that directly impact how you perceive and interact with the world. You will have a much more clearly defined and restricted view of reality.
  41. Replies
    137
    Views
    2,916

    ►►Re: Ye atheists by name, lend an ear, lend an ear◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Marshmallow Marshall View Post
    If you're not aware of something (such as in your example where religion does not exist, even though that world is utterly impossible since religion is an answer to questions humans ask themselves), then you can't believe in anything because it's simply not in your mind. Stone Age people did not believe Alpha Centauri existed, nor did they believe it didn't, for they simply were not aware of the possibility of its existence (as far as I know). But as soon as you are aware that something is possibly existent and take a position on whether it exists in reality or not, you believe that it exists or that it does not.

    "I do not believe in any god" is not a belief, it's a statement of nonbelief, indeed. But that falls under agnostic atheism, as you're leaving the existence of a god undetermined. Gnostic atheism is the statement, the certainty that there is no god. And that is a belief.

    Right. "I know what happens when you die!" = belief. Is it a religious belief? No. But it certainly is a belief, much like believing the Earth revolves around the Sun.
    If belief is merely predicated on the awareness of a concept and a firm stance about it, can I make you believe more things by mentioning gibberish constructs? Lava lamps with wings, trees that bear playstations, flying sphagetti monster, etc. You presumably inwardly dismiss these things as absurd at their very mention, yet I don't think it's reasonable to suggest I've induced more beliefs within you, even if those constructs may exist somewhere.
  42. Replies
    137
    Views
    2,916

    ►►Re: Ye atheists by name, lend an ear, lend an ear◄◄

    Christianity and Islam have done much more for the world than "making people happier" in some vague sense. Churches and mosques have functioned as critical community centres for like, forever. And they have also been used as places to politically organise against repressive regimes.

    But that doesn't make Aamirus wrong either. They're also homophobic as fuck, and uniquely homophobic. Many societies and civilizations, while not great, had their own nuanced takes on human sexuality before empires of christian and muslim denomination came along and effectively shoved their perspectives down their throat. Or at least, that's what I've gathered from my limited understanding.

    I don't really see the value in conversations about whether these religions are "good" or "bad" for the world, because I don't know how you could possibly go about imagining what a world without these religions would look like. And it's totally out of our hands when or even if these religions will die out. I imagine these conversations would be more productive and less draining if the premise of discussion was less vague and ambitious. Maybe ask instead how religion X affects factor Y in place and time Z.
  43. Forum:General Discussion

    Thread:Aamirus is a liar

    Thread Author:CuteTheCutie

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    50
    Views
    3,322

    ►►Re: Aamirus is a liar◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Oberon View Post
    Not only on the Internet: in real life as well. And usually I come to the conclusion that Iím being unreasonable
    Well maybe you walked away from some of those encounters with the wrong conclusion. If someone is saying things and intentionally disregarding your feelings or even deliberately trying to hurt you then it's totally normal to get angry or "offended". They're the asshole, not you. You deserve respect from other people and should hold other people to a higher standard, otherwise you're just going to end up repressing your emotions.
  44. Replies
    42
    Views
    891

    ►►Re: Should Honest Men, reveal their roles to Jailor?◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by yzb25 View Post
    have you considered having a brief copy-paste explanation of your strategy ready for everyone who jails you? I am certain that'd make everyone totally content with your strategy! An honest man values transparency, after all.
    or you could just copy-paste a link to this thread. If they are truly worthy of you they'll be able to read it in <30 seconds, including lag's math.
  45. Replies
    42
    Views
    891

    ►►Re: Should Honest Men, reveal their roles to Jailor?◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by ZZorange View Post
    Guys the thread is titled should Honest Men reveal their roles. Literally everyone who has posted here is a known liar and therefore the thread doesn't apply to them. Hence the line at the end

    "Now of course if you're a regular player of Mafia who is able to lie, this thread does not apply to you. As you can claim town as evil."

    However this does let me know who read the full post so,

    Props to LagAttack for reading the whole post!

    However LagAttack obviously mathmatically claiming will result in less failorage but it'll be a constant. With the not claim strategy first off it's the best strategy against kidnapper scum, which is what you want as a townie, because fuck the mafia. "Eat a dick kidnapper" is the best response. Also the not claiming strategy has the potential to become better overtime, as opposed to claiming which as stated stays constant.

    I don't have to be a rocket surgeon to say that Mafia does not have many new players, and the few casual players it has will learn overtime to not jail a man who is Town 94% of his games.

    Keep in mind during all of this we are ignoring any spite jailors in the equation because spite jailors will execute regardless of role as most spite jailors are long timers who know that they are jailing someone who is 94% town but they execute anyway because they hate said player.

    Overtime given enough samples the pool of failors will gradually shrink with the no claim strategy and become the optimal strategy. Which I think is something you missed in your initial evaluation LagAttack the future prospects of the strategy.
    hmmm

    consider the highly theoretical possibility certain strategies net you more spite jailors. This can make a strategy bad even if on paper perfectly informed players never choose to imprison you unless they're kidnapper or have information / evidence that specifically suggests you're scum.

    also, I think lag's math not only implies more failorage, but that the increased failorage actually offsets the gain in avoided kidnapper executions.

    have you considered having a brief copy-paste explanation of your strategy ready for everyone who jails you? I am certain that'd make everyone totally content with your strategy! An honest man values transparency, after all.
  46. Forum:General Discussion

    Thread:''Living''

    Thread Author:OzyWho

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    14
    Views
    1,400

    ►►Re: ''Living''◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Marshmallow Marshall View Post
    This thread is honestly depressing...

    If life has no goal because there's no God or any preprogrammed goal, can't we just make whatever we want out of it, though? If there's no "higher cause", then let's make the Earth a place where people can live well and let's just have fun. If life has no inherent meaning, it means we're basically in a sandbox, and it's actually not bad at all.
    +1. And the quote in #2 uses very bizarre reasoning. Noone would try to argue minecraft "lacks intrinsic value" because standing still doing absolutely nothing in the game and simply "having it run" brings no pleasure. I'm not a fan of pessimism for the sake of it when there's enough things to cry about in real life without farfetched mental gymnastics
  47. Forum:Serious Discussion & Debate

    Thread:Lottocracy

    Thread Author:OzyWho

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    26
    Views
    616

    ►►Re: Lottocracy◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by OzyWho View Post
    I just noticed something I missed the first time me watching that video.

    You can just look at what some people believe, then come up with reasons why they're right - and they'll love it. Politics. You can become a leader not by leading but by following the consensus.

    Likewise, one might think that the internet can give a person as many different perspectives as never before in the history of humankind and that would make them smarter - right?
    Wrong. It's easier than ever before to escape from accountability by finding places where everyone believes the same as you. People look for lone reasoners who can defend their intuitions for them. The reasons they give donít have to be good just good enough so that can feel like justification exists.

    The whole purpose of reasoning.


    Everything we know about the credibility of lone reasoners suggests that leaders and those in charge everywhere should be held accountable by as many different perspectives as possible.

    The more I think about it the more I feel like our world is governed by confirmation bias. I felt similar before and still am about cognitive dissonance. It's the same thing - just opposite.
    But the feeling about cognitive dissonance was just "ok, I guess it's really hard for humans to change opinions".
    Now the feeling is the whole social structure of the world is based on people confirmation biasing because humans are so stupid that idk how could we ever think that we're intelligent.
    Yeah, it kinda is built on confirmation bias. The thing with everyone communicating and influencing eachother is everyone's opinions get gradually pulled closer together as they "settle around a mean average" and after a while people are just preaching to the choir. You end up with a massive lack of diversity of thought. Imagine a world where everyone is semi-isolated and forced to develop opinions for themselves. Opinions would probably be much less developed and cohesive in most people but there would be much greater variation. Even think about hundreds of years ago when different cultures had massively different attitudes from one another compared to today where everything is getting globalized and everyone is inundated with just a handful of the same cultural perspectives.

    Even if people "fixed" social media to try and stop big tech "personalizing" your feed to only show you things that validate your worldview, the fundamental issue that this level of communication and interaction kills diversity would still remain. It's purely anecdotal, but the opinions younger people possess tend to be more coherent and conforming to a particular ideology rather than the erratic mishmash of random, personal ideas I often seem to get when talking to older people. It's ironic because you'd expect communication to create more ideas, and it definitely has that potential. But I think in practice it just seems to breed conformity as the most marketable ideas rise to the top and consume the others.

    From that point of view, the current state of human thought where you appear to have all thought collapsing into a few ideologies whose borders are becoming increasingly pronounced and distant from one another might have been kind of inevitable.

    That's a wildly anecdotal and whimsical take, and I don't even know whether this is a cohesive reply to what you wrote. I apologize if it isn't ^^.
  48. Forum:General Discussion

    Thread:Song Request

    Thread Author:OzyWho

    Post Author:yzb25

    Replies
    76
    Views
    4,286

    ►►Re: Song Request◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Stealthbomber16 View Post
    If he came to me we could negotiate a starting price. I don't travel for work.
    I don't know if he could come all the way to you... that would require a lot of pelvic force!

    I'll see myself out
  49. Replies
    23
    Views
    932

    ►►Re: Bitcoin is fucking dumb and useless◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by aamirus View Post
    I meant withdraw like walk into the bank and say I want all of this in cash right now. Payments are different because they are also just promises. The store doesn’t actually get your money right away, they are getting a promise from your financial institution that it will give them the money. That’s why on your statement the charges will just show as pending for a couple days before changing to complete
    the more you know. If I may ask a couple more questions:

    So I'm under the impression they (the recipient bank account) is waiting for the paying bank to make good on the promise and actually transfer the money and demonstrate they have it. But if a bank is transferring internally shouldn't they know they have the money anyway? Why should there be any delay when the bank is essentially giving money to itself?

    What would happen if I paid for something and the bank found out after the fact they can't provide the money. Would my purchase be nullified? Would I owe the vendor or would my bank? And what happens if the money changes several hands before it's confirmed it doesn't exist? I guess this is hopefully not something we'd have to worry about, but a bank could fail to make a payment purely because another bank failed to make good on its transfers to the first bank, and it isn't clear to me how the "blame" is apportioned.

    erm sorry for asking you to basically teach me these things. If you could at least recommend somewhere I can learn this I'd appreciate that lol.

    p;edit I probably should have put this in a pm instead my bad
  50. Replies
    9
    Views
    294

    ►►Re: do you guys like spicy pepper◄◄

    I was at a mate's house when he asked me if I want chocolate. After hearing me reply "yes", he takes out this envelope under a pile of files and hands it to me. There's a single chocolate piece in it. I like chocolate, so I put that shit right in my mouth without hesitation. But as I start to chew it's the most bitter shit I've ever tasted. I'm about to ask "bro is this dark?" when suddenly my mouth sets on fucking fire. I dash to the sink and put the tap on max. I need to put as much water in my body as possible. I hear the dude laughing like a psychopath behind me while he tells me the shit had carolina reapers in it, which is supposed to be one of the spiciest peppers in the world or something. He hands me this 2L (3.5 pints) bottle of milk with a glass and in like 1 min I've finished the whole fucking bottle. And I'm a skinny ass guy. My stomach is fucking killing me at this point and I lie on his sofa and curl up there saying nothing for like the next 20 minutes. The water and the milk did jackshit. He's like "sorry dude it only bothered me for 5 mins lmao". Fucking brown people. After an hour I've finally fully recovered. I'm worn out like I just did intensive exercise for 2 hours. But the real battle didn't happen until 6 hours later. Anyway, I think I just needed to get this off my chest.

    yeah fuck spicy peppers
Results 1 to 50 of 2000
Page 1 of 40 1 2 3 4