Comments

3

jadedctrl wrote (edited )

There aren't strict bans on out-of-line opinions-- other than, y'know, plain-out bigotry and reprehensible stuff. Though if you go into /f/communism and espouse liberalism, you're going to get a forum ban. I feel like that's kind of implied, why would you even try going there, lol.

Reply to comment by /u/Hyolobrika in I have an idea by /u/Hyolobrika

2

jadedctrl wrote (edited )

Ohhhh, no, that's not it.

It's just that the type of person who is rigid about avoiding fallacies etc. tends to also be the kind of person that's absolutely unbearable and with too much free-time. AKA /r/iamverysmart

Reason is important, yea, but mandating it essentially limits those who can post to the type of person I mentioned before. Stick-up-ass, too much free time. I should know, I definitely used to be that kind of person obsessed with “reason” and “empiricism”. I was total asshole, and so were most of the people in communities that scream about how much they care about those two things.

I don't hate those kinds of people… I just avoid them IRL.

And please stop the armchair psychology, it's about as accurate as palm-reading.

2

jadedctrl wrote

Everyone knows the beginning and end of The Titantic. Doesn't matter if you've seen it or not, just that you know the beginning and the end. If you've seen it, you've forgotten the middle. If you haven't seen it, you don't know the middle anyway. People only know the start and the finish. Everything in the middle is forgotten— literally anything could happen there, and no-one cares. It's all sandwiched between the things people care about: the beginning and the end.

I'm optimistic in that I think everything right now is “soon-to-be-sandwiched.” Either things will go alright, and the horrible bits will be covered up by improvements, or things will go to shit, and the horrible bits will be covered up by the End. I think that's very comforting. :)

2

jadedctrl wrote (edited )

if you're using Torbrowser, you might want to use the client built-into Synapse.
Just take your home-server, then add this to the domain: /_matrix/client/#/

That client is way lighter-weight than Riot, and performs a lot better for me over Tor. It doesn't support some of the fancy bits like stickers, but you probably won't miss anything. :)

For matrix.org, just go to https://matrix.org/_matrix/client/#/

Reply to Why are we here? by /u/ziq

7

jadedctrl wrote

Raddle: Because it's so much better than Reddit and any Reddit clones out there.

Life: I'm here because my mum didn't use protection and didn't believe in abortion.

1

jadedctrl wrote

if you get the sha256 hash of 12 characters or so, like in an IP address (XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX) there are only around 61917364224 (12^10) possible values.
That might seem like a lot, but a computer can create all of these values and then find the sha256 hashes of them quickly, then save them all in a list of hash-to-IP values.

Then, the hashed IPs that would be logged could easily be compared with the list of hash-to-IP values to find actual IP addresses.

Basically, storing a hash of an IP isn't obfuscation at all.

But throwing salt into the mix— making the hash values of the IP addresses less predictable— would make it very hard to calculate all potential addresses, especially if the salt is completely random.

Let's say that IPs would be hashed as "XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX" with a near-random amount of random characters at the end (salt), determined once every 24 hours. Assuming true randomness, something like that would make them incredibly difficult to predict the hash-to-value list of.

7

jadedctrl wrote

What we need is a place moderated to make rationality/quality mandatory. All fallacies and incendiary speech banned.

So basically, a place where only pedantic assholes with massive amounts of free time to write essays for comments can post? That sounds horrible.

3

jadedctrl wrote

The odds of your recording an audio-book dipping into their sales are pretty small— even if they did, it probably wouldn't be noticeable.

You gave a good effort to contact the author, and you're doing this whole thing in good faith. I think you should go ahead and do the audio-book with a clear head. :)

2

jadedctrl wrote (edited )

Ĥmmm… mi ankaŭ ne sukcesis.

Mi konas amikinon, kiu havas grandan librejon en ŝia domo, enhavata de centoj da Esperantaj libroj el la 19a jarcento (inkluzive iom da historiaj ϗ raraj libroj).
Kiam mi sekvtempe rekontos ŝin, mi pridemandos ĉi tiun libron!

REDAKTO: Unutage, mi volus skani ŝiajn havantajn librojn kiujn ne havas kopioj sur la reto. Ankaŭ, eble mi demandos pri tiu ideo. `o`

1

jadedctrl wrote (edited )

I don't aim for a perfect, utopian society-- but I want a significantly better society.
Even an anarchist, communist society wouldn´t be Utopian: there´d still be pain, conflict, and violence (just not nearly as much).

2

jadedctrl wrote (edited )

"Legally they are unable to consent (and I suppose there's a good reason for that), but not ‘completely’ unable." -F3nd0

Yea. They can't consent, but it's not like the capacity is completely non-existent. It's not sufficient, though.

Do I really need to explain how fucked up this is?

Come on. He literally just said that it varies— it can be somewhat damaging, horribly damaging, or anything in between. That's a given for anything, there's always variability no matter how horrific something is.

but they left the conversation and never came back to it to apologies and show that they have learn which lead me to believe they still think the same which make them transphobic.

They put mostly positive spins on sentences that technically could be interpreted as transphobic or trans-friendly, and then stubbornly defended them the whole thread. They're very stubborn, but that doesn't make them transphobic.