papasquat's recent activity
-
Comment on Elon Musk net worth estimated at $1.1 trillion in ~finance
-
Comment on Singer Oliver Tree dead at 32 following tragic helicopter crash in ~music
papasquat LinkI wasn't a big fan, but it's incredibly tragic that someone basically at the peak of their career, at essentially the beginning of their life doesn't actually get to enjoy any of their success. As...I wasn't a big fan, but it's incredibly tragic that someone basically at the peak of their career, at essentially the beginning of their life doesn't actually get to enjoy any of their success.
As a side note, it seems like this happens far too often with celebrities. I wonder if anyone has compared the death rate of celebrities in aircraft versus the general population. Air travel is by far the most safest way to travel for most people, but celebrities seem to die that way all the time.
-
Comment on Not alive, but not dead: disembodied human brains used for drug testing in ~science
papasquat Link ParentI've never done one myself, but that's the goal with a sensory deprivation tank. You get sealed in a dark, silent room, suspended in room temperature water. There's no visual, auditory, olfactory,...I've never done one myself, but that's the goal with a sensory deprivation tank. You get sealed in a dark, silent room, suspended in room temperature water. There's no visual, auditory, olfactory, gustatory, or tactile input at all (or at least as close to as feasible). There are minor sensory inputs like the vestibular system, but you're motionless, so nothing is really being stimulated much.
From what I've heard, people do hallucinate and go into a somewhat altered, meditative state, but they're still conscious. They also have to be willing to enter that altered state. At any moment, they can choose to "snap out of it" and become fully aware and conscious, which I imagine someone forcefully put into that situation would try to do, like trying constantly to wake up from an endless black void of a dream but always failing, without any feedback as to why.
-
Comment on Not alive, but not dead: disembodied human brains used for drug testing in ~science
papasquat Link ParentWell, I think it comes down to the reasons why murder is scarier to most people than dying of natural causes. If you're suffering because of some natural law of the universe, that's something it...Well, I think it comes down to the reasons why murder is scarier to most people than dying of natural causes. If you're suffering because of some natural law of the universe, that's something it sucks, but its no one's fault, it's just a constraint of the world.
When someone causes your suffering though, there's the knowledge that it didn't actually have to happen, they could have made a different decision, but chose not to.
Like, falling off a cliff to my death would suck. I'd rather have that than be pushed off a cliff to my death though.
-
Comment on Not alive, but not dead: disembodied human brains used for drug testing in ~science
papasquat LinkAnother day, another torment nexus. This might be the most horrific scenario to ever be imagined by humankind. If this happened to me, and I was in any way conscious, it would be the most...Another day, another torment nexus.
This might be the most horrific scenario to ever be imagined by humankind. If this happened to me, and I was in any way conscious, it would be the most absolutely horrific thing I can possibly imagine happening to me, physically. I'd literally rather be in a Nazi death camp.
With that being your risk, I don't see how any of this could ever be made ethical in any way.
Alzheimer's is horrific, but at least it's a natural phenomenon.
Knowing that human being decided to keep you alive with the risk, however small, of remaining conscious, and cutting off all of your sensory function or connection with the real world to bathe you in experimental drugs repeatedly before killing you to study your response would be the worse kind of torture I can personally even imagine.
-
Comment on What's a game you're dying to play that doesn't exist? in ~games
papasquat Link ParentI've looked at it. It seems really it interesting, but I haven't given it a try because I've heard there's not much in the way of content. If I'm going to rope a bunch of my friends into buying a...I've looked at it. It seems really it interesting, but I haven't given it a try because I've heard there's not much in the way of content. If I'm going to rope a bunch of my friends into buying a game, I'd want something that'll keep them engaged for at least 20 or 30 hours.
I believe there was another similar game that was supposed to be released soon, but I forgot the name.
-
Comment on What's a game you're dying to play that doesn't exist? in ~games
papasquat LinkMy all time absolute favorite psuedo genre of game is something I'd maybe call... "Co-op journey games". Games where the objective is to get from one place to another over a long journey with your...My all time absolute favorite psuedo genre of game is something I'd maybe call... "Co-op journey games". Games where the objective is to get from one place to another over a long journey with your friends. Usually centered around some vehicle or vehicles.
Barotrauma is the one I've been playing lately, but RV There Yet, The Raft and so on fit into the genre nicely also.
I've always wanted one of those games, centered on an air ship. The key is that you must make a reason for the players to stop frequently. Interesting caves to explore, resources to upgrade the airship, fuel to power it, materials to craft ammunition for it. The airship becomes a base, but also close air support if you get into a sticky situation.
Upgrades and customization are the main source of the feeling of progression, and there are ideally lots of procedurally generated missions, but also hand crafted story missions that tell some sort of overall interesting story. Something like the fallout universe would be a great setting; huge overarching meta story, but also lots of interesting little pockets of societies and cultures within it.
I've dreamed of a game like that for years, but haven't seen anything that scratches the itch.
-
Comment on "Teachers are going to hate it": How social media apps hooked teens at school in ~tech
papasquat Link ParentI think they're saying that you'd suspend section 230 protections for companies that "meddle" in their feed by choosing to show certain content to certain users. It makes sense, because by...I think they're saying that you'd suspend section 230 protections for companies that "meddle" in their feed by choosing to show certain content to certain users.
It makes sense, because by exercising editorial control, you're acting in a greater capacity than just a simple service provider.
-
Comment on "Teachers are going to hate it": How social media apps hooked teens at school in ~tech
papasquat Link ParentI've heard people say that a lot, and while I disagree with the kind of data collection that would be needed to actually implement this stuff, I don't doubt it would work. I think the argument may...Prohibiting teens to do something is never, ever going to work. While the intent may be good, these kinds of laws are utterly useless, and won't solve anything.
I've heard people say that a lot, and while I disagree with the kind of data collection that would be needed to actually implement this stuff, I don't doubt it would work.
I think the argument may boil down to different definitions of "work". Like, will it eliminate all kids on social media 100% of the time? No, definitely not. I think putting technical controls in place would definitely reduce the number of kids on social media though.
Lots of kids would install VPNs or use fake IDs or whatever, but not all of them would, because it's a pain to do. There'd be some level of reduction in social media access. How much? No clue.
-
Comment on Kings of the losers in ~life
papasquat LinkOne of the annoying things about the mainstream response to incels is the knee-jeek reaction to refute everything they believe in with the exact opposite point of view. I think "black pill" and...One of the annoying things about the mainstream response to incels is the knee-jeek reaction to refute everything they believe in with the exact opposite point of view.
I think "black pill" and incel logic came as a reactionary view towards the sort of feel good, soft nonsense advice and messages that people give to each other during their formative years.
Namely, I'm talking about things like "just be yourself", and "it's what's inside that counts" or "don't worry, you'll find your soul mate".
If someone is unattractive to women and spends all of their time watching anime, no, just being themselves will not find them a girlfriend. Yes, what's inside counts, but what's outside counts too. Physical attraction is almost always the basis of romantic relationships. And soul mates aren't real, but even if they were, some people will obviously never find them.
These are uncomfortable truths, but they are truths. Telling kids feel good nonsense about how relationships work makes them feel completely betrayed when they find out how the real world works.
That doesn't validate the black pill ideology, but it does mean that there's a pinch of truth there.
If one wants to find a romantic partner, the best thing to do is to make yourself as physically and mentally attractive as you can, within reason, change your hobbies to things that puts you around the opposite sex often, and actively look to date.
"Just be yourself" is nonsense advice, that doesn't mean anything. It makes sense to tell someone if they're just lying to people about their achievements and their personality, but don't tell a nerd that spends all day playing video games that. Being themselves hasn't gotten them what they want.
Where incels get it wrong is that they think that women don't face similar struggles as they do. Sure, if all things were equal, and your average woman wanted to have no strings attached, one night stands, they'd prefer to do it with the tall guy with chiseled abs and a perfect jawline, just like the incel boy would prefer to do it with the supermodel with perfect skin and huge boobs. The average woman and man aren't sleeping with or dating people like that though.
Most men and women want to be in relationships with people similar to them who they're attracted to, that's it.
If your only goal in life is to have sex with the most, hottest women you possibly can, then yeah, you should probably strive to be as tall as possible, as muscular as possible, with perfect teeth and hair and with a cool, active lifestyle. If that's your goal though, you should probably take a step back and examine why though. It wouldn't be a very fulfilling life.
-
Comment on Has anyone else seen a LOT of dead birds on the side of the road this year? in ~enviro
papasquat Link ParentTo be fair, you are asking an extremely local question. It's very unlikely that there's some global event going on that would cause birds to die at a rate so much more dramatically that you'd...To be fair, you are asking an extremely local question. It's very unlikely that there's some global event going on that would cause birds to die at a rate so much more dramatically that you'd notice it this year.
It's definitely possible that there's something environmental going on near where you live, like pollution, or altered migration patterns, or disease, but for something to affect all of the worlds birds so much that people across the world notice, it would have other, way more catastrophic symptoms that people would also notice
-
Comment on Do we want to stop all crime? in ~society
papasquat Link ParentMore severe punishments might not deter crime directly, but I don't think it's possible that punishment itself doesn't deter crime at all. Also, incarceration isn't the only punishment for crimes....More severe punishments might not deter crime directly, but I don't think it's possible that punishment itself doesn't deter crime at all. Also, incarceration isn't the only punishment for crimes. Fines, community service, and probation are all punishments too. I mean, even the process of actually being arrested is a punishment, because it's hugely disruptive to your life and embarrassing.
Like if Walmart had a policy where you shouldn't steal, and stealing was illegal, but if they found out you were stealing, they couldn't actually do anything about it, why would anyone pay for anything at Walmart again, other than feeling that they should? I'll grant that some amount of people would continue to pay for things just because it feels morally wrong not to, but would most people?
I can say from firsthand experience working as a waiter who primarily lived on tips, if there's no punishment for not paying for something, a lot of people just won't. On a given shift where I had maybe 30 tables, I'd say 5 or so of them would stiff me. I think that's a pretty close comparison.
-
Comment on Tildes Survey #8: What is your favorite video game? (Results) in ~talk
papasquat LinkIt's gotta be Homeworld for me. I'm not even a massive RTS guy. The most RTS gaming I ever did was a bit of laddering on StarCraft 2 when it came out for about six months. I don't mind the genre,...It's gotta be Homeworld for me. I'm not even a massive RTS guy. The most RTS gaming I ever did was a bit of laddering on StarCraft 2 when it came out for about six months.
I don't mind the genre, but 1v1 is some of the most stressful gameplay in the world for me, and I'm really quite bad at multitasking, so it's not something I'm particularly great at.
Particularly, RTS campaigns really tend to bore me. Their stories are usually just "you're a commander fighting this war", and the levels feel mostly contrived and handicapped for no reason (oh, you know that huge army you built on the last mission? Yeah, it's gone. You're now one guy and a few other disposable guys trying to infiltrate a base for some reason.)
Homeworld managed to convey one of the most emotional, powerful stories in a game I've ever played, and it did it without showing a single human face.
For those that don't know, the game is about a fledgling race taking their first steps from a desert world, who slowly realize that they're not actually native to that world, and find evidence of where their actual origin is. The issue is that it's across the galaxy. Luckily they also find an ancient hyperdrive, so they jumpstart their entire world economy over decades to launch the greatest expedition they've ever attempted, sending 200,000 people to find their Homeworld. Diaster ensues en route, and the success of their expedition becomes much more important.
One of the great things about the game that I wish more RTS campaigns did, is that you play as a ragtag fleet. There's no "high command", there's no backup, there's no other theaters of this war. It's just your fleet, your journey, and what you can build, salvage and research on the way.
Importantly, that means that the army you finished one mission with is the army you start the next mission with. This can massively throw off the balance of the game. If you're obsessive and salvage enemy ships and strip mine the whole level, you'll have a huge fleet that snowballs into huger fleets. The enemy fleets adapt to that, but it still makes the game easy, which I actually appreciate, because it makes it feel like the choices you make matter.
The gameplay is so satisfying, the score is so emotionally powerful, the voice acting conveys so much in a clipped, military manner.
I love the game so much, and still play through the campaign every few years. It may be the only game that ever made me cry.
-
Comment on Do we want to stop all crime? in ~society
papasquat Link ParentKind of a fallacy there, isn't it? Punishment doesn't have to stop all crime for it to be effective. It just has to stop some of it. Haven't really done any research about it, but the fact that...Kind of a fallacy there, isn't it? Punishment doesn't have to stop all crime for it to be effective. It just has to stop some of it. Haven't really done any research about it, but the fact that you might go to jail seems like it would at least deter some amount of people from walking out of best buy with a new phone they didn't pay for.
-
Comment on Have you tried Pewdiepies' self-hosted AI workspace, Odysseus? in ~tech
papasquat Link ParentI agree with you, but to me, that's an argument against using vibe coded software at all, not just against using vibe coded software that you personally created. When I say vibe coding, what I...I agree with you, but to me, that's an argument against using vibe coded software at all, not just against using vibe coded software that you personally created.
When I say vibe coding, what I mean is code that the human "producing it" doesn't understand. I fully see the value and use case for AI code assistants. I even see the value in vibe coding small one off applications. What I don't see the value in is paying for, or even using for free, someone else's vibe coded output.
-
Comment on Have you tried Pewdiepies' self-hosted AI workspace, Odysseus? in ~tech
papasquat LinkMy take on these vibe coded AI tools is that maybe they're useful to some people, but honestly if I had a real need for something like this, I'd just vibe-code it myself. If we're at the point...My take on these vibe coded AI tools is that maybe they're useful to some people, but honestly if I had a real need for something like this, I'd just vibe-code it myself. If we're at the point where YouTubers without actual technical backgrounds are releasing open source AI tools, the barrier to entry is so low that theres really no reason not to just do it yourself.
It's part of what I don't think people grasp about the big picture implications of all of these ai tools and startups built around them. If the entire prospect is that LLMs are good enough that you don't ever have to think about code again, why would you ever engage with some 3rd party tool or product. Code is fundementally worthless at that point, and paying for, or even downloading for free someone else's AI generated code makes as much sense as paying someone to transcribe your messages, or perform Google searches on your behalf.
-
Comment on My partner says our relationship has always felt suffocating, but she does not know what she wants. What would you do? in ~life
papasquat LinkMy take is that long term relationships are hard. They require constant work, because two people inevitably change and grow, and learning how to incorporate those changes into your dynamic is...My take is that long term relationships are hard. They require constant work, because two people inevitably change and grow, and learning how to incorporate those changes into your dynamic is difficult and takes active effort. However, they generally shouldn't start out hard. The reason long term relationships work out is that you have a strong base to build on. When you first meet a partner, ideally, it's not difficult at all. Being apart from them is difficult, but you're compatible enough, and infatuated enough that when you're together, there's no problems at all. In most good relationships I've been in, this phase lasts 6-12 months minimum. After that, you start fully understanding each other on a more realistic basis, and you need to start actually working to accommodate one another, but beforehand, none of that really comes into play.
To me, it sounds like you never really had that strong base. You liked each other, but you were never really fully compatible. It seems like it would be extremely difficult to have anything work out long term without that foundation existing.
It sounds like you know that you need to move on for both of your sakes. Life's too short to be stressed out about your relationship all the time if you're not actually getting anything out of it. Go be single. Being single is awesome. Enjoy the feeling of being able to do whatever you want whenever you want with your free time without having to worry about someone else, and let her find the same joy.
-
Comment on The big little penis panic in ~life.men
papasquat Link ParentI think that would be pretty solid advice with some more nuance, and it's advice that women often get. "Men should stop being assholes" isn't advice, because its not actionable by the person...I think that would be pretty solid advice with some more nuance, and it's advice that women often get.
"Men should stop being assholes" isn't advice, because its not actionable by the person receiving it. The only actual, useful advice in any situation, are suggestions of what you can do differently.
-
Comment on Do we want to stop all crime? in ~society
papasquat Link ParentI think it actually is quite applicable to the real world, even though the scenario itself is obviously unrealistic and impossible. The thought that led me down the road of pondering this in the...I think it actually is quite applicable to the real world, even though the scenario itself is obviously unrealistic and impossible. The thought that led me down the road of pondering this in the first place are proposals in my city for instituting some new surveillance technology (flock cameras, and some drone as first responder stuff).
A lot of the arguments against those technologies focus on all the harm they cause if they're misused, or exploited. But it made me think that even if they weren't, would they still even be desirable? Would we even want a perfect version of them?
Usually when there's a proposal for something, opposition is focused on the negative side effects that maybe haven't been considered. The noise a new train line makes, or the crime that a casino being built would bring. The benefits that the people who are bringing the proposal are touting are usually universally good things, and if the idea was perfect, everyone would support them. It's the implimentation that's the problem. I was wondering this is truly the case with police surveillance technology though.
I saw this in my city a few years ago as a microcosm. They put red light cameras at a lot of stop lights. In theory, it's a good idea. It just mails you a ticket when you run a red light. They're pretty accurate, they have a recording of the incident so it can be reviewed and appealed if there's a problem. Everyone, including myself, hated them. They were deactivated after a few years. Why? I don't really know. If I'm honest with myself, I want to be able to run red lights sometimes I guess, and I want other people to be able to run them too sometimes? I don't know, it's a weird idea, but in that case, I want crime to be possible on some level.
It made me think about the idea more broadly, because if most people truly do want a little bit of crime, isn't there a good chance we may be over investing in law enforcement? Or at least, investing incorrectly?
I never see this argument being made, most probably because it would be political suicide, but maybe also because it's not something a lot of people considered.
-
Comment on The big little penis panic in ~life.men
papasquat Link ParentYou are a man, so I assume that's why she gave advice that puts the responsibility on the man in this scenario. You don't have control over what other people do, you only have control over how you...You are a man, so I assume that's why she gave advice that puts the responsibility on the man in this scenario.
You don't have control over what other people do, you only have control over how you react. Because of that, advice is always going to put responsibility on the person that's being advised. It doesn't make sense for someone to say "this is what those women should do", because those women aren't reading the post.
Elon Musk has made me think about leadership as a concept a lot lately.
He's one of the most controversial business leaders of the past 50 years, with lots of people canonizing him as a radical, innovative genius, and a lot of others categorizing him as a lucky, delusional nepo baby without much talent.
It's made me think about the idea of whether the leader of an organization is responsible for its success, and compare it to leadership experiences in my own life.
I think the common conception of leadership is a little flawed. We tend to ascribe all of an organization's successes and all of its failures to its leader. There's some truth to that, but I don't feel like its all of the truth.
It is true, in almost every situation, that the leader of an organization has more influence on that organization than any single other person. I don't agree however, that they have more influence than all of the other people in the organization.
I've seen great leaders fail because of terrible organizations, and terrible leaders succeed because of great organizations.
I've been both that terrible and great leader myself I think.
A lot has been said about Elon main strength being his hype generation/reality distortion bubble a la Steve Jobs, and I agree that much of his success is owed to that. The discussion around that ability focuses on the demand side though; he drums up excitement by investors and consumers by talking about incredible, moonshot sci Fi ideas, and despite always coming up short and not being able to deliver on them, he manages to continue to sell these ideas. He doesn't just sell it to people buying his products and shares of his companies though. He also sells it to prospective employees.
I actually interviewed for SpaceX a few years ago for a technical role relating to Starlink. I was working at a large bank, making pretty decent money, fully remote, but I wanted to move on because it was getting pretty stagnant. There was at least four rounds of interviews, and a take home assignment that was pretty in depth architecture work. It took me about 8 hours, and I was quite confident in the solution; I'd been doing network architecture for years, and what they were asking was complex, but nothing too daunting for me.
They told me that 1. They didn't like my solution 2. They would not be telling me why they didn't like it, and 3. Baffingly, they wanted to continue to interview me.
The next round would have been an in person, 3 day long interview in LA.
Between that, the fact that when I asked about Elon (this was right at the beginning of his "dark maga" stuff), they deified the guy, and the fact that they were actually offering less than I was making at the time for a 100% in person job, in LA, I told them to forget it.
It made me think though, there probably are quite a few people with a similar skill level as me that are willing to do that job for the chance to say they work with rockets at SpaceX. It's kind of a nerds dream job.
It's not surprising that Elon has been able to use this strategy to underpay for world class talent, just like he's able to overcharge for subpar products. It's a massive leg up when it comes to building a successful company.
If Elon's only real skills are this marketing ability (and they very well may be), it still means he has a company run by some of the best people in the world who he doesn't have to pay that much. It's hard to fail when you have that foundation. His leadership ability, vision, strategy, or whatever else a CEO is supposed to have doesn't really matter. His strong talent base will continually save him.