So this one isn’t necessarily about the poverty and struggle, but it definitely feels like a character in the life of the main protagonist: Blue Ruin

(action/suspense film, but mc lives in a car)

I’m a bit paranoid about neighbors stealing it. I live in a place where most people vote the way I do, but I’m still anxious about people just being assholes, or thinking I look like a conservative (I get it, I kinda do) even though I’m not.

I still mail mine in though, I just try to put it in my mailbox an hour before the carrier is gonna arrive to pick it up. Plus, I am subscribed to an email system that tells me when they get it.

The whole thing is dumb if you accept a premise of “infinite monkeys”. An infinite number of monkeys will type the works of shakespeare immediately, because an infinite number of them will start with the very first key they hit and continue until the end. (So it’ll be complete exactly as fast as a monkey can type it, typing as fast as simianly possible, with no mistakes.) You don’t even need the infinite time.

It only becomes interesting if you look at the finite scenarios.

And BTW, the lifespan of the universe is finite due to the eventual decay of all matter, including the monkeys and the typewriters. There’s no infinite time.

Trump is the market favorite because some rich dipshit was ballot stuffing. Ignore the market betting.

deleted by creator

When I saw what community this article is posted in I almost choked.

Is it? If ChatGPT wrote your paper, why would citations of the work of Frankie Hawkes raise any red flags unless you happened to see this specific tweet? You’d just see ChatGPT filled in some research by someone you hadn’t heard of. Whatever, turn it in. Proofreading anything you turn in is obviously a good idea, but it’s not going to reveal that you fell into a trap here.

If you went so far as to learn who Frankie Hawkes is supposed to be, you’d probably find out he’s irrelevant to this course of study and doesn’t have any citeable works on the subject. But then, if you were doing that work, you aren’t using ChatGPT in the first place. And that goes well beyond “proofreading”.

Well I’m certainly surprised that the WaPo itself produced a story about it. Someone over there has some cajones.

This is exactly what it is. When everything you believe is made up, it’s easy to accidentally make up the wrong number and then believe that instead.

if it’s the latter, just get it in writing.

Maybe, I don’t know enough about him, but I will say this: Nobody fits my definition of “people who work hard” better than Euler.

When someone says “He’s an unbelievable genius,” I now understand that the person speaking is either a con artist or a gullible idiot. Unbelievable geniuses don’t exist, there’s just specialists, people who get lucky, people who work hard. So if you’re saying someone is such a genius, either you have no metric by which to measure genius, or you’re selling something.

“I think Cullen made the Satoshi accusation for marketing. He needed a way to get attention for his film.”

Cullen is absolutely selling something: he’s selling his documentary.

The various denials and deflections from Todd, [Cullen] claims, are part of a grand and layered misdirection.

Smells 100% like bullshit. I had no take on this documentary one way or the other before, but now I’m very skeptical.

I have a very cynical reason. If you look at what most religions say about it (against), you have to wonder why they all agree on it and it seems to me that if you off yourself, you’re not supporting the team. When there weren’t many humans, you really needed a bunch of team players on your religion making more babies, and the dead ones can’t carry out your crusades.

Now we put capital above religion, but it’s the same thing: we need workers for our factories. We need babies to become workers for our factories. Dead people can’t make cars or babies.

deleted by creator

Well, when you get to college, they’ll teach you that writing can have intentional errors, including grammar errors, to achieve a specific effect in the mind of the reader. In your mind, the effect was “I gotta correct this guy on the internet. I won’t bother checking his comment history, I’m just gonna assume he doesn’t know what an adverb is.”

Are you 16 getting an A in English class?

I always feel weird about these, like that dril quote. Shakespeare, Hobbes, Dril, and the people who worked on gargoyles all share the same thing: THEY ARE WRITERS. They know how to write good. They got paid to write good. They built their lives around writing good. These amazing quotes like “face god and walk backwards into hell” don’t happen by accident, they are intentional creations by people who are doing their absolute best to write something memorable, and occasionally succeed.

Interesting. I also had only the vaguest impression of the person pushing the ball, but I definitely caught a glimpse before the ball rolled off the table. Slacks and a blue shirt, that was about it.

Knowledge is knowing the common definition of fruit doesn’t include tomato.

This feels like a case where botanical science should just have picked a different name. If you invalidate everything people think of as a berry and then tell them a dozen things that are clearly not berries are, in fact, berries, you’re just making the word berry meaningless.

Berry means a tiny, usually sweet, fruit-like growth from a plant. The kind that is usually picked in bunches. The kind that you use to make smoothies. That’s a berry.

Botany did us all a disservice by choosing the word “berry” to mean “a specific thing which invalidates everything you think is a berry.” Just call that plant structure something in Latin, ffs.