I identify myself as a homosexual.

I’ve heard homo being used in a derogatory way as an insult. That usage should not be tolerated.

Retarded is just a medical term, yet you can use it as an insult as well.

That is what this “specification of conditional” aims at. It’s fine to use the word in a descriptive way, you’re just not allowed to go around angrily calling people “fucking zionist”

From the link of this post that you could have clicked on:

Twitch specifies this is conditional: you’re allowed to discuss the political movement of that name, but not “attack or demean another individual or group of people on the basis of their background or religious belief.”

If you had looked at the link of this post, you would have read:

Twitch specifies this is conditional: you’re allowed to discuss the political movement of that name, but not “attack or demean another individual or group of people on the basis of their background or religious belief.”

I.e. nothing is masqueraded here as long as they keep to this. This seems to be a reasonable policy. I’ve seen a couple of instances of people being derogatorily called zionists just for supporting the people of current Israel not being pushed away out of their now decades-old homes, which is hard to still call Zionist if they don’t support any further expansion and any offensive military action.

There’s almost never anything gained to use “Zionist” on someone as if saying “asshole”.

What is “better in general”? I don’t particularly mind the human species going extinct, it’s unlikely there’ll be no life left over. No one knows the nature of the universe.

In any case, it’s incredibly unlikely we’ll go extinct anytime soon. Maybe climate change etc causes extreme loss of life, but humans are so adaptive, some will surely survive.

No one can even define “enlightenment” either. Maybe we already are, maybe such a thing doesn’t exist. Currently, it’s just a story element.

With this answer I would also change my answer. It seems to me simply that you have found “love on first sight”. For some reason this guy’s looks, smell, mannerisms, movements, whatever are all fitting together to make him extremely attractive to you. Seems like not your usual type but as you said, definitely attractive.

I’m not exactly sure why you cry xD but it could be because you’re feeling regret to not having approached him? Or it could be that you wish some of these other men were “like him” because you would like to be with them, but unfortunately they didn’t have that same spark with you?

I love you, you understand me. I completely agree with everything you wrote. Of course there aren’t only 2 types in total. I just thought what you wrote sounded like these 2 types.

And the answer to mine and the downvotes are exactly what I’m talking about, they are the social conditioning speaking. My views have to be dismissed without looking at what I’m actually saying, because it goes against this conditioning. No one is actually talking about your problem/issue/question anymore.

Luckily I don’t care about downvotes/disagreement. If someone is clearly not even reading past the first sentence I don’t need to spend my energy engaging with them more, trying to work against their offendedness.

Did you really just not even finish the first paragraph after reading the first sentence?.. The second sentence is literally “Obviously best combined in one person”

Are you biologically female and cis? You guys have attraction for 2 types of guys, the long term, dependable type, and the physically attractive “stud” kind of guy. Obviously best combined in one person, I’m just talking about types of attraction.

But of course it’s hard to be such a “perfect specimen” and combine both types in one. Most men lean/optimize more the one direction than the other.

Now it’s quite obvious which type society conditions you to want - the long term kind of guy. You’re also getting a lot of “slut shaming” or puritan sex shaming type of conditioning from society which pushes you away from the physically attractive, dominant, “stud” type of guy.

But both attractions are still very real, you’re just being pushed in one direction and away from the other.

So for me it seems like you are in conflict with your natural attraction you have and the way society conditions you to behave. This conditioning is very strong, so that you consider giving in to your sexual desires impossible. As such, you feel a real sense of loss - you lose the opportunity to follow your desires, you “lose” this person you desire - and a feeling of loss makes you sad, so you cry.

I was on keto for a while and always the main target for mosquitoes among all my friends.

But what classes as excessive?

That’s a good question, one that I have not defined for myself perfectly.

I think part of it is the nature of the transaction. When you sell something off your Etsy shop, you create a thing, you sell the thing, you can’t sell the thing again. A shop like Steam continuously takes money from you for the exact same service. Of course it takes money to run the servers and any other running costs, and I’m not saying those shouldn’t be covered. But theoretically, if they have set their automated systems well, Steam runs by itself without intervention from anyone. Whoever owns Steam basically makes money on their sleep. They created it once and it continually makes money for them.

When a game sells well, this game will be downloaded more often, so the relative load/usage of the Steam servers increases. So it is fair to take more money from games that sell better, so tying it to “amount of games sold” makes sense. But does the load on the Steam servers really change if a game is sold for 50€ or 10€? No, what really matters is the size of the game, the amount of updates the developers push and so on. So tying the costs to sale price is also not necessarily fair.

Apart from that, it’s hard to define something as “excessive” without comparing it to other things. As I mentioned once, I don’t think a teacher is doing a less valuable job than a CEO of some big company. Most jobs are benefitting others/society in some way, so I actually value most jobs roughly the same. In conclusion, I would define as “excessive” anything that is a large deviation from mean income, completely arbitrarily I might say if your income is more than double the mean, it would be excessive.

All profit is excessive by nature, isn’t it?

I don’t necessarily think so. People die, so their accumulated wealth disappears or is transferred to someone else. Human beings are made to acquire more resources. But death is a natural endpoint to this process. There is probably an equilibrium point of profit that is sustainable with a certain population.

If they laugh at your failures, they don’t deserve your unending love. While you may consider them your friend, they don’t consider you their friend. Friends don’t do that shit. Do you really want to love someone dearly that doesn’t even consider you their friend?

Just wait until this extends to “work” as well!

Seriously though, nothing is “worth” doing. Eventually we’ll have the heat death of the universe. Or our sun will die and we haven’t figured out interstellar travel. Or climate change will destroy everything. Or you’ll just simply die.

Once you accept that nothing is worth doing though, is when you can stop worrying if something is worth doing and just do it. Like you could either do nothing and end it now or do something. Usually, your natural biological will to live won’t let you do nothing and end it, so you might as well do something.

I’m sorry, but distinguishing between different concepts is forbidden here. You go straight to jail.

Uuuuh byyy… Republicans not voting anymore?

I guess that makes more sense now that I see an example. I just can’t fathom how any Apple artist thought they made a “grinning face with smiling eyes” when they looked at that image. It’s “grimacing face with smiling eyes” very obviously. I thought all representations were like the others in this example - they all look like a “grinning face with smiling eyes”. They look different but it doesn’t matter.

I still think though that if there weren’t obvious mistakes like this, it doesn’t matter how the “grinning face with smiling eyes” exactly looks, or any other emoji for that matter.

Then program some inconsistency into the aimbot. it’ll still win against everyone most of the time, still being a problem.

Manual review is always possible, but this requires a lot of people. And if someone really looks at the best players, they seem like an aimbot all the time.

Client-side scanning forces hackers to run the input through hardware, which increases the level of entry and investment necessary to start cheating. Of course everything is always avoidable, but it’s about reducing the amount of cheaters by detecting the lazy/stupid people. If you just don’t client-side scan at all, there will be a lot lot lot more cheaters. It’s about reducing the volume so much that the amount is not that bad anymore and can better be dealt with manually.

It’s about forcing cheat developers to spend time/money finding new ways to hide, reducing the value of trying to create cheats.

Of course there are privacy and security concerns. But client side detection in a limited manner does make sense.

What exactly does it matter to be stuck with old emojis? Why is it important for them to be perfectly uniform?

It does matter though. If you program the aimbot to act as if they were the best human, the aimbot is still going to beat everyone else, same as if it was behaving unrealistically superhuman. But you can’t simply ban the best human from your game.

There’s so many amazing games on Linux that you’ll never have the time to play all of them in your lifetime. So I’m not sure how this is bad news, just means less choice paralysis?

How do you suppose to block an aimbot on the server side?