namark @namark@qoto.org

@mngrif erm... buildings bow before the snowman of infinity
#invertthat

@snow it only takes a second so can't be art... look it's a sword hug, don't you like? In what other universe will sephiroth give sword hugs? In inverted universe impossible things become possible...

@alex_ #invertthat

@snow #invertthat

@realcaseyrollins
You said you were doing it, I figured you knew what you're doing, and wanted to say something nice to you. You should probably stop doing it if you don't like it. There is nuance to the matter of course, it is not as clear cut.
@alex @mewmew

@realcaseyrollins
I have to remain sceptical, but sounds nice, hope it works out.
@alex @mewmew

@alex

These numbers basically say that men are more violent, but how do you conclude that it is because of strength? Especially in society where men are expected and conditioned to be more violent, I think it is obvious that those social norms are a much more likely to be the cause. In many situation strength wouldn't play a role at all. If someone is mentally ready and capable to fight or cause harm, you must be equally ready and capable(mentally) to even attempt to resist them. I'm pretty sure in most domestic violence situation victims simply do not fight back, so physical strength would only matter in the most extreme cases.

If you can agree with that, then there are two possible solution:
1. Stop conditioning men to be more violent.
2. Start conditioning women to be more violent.
Keeping in mind that none of these will prevent domestic violence, they would just make the statistics even, which I figured is your ultimate goal here.

@mewmew @realcaseyrollins

@mngrif #invertthat

@SecondJon Not sure if the article is saying "get a life and have babies" or "I have no life so no babies for me~"...

@freemo cause that's a buzzword you can't quite attach to a train?

"This high speed train has an automatic speed control!"
- uhm... sure... good for you... I mean, what's the big deal it's on tracks anyway right?

"Planes autopilot bla bla bla..."
- uhm... sure... planes are a big deal of course they'll have that... but, I mean, how much stuff is there in the sky to collide with anyway?

"self-driving car"
- Whaaaaa?! Unbelievable! Tell me MOREEE! Can I have oneeeee???

If there was some sort of a "next gen self driving train" project, that presented no actual objective value to the industry right now, you likely never heard of it. "Self-driving car" can survive on the buzz alone until it becomes actually useful or is deprecated.

@mort

It's basically a closure or "context" state, I guess. If you need to call compile() a lot, in many different places with same parameters, you worry about passing 1 parameter around not 2(or N).
Perhaps something like

Compiler.Context ctx = new Compiler.Context(in,out);
Compiler.compile(ctx);

would have been more clear/direct, but it's pretty much just a syntax preference.

Could be more than just preference though, in a specific case, cause the language might give special privileges to a one or the other.

@Matter

@ae #invertthat

@JulianRott #invertthat

@dicktripover #invertthat

@snow @freemo #invertthat

@users #invertthat

@mngrif #invertthat

@ae #invertthat

@freemo #invertthat