Digit
@Digit@lemmy.wtf
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 6 days ago:
how so?
- Comment on PRAISE HIM 1 week ago:
I was thinking of his noodliness
- Comment on Why can't we have a static vintage web? 1 week ago:
Do you know of any browsers that would not render <html>simple site</html>?
I just tested it in brave, dillo, librewolf, links, and it works in each.
I only recently discovered this (that contrary to prior belief and training), even <body> is unnecessary.
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 week ago:
Nope.
But I’d still love to hear what credence is behind your metagaming introduction assertion.
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 week ago:
For the original version, nearer true, since suppression may take time and effort, or none, similarly with violence. Even then, arguing tone seems to always take more time and effort than mere contradiction.
- Comment on Why can't we have a static vintage web? 1 week ago:
At the browser level?
Otherwise,
can haz
<html>simple site</html> - Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 week ago:
You’ve introduced metagaming.
???
I’m not sure you’re aware what’s happening here.
You’ve introduced
This is an attempt at a re-creation of someone else’s extended version. As noted in the text in the image, and in my other post here (which in hindsight (especially after seeing this comment) I think I should have included in the original post, and put my question in the title.)
It’s an interesting thing you’ve created, but it’s not the same kind of thing.
Like I say, I’m not sure you’re aware of what’s happening here.
If you are, then please, by all means, if you have access to the original extended version this is a re-creation of, please share it, so we can compare where I went wrong. (I re-created it as faithfully as I could from memory, after exhausting myself on several attempts to find it again.)
If not, and you thought this extended version is entirely created by me, then let this reply be a correction, refuting that.
Also… re:
metagaming
it’s not the same kind of thing.
I’d like to know more about your thoughts and feelings on this, as it’s not clear to me how you think this is so, and is not apparent to me how the original 2-layer-extended version I’ve copied from memory is doing this.
To my thinking this extended version seems exactly in the same spirit of Paul Graham’s original, adding necessary extension to cover further levels by which some people seek to win arguments by worse means than mere name-calling.
But like I say, I’d love to hear more about your perceptions of this is being in error, and it being “metagaming”, and “not the same kind of thing”. If you can, for those of us to whom that nuanced insight’s not apparent, may you please elaborate on that?
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 week ago:
Wouldn’t that merely be responding to tone?
- Comment on Why can't we have a static vintage web? 1 week ago:
We can.
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 week ago:
Yup, it is problematic when others keep their arguments nearer the bottom. But at least your argument will have been valid. Even if they do attempt childish suppression.
One can even reference Graham’s Hierarchy of Disagreement, and some will still remain on the attack at the bottom. As just happened to me on another thread on lemmy. It harms their credibility, and their cognitive ability.
- Comment on Cause and Effect 1 week ago:
Wow.
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 week ago:
The chart does not cover fallacies like strawman arguments. Perhaps that’s around a corner of the “pyramid”, on a side not shown.
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 week ago:
Could be not even on the chart, or could be suppression.
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 week ago:
Orwellian language of the oppressor. But beyond that, yes.
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 week ago:
Thanks for the thoughtful response.
sometimes there comes a point where all parties realize that there’s just no common ground, or what little there is has been charted. You say one last thing, then it ends.
I suspect (or perhaps am being wishfully optimistic), this may be confirmation bias, and that common ground and progressing dialogue can be rediscovered.
whittled me down to agree after all? That’s where it becomes slightly abusive* imho.
We are each not our arguments, and it serves the dialogue and exploration/search for truth, to rest in this non-attachment. But yes, there’s much risk of misfortune and succumbing to compellingly argued wrongness, failing to find adequate counterargument in a timely manner.
- Comment on Is anyone NOT steaming their Music? 1 week ago:
Hah! I didn’t even notice the missing r, even after seeing the more recent saute joke from someone else. N1
- Comment on Is anyone NOT steaming their Music? 1 week ago:
And I don’t personally see any fucking reason to own a copy of my music.
And reading that was when I stopped moving the cursor to the upvote arrow. ;-)
But that’s fine, so long as when you own nothing, you’re happy. ;-) /s
I see owning a copy of arts as performing part of a duty to the future, increasing the resilience against the book burners and history re-writers.
- Comment on Is anyone NOT steaming their Music? 1 week ago:
I have the music I made on my computer ~ well, technically on my external storage hard drive. And so, I don’t need to stream my music. ;-)
But then, some argue such things as soffmimuhod.bandcamp.com may not even qualify as music.
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 week ago:
Hope better, higher.
Hopefully you can raise it to centrally refuting the point.
Or at least to counterargument, above mere contradiction.
- Comment on Cause and Effect 1 week ago:
Total sidetrack and total missing the point.
I didn’t say “taxes are good” or “current education is good”.
The problem I posed is that knowledge transfer is an essential skill and people who are bad at it are–I would suppose–both oblivious to it and easier to take advantage of.
Edit: TBH your comment is so whacky and on your own terms I didn’t even read to the end section. It’s not even left field, it’s 2 counties over.
Edit 2: Now I read it in full and, bro, that’s a bunch of potentially well meaning conspiratorial retardation. Just no.
You are unfortunately, literally pictured in the OP meme with a veneer of “I’m 14 and this is deep”.
Fun to see such a retort, on same day as I posted a re-creation of the extended version of Graham’s Hierarchy of Disagreement.
Starts with a non-sequitor, follows with an apparent strawman argument refuting an accusation not made, then a “not even wrong”, then arguing tone coupled with a celebration of ignorance and unwitting mischaracterisation, ending on two ad-hominems. XD See? Epistemology’s fun.
- Comment on Cause and Effect 1 week ago:
How do you determine they are “nonsensical conspiracies”?
Could it be media induces in us a belief that we think ourselves “media competent”, such that we begin to presume to know, without scrutiny?
… Certainly used to be my job, when I worked in advertising. Easier to induce in people, than to undo.
Few seem of a Socratic bent, such as “All I know is I know nothing. And sometimes I forget even that much.”, preferring instead the feels of believing themselves smart and wise, not confronting the horror of how readily manipulated they are. … Sorry for my part, doing that to everybody who saw the adverts and corporate branding I made when I was “just doing my job”. Had I stayed in the industry, I dread to think what I’d be doing now with the power at the advertiser’s/marketer’s/propagandist’s disposal, able to cold read smart phone users, 24/7.
I used to do it. And I’m not self deluded enough to think even my level of media awareness is in any way adequate a protection against it.
But having said that… Yes, better media awareness(/“competence”), than “a doctors degree”. Having a doctorate makes sure you were obedient enough to get through the system, and makes you a special influencer target for such manipulations. Always seek another “2nd opinion”.
- Comment on Cause and Effect 1 week ago:
And epistemology to help build the firewall’s list?
“It is the mark of an educated mind, to be able to entertain an idea without necessarily accepting nor rejecting it” --Whoever said that.
- Comment on Cause and Effect 1 week ago:
Wouldn’t a better thing to teach be innovating upon technology and social structure, such that we no longer even need taxes? Nor any other rents designed to keep us down and impoverished. Imagine where we’d be now if not for the suppression of all the emancipatory technologies. All those patents being sat on, or secreted[1]. All those inventors usurped or disappeared. We have so much more headroom.
If education were not so corrupted and riddled with nonsense and slave conditioning, perhaps there’d be fewer rejecting it; fewer throwing the baby out with the bathwater. We can all be polymaths in the making, not slaves in training.
[1: According to patent office whistle blower Tom Valone, (iirc) there were already over 3000 free energy device patents secreted by the year 2000. Seriously. We have so much headroom without the corruption. Even the rich parasites would be better off, with the release and proliferation of the emancipatory technologies. …Buuuuuut, that’s not in most people’s world view to which they’re attached, and so, they tend to go on attack upon encountering mention of such, as if this new information is a threat to their life.]
- Comment on Cause and Effect 1 week ago:
Because there’s no valid nor sound singular-pecking-order, and typically those “smart people” respected as “so smart” are “smart” in other aptitudes than the social aptitude and ruthlessness to so social climb and manipulate to be “in charge”.
I very often say: we can all be polymaths in the making, not slaves in training. If/when we do so proceed that way, we’d catch more of these follies, and seek better protections and implementations and systems, than just leaving it to the most ruthless social climber, the most effective liar, getting in charge.
- Comment on Cause and Effect 1 week ago:
A person is smart. People are dumb.
Well between the anti-vaxxers and any-vaxxers, the any-vaxxers won, by measure of how many took the jabs, believing “follow the science” without detecting an oxymoron.
Beware the power of advertising and ignorance of epistemology.
- Comment on For when arguments go off the bottom of The Debate Pyramid 1 week ago:
I ask, because, I’m not sure if the 2nd from bottom level was called “suppression”, nor am I sure (at all) what was the elaboration in the “violence” layer. … But I hope I’ve at least remained faithful to the spirit of it. Eager to hear any corrections. Or even, if anyone finds the original extended version, that would be great to compare to.
- Submitted 1 week ago to nostupidquestions@lemmy.world | 38 comments
- Comment on AI Coding Is Massively Overhyped, Report Finds 1 week ago:
All the best garbage to learn from, to debug, debug, debug, sharpening those skills.
- Comment on AI Coding Is Massively Overhyped, Report Finds 1 week ago:
Heh. That’s a fun chart. If that’s programming aptitude, I scored 80 on that part of the broad spectrum aptitude test I got a sneak-peek chance to do several parts of. Well now I know why I’m so easily in agreement with “senior coders”, if it is programming aptitude quotient. If it’s just iq, … pulls hood up to block the glare.
Daunting that there may be a middling bias getting apparent advantages. Evolution may not serve us well like that.
- Comment on AI Coding Is Massively Overhyped, Report Finds 1 week ago:
And many between “seniour developers everywhere” and “a layman who never wrote code in his life”.
Like me, I’m saying it too. A big ol “No duh”.
Disbelieve the hype.
