bath towels: weekly

bedding: every 2 or 3 weeks, depending on the season

Olives

Training good models requires lots of training data and computational resources, so the only ones who can afford to train them are big corporations with access to both. And the only objective they have is to increase their profit.

Donating blood plasma is good as it helps people in need. Sure, it sucks that there is a company in the middle making a profit, but not donating is not the solution to that problem, as it hurts the people in need more than the corporation in the middle.

I think its kinda similar to the tipping situation. Yes it sucks that restaurants don’t pay their employees properly and that you have to tip to support the employees. But not tipping hurts the employees rather than the restaurant owner.

In both cases, if we want change, we need to change the legislation.

1.4% (I live in Germany)

Departing Scene in my ass

It sure is easy to portray your country as successful, clean and beautiful if you don’t allow any free press to contradict you.

42 is from the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, 69 is a sex position, 420 refers to weed

It’s not like I hate other operating systems, I just really like the idea of FOSS and try to use it whenever possible.

Humans have other senses besides sight you know? Taste, touch, smell and sound are all heavily involved in sex. And if you can sense them, you can imagine them. Do you need to see your partner to get aroused?

(Also, a majority of blind people have not always been blind, so I imagine many of them still also imagine what someone looks like)

No, I just have very different ideas what progress is.

Progress in my eyes is made when a society becomes more democratic, and when we solve conflicts without bloodshed.

In that sense, sure, the GDR was a step in the right direction, but nazi germany didn’t exactly set the bar very high.

The idea of socialism is nice, but you hardly have any progress if the system (be it built on free markets or planned economies) doesn’t work to improve ordinary citizens’ lives, but only to keep the powerful in power.

Personaly, I don’t care much about free markets or planned economies. I think the best approach, as so often, is a kind of blend, a social market economy that allows independent companies in a framework that protects workers, consumers and the environment.

Thing is, the specifics of the economic system aren’t important. What matters is that the people are the ones who decide them.

There is nothing wrong with pursuing a utopian society, but ultimatly you have no control over what happens in the far future (neither should you, future societies need to be ruled by future people).

The only thing you can control is the present and the near future, so what really matters aren’t the ends you strive for, but the means you employ while doing so.

Ah yes, my grandparents, the landlords. Wait hol’ up, they were working people, not landlords. GDR fucked them regardless.

“bUt tHAT wASn’T rEaL ComMunIsM” If neither the USSR nor China could achieve true Communism, then maybe it isn’t so much a realistic goal as a utopian ideal, a convenient justification for all kinds of crimes against humanity that occur in its pursuit.

I compared these numbers to the general population (Source: https://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/ )

Support for the far right AfD is about 5 percentage points lower than among the general population (12% vs 17%)

For the conservative CDU/CSU it is 10 pp lower (20% vs 30%)

For the Social Democrats it is 3 pp lower (12% vs 15%)

For the liberal FDP it is 4 pp higher (8% vs 4%)

For the Greens it is about 4 pp higher (18% vs 14%)

For the Wagenknecht alliance, a weird mix of far right and far left, it is about the same (5%)

Unfortunately this article doesn’t mention the socialist left, which for the general population sits at around 3%

So, to conclude (and from my own experience) youths in Germany don’t deviate that much from the general population in terms of their political views. They tend to be less conservative and xenophobic. Most of them are somewhere in the center, having slightly more liberal tendencies than the general population.

If this surprises you, you never had to worry about how you are going to pay next month’s rent

The title says “There’s more people who wake up at the same second than people who fall asleep at the same second”. One could (and most people seem to) interpret this as “the maximum amount of people waking up at any given second is higher than the maximum amount of people falling asleep at any given second”, which is a statement I agree with. I interpreted it as “The amount of people waking up at any given time is higher than the amount of people falling asleep at the same time”, which is of course false.

It seems we just weren’t talking about the same thing. You were talking about the maximum values of both distributions, for which the statement is true, while I only considered the distributions’ median and mean values, for which the statement isn’t true.

I disagree that the post makes clear OP is referring to the max values, but I guess that’s because english is not my first language, and my statistics background likely made me over analyze the statement.

Of course there are moments where more people awake at the same time than fall asleep at the same time. In the second 07:00:00 , yeah, more people awake than fall asleep. The same isn’t true for 22:13:35. And if you look at all seconds of the day you will find that on average, each second the amount of people that fall asleep is roughly equal to the amount of people waking up.

What you are talking about is variance. There is a higher variance in the times of people falling asleep than there is in the times of people waking up. That does not mean that “more people wake up at the same time than fall asleep”. There are times of the day when significantly more people wake up than fall asleep, but as a counterweight, on prettey much all other times, the amount of people falling asleep is slightly higher than the amount of people waking up.

So actually, it’s the reverse. Given that most people wake up to alarm clocks, if you pick a random time of the day, it is likely that in that second more people fall asleep than wake up

I don’t see why that would be true. People generally fall asleep about as often as they wake up, so the number of people who fall asleep at the same time and the number of people who wake up at the same time, averaged over all moments of a day, should be pretty much equal.

Of all the shit Ubisoft does, not selling on steam is the dealbreaker? Alright.

He doesn’t mention protest votes though, only not voting out of protest, which is something entirely different imo. Not voting can be interpreted as satisfaction with the status quo, while a protest vote is the opposite, a clear statement of rejection of all available choices. Not voting is quiet approval, a protest vote an active display of discontent.

Also, I disagree that a vote for a third party is a protest vote. I usually vote for a fringe party, but I’m not doing so to protest the system or ruling parties, but simply because I think they are the best candidates.

Finally I don’t agree with the idea that I am throwing away my vote by voting for an unpopular candidate. If anything, I am doing the opposite, I am making my will known. The people who decide that this vote has no worth are the ones throwing away my vote and they are the ones undermining democracy.

The people doing the reforming would need to be the people with the power to change the system in those ways. I’m not familiar enough with the system in the US to know whether that is the president, the supreme court, congress, or some other entity, but someone has the power to do that I’m quite certain.

To get them to do this, the people would need to pressure them into it, be it with their vote, petitions, demonstrations, social media posts or whatnot. There are many ways to achieve change, but it won’t happen as long as people just keep voting for the lesser evil, because “eh, what can you do”