• 61 Posts
  • 164 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 18th, 2024

help-circle










  • Yeah. Probably my least favorite brand of it is when someone wanders into the comments to say, “I heard Kamala Harris wandered over to Gaza personally and shot some Palestinians just for fun, and then stopped by Tel Aviv to engage in some light foreplay with Netanyahu before getting back on a plane home stopping only to personally cause capitalism and so that’s why I don’t think I’m going to vote for her, I just don’t feel comfortable personally” and then reacts with “Whoa whoa whoa that’s only what I heard, I don’t really know, I don’t know why you are getting upset with me, I’m not even sure it’s true to be honest, I don’t really pay close attention to politics” when I get irritated at them about their type of engagement.


  • Yeah. There are genuine types of sophisticated trolling which involve pretending to be overtly polite while refusing to engage in any respect with the substance of what the other person’s saying, using politeness as a shield to sneak bullshit and bad-faith engagement into the discourse while making the other person look unreasonable if they start getting irritated about it.

    In about 100% of cases where I’ve seen someone accused of “sealioning,” though, it is just that they are trying to engage with the conversation and ask for sources, if you have a certain way of approaching disagreement, that’s kryptonite to your argument and so the only response is to start whining about sealioning.




  • I don’t quite follow you here as several people have demonstrated in various ways that the Voynich manuscript text does not at all conform with random gibberish.

    Yeah, you’re right, I wrote my language backwards. I just fixed it. “You could certainly disprove that it was a real natural language by showing statistical regularity in it that’s of a type that would only exist if it was statistical random gibberish” is what I meant.


    1. Yeah, this is interesting. I’m a little skeptical of any analysis that proceeds immediately to statistical analysis of one particular assignment of “letters” with the implied boundaries to the letterforms, without apparently dealing with the nontrivial problem of figuring out how likely it is that any particular shape is a particular “letter” or where the boundaries are. But you could certainly disprove that it was a real natural language by showing statistical regularity in it that’s of a type that would only exist if it was statistical random gibberish (which many people have tried and failed to do).
    2. You need the http:// in front of your link, it’s being processed as a relative link compared with this document
    3. Why is Leisure Suit Larry at the top of this paper

    Edit: I backwards



  • The most compelling hypothesis I saw for the language explanation was that it was Manchu with an unusual romanization. It’s such a rare language (basically dead language at this point) that it would make sense why the statistics line up for a real language, but people haven’t managed to decode it. Then add to that the fact that it’s not super clear what glyphs are stylistic differences and which ones are alternate glyphs, and it’s not even clear where to split the forms into different glyphs because they’re all connected, and it kind of makes sense.

    This video is the most compelling case I’ve seen for it not being a real language. Like I say, it’s kind of sad to think it might not have a real decoding.






  • No idea about tools although I hope you find something.

    Two related suggestions that will change your life:

    1. Grunt Fund if you are making decisions about equity
    2. Have people estimate the total time for a task, rigidly enforce that every man-hour spent on a project has to be allocated to one of those tasks (including the elusive but vital “oh shit we forgot” task), keep track of the coefficient between the two. It’ll be different for different people sometimes. When estimating a project, have people come up with estimates and then multiply by the coefficient. Be transparent with everyone about this system. It’ll revolutionize your project management life once people get used to it. I tried to find a blog post which explains more detail, but honestly, it’s not complicated, and Google is too shit now to find it.