Yes, and?

Nordic (or Finnish/Swedish at least) “sandwich cake”.

Jimothies are secretly badasses.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/87yubaq02zw

No you won’t.

But highest amount of NHL players per capita and suddenly the top three is Finland, Sweden and Canada, while USA falls way behind.

Even though it’s the “Nation” in the “National Hockey League”.

Correction, I managed to shame you into actually writing something instead of that childish spam.

You still can’t address why you’re in the thread to begin with. The proof that I am right is in you spamming “k” for a dozen comments because you can’t discuss the definition of “arbitrary” because you realise your previous statements weren’t correct. And you’re just not big enough of a person to admit that to yourself. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Dig your pit deeper.

Remember how you said you “love being proved wrong”?

Well timekeeping systems aren’t arbitrary. Care to comment? No…? ;>

Good looking, intellectual, profile, eh?

I won this time, like I usually do.

You’re dragging this out because you’re pretending you didn’t. But… You can’t talk about the thread. You’re just seething that you’re caught in this. Ego makes you reply without you being able to talk about why you’re in the thread to start with.

Like I’ve said, I’ve seen this a 1000 times. You think you’re being clever. No. You’re just being infantile.

The great part is you can’t say anything, showing you’re only here because of your ego, despite having literally nothing to say, while I keep giving you options and urging you to just accept growth. You know, since you “love admitting when you’re wrong”?

Remember when you were talking about how you love to admit it when you make mistakes, because it’s a learning opportunity? Or was that someone else pulling this same shit. Because again, I have seen this 1000 times over several years if not decades.

I don’t want to come off as bullying, but I think it’ll benefit from you if you learn to handle situations like this. So I’m gonna keep replying. Sorry.

Why do you consider timekeeping systems to be arbitrary?

I don’t want to come off as bullying, but I think it’ll benefit from you if you learn to handle situations like this. So I’m gonna keep replying. Sorry.

What’s “arbitrary” mean?

Properly implemented machine learning, sure.

These dimwits are genuinely just gonna feed everything to a second rate LLM and treat the output as the word of God.

You’re basically refusing to take an L that you’ve already taken. Yeah, it’s a cringe expression. So is “cringe”, but times evolve.

As I said, you’ve already “lost”. You can’t address the topic, but yet your ego keeps forcing you to come back and reply. I’ve been in threads like these for months. The thing is, I can say whatever and address anything said in the thread, while you can’t.

What’s the definition of “arbitrary” and why do you think timekeeping systems are arbitrary?

So now you’re in the “I’m gonna return every few days, so my profile won’t look as silly when all my childish answers aren’t packed one after another, but spread over weeks”-phase?

Like I said, I’ve genuinely been down this path hundreds of times before, seen your exact “tactic” employed. You have nowhere to go, and you can’t address the topic at all. Check mate. You’ve lost, and now you’re just digging deeper and deeper.

What’s the definition of “arbitrary” and why do you think timekeeping systems are arbitrary?

I want one. Or rather I’m jealous of the specs. But not the OS

You can mix truths in with lies and that would still absolutely be considered dishonest, but you cannot mix lies into truths and still be honest.

Depends on how you look at it. For instance if someone asks about a subjective matter, and you know they’re not asking because they wish to know your opinion about the subject matter, but because they need psychological reassurance or some such thing.

For example “does this make my ass look big”? Or “do I look good in this dress?”

Would you consider a person dishonest for reassuring someone who might have struggled with weight and confidence issues, even if they might not regard that person personally attractive to them?

Is it lying? Perhaps. Is it dishonest? Unless you think there’s some objective standard for what is a big ass and what is good-looking, then it’s gonna be hard to argue either of those are lies, no matter what the scenario. You can also do “well no, that doesn’t make your ass look big, it looks the same size both with and without pants” or “no, that dress doesn’t make you look good, you always look good”.

“Never cruel or cowardly. Always try to be nice, but never fail to be kind.”

I’ve often thought about it.

Generally probably you just slowly learn what not to say or do to not get in trouble and keep your head down and hope you get through it.

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLOsQDFuB3bqczBIz-a66NvwaOBSyiCo9z

Colditz is a nice show. The Kommandant isn’t a Nazi, but a member of the Reichswehr, and often finds himself in the difficult position of doing the right thing or following orders.

It’s a bit more nuanced than when Finn in the new Star Wars shows changes sides from the empire to the rebels and two seconds later is blasting his former mates accompanied by loud “yee-haas”.

Also varied tread depth.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/21/Stumble_steps.jpg/500px-Stumble_steps.jpg

We had some stone steps in the yard of a house I grew up in and I could still run those even in the dark, but I’m sure anyone running after me, unfamiliar with the steps would stumble.

I’m just wondering whether the ingenuity was from someone who actually designed them as such, or someone who did a poor job, almost got a bollocking, but then launched into a rant about how it’s actually a defensive feature.

I get your point but also I’m a pedantic Lemming, so I want to point out that in the middle-ages, castle would purposefully build uneven steps. People familiar with the castle would soon get used to them and they’d be no bother, but an attacker running upwards will surely trip. And they’ll trip because of the stairs. Or will it be their own fault for not looking at each individual step to give your body the information it needs?

Just rhetorical exercise, I don’t actually care at all about one side or the other.

(An added stair fact, round staircases would ascend in a clockwise manner, so that right-handed defenders would have the advantage over right-handed attackers whilst fighting in the stairs.)

Ugh, no.

One can’t argue that personality disorders are inherently genetic. You can argue there’s a significant genetic component, but to think that someone is just going to be a narcissist despite how you would rear them is… well, bioessentialism.

Edit oh wait sorry. You asked you didn’t argue. Everyone is born like that, yeah, like everyone is born without object permanence. Then you develop it very early on. Just like you develop a sense of self-criticism as your cognition grows. Some just never do.