aldhissla

joined 3 weeks ago
[–] aldhissla@beehaw.org 2 points 1 day ago

Swiss authorities will never pass up an opportunity to fine you, so I don't think we'll have an enforcement issue.

[–] aldhissla@beehaw.org 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Painter decorator is a normal job you muppet

[–] aldhissla@beehaw.org 2 points 2 days ago

Orange cats cannot overthink anything

[–] aldhissla@beehaw.org 9 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

only there for you half the time

Liz Lemon: Shut it down, dealbreaker

[–] aldhissla@beehaw.org 2 points 6 days ago

Ein paar CRT-Bildschirme und sonstiges durch die Fenster von Ministerien geworfen haben schon mal gewirkt, selbst bei schwierigeren Machtverhältnissen. Eine gewaltfreie Lösung, die schon mal funktioniert hat, ist mir leider nicht bekannt.

[–] aldhissla@beehaw.org 2 points 1 week ago

TS dev here. Yep.

There's worse, but not by much. Looking at you, PHP

[–] aldhissla@beehaw.org 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm an absolute layperson in chemistry, but I'm reminded of something from Ryan McBeth's earlier content. It was around the start of the war in Ukraine, and someone had asked him about self-destruct explosives on personnel or personnel carriers. His answer was dismissive on the grounds that manufacturing, handling, and more importantly combat application of explosives always carries a combination of unreliability, both to explode and not to explode. Basically, the failsafes needed to safely and reliably implement self-destruction on a large scale will eventually result in troops getting blown up by their own equipment.

My take from this, is that if you would manufacture degrading mines in huge numbers, the degradation mechanism might very well make some mines a random time bomb, simply because of the inherent properties of explosives. I can't argue for or against the plausibility of chemically engineering a safe and reliable temporary mine, but I would only take expert opinions into consideration.

The internet has a tendency to enable laypeople to act as if they're entitled to be given the same consideration as an expert in any given field. This is why I think taking a big step back from this question is the right thing to do for me and for those who I think are no more qualified to make statements on this than I am. But it's good to be hopeful.

[–] aldhissla@beehaw.org 0 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I doubt there's a safe way to make explosives degrade.

[–] aldhissla@beehaw.org 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Did you read the article? It's long, but worth it. It describes analytical problem solving and software development.

Did I miss anything supporting your claim that the article argues about art?

[–] aldhissla@beehaw.org 4 points 2 weeks ago

Don't agree. Our cats were always welcoming us affectionately.

[–] aldhissla@beehaw.org 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

They might have criticised self-treating by laypeople, not the peptides themselves.

[–] aldhissla@beehaw.org 1 points 2 weeks ago

You're mixing up the motivations of the opposing sides. For the enemy, incapacitating someone might be in some ways preferable, but for an injured soldier's own side, rescuing them would always be preferable to abandoning them.

view more: next ›