Unpopular Opinions V6 You know maybe fascism wasn't all that it was cracked up to be
5,009 replies, posted
There is nothing wrong with putting effort into your appearance. I honestly think that if everyone did it everyone would be at least a bit happier.
I felt miserable last year so I got a haircut, got nice-ish new clothes, started treating acne/showering more/better hygiene, and now I'm a lot more confident and happy.
[QUOTE=Bathtub;49974320]There is nothing wrong with putting effort into your appearance.[/QUOTE]
do people actually think there is?
[QUOTE=gokiyono;49972688]And then you respond with being condescending?
Seems counterproductive[/QUOTE]
wat
[QUOTE=GarbageCan;49972894]Lol, most of the people who say this are [b]computer science[/b] or engineering majors, not physical, environmental or life scientists. So [b]I wouldn't qualify them as "real" scientists either.[/b][/QUOTE]
The amount of ignorance here is astounding. Do you even know what computer scientists do?
duh, tech support
some of them try and tell me that they can't but by god I'm going to see through their lies and phone them at 3am when my toolbars disappear
[QUOTE=kyle877;49974512]wat[/QUOTE]
You said that you disliked when people were condescending, and yet you come with a condescending remark "HURR DURR TURMP GET ELEKTED IM GUN GO TO CANADALAND :^))))"
[QUOTE=Sector 7;49974510]do people actually think there is?[/QUOTE]
People will call you shallow
[QUOTE=Zephyrs;49976094]I'm not going to say that liberal arts people are inherently illogical by any means, but I have routinely observed "no measurably correct answer" to be "aligns with my own personal beliefs, however sane or asinine they are." The softer the science, the more baseless conjecture and pure speculation I see. I'd have a great deal of respect for soft sciences and liberal arts if so many people in them weren't so dead set on pushing agendas and were OK with saying "We don't fucking know." Many of them aren't even aware that they are just making stuff up.
My disdain for liberal arts isn't because I don't respect/enjoy the material. My disdain is for the frequent lack of actual coherent reasoning behind things.[/QUOTE]
These are people who study for a minimum of 9 years to earn a PhD in their field. There isn't some "inane speculation", people consistently do tests on these things. Social Scientists do actual science, with methods, testing, hypothesis; it all follows the scientific method. It just sounds like you're anti-intellectual because it all disagrees with you and haven't bothered with looking into the reasons social scientists come up with their conclusions. "I haven't seen a black hole, I don't think they're real" someone might say. Social Scientists aren't infallible but the same goes for hard scientists as well. The fact that they had to work hard and earn degrees in their field, however, means the general conscious of their works can generally be seen as right, i.e. climate change for hard scientists. And you can cry "Appeal to authority" all you want, but people appeal to authority all the time to hard science. It's just harder to disagree with hard science because you don't have innate opinions on, say, the inner workings of a star compared to how inherent biases you may have an effect society in general.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;49976005]People will call you shallow[/QUOTE]
And then promptly proceed to judge others by appearance.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;49976005]People will call you shallow[/QUOTE]
You're getting it wrong.
People don't call people shallow for putting effort into their appearance. They call them shallow for thinking less of people who don't. Not that all of those people think that way.
I think it goes so that if appearance is everything for you then you are shallow.
[QUOTE=Wunce;49975589]The amount of ignorance here is astounding. Do you even know what computer scientists do?[/QUOTE]
they install gentoo
[QUOTE=Wunce;49975589]The amount of ignorance here is astounding. Do you even know what computer scientists do?[/QUOTE]
I think the point is that a lot of engineers and associated types don't follow the actual philosophy of science as such, yet criticise other fields with a kind of arrogance that presumes their field to be somehow more "scientific".
Engineers don't need to be scientists to do their job. They don't even need to do experiments or research papers.
Swearing =/ funny. I learned that the hard way when most of the jokes I would tell involve swearing, most of time it doesn't work, or makes my parents mad at me(what am I 12?!). It's normal to swear, but not to a degree where you say "fuck" or "shit" in every sentence you say.
I have less than no interest in Warhammer and find the entire concept so thoroughly stupid that I believe my body has developed some sort of rejection mechanism that triggers every time the lore of that universe attempts to force itself in to my mind
[editline]e[/editline]
I think if I were to pick random spooky words and mash them with random complex old Catholic sounding words I could convince Warhammer fans that something I made up was real lore
fear the Ecumenical Dreadnoughts
[QUOTE=Wunce;49975589]The amount of ignorance here is astounding. Do you even know what computer scientists do?[/QUOTE]
If you get a PhD in Computer Science? Sure! You can become a true scientist. However, most of these undergrads with superiority complexes just get a bachelors and go become code slaves to some company. They aren't scientist, they don't revolutionize the fields of computers; they just write whatever their manager tells them to. Please actually think who I'm talking about before calling me "ignorant".
[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;49977864]#I think if I were to pick random spooky words and mash them with random complex old Catholic sounding words I could convince Warhammer fans that something I made up was real lore[/QUOTE]
Imperator Lupa
[QUOTE=maddogsamurai;49977466]Swearing =/ funny. I learned that the hard way when most of the jokes I would tell involve swearing, most of time it doesn't work, or makes my parents mad at me(what am I 12?!). It's normal to swear, but not to a degree where you say "fuck" or "shit" in every sentence you say.[/QUOTE]
I disagree
[video=youtube;NkKOeeYko7w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkKOeeYko7w[/video]
[QUOTE=gokiyono;49975882]You said that you disliked when people were condescending, and yet you come with a condescending remark "HURR DURR TURMP GET ELEKTED IM GUN GO TO CANADALAND :^))))"[/QUOTE]
what is satire
[QUOTE=kyle877;49978747]what is satire[/QUOTE]
Not really something you'd use in that manner when saying you don't like people being condescending
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;49976651]they install gentoo[/QUOTE]
[video=youtube;VjGSMUep6_4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjGSMUep6_4[/video]
RARE footage of a real computer scientist at work
[QUOTE=GarbageCan;49976401]These are people who study for a minimum of 9 years to earn a PhD in their field. There isn't some "inane speculation", people consistently do tests on these things. Social Scientists do actual science, with methods, testing, hypothesis; it all follows the scientific method. It just sounds like you're anti-intellectual because it all disagrees with you and haven't bothered with looking into the reasons social scientists come up with their conclusions. "I haven't seen a black hole, I don't think they're real" someone might say. Social Scientists aren't infallible but the same goes for hard scientists as well. The fact that they had to work hard and earn degrees in their field, however, means the general conscious of their works can generally be seen as right, i.e. climate change for hard scientists. And you can cry "Appeal to authority" all you want, but people appeal to authority all the time to hard science. It's just harder to disagree with hard science because you don't have innate opinions on, say, the inner workings of a star compared to how inherent biases you may have an effect society in general.[/QUOTE]
I love how you are jumping to conclusions here and accusing me of being anti-intellectual. Many "soft" sciences have enormous amounts of hard objective data behind them. I've never claimed otherwise. The problem is that people seem to be free to ignore the hard data in many of these fields without serious backlash. Overall I actually agree with most of what you are saying. Soft sciences get shit on for dumb reasons, but there are plenty of legitimate ones to rip into.
Let's use your example of social sciences. More specifically gender studies type stuff. Look at the amount of non scientific bullshit that gets dumped in that field alone. Yeah, things aren't as definitive as math or engineering, but it's abhorrent how much total rubbish is put out by sociologists with agendas. Then when actual serious psychologists, neurologists, and the like come in, they contradict nearly every single point made by people in these groups, and back it up with mountains of hard hitting blind data. And people within these groups refuse to acknowledge that they are spouting fountains of trash. It's the social science equivalent of client change denial and not accepting evolution. Hell, you can go a step further in social sciences and argue that it [i]is[/i] outright denial of evolutionary interactions.
This disregard for objectivity seems to be more accepted the farther away from the "hard sciences" you go. I guess you could argue that there's more room for interpretation in these fields, but to me that's just more reason to preface things with so called 'weasel words' to avoid speaking in absolutes and make it explicitly clear what you are and aren't sure about.
The Nintendo NX should aim for Witcher 3 on Ultra at 2160p30.
My reasoning for this is because the Wii U didn't get much third party support because it pretty much amounted to Nintendo playing catch-up with the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. With the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One existing, there's even less reason for said developers to make a Wii U game so I'd like to think that it would be good for Nintendo to armor their next system against the Playstation 5.
[QUOTE=flashn00b;49979798]The Nintendo NX should aim for Witcher 3 on Ultra at 2160p30.
My reasoning for this is because the Wii U didn't get much third party support because it pretty much amounted to Nintendo playing catch-up with the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. With the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One existing, there's even less reason for said developers to make a Wii U game so I'd like to think that it would be good for Nintendo to armor their next system against the Playstation 5.[/QUOTE]
Eveing going back to the gamecube days, Nintendo hasn't produced a high power system. Even the N64 wasn't top end for it's time.
Up till the WiiU it worked quite well for them.
[QUOTE=Wunce;49975589]The amount of ignorance here is astounding. Do you even know what computer scientists do?[/QUOTE]
computer science degrees aren't really about computers or science
[QUOTE=Sector 7;49980263]computer science degrees aren't really about computers or science[/QUOTE]
No? It might be different over in the states, but at my university we have some very good courses in the CS degree program regarding algorithms, data structures, asymptotic time complexity etc. These are the theoretical underpinnings of almost every computer in existence. Whether or not it's science depends on if you believe mathematics is a science - which is a whole different kettle of fish.
[QUOTE=Wunce;49980825]No? It might be different over in the states, but at my university we have some very good courses in the CS degree program regarding algorithms, data structures, asymptotic time complexity etc. [/QUOTE]
that's all more of an information philosophy thing, though. you don't actually need a computer to explore programming, you just need a computer to explore programming in a way that isn't boring as hell.
IT degrees are about computers, in that you literally study up on the machines themselves and the developmental curriculum is more 'how-to' than 'how-and-why'.
This is [b]reaaaallyyyy[/b] unpopular, but I'll share it anyways.
Criminals don't need prison time, they need mental help.
Would you rather have someone just sit in a cell for the majority of the day (which does NOTHING to change what they believe is right or wrong), or be taken to a mental help institution where they can be shown that what they did was wrong?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.