jsomae

explaining the etymology doesn't really change anything. I don't know why you thought that would make me stop associating it with the bible belt.

Half-life is good -- I played it recently -- but I think it relies on having a bit of skill already, it's not a great choice for a beginner in my opinion. I would suggest Minecraft (if you're creative) or Portal (if you like puzzles) instead, to learn the ropes of how to control a game in first-person perspective.

Y'all reminds me of the bible belt. I'm not transgender but I am queer and now and then it makes me uncomfortable.

Twitter is evil

Mastodon has bad UX

BlueSky is fresh

Then you did not prove that there is no discontiguous mapping which maps [1, 2] to the natural numbers. You must show that no mapping exists, continugous or otherwise.

But then a simple comeback would be, "well perhaps there is a non-continuous mapping." (There isn't one, of course.)

"It still works if you don't" -- how does red's argument work if you don't? Red is not using cantor's diagonal proof.

Crack your knuckles, solve your problems your own way, stop comparing yourself to other people, ditch the drugs, and turn your life around. You're the main character; this has been episode 1, now let's do episode 2.

This isn't entirely correct. It's kind of like saying "SAT score" is a racist pseudoscience -- which honestly I can kind of get behind, heh. "IQ" is not a property of a human the way height or eye colour is, it's just a test score. Yes, it's used by racist people for racist ends, but racist people use everything for racist ends. The actual science behind IQ has always shown that (a) individual variation in IQ score is vastly, vastly greater than any potential racial factor in IQ, and (b) different research findings on racial averages in IQ score are varied enough that it's hard to draw much of a conclusion. It's also well known that IQ tests have a bias in favour of people from western developed nations. To me, it's most likely that racial averages are similarly biased by the test.

Dowsing is a pseudoscience -- it falls apart under scrutiny. But under scrutiny, IQ test scores still correlate with success just like SAT scores do. They are slightly heritable, just like SAT scores are. It sucks, but that's our capitalist society for you. (Let's revolt.)

But to the OP, please understand that these correlations are nothing more than correlations, and they are meaningless when you zoom into the individual level. Statistics about groups of people only make broad guesses but are meaningless about individuals. Statistics say the average person has one ovary and one testicle. Statistics say the average American has never heard of lemmy. So, don't let statistics define you -- that would be pseudoscience.

If it helps, remember this: it's not scientific to say "my IQ is just 76." You should say "My most recent IQ test score was 76."

Your explanation is wrong. There is no reason to believe that "c" has no mapping.

Edit: for instance, it could map to 29, or -7.

Exactly. So I am curious why OP considers it remarkable that "neither left nor right" is not what it seems.

As for me, I might consider someone from a different country with different politics, like Japan perhaps, to be neither. Or someone who lives under a rock and doesn't pay attention to the news.

Please describe someone who could be considered neither left nor right. Is it possible you are viewing the absence of left-wing qualities as being right-wing?

augh it's annoying