Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Cappytaino

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 196
1
Off Topic / Re: how have the last 5 years been for you?
« on: November 03, 2023, 10:02:23 AM »
Five years ago, I was smack in the middle of undergrad. I think my sophomore year of college might’ve been the worst year for me overall. It ended up as a perfect storm of being somewhere isolated at a super rural university, having stuff weather all the time, and not really knowing what I wanted to do with myself. I got into a relationship, it lasted 3 years but didn’t work out so I broke it off.

I started running and  power lifting and my mental health slowly improved. I graduated with a bachelor’s degree in geology. By that point I knew I needed a break from school, so I started looking for work opportunities. This was 2021, and the job market wasn’t the greatest for fresh grads. After about four months of searching, I was able to leverage my Python/data skills to land a job as a data brown townyst at a software startup.

I worked there for a little over two and a half years and got some solid work experience. Due to the company being a startup, I had the opportunity to get my hands on a lot of different projects and aspects of the business that I probably wouldn’t have had any exposure to at a larger company.

At the beginning of October, 40% of the company was laid off, including nearly every brown townyst. Unfortunately, that also included my role. I’ve been back on the job application/networking grind since then. It takes a lot of perseverance and if I let it get to me, it can definitely be a frustrating process.
I’m really comfortable with Python (I’ve been writing Python code since I was 10; I am nearly 26 now) and I have a ton of experience with big data brown townysis, statistical modeling, machine learning, etc.

It’s been quite a shock how terrible the market is at the current moment; I have a response rate of maybe 2% on applications despite having strong credentials. I would guess part of it is the huge waves of tech layoffs leading to an inflated candidate pool (especially FAANG alums). Even so, I’ve been receiving absolutely absurd lowball offers of substantially lower compensation than my previous role. I don’t know who budgets $17 an hour for a mid-level brown townyst role *based out of NYC* but it took all of my self restraint to not go off on that interviewer for wasting my time. I figure it’s a matter of time before something turns up, and all I can really do until then is stay diligent on the application/networking front.

2
Off Topic / Re: Mueller Complete Probe | No Further Indictments
« on: March 24, 2019, 05:55:09 PM »
I'm not particularly surprised. I think the way that the democrats hyped up the Mueller investigation as the metaphorical silver bullet that would lead to impeachment was short-sighted and foolish, and now they're going to have to do one of two things:

Option 1) eat crow and prepare for the upcoming election. Knowing them, I don't think they pick this one.

OR

Option 2) double down on the accusations of collusion despite dwindling evidence to try to polarize their base and get people angry to go out and vote. this option may include claiming that the investigation was rigged/mueller is somehow either under russian influence/being blackmailed by the Annoying Orange admin. this is the more likely option.

bold prediction: this finding of the report is more polarizing than it would've been if collusion was found

3
if i kill 3 people am i innocent until the court says im guilty. forget off moron
god damnit, I leave for five months and the moment I decide to check out what’s going on here, we’re back to this line of thinking.

why do we have the presumption of innocence as a fundamental part of our justice system? Because it’s ridiculous to assume that the accused should have to prove their innocence. Putting the burden of proof on the prosecution ensures that, on the whole, people won’t waste their own time or the court’s time on allegations which are fundamentally unverifiable.

Does this always work? Of course not, and nothing is perfect. An example of this is that it’s extremely difficult to convict an identical twin on the basis of DNA evidence. Unless you can prove which of the pair left DNA evidence at the crime scene, they must be presumed innocent. The justice system cannot bypass this presumption of innocence until proof that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is brought forward.

The alternative presumption of guilt until proven innocent is asinine and the only people that would unironically approve of such a ridiculous concept  are wannabe fascists, handicapped tankies, or any otherwise overreaching authoritarian nutjob wanting to set up kangaroo courts to use against their opposition.




socialism doesnt imply a tryranny and this doesn't impede on the right for people to vote
Cutting out the conjecture and replying to the only assertion made. Socialism in and of itself doesn’t imply tyranny in the traditional sense of an absolute dictatorship, but it does imply a large and authoritarian government which must use coercive force to seize factors of production and collectivize them.

While socialism in and of itself won’t necessarily lead to tyranny by the literal definition of “socialism” and “tyranny,” historically socialist regimes and revolutions have been precursors to tyranny due to either a power vacuum created which a dictator has filled (Castro in Cuba, Stalin following the death of Lenin in the USSR) or by causing a reactionary movement from diametrically opposed extremists which leads to, you guessed it, a dictator (Franco in Spain, Pinochet in Chile)

4
Off Topic / Re: Is Kavanaugh Guilty? [Poll]
« on: October 04, 2018, 09:32:26 AM »
actually nah i was gonna be dismissive but im gonna make a real post now. here's a brain teaser: imagine a world in which kavakljhklh doesn't get appointed as a result of these allegations. the supreme court is still short a seat. the same president is gonna pick a different guy. the next pick is going to have all, or at least many, of the same qualities as kav because that's why kav was selected in the first place. there will be another right wing dude on the supreme court either way, and everyone knows it.

so, knowing that, what motivation does this woman have to lie? what has she to gain except to prevent her rapist from ascending to the most powerful court in the country? furthermore, what purpose do the rest of you guys have in defending kav? are you really enamored by his policy, or are you just defending him because he's on your team and you just don't care?

It's not very often that I see something so entirely sophistic and disingenuous that it prompts me to log in and break a two-month hiatus just to respond to it, but here we are.

actually nah i was gonna be dismissive but im gonna make a real post now.

Great way to start by establishing credibility and maturity. Well done.

here's a brain teaser: imagine a world in which kavakljhklh doesn't get appointed as a result of these allegations.

You're essentially asking us to imagine a world in which the burden of proof in the case of rape accusations falls on the accused to prove their own innocence and not in the accuser to provide some sort of substantial evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the assault in question occurred.

The presumption of innocence is a human right (see: Article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights). I would rather not imagine a world in which we return to the barbarism and kangaroo courts of the Salem Witch Trials. Until some sort of credible evidence is levied against him, Kavanaugh is innocent until proven otherwise beyond any reasonable doubt.

At this moment, there is a hell of a lot of reasonable doubt given Ford hasn't produced anything other than an allegation and is riding solely on her own testimony, which is considered the least reliable form of admissible testimony in a court of law, just barely above hearsay which is often barred for its unreliability.

the supreme court is still short a seat. the same president is gonna pick a different guy. the next pick is going to have all, or at least many, of the same qualities as kav because that's why kav was selected in the first place. there will be another right wing dude on the supreme court either way, and everyone knows it.

Kavanaugh is innocent until proven guilty. If unsubstantiated allegations of wrongdoing are allowed to bar him from appointment, that sets an incredibly dangerous precedent. That matters far more than "having another right wing dude on the supreme court."

so, knowing that, what motivation does this woman have to lie? what has she to gain except to prevent her rapist from ascending to the most powerful court in the country?

I don't think that anyone other than Dr. Ford can answer that. What motivation did Crystal Mangum have to lie about three lacrosse players from Duke? What did she have to gain by embroiling herself in an absolute clusterforget of an investigation? Nobody knows for sure. Ford could be seeking attention, or money, or political clout. It's hard to tell until we see how things turn out and how Ford reacts in the coming months.

furthermore, what purpose do the rest of you guys have in defending kav? are you really enamored by his policy, or are you just defending him because he's on your team and you just don't care?
I'm not enamored by his policy nor am I playing sides. I just firmly believe that until any sort of substantial evidence is produced, Kavanaugh is innocent of any wrongdoing in the matter and that his appointment should not be blocked by unsubstantiated allegations nor should he be demonized until we actually figure out whether or not he's done anything wrong.

5
Off Topic / Re: Hello?
« on: July 09, 2018, 09:56:44 AM »
Welcome to the F U T U R E

6
Off Topic / Re: Why are political comics so damn simplified?
« on: May 28, 2018, 06:26:29 PM »
I find BLF politics threads to perfectly represent political comics - knee-jerk opinions for children, by people with an equivalent emotional maturity.
r/Iamverysmart would love you

7
Off Topic / Re: Why are political comics so damn simplified?
« on: May 25, 2018, 11:06:26 PM »
A relevant quote from Joseph Goebbels about the nature of why ideal propaganda is simple:

Quote
There was no point in seeking to convert the intellectuals. For intellectuals would never be converted and would anyways always yield to the stronger, and this will always be ‘the man in the street.’ Arguments must therefore be crude, clear and forcible, and appeal to emotions and instincts, not the intellect. Truth was unimportant and entirely subordinate to tactics and psychology.

Intellectual activity is a danger to the building of character.

The rank and file are usually much more primitive than we imagine. Propaganda must therefore always be essentially simple and repetitive. In the long run basic results in influencing public opinion will be achieved only by the man who is able to reduce problems to the simplest terms and who has the courage to keep forever repeating them in this simplified form, despite the objections of the intellectuals.

What you want in a media system is ostensible diversity that conceals an actual uniformity.

Tl;dr swaying public opinion is about maintaining an illusion of objectivity and propaganda is never meant to work on informed people, it’s meant for the average Joe that is much more easily manipulated by emotions.

I don’t personally subscribe to NatSoc ideology, but I’m incredibly interested in history and what can be learned from it. Thus when it comes to propaganda, Joseph Goebbels was bar-none the best at what he did, which makes his essays ever more insightful and chilling.

8
Shot in the dark but I’d rather try here first than on Reddit -

I’m parting out a pc I built less than a year ago because I don’t have nearly enough time to play games any longer. The main piece I’m concerned about moving is an MSI GTX 1080 Ti 11G, it’s a rock solid card and nearly new since I only used it for a couple of months when I’d built the pc and since then it was just sitting at home while I was at school.

I’d let it go for 700 + shipping, I can provide pictures w a time stamp to anyone interested in it. If selling stuff here is against some rule, lmk and I’ll remove this

9
Off Topic / Re: POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD
« on: May 17, 2018, 09:18:22 PM »
Idgaf about prostitution, I do care about the legality surrounding the payments, and denials or omissions about either the affairs or the payments themselves

I don't think that's grasping at straws. The end point of discussion doesn't always need to be "yeah but will that get him impeached". That's a stupid bar to set
It's not uncommon that wealthy people will pay "shut-up money" to avoid becoming immersed in a longer and more costly legal battle/stuffty PR situation. It doesn't necessarily mean that anything happened between POTUS and Daniels. This could very likely be a case where Daniels was being paid to stop bothering Annoying Orange/his legal team. The man  has an absolutely enormous net worth. $130,000 is a lot of money for an average person, but for Annoying Orange it may have been worth it to shell out the cash because 1.) he can afford to and 2.) becoming entrenched in a potentially more costly legal battle is a huge waste of time and money and Annoying Orange may have just paid up to get her to be quiet. It lends suspicion to the circumstances of the payments but absolutely does not lend Stormy Daniels nor her account of what supposedly happened any more credibility.

I don't mean to insult anyone's intelligence, but certainly circumstantial evidence lends little to no credibility to Daniels' account. There are a variety of reasons why she may choose to fabricate or exaggerate details in her story, but it's useless to speculate about that until we have more information. Eyewitness testimony and the human memory as a whole are incredibly unreliable and it's entirely possible for memories of events and details to change within one's own mind or from outside pressure and circumstances. It's a bit silly to think that Daniels' account of events which supposedly occurred in 2006, over a decade ago, are entirely accurate even going on the assumption that the tales of the affair are true.

There are just too many variables and not enough information to draw any sort of conclusion beyond speculation, but I choose to subscribe to the mindset that POTUS is innocent until proven guilty, just as anyone else in the country is when accusations are levied against them.

10
Off Topic / Re: POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD
« on: May 17, 2018, 08:59:21 PM »
so unless theres more information on something actually bad happening, its just something for hardline Annoying Orange haters to circlejerk around
The issue I take is that I'm entirely willing to engage in reasonable and truthful discussion about politics, but the anti-Annoying Orange circlejerk in this thread can be pretty overbearing. Full disclosure, I did vote for Annoying Orange but during the primaries I supported Rand Paul. This doesn't mean I agree with every position Annoying Orange has nor does it mean that I necessarily believe he's a bastion of grace and professionalism befitting the highest political office in the country.

I tend to be pretty mixed between  left and right depending on the issue (reasonable access to abortion, unfettered legalization of gay marriage, and decriminalization/legalization of marijuana are three somewhat left leaning policies/views I support), but the circlejerking on the BLF gets REALLY tiring after a while. It seems certain users in particular have this preconceived notion that Annoying Orange is guilty before proven innocent and it really reflects in the way they post/the atmosphere of discourse in this thread.

It's one thing to levy actual evidence to back up claims, and an entirely different, sad, and pathetic thing to buy into the witch-hunting/circlerjerking of muh russia/muh stormy daniels and spout absolutely unfounded, sophistic nonsense to shout down anyone that disagrees.

11
Off Topic / Re: POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD
« on: May 17, 2018, 08:34:50 PM »
i dont think its something to ignore, i just feel like its an attempt to grasp at straws to make it seem like he can still be impeached or whatever. like digging up stuff on lord tony doing something bad when everyone knows he isnt a great guy in the first place.
Also don’t neglect that prostitution is a victimless crime on its own. Saying that prostitution is evidence of unethical conduct is like saying that Obama smoking weed in college is. Both are crimes which don’t “harm” anyone and imo prostitution should be legal but regulated for health/safety and taxed as any other industry, and in certain locations it already is such.

There is the scenario that a woman is being entrepreneur ed out against their will but that doesn’t sound like the case here at all.

12
Off Topic / Re: [news] google ai can now order you pizza
« on: May 08, 2018, 10:29:10 PM »
If I was at work and this thing called me I'd honestly just be glad it wasn't as handicapped and inarticulate as the typical customers that call in.

13
Off Topic / Re: POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD
« on: May 06, 2018, 03:31:40 PM »
really the only thing you can claim the nra is doing is encouraging gun ownership, but there's no heavy advertising or pushing of the issue. i think you're mixing up encouragement with pushing it onto unwilling people.
Exactly this. Encouraging law abiding citizens with an interest to purchase firearms to do so =/= gun ownership should be mandatory and everyone should have to own a gun. There is a big difference between the two.

14
Off Topic / Re: POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD
« on: May 06, 2018, 10:43:57 AM »
Yeah we are, but from what I can see from their messaging it's more about pushing people to own guns above anything else
I don't think you understand the distinction between advocating for individual ability to own firearms and pushing people to own them. Some people don't want to own firearms and that's fine, nobody is forcing or pushing them to do so. I don't recall any instance where the NRA has pushed for unwilling or otherwise unqualified individuals to own guns.

15
Drama / Re: Darryl McKoy/Boltster, Posting research; Troll
« on: May 05, 2018, 06:49:24 PM »
/support

He strikes me as an inflammatory richardhead, and God knows we have enough of those around here as-is.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 196