yetAnotherUser

joined 2 years ago
[–] yetAnotherUser 8 points 4 weeks ago

Are you Odysseus or smth?

[–] yetAnotherUser 3 points 1 month ago

This isn't the Funhole, this is the Unix Surrealism community. Even then, thank you for your Funhole-related content.

[–] yetAnotherUser 19 points 1 month ago (5 children)

Do you not know why almost everyone left? Are you out of the loop?

[–] yetAnotherUser 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

What's the difference from your normal sudo?

[–] yetAnotherUser 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Wait! Before you do, let her licence that style using an FSF-approved licence!

[–] yetAnotherUser 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

You made this?? It looks really cool either way!!

[–] yetAnotherUser 1 points 1 month ago

I see! That's a great point! Thank you!

[–] yetAnotherUser 4 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Not sure if this is the right place for questioning philosophical theories, but I have a few questions about this one.

  • The sentence is "I think, therefore I am". What if we don't think? Let's imagine, for example, that there is a god or gods, that are the only beings capable of thinking, and that everyone just recieves those thoughts from the god(s), just gets them delivered right to the brain. In that situation, we wouldn't be capable of thinking, would we? (iirc this was one of the main critics to Descartes's chain of to thought. In this situation, I think the sentence could be generalised to remain valid.)
  • The sentence is "I think, therefore I am" (or if we generalise it to remain valid due to the previous point, "if something thinks, it exists"). Why can't it be "I eat therefore I am", or "I breathe, therefore I am"? What makes thinking more valid than any other action we can do when trying to prove our existence? How is thinking capable of proving our existence at all if nothing else is said to be capable? In fact, what shows that thinking can prove someone's existence? (this one feels like a reworded common critic, although I'm not sure)

I would like to invite anyone to comment/evaluate/counter/correct what I wrote here (just pls don't attack me (>~<), attack the content instead). I know I could just research these things on my own, but I have a bit of trouble understanding the formal language that is used by specialists when discussing this type of problems, and I find it likely that others feel the same, so it felt cooler to talk about it here.

P.S.: it's kinda sad that this theory doesn't quite prove the existence of our brainrot homies :3

[–] yetAnotherUser 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I tried accessing the website, but I only got the text "Access denied FE". Does it work for anyone else? Could it not be accessible where I am? (I'm outside the US.) Or did I arrive too late to the party?

[–] yetAnotherUser 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

There's already Fedivision, where any person with a Fediverse account can participate. Lemmyvision seems to be more about each community presenting their song, and the concept of communities doesn't exist in most fedi platforms, so ig it makes sense to make it a Lemmy-only thing.

[–] yetAnotherUser 2 points 1 month ago

I really like your art! Keep going!!

[–] yetAnotherUser 14 points 2 months ago

Yep, the "Comments" thingy behind the text box gives it away

view more: ‹ prev next ›