16
luaq
44d

oh dear fucking god

Comments
  • 11
    Word ip?
    So many questions here.

    Domain name?
    IP trademark?
    I Pee?

    Why does the world keep making stupid people... even more stupid?
  • 7
    @C0D4 why waste brainpower trying to figure out whatever some moron shits out of their noise hole
  • 10
    @C0D4 Stupid people reproduce more, while intelligent people reproduce infrequently; this actively selects against intelligence.
  • 1
    @Root why?

    (Not saying you’re wrong)
  • 2
    simple 🤷‍♂️ by using no ip
    https://www.noip.com/
  • 2
    @Root we're all just animals.

    intelligence may just be a dead end.
  • 1
    @C0D4 I also thought of having an IP (as in Internet Protocol) address, which is 1 word in size (rather than 4bytes)
  • 5
    @molaram Love (or strong emotions) make you want sex; sex is enjoyable. Ergo, procreation. Especially for those ruled by their feelings and/or sensations.

    By contrast, people who find projects more enjoyable or more worthy of their efforts don't seek out sex, or at least have less time for it. Nerds don't get laid because they're busy with other things. Also because they tend to stay indoors working/studying rather than going out socializing -- less time around people means less chance of finding a mate. Children are also a huge distraction. Ergo, less procreation.
  • 5
    @mr-user
    (This comment assumes you know and understand this: intelligence is genetic and therefore hereditary. Smart people are more likely to have smart offspring; stupid people, stupid offspring. Plus some minimal randomness, environmental detriments, whatever.)

    The intelligent graciously sacrificing themselves and their genes for the good of those who don't care, know any better, and/or can't help themselves? Yeah, what a great thing, that. Totally virtuous. /s

    The intelligent should (and generally are) trying to solve problems, exactly like the one you mentioned. (Example: automated vertical farms). By contrast, the unintelligent are busy creating more. And considering my above comment, it's a foregone conclusion which will win. Hint: problem creators outnumber solvers, and with exponential growth... problems will quickly overtake our ability to adapt or solve them. Another hint: things keep getting worse. Spoiler: I'm pretty sure we're already past the point of no return, at least without some huge correcting change like genocide or starting over via intrastellar colonization.

    But sure, let's have all the intelligent people make way for the idiots' babies to inherit the earth.

    Is it any wonder I've basically given up on humanity?
  • 0
    @Root I doesn't really agree with you that smart people are based on their gene.Maybe we are at the turning point and not the end.

    The problem with climate changes is that the effect doesn't show result fast like wars. If there is an enough existential crisis, I think humanity will strive for better.

    I think the wars stop is not because people suddenly find kindness to forgive other (I am not saying it's not a part of it) , I think it is because of technology advancement. People suddenly found out that if we try to nuke each other out, there will only be mutual destruction. Since there is a advancement in agricultural technology,people can feed themselves without taking other people slice of pie.

    I have seen research (forget which one it is) that show developed country have less baby than developing country. Maybe it a silver lining.

    In summary don't give up on humanity and just educate people around you which you care enough.You don't have enough energy to educate everyone.
  • 3
    @mr-user Whether or not you believe it, intelligence is genetic. This isn't to say it's simple; genetics are anything but. However, a rule of thumb is that intelligent people will have intelligent children; unintelligent will have unintelligent children. The same is true of many other traits, defects, etc.

    I'm not going to touch climate change. In general I agree with the science, but not the vast majority of opinions about it.

    As for wars: I doubt they will ever stop. Conflict is in human nature. I also doubt technology will change that. The only effective deterrents to conflicts have been: a) difficulty, e.g. obstacles like oceans, and b) risk. For difficulty, technology will always find ways of surmounting the obstacles, so they only delay the conflict. Risk only prevents (or: decreases the likelyhood of) conflict while it's present. A robber is not going to rob Chuck Norris (ever), nor a redneck who carries a shotgun everywhere including the bathroom. Neither will a country (overtly) attack another if they cannot guarantee minimal/acceptable losses. Similarly if their attempt will cause them economic/political damages. It's all a risk/reward equation. However, as soon as that risk diminishes... Someone who wants to rob you will find a way, and countries invading one another are no different.

    To summarize human conflict:
    The have-nots will always hate the haves for having more. The haves will always hate the have-nots for trying to take what they have not produced -- and for not producing. Nobody likes a parasite, even other parasites. Humans also tend to fear what they do not understand, and respond with violence. It's possible to solve the latter with education; the former, however, isn't a lack of knowledge, and may very well be unsolvable.
  • 0
    @Root

    I agree with you on that conflict is in human nature. Conflict create pressure , pressure create advancement. We are surrounded by all kind of conflict whether we know it or not politically , economically , ideologically , socially.

    Fear is a emotion which is benefit to most of humanity. It help in the survival of human. Since we fear predator we form group which increase our chance of passing our gene to next generation.
  • 1
    64bit or 32 bit? For ipv4 I would use a byte array or struct though
  • 1
    @Root

    I seriously question to which degree intelligence is hereditary, I've seen kids from "stupid" environments be raised in a "smart" environment and do exceptionally well.

    But in the end, that discussion doesn't even matter much, because on average, smart people do not just procreate less, they of course also raise less kids. Apart from a few exceptions, people don't usually give away their offspring.

    It is interesting though that on average, IQ is increasing worldwide (Flynn Effect) by 3 points per decade, and this effect is more pronounced in regions which are significantly increasing their standard of living ("upcoming economies") -- although I bet the standard deviation is also increasing worldwide.

    Overall, I don't think we have to be afraid of "Idiocracy".
  • 1
    @Root Or, to be more correct about my statement: Intelligence is of course *partly* hereditary on the scale of individual families, but I question to which degree that influences the movement towards an "idiocracy" -- improved education and environment seem to affect the IQ more than reproduction.

    In my opinion, there is an easy analogy with muscles: The child of an athlete has a bigger chance of winning a gold medal -- but it's easier to increase average body strength & fitness of the population by exercise than some eugenic breeding program.

    IQ is oddly similar to physical fitness: Your range of performance is more or less determined from birth, but the range is pretty broad, and exercise can make you more fit.
  • 1
    easy: read the numbers and write them down as words. localhost example: onehundredtwentyseven.zero.zero.one
  • 0
    He seems like a beginner who just doesn't know better.
  • 1
    @Root I am curious when do you consider a person intelligent or smart?

    Because the people i have seen that usually are born by people that are "considered smart" (At least considered smart in that topic they work in) are more likely to work/studie harder. They will be good in one field, i wouldnt call them intelligent just because they are good at one thinh, after spending years ressourcing and working in that field. We arent getting fewer truly intelligent people, the definetion of being intelligent has always been linked to people who are getting good at something due hard work. which i think is wrong.

    A lot of the idiots we see are usually the ones getting most attention. Well are we getting dumber? I honestly isnt smart enough to be the one to answer it, but i just felt it was a point to keep in mind.

    Except from that i agree on your views on humanity. (I am far from being a smarty pants myself, but i would like to think i am avarge with a common sense)
  • 0
    @Frederick nice shitpost. almost had me fooled.
  • 0
    @Frederick

    For me being intelligent is different from being a hard worker. Smart people and hard working people may get the same result but their efficiency is different. Smart people usually used "smart" method to get the work done with less time and effort.

    Hard working people may use their time to solve the problem but the smart people may use "search engine" to get their answer.

    I am not saying any negative thing about hard worker but I have seen people applying their effort in wrong way.

    It look like I am saying the hard worker and smart people are two different type of people but in reality they are mixed.

    For me the definition of smart people is a person who can think of future.
Add Comment