> While the rule on hate protects such groups, it does not protect all groups or all forms of identity. For example, the rule does not protect groups of people who are in the majority or who promote such attacks of hate.
That sounds as if you're dismissing the seriousness of anti-white racism.
I think you're wrong to do so. For example, 1036 people were victims of anti-white hate crimes in 2018. There were more anti-white hate crimes than anti-Asian, anti-Hispanic, or anti-native hate crimes.
I am dismissing equating protecting vulnerable minorities with the allegory of George Orwell's Animal farm, where the ruling class was enshrining privileges for itself.
Yes, the "ruling class" of social media is enshrining their privilege to say nasty things about white men and women.
Banning "hate speech" would be less disturbing if it were done fairly, but so much of the content on reddit is hate speech that I'm sure that won't happen.
By adding the caveat "the rule does not protect groups of people who are in the majority", reddit admits that anti-white racism is a problem on their site, and says they've decided to allow it.
The left is currently redefining racism. Hate against Whites is defined as not being racist. And being White is means that you are always racist. I wish, I was kidding.
The silent majority needs to be able to stand up to the authoritarian and vocal minority. The problem is that you can loose your job over questioning them.
I didn’t make the argument that racism against whites doesn’t exist. I am a white male who has been a victim of racism, too.
I’m making the point that policing instances of racism perpetrated against people of color doesn’t make white people victims.
Don’t like the association with racism just because you’re white? Then do something about it. Spread the word that racism is wrong.
And well, if don’t mind the association with racism quite so much as the fact that many white people are starting to be held accountable for their racist actions, then you are a racist.
> While the rule on hate protects such groups, it does not protect all groups or all forms of identity. For example, the rule does not protect groups of people who are in the majority or who promote such attacks of hate.
Not a single word about white people not benefiting from such protections.
Anyone can look at my comment history and verify for themselves that you are trying to poison the well by accusing me of arguing in bad faith. I assure you I am just here to get my side of the argument out in the open, but the irony of a “free speech advocate” trying to censor me with lame ad hominem attacks is pretty rich.
How about you answer your own question: who is the majority? You seem to be assuming that each individual community on reddit is frequented by a white majority. Where is your evidence?
I'll support my statement, and save anyone who is reading this the trouble of checking your comment history, by citing a selection of attacks you wrote in every single comment at the top of your history right now, to several different people:
> Maybe consider consulting a dictionary.
> What the fuck is the matter with some of you...
> then you very clearly don’t give a flying duck about right or wrong, either.
> You appear to be admitting in plain — though horribly ungrammatical — English that you don’t care about the difference between right and wrong
> your writing is so bad that I’m genuinely struggling to make sense of it.
> Someone doesn’t understand the terms...
> What kind of fucking creep sees ...
I think it's unproductive to continue this discussion at this time.
I like how you totally ignored my actual argument and wasted your effort trolling my comment history for any non sequitur comment you could find, all while once again completely ignoring the meat of my arguments. Are you familiar with the “fallacy fallacy”?
Please do not do tit-for-tat flamewars on HN, regardless of how right you are or how wrong the other person is. When two commenters get locked in an aggressive dance like this, the quality of the thread drops sharply, and no one else is interested.
Your take would mean that anti-black racism would not be against the rule in r/blackpeopletwitter. I don't think that's what reddit meant. I think reddit meant either the majority on reddit or the majority in the US (reddit being a US based site that mostly discusses American politics).
But you don't seem capable of following the guidelines here, and I'm not interested in your style of debate. Let's just move on.
You seem pretty set on assigning your own arbitrary meaning to words that are pretty clearly delineated by reddit in the policy update. It doesn’t matter one teenay bit what you think reddit meant. There is a huuuuuuge amount in diversity in reddit’s countless sub communities, and it is clear just from the text that I posted above that they aren’t referring to reddit on the whole with this new policy.
By the way, your comments have been flagged as well as mine, meaning you are apparently just as incapable of following the guidelines here as myself. I’m not just going to “move on”, I’m still waiting for you to bring a well-reasoned argument to the table rather than personal attacks.
Please do not do tit-for-tat flamewars on HN, regardless of how right you are or how wrong the other person is. When two commenters get locked in an aggressive dance like this, the quality of the thread drops sharply, and no one else is interested.
Yes, of course. But they should be called out for misrepresenting policy designed to work against discrimination of racial minorities as a discriminatory act against white people.
Chaim's amazing, and Earth Primer is one of his finest pieces of work, inspired by other simulation games like SimCity, SimEarth, and Spore. Check out his Experimental Gameplay Workshop talk and demo -- he shows it in action and tells about how Earth Primer is an example of a genre of educational simulation software that combine telling, showing, and doing. He's currently finishing up a book about the history of SimCity and computer simulations.
Projects and clients include Spore, EA/Maxis, Earth: A Primer, Valve, UCSF Medical School, and Linden Lab. My expertise and interests include authoring tools, tangible computing, prototyping, simulation, and play. Design lead for Spore Creature Creator. Freelancing and open to the right longer term fit.
Currently focused on finishing a book for MIT Press on the history of SimCity and computer simulation. I'm doing a little bit of consulting, and will have more bandwidth beginning around mid-2020, when the manuscript should be complete.
This specific implementation won't easily work on the GPU, it's mostly the grid based ones that are easy to parallelize. You could even stick to common fragment shaders if you wanted to port that to the GPU.
Diamond square should be good enough for initial terrain, but I'd keep it smooth; let the erosion take care of the details.
- If you raise all height values to a power, you get creases in the terrain that are generated by erosion in real life.
- If you raise all terrain values under a height just above sea level to a power, then you get beach like erosion, so flat areas will form along the shore.
Some are more equal than others.