And only LiveJournal is untouched by time

I still don’t quite get why planes are somehow the exception - likely because something about engineering and use of real planes makes inverted Y preferable, or that joysticks as opposed to mouse/keyboard make inverted Y a bit more tangible? I don’t find the inversion intuitive in any game-related context, at least as a mouse/keyboard/gamepad user.

Up is up, down is down, simple as that. I just piloted a spaceplane in Space Engineers after piloting a dragon in World of Warcraft and both games just have up on up and down on down. To me, this is how it should be, or at least there should always be an option to make it so.

For any casual play, it just adds to a consistent and predictable experience.

But then again, I might be biased because inverted Y just doesn’t click with me, no matter how much I challenged myself to figure it out. Automatic reactions always lead me the wrong way.

I’m just completely unable to learn inverted Y.

Any game that doesn’t have an option to make it regular is unplayable for me. Oh, and sadly IRL radio controlled planes are too. I tried two, and both got smacked into the ground and needed repairs.

I can comprehend it when both axis are inverted, but when it’s only one, it doesn’t click.

Wow, that’s an interesting way

It it would be a lever behind, X axis would be inverted too.

Y inversion is just terrible and has no good explanation in relation to non-piloting games (and even there most people would be better off with regular Y)

You’re a monster

Flying games should have an option to choose regular or inverted.

If you’re into piloting, got a joystick or something - sure, inverted is your choice.

Otherwise it’s just unnecessarily confusing.

I think it refers to the delivery of mRNA inside the cells.

Except mRNA does not persist and thereby cannot be seen as a genetic alteration.

It is, which is why I said “related” as a hedge - and also mentioned that you don’t have to be any kind of biologist if you just listened to your biology classes back in the day.

Basic education is enough to understand, in general terms, how it works.

On my end, as a microbiologist, I had extensive training on viruses and the way most of them work is very similar. I can confirm that the vaccine doesn’t do anything SARS-CoV-2 itself wouldn’t.

So, what makes you skeptical of these vaccines? Or are you trolling around?

I’m sorry if my assumption was wrong - it was simply written in a way that reminds of how LLMs get to write the texts.

In any case, thank you for the discussion! It was interesting indeed, though it could be held eternally - and we still have limited time in here to make it special.

Because I studied well at school (which is enough as a prerequisite), and also happen to have a major in microbiology, which is related to what we’re talking about.

If there are things in particular that you are skeptical about, let me know.

The fact that this is a real IT question and not a culinary review is hilarious

Even better that one of the responding comments is written by Barbecue Cowboy

And in case someone hacks into your Jellyfin, what exactly would they do with it? Watch movies? :D

Contextual answers come from the shared experience that got interpreted in a similar manner.

In your Jeff example, I imagined a car. As such, it was not conveyed to me that it was the train, because we have different experiences in modes of transportation mentioned by default. Your neurons reconstructed one thing, mine did the other.

How does energy exist in a world without matter? Immediate questions arise: what does it relate to? Can it be measured? How does it show itself? How do we know it’s there if there’s no matter for it to act upon? How did it form?

And God - there’s no good reason to believe He exists in the first place. Being lost in the woods of the so-called “immaterial” doesn’t bring Him an inch closer to being material and real. What is material does not need you to believe in anything; it just is.

You may believe that the wall is there, or you may not, but if it’s there, you won’t be able to walk through it like it doesn’t exist. And for all we know, no one has managed to produce something objective solely out of their perception or beliefs.

As per the last paragraph - it made me wonder if I’m talking to an LLM. In which case - good job! but please, keep it somewhere else.

Yes, because we knew no better. Now we can be more precise and replicate specifically the parts immune system can recognize that are not harmful to us. If anything, we made vaccines safer than they were before.

It’s like saying solar panels are technobabble because we once gathered nearly all energy by burning wood or coal. Sure, we did, but why do it now? We know better options.

Besides, it takes school-level knowledge of biology to understand the reasoning behind these vaccines. They rely on the knowledge we had for many decades now; it was only hard to produce such RNA sequences at scale and to meet all the standards while doing so. Now we can do this, and it makes no sense to do otherwise.

Traditional vaccines are more dangerous and, at their best, just as efficient. Besides, they typically take longer to develop and test, and time was a pressing issue. Some traditional-style vaccines got eventually rolled out, but they did not outperform the alternatives, and so they didn’t gain much traction.

So, overall, the biggest issue with mRNA/vector-based vaccines is lack of literacy among the people who fear it.

My local one and either Japanese or Chinese. These folks have nailed it, but I still want to eat something familiar as my staple.

Adapter or charger. Rarely - power brick.

I’m pretty sure you misunderstood the way these vaccines work - no judgment, media is ass these days - so let me clear it out for you.

mRNA vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna) give cells a piece of RNA (ribonucleic acid) coding the spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2, the virus causing COVID-19. mRNA normally serves as a translation layer: it simply comes to rRNA, lays down and says “we make THIS”. And there’s the end of it. No long-term changes are made, the cell just produces respective proteins for a while, before new genuine orders come along.

In this process, spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2 are being created, are being recognized by the immune system as something that is clearly not yours, destroyed and remembered. Other than this response typical for any vaccine or illness, nothing else ultimately changes.

Vector vaccines (Johnson & Johnson, Sputnik V) put the spike-coding sequence into another virus that is otherwise harmless. Then this virus enters your body with a shot, and then much the same thing occurs.

To be clear: viruses do these kinds of things all the time. SARS-CoV-2, that very virus causing COVID-19, does this too, except it instructs cells to replicate the entire thing, so that it could infect other cells and proliferate. In this way, such vaccines are no different than just getting infected, with one major difference in that you don’t get sick in the first place and don’t have random dangerous code replicate all around your body. Harmless spike proteins get formed in a controlled manner and quantity - and that’s it.

Even if you were an evil billionaire wishing to decimate human population or something, you’d have very hard time making something RNA-based that somehow persists in the body and also doesn’t reveal the effects for a long while. Easier to do with vector-based vaccines, but very hard to make it unnoticeable, either.

Time is the way we perceive one of the defining characteristics of material world. Our perception is material, and so is the world.

Same with, say, energy. It’s not matter itself, but it belongs to the material, because it defines the interactions of matter and doesn’t exist outside of it.

The common understanding of immaterial implies that it is a thing in itself. But any definition, any concept gets born in matter (our brains), can be clearly defined through matter in any of its carriers, and can never exist outside of matter. It is simply, thereof, an arrangement of matter, of the material.

The lens of nothingness is, by definition, nothing. Where nothing exists, no concept exists, either. Think of the vacuum. It has no temperature - it’s not 0K, not 1000K, it’s nothing. It has no radiance, no density. In total, uninterrupted nothingness, concepts of time, God, gravity, energy make no sense; there are no symbols, no writing, nothing. Any meaningful concept is not present in the void. Immateriality, like nothingness, is null.

Writing is merely an act of transcribing concepts in our head to concepts on paper, only meaning anything because we agreed on what means what. We can transcribe our imagination, the electrical dance of neurons. We can transcribe our memories stored much the same way.

For what it’s worth, writing is a clever trick we have invented to transfer our knowledge from material brain to material paper by manipulating matter in our hands and pieces of matters that leave a trace on paper surface. By agreeing on what these traces mean and by teaching younger generation to understand them, we learned to preserve knowledge beyond the time our neurons die.

Writing, thereby, does not invoke anything immaterial; it is merely a way to make backups, same as word of mouth (transferring knowledge to neurons of others, so that your death doesn’t mean data is gone), but more reliable.

And while it is incredible that we learned to preserve knowledge much beyond our own lifespans, it is purely, and completely, material

Also, I’m interested in why do you say the “immaterial” cannot be moved? It’s as easy as making a copy - and in the age of computers, making a perfect copy is entirely possible.