it was a bit of squeeze to add even Gemma3n:e2b onto it
statements dreamed up by the utterly deranged
V0ldek
joined 2 years ago
This is so funny, I don't think I've seen this before
Like imagine a cryptobro circa 2020 being like "no, we're not early, this is actually the honeymoon phase and it'll just get worse"
My immediate gut reaction to a rule as general as this is that there's fat chance it's universally applicable, there will always be cases where active would be clunky.
Like I can't imagine an RPG protagonist exclaiming that "Someone trapped this chest!" instead of the 100% more natural "This chest was trapped!"
This article is wild already, on the first page there's this quote
‘Do not use the passive voice when such use makes a statement clumsy and wordy. . . Do not, by using the passive voice, leave the agent of the verb vaguely indicated, when the agent should be clearly identified.’ [Edwin Woolley, Handbook of Composition, 1907, p. 20]
Emphasis mine on... a clear usage of the passive! In active this would have to be "when you should clearly identify the agent" or something of the like, the fuck, how hard is it to not expose your whole ass like this mate
Wait what, TIL there was/is a crusade against... the passive fucking voice?
Some people just need to invent problems for their life to feel meaningful, don't they
so businesses and employees who get real value out of the stuff.
I have really bad news about what percentage that would be
Mods when a post escapes containment: No! No!!
Sickos like me when a posts escapes containment and they get to see the worst takes humanity has to offer: Yes... Ha ha ha... YES!
I'm sorry but what the hell is a "work trial"
Exactly, like the whole point of their schtick is that they want to legitimise plain old racism as something more sophisticated, so I don't see a reason to entertain them as such.
I really don't see a reason for us making a linguistic distinction between "low-brow bigotry" and "high-brow bigotry", which is essentially what this is in practice.
When my uncle drunkenly complains about how "those stupid immigrants are everywhere and they ain't even speaking our language" - it's racism; but when a guy with a university degree writes a treatsie about how immigrants will take over and that's a problem because his bayesian priors say they're statistically less intelligent - then it's suddenly "race pseudoscience". No, both of them are the same breed of racist, the only difference is the latter had enough money to attend Yale.
but at what point do we start calling it race pseudoscience
I think the word you're looking for is "racism"
Ah ok, I'm aware of what this is, just never heard "work trial" used.
In my head it sounded like a free demo of how insufferable your new job is going to be