Posts by StevenNL2000

In 1916, Karl Schwarzschild found a formula to calculate the size of a black hole, formally known as the event horizon. What not many people know is that when he tested his new formula, he found a theoretical limit to how large a black hole can be. He wrote that if a supermassive black hole would continue "eating" matter after reaching this limit, it would likely become unstable and collapse on itself. His calculations showed that this event would generate gravitational waves so large that our entire solar system would be torn apart, regardless of where in the universe the collapse occurred.

His results were dismissed by other scientists as "a science fiction tale" and they pointed out that such large black holes could never exist. Many of them were surprised when none other than Albert Einstein said he looked at Schwarzschild's results "with the utmost interest". Einstein was correct: after Schwarzschild's death, multiple black holes close to the limit were found. The currently largest known black hole, TON 618, is estimated to be at 99.7% of the limit and is still eating as we speak...

↩  Miwojedk As you have said, the mistake is very likely to be noticed because the rightful recipient will complain, and the restaurant is very likely to decline having the cold food picked up again*. As such, contacting the restaurant very likely does not change the outcome of the situation, so I would not see that as a moral obligation, although it would show honesty. The fate of the food is then yours to decide since the other parties have no use for it.

* It should be noted that because of hygiene standards, this would also apply if the food was still hot but left the eye of the delivery driver.

↩  Miwojedk From an organizational point of view, the restaurant bears the responsibility for the delivery driver's mistake. But the question wasn't if the delivery driver would be held responsible, but if it is wrong to accept the food, and as such I argue that you are likely to inflict more harm by accepting it than by declining it.

As for your second point, the person accepting the food should know it wasn't meant for them because they didn't order anything... If someone has for some reason sent you food without letting you know, the delivery driver will come back around after confirming that it was in fact the correct address.

The delivery driver leaving the food at your doorstep is not a comparable situation because you are not given the option to accept or decline it. If they do not want to pick it up again because it has gone cold, you had no hand in that chain of events.

↩  Miwojedk The delivery driver made a mistake, but by accepting the food, you are unduly inflicting harm on a party that did not, namely the restaurant. It is also likely that you have increased the harm to the delivery driver by escalating the situation from taking slightly too long to deliver at the correct address to not delivering at the correct address at all.

I would like to hear what arguments there are in favor of accepting it, since you're simply taking something that is not yours.

I think the value of the movie comes from the fact that they have managed to make almost every single scene memorable. I can name "Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries!", the Knights Who Say "Ni!", the Killer Rabbit of Caerbannog (which is even in Minecraft), and "What is the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?" off the top of my head, and that is not even close to the entire movie.

↩  FromTimeToTime That was definitely the original philosophy, but they moved away from that a bit when they introduced profile pages.

This thread highlights for me that we shouldn't take for granted that everything that was blocked in the past still needs to be blocked now. By now it has also been a while since my test: maybe it's still fine, maybe it's broken again. We should however actually be checking that instead of defaulting to keeping everything blocked.

To be fair, this is probably confirmation bias more than anything else. Almost every possible (and impossible) event has been predicted by someone at some point. Over 99% of the time they are wrong and forgotten about, and once in a while they happen to get it right and their text predicting it is rediscovered after it has come true.

↩ @'billy7oblos' Of course, but that still reduces the transparency of the process.

To be fair, the only reason this is the case is because we haven't been purging inactive members, there are over 130 of those.

↩  Tizz ↩  RedEastWood The IP address is not just a formality, it can be used as evidence in combination with logs. See for example the summer_nicole02 account in https://forum.totalfreedom.me/…-femboyxx-summer-nicole02.

↩  FromTimeToTime Paper actually has this functionality built in, with less performance impact than Orebfuscator.

↩  FromTimeToTime https://forum.totalfreedom.me/…-new-forum-project-update

We actually installed a new plugin to allow video embeds just a week ago:
https://forum.totalfreedom.me/d/2947-test

It turns out that there is a Flarum plugin that allows you to make discussions sticky only in the tag they are in and not on the All Discussions page:
https://discuss.flarum.org/d/27888-stickiest

I vote to install this plugin.

For the amount of text in this thread, most of it seems to boil down to a fairly simple point, namely that we either do or do not trust the person making the final decision to weigh the arguments properly. I say "properly" rather than "objectively" because weighing arguments is by definition not objective, it may just feel that way when you reach the same conclusion yourself.

There are a lot of options here, but they all come with their own downsides. We could just stop banning IP addresses in indefinite ban requests, but that might reduce security. Restricting the entire section to admins reduces transparency, and making the IP addresses only visible to admins requires development, which we are short on.

This is not necessarily a duplicate, but I will close it because it's not a bug in the sense of something we can just fix.

Unbanned.

↩  man Innocent until proven guilty. The policy doesn't need to be exactly what characterslimits posted, but right now there is formally no way for accidental usage to be exempted at all.