I think if you shared one picture, you would have saved paragraphs of text you didn’t have to write and so much back and forth in the comments, as everyone doesn’t understand what you’re asking.

I meant you wouldn’t have to work as hard as normal jobs if you are top 0.01% beautiful, not that you can’t make money unless you are. If you aren’t top 0.01%, you’ll have to do lots of work to make money.

It’s actually extremely hard to earn money with OnlyFans. You’re not the first one to get the idea. There’s massive competition and if you’re not seriously willing to do a lot of marketing (which basically means going on social media and messaging thirsty dudes/people and being flirty with them), you’re only going to earn peanuts if anything at all.

Unless you’re really top 0.01% beautiful, but yeah as you see that’s unlikely.

It’s basically as much work as any other job, so yeah, might as well do any other job.

Did you try being bored by it? “Oh it’s one of those nightmares again, let’s get it over with. Where is the monster chasing me? Ah, there it comes, yes, eat me, I’m so scared, aaaah”

I never had such extreme episodes but enough that I did actually get bored by them.

What’s important to say is that I was a very anxious person, scared of everything. I did decide to start confronting my fears and getting rid of them. Part of it was accepting the fears and just letting myself be scared without the judgement of fear being bad. Accepting the fear as part of myself and my psyche. Getting bored of nightmares definitely coincided somewhere around that time.

So yeah, I would suggest working to solve your issues in waking life.

I literally have a rpi4 and just put libreELEC on it

But yeah that’s the thing, even you call it “trained” sociopathy. I.e. everyone else could be trained into it as well. Of course that wouldn’t happen because people are different, we can’t predict everything yada yada. If you grow up with awareness about richness and the good of socialism, communism and so on it’s more unlikely you make the same mistakes and so on.

But if you’re extremely poor and have a mindset of “oh I just have to work hard and then be rich eventually” and actually aspire to be rich, which a lot a lot of people do, then I think those will quickly become exactly the same as current rich people. The reason the system still works is because there are still a majority of people believing in it and supporting it. Those poorer people would, if they became rich, be essentially the same kind of rich person as current rich people.

Then we agree. It just sounded like you somehow attributed more inherent evilness to them than everyone else. I of course agree that the resulting behavior is worse, but mostly by accident through the situations they’ve been in.

We would disagree there then. In my opinion the only difference is the situation people are in not allowing them to get more. If you need to work 2 months to get a new phone, gotta be “happy” with it for at least 2 months, and also can’t buy something else new.

If you look at lottery winners, most of them manage to lose all the money relatively quickly.

Most “non-rich” people spend their money they get from working quickly/instantly.

Yeah of course we can override our desires, I never said anything to the contrary. The difference though is not the existence of the desire, but the lack of overriding it.

idk, the only “personal data” GitHub requires is an email address… If you don’t have a throwaway one not associated to your identity yet, what are you even doing on the internet :D

This isn’t unique to the “hungry ghosts”.

Our behaviors are really quite simple. It has been shown a few times that our logical explanations for how we decide on our behavior are mostly rationalizations after the decision has been made, not actual reasons. I.e. like you say, we want more, then we find an explanation why we would want more.

For example, someone likes a new phone because it’s shiny and new, and says “why wouldn’t I treat myself once in a while”, “it’s faster which makes me more productive”, “it has X and Y new features which are useful in A and B situations”(which they’ll never encounter), and so on

Could almost say that wiping out all life on Earth over pieces of paper is unsustainable, but that’d probably go too far.

int toIncrement = ...;
int result;
do {
  result = randomInt();
} while (result != (toIncrement + 1));
print(result);

Also just noticed the site I linked also has performance per dollar pages, USA, new, non-used prices though. I would encourage to buy used.

I’m not sure if 16GB over 12 currently has a lot of effect. I currently have 16 and my VRAM almost never goes above 8-10 or so. Depends heavily on the game of course, but I think 16 is only really useful in the future.

That is for you to decide.

The way you decide is to go to a reputable review website like https://www.techpowerup.com/review/?category=Graphics+Cards&manufacturer=&pp=25&order=date and select one of the reviews of a relatively recent, unrelated card, for example the XFX Radeon RX 7900 XTX.

For this specific site, you then go to the “Average FPS” (or “relative performance”) page and look for your models you actually want to compare to in the list. Since you picked a relatively recent review, you can also see newer cards, so you can also see how much of an upgrade you’d get with newer cards you maybe haven’t considered yet.

In this case, the average fps of the 5700XT is 49.2, while the 6700XT gets 60, an improvement of ~22%. Now, you either know what 49 and 60 fps look like, or you go into one of your older games and use an fps limiter to limit to those fps values and play a bit and compare.

In any case, the final decision is up to you and no one can really tell you what you think your money is worth.

Edit: of course, this assumes your CPU is not a bottleneck. These tests always go with the most powerful CPU. You haven’t said anything about yours, so I assumed it wouldn’t be a bottleneck.

I would immediately get rid of the warning for unstableness in both projects. They are simply unnecessarily self-deprecating and “stay away” markers. When would you remove them?.. I don’t know your projects, but it’s incredibly unlikely that they are worse in those regards than basically any other software project. It’s always the user’s fault if they use some unestablished thing in production, you’re not responsible for that and have to help them learn that.

Being experimental can be expressed through a 0.x.x versioning scheme. Having bugs is expressed by the issue tracker, and in any case not unique at all. Incomplete features is something anyone will see if they decide to try it.

The chat thing seems like one of a million chat things, why is this chat solution better than any other already existing one? Needs to be clearly expressed as the first thing. tool like this suffers from adaption usefulness, it’s only useful if people use it, why would you use it if no one uses it.

The other thing looks very niche, so also not surprising that it’s not used that much.

I don’t know, I wouldn’t worry about it that much. Kind of confused anyway why you’d “look for” contributers. Seems kinda like you want to simply get a following for ego reasons or something.

Ah I see!

So you’re essentially saying that instead of asking women to smile, I should also ask them to get their tits out for me to gawp at!

Thank you :)

Exactly, in other words, you get people involved by making your tools good and advertising them to increase usage.

Write good documentation, make it user-friendly, create beautiful landing pages for the repository (i.e. readme), create a marketing/project website, be responsive in discussion forums, etc etc

I’m subscribed, when the video came out something along those lines was the title. They likely changed it because it performed better with viewers.