Andrew Nissen

every time I start to notice any slowdowns I spend the next day with Tracy (github.com/wolfpld/tracy) and knock as much out as I can. It’s such a crazy good tool. got back up to the consistent 60 from around 45 worst case today :)

swapped out my very naive tcp stream based multiplayer implementation with github.com/ValveSoftware/… last night and as expected it’s p. incredible. so thankful it’s available!

@lydiakauppi @marisiyaaa @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy yea this is very well put!

@marisiyaaa @constantlydumb @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy An act can be reasonable, understandable, even justified, and still illegal. Sometimes we do those acts knowing and accepting the consequences, and that’s part of society. Sometimes the fact it’s worth catching the charge is part of the context. But it’s still assault

Bluesky is mad at Taylor Lorenz for attending the WHCD and the discourse has unearthed some other TL lore

@marisiyaaa @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy "mental danger" is not a valid reason to destroy someone's property (or assault them, or whatever). yet again another reason why we have drawn the line so clearly at real, physical danger, because who the hell knows what "mental danger" means

@constantlydumb @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy no but lorenz was violating privacy of people who’d just been victimized in a terrorist attack one of whom was partially exposed you could argue that poses a mental danger especially to people who are probably under extreme mental load and had just experienced a traumatic event

@marisiyaaa @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy correct, i do not want to change the right to record freely in public without having your property destroyed, I strongly believe this is a core principle of a free society. if you don't that's fine!

@constantlydumb @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy literally your entire argument has been antichange. a lot of issues could be diminished to oh your just offended why should we have to cater to you. i mean labor rights organizers were just offended if we give them what they want theyll just keep taking and society will collapse

@marisiyaaa @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy right yea that's why he got charged and fined, because he wasn't in any danger

@constantlydumb @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy someone not something? great you don’t think property damage is assault we’re in agreement

@marisiyaaa @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy this is why we have placed the line at "if you or someone is in physical danger", because no matter what over enough time you will have to relitigate all of these specifics at some point

@marisiyaaa @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy I'm definitely with you that things need to be able to change, but sometimes you just end up in the same place. if you empower citizens to destroy other citizens property if they are offended, the definition of offended gets blurrier and blurrier, eventually it escalates, etc

@marisiyaaa @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy no of course we shouldn't change a law for that, that'd be insane, because we believe (as a society) in the right to record freely in public! we handle special circumstances like this by not charging them! you are arguing for _less_ rights!

@constantlydumb @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy do you literally not know or is that a rhetorical question? again you’re saying that the laws shouldn’t change to account for moments where people destroy property to protect the privacy of a terrorist victim, that is ironically a conservative impulse funnily enough

@marisiyaaa @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy no, I said it's a right wing impulse, because I think lots of people have understandable moments like this. but I think it's important to not go too far the other way and start actually changing definitions to make it seem like an "ok" thing. was this person even charged?

@constantlydumb @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy if i don’t consent to someone taking pictures of me partially naked because im getting medical care after being hit by a terrorist in a car and someone slaps the phone out of the hands of the person recording you think the person hitting the phone is conservative?

@marisiyaaa @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy you either believe in rights or you don't! we have the right to record in public; exerting physical force to take something from someone's hands and destroy it because you do not agree with that right is obviously a right wing impulse

@marisiyaaa @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy it is what you're advocating for! even if there were a definition of assault where you can take something from someone and throw it on the ground and it didn't count, trampling the rights of others through force because you're uncomfortable is clearly conservative!

@marisiyaaa @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy arguing private citizens should be able to assault other private citizens in public when they are personally upset is so laughably far-right I don't think there's much of a response here. I think the websites you are spending time on are hurting you

@constantlydumb @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy that’s not what conservative means. i guess i now have to ask what you think conservative means because you seem to think mutually understandable definitions are really important

@marisiyaaa @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy because we have agreed as a society that you cannot do violence onto other people unless you are in danger. obviously!

@constantlydumb @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy how is it conservative?

@marisiyaaa @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy for filming people in public without consent, you can make this argument, but the obvious response is that the people who benefit most from not being filmed in public are obviously the ones who need to be filmed the most. off duty cops don't need more excuses to be insane

@marisiyaaa @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy the answer for the assault definition is because that's still not acceptable behavior. you want it to be ok to swipe shit out of peoples hands as long as you don't touch them? what if you hit the phone but they're clutching it and hurt themselves? obviously a bad idea!

@marisiyaaa @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy i guess we just have a disagreement where you believe it is ok to (legally) assault someone for filming in public if you are upset by it. I personally find that incompatible with a free society, and I think the law clearly agrees. if you just dont believe in laws then thats that

@constantlydumb @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy hey and i’ll give you a hint you can even google what it means and try and twist the definition to fit the nonsensical way you tried to use it

@marisiyaaa @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy anti-progressive and favoriting conservatism? i obviously consider assaulting people for exercising their rights in public to be anti-progressive and conservatism, yes, that is what I have been saying for a while now

@constantlydumb @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy what do you think reactionary means? because if you just sling more insults i think it shows that you don’t actually know

@marisiyaaa @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy honest question are you a child? are you pro vigilantism? i'm seriously sorry if i've been arguing with a child this whole time

@constantlydumb @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy what do you think reactionary means?

@marisiyaaa @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy the state is something we all participate in, ostensibly have the power to change, and is a necessary function of living in a society. random people deciding they are offended by your filming in public and taking your stuff is vigilantism. extremely reactionary.

@constantlydumb @lydiakauppi @Kittenfish817 @pjharpy you are not a leftist you are literally defending the state deciding what is morally correct. reading comprehension would be a big help for you bc the first amendment is freedom from government suppression of speech which im not advocating for the government to smack ppls phones