Lowkey - McDonald Trump

Fight? Sure.

Succeed without significant loss of life and infrastructure? Doubt.

But then you’re just pushing the unknown/undefined part to “feels like”.

We cannot define it properly so we can’t discuss it formally or make assertions like it’s the only thing in the universe that is not an illusion.

You could assert “Cogito, ergo sum.” but that’s kind of been done before.

Anecdotally Fifa (EA FC or whatever they’re calling it now) would have to be up there. Hadn’t played it in years but gave it a go last season as it was free on Game Pass.

They’ve combined the addictiveness of card collecting with loot box mechanics, FOMO and moving the goalposts (pun intended) to get the best players. The gameplay also seemed pretty rigged to prevent grinding rewards out.

Then when the new game is out, rather than dishing out all the rewards to those still playing it instead becomes infeasible to unlock any more decent players so you’re pretty much stuck with what you have.

Even if you pay full price for the next game you’ll have to use low stat players as they only seem to start releasing decent ones half way through the season.

I couldn’t claim to have a definition as the origins of consciousness are still unknown to science and not formally defined.

However your definition is definitely not the widely accepted one. It doesn’t even offer a proper definition, all it does is push the unknowns to “what it is like to be that organism”.

Who defines what it is to “be” something? What is the smallest unit of “being”? Are we saying that consciousness is an inherent property of organisms or could it be recreated on a computer?

Ok, I agree it can’t be an illusion the way you define it, I don’t think that would be an unpopular opinion.

I also maintain that it cannot be defined the way you define it.

Yes my point was that if there was a hypothetical being outside our universe looking in they could correctly say that our consciousness is an illusion from their subjective experience.

It’s an oversimplification because that is not the scientifically accepted definition of consciousness. It is currently undefined and seems to be an emergent property from the brain, the complex object known to us.

If the universe is a simulation then conciousness could be considered an illusion to those outside the simulation. From an internal perspective it wouldnt be an illusion as it’s the only thing that we experience.

However we have trouble even defining what counciousness is (an oversimplified quote from a philosopher doesn’t cover it) so it seems pointless to make such speculative black and white statements about it.

“I saw it on TV!”

Took our jerbs, eat our dergs.

2. Yeah good shout, I just know certain fans/pundits don’t like complicated rules so tried to keep it simple but your method is better.

3. Sorry, I think I was unclear… Above the end of the sleeve meaning on the sleeve is fine. I don’t think that’s the current rule as I’ve seen many recent decisions when they’ve given handball for the ball hitting the sleeve. If that’s not the case, I refer back to #1.

1. VAR has the potential to make the game much better. The refs’ interpretations of the subjective rules are the issue. The whole rulebook needs to be rewritten with the aim to eliminate grey areas.

2. Offside lines should be drawn from the back foot of the attacker. It was designed to stop goalhanging, not to penalise attackers who gain no advantage from being a centimetre offside.

3. This one I’m not even sure I agree with but here goes… Headers should be banned because repeated knocks to the head are not good. In exchange, anything above the sleeves of the shirt should not be classed as handball.

Imagine not starting the season with him in FPL.

Why would you expect it to affect productivity when you were working the same number of hours?

It’s just slightly increased flexibility under the guise of a 4 day week.

Perhaps we could consider equipping them with emission cannons that blast particulates into the air to keep the temps down. 🫡👍

Guessing you might have been being rhetorical but I’ll give my take anyway… The stabbings were just the spark that ignighted it all.

They do not have a common goal but they are united in thinking immigration levels are too high, despite it being a net benefit to the country. From what I’ve seen they generally fall into 3 groups:

1. EDL/BNP/facists/racists who have been whipping up anti-immigration rhetoric forever. Emboldened by extreme language used by Farage, successive Conservative governments and no doubt rhetoric from the convicted felon across the pond. They blamed the stabbings (and every problem ever) on immigrants despite the fact it was carried out by an autistic kid born in this country.

2. Brexit/Reform voters who see themselves as “more centrist” because they aren’t as far-right as #1. They blame years of austerity, worstening living conditions and growing class divide on the idea “the country is full”. They thought Brexit was supposed to solve this and are now protesting because it hasn’t. They claim it wasn’t done properly so voted Reform but got a more centrist government instead. They want to make their dissatisfaction heard but as far as I know do not condone the violence. They might now know the stabbings were not linked to migration but the issue has escalated beyond that incident now.

3. Young people who are generally not very well informed on any of the issues and have been fed misinformation on their various social media channels encouraging them to join the protests. It’s the holidays, they are impressionable and angry. They think they’re part of some revolutionary movement or just drunk and up for some chaos so are out with their mates filming it all in their phones for the views. I imagine as they become more informed they will align with #1 or #2.

Shame climate change has rendered it about as useful as looking out the window at predicting the weather.

Isn’t that the joke?

Ok fair enough, just thought it was strangely straight for an “I’m ok folks” wave.