Keyboard pictures using keyboard

To me Abby and producers are the different sides of the same coin. So why is everyone always bitching about melissa 'enabled abbys abuse' all the time when she hasn't talked to Abby in 5+ years.
But Christi never gets hate for being buddy buddy with the producer?? Its obvious she and chloe got the best edit and benefitted from the friendship - like them not showing the physical fight she got in with Cathy. Just like Melissas relationship with Abby was detrimental to other kids so was christis relationship with producers. They edited Maddie & Kendall to look like brats, aired only melissa's dirty laundry on national tv, and were the ones who were in the power to enable abby. Not to mention Christis willing participation in all of this to keep the narrative going, she was constantly giving interviews alluding maddie was a sore loser, the one who brought up the affair, and the one constantly throwing stones at people. Oh and is still friends them to this day. Could you imagine the fit christi would have if melissa was still friends with abby??
And before the christi stan keyboard warriors start copying and pasting list of every bad thing melissa has done in her life - we get it you copy and paste the same list over and over again this is not about melissa. This is about christi and the harm she did to kids that always get swept under the rug.

Every time I type in a Teams meeting, it inputs double words whenever I type in chat box. But for some reason it doesn’t do this on Word or any other typing platform 😢

Which of these 3 do you think I should go for? Option 1

Legion Tower 7i Gen 7

• Processor: 12th Generation Intel® Core™ i7-12700F
• Operating System: Windows 11 Home 64
• Graphics Card: NVIDIA® GeForce RTX™ 3070 LHR, 8GB GDDR6X
• Memory: 16GB DDR5-4800MHz (UDIMM) - (2 × 8GB)
• Storage: 1TB SSD M.2 2280 PCIe Gen4 Performance TLC + 1TB 7200rpm HDD SATA 3.5"
• Cooling System: Lenovo Frost Air.

Option 2### CYBERPOWERPC GMA3300SAMV2 C Series

• Processor: AMD Ryzen 7 5700G, Octa Core (3.8GHz base, up to 4.6GHz Turbo Boost, 16 threads, 16MB cache)
• Memory: 16GB DDR4 3200MHz RAM
• Storage: 512GB PCIe NVMe SSD + 1TB HDD
• Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060, 12GB GDDR6
• Cooling: ARGB CPU Liquid Cooler
• Case Lighting: ARGB
• Connectivity: 802.11 AC Wi-Fi Built-In
• Accessories: USB Gaming Keyboard, USB 7-Color Gaming Mouse
• Operating System: Windows 11

Option 3

Alienware Aurora R12 Lunar Light

• Processor: Intel Core i5-11400F, 11th Gen Hexa Core (2.6GHz base, up to 4.4GHz Turbo Boost, 12 threads, 12MB cache)
• Memory: 32GB DDR4 3200MHz RAM
• Storage: 1TB NVMe PCIe M.2 Gen4 SSD
• Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, 8GB GDDR6
• Cooling: Low-Profile Smart Cooling CPU Heatsink
• Power Supply: 1000W PSU
• Connectivity: Intel AX1650 Wi-Fi 6 and Bluetooth 5.1
• Operating System: Windows 11

How can we stop going around in circles with these corrupted nihilists? (basically an extreme religious-nut but in reverse; no meaning, no value, no good/bad, nothing matters) I've compiled some of my thoughts/comments.

But first If you are not caught up yet:
1 Re: Vegan Gains ...The Militant Vegan Raffaela Interview - (May 12, 2024)
2 Vegan Gains is a sub-Jerkivest [5/11/24]
3 Moral Realism Debate w/ Inmendham - (May 16, 2024)
4 WTF #899: The vegan gains debate ... Value realism - (May 19, 2024)
5 Vegan Gains ...Denialism is the only nihilism [5/19/24]
also saw this Controversial Topics with Vegan Gains (Horse Riding, Bivalves, Depression, and much more!) - (May 11, 2024) ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ (he thinks in terms of some dogmatic religious brain-rot morality source of right/wrong, but a kind of reversed/opposite conclusion of it's absence, nihilism)
the very reason religion was invented in the first place was because humans by nature had a value-engine driving them & NEED for meaning, that's the irony. value gave rise to religion, religion never needed to grant value. The fact people can't grasp this. 🤦 ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎

Now onto the various arguments, sorry how long and out of order it is But the idea is to provoke you coming up with better ideas/arguments, and if you can critic and strenghen my and ultimately inmendham's arguments. The GOAL should be to Create a formal argument AKA a syllogism, modus ponens. Something clear and concise that can't be taken out of context or misinterpreted, as happened with the debate...

On the subject of Efilism, tread lightly, the philosophy and argument extends beyond merely focusing on suffering; it also includes the critical issue of consent violation. Its proponent and creator, Inmendham, argues for value realism, which contrasts starkly with the notion of subjective morality which I find illogical. While objective morality is full of baggage... often linked to outdated religious doctrine so on face value it's not fun or easy subject to broach... many contemporary non-religious ethicists ground it in realism. Personally me, inmendham and others see no use for the term "morality" as it's tainted. value-realism is the subject. Is it a value-laden universe or not?
it is not necessary to call TRUE/REAL right or wrong Objective, because if objective is defined as mind-independent than without minds there's nothing right/wrong to happen to, therefore THE discussion should be just regarding what is TRUE or NOT, subjective doesn't necessarily mean mere contrived opinion or preference but can be logical conclusion, e.g. you can conclude 2 + 2 = 4 as we understand these concepts of numbers to model reality but can you call it objective or mind-independent 2 + 2 = 4, or that math exists? Not really. As you require a modeler to model reality, an observer to make the observation, a mind to come to such accurate conclusions. To me, claiming there is no real right or wrong is akin to asserting that moral standards and ultimately the subject of Ethics is as fictitious as religion or Santa Claus, you just believe it cause you want to or have preference to. Why maintain this pretense if it's all a mere fabrication / contrivance?
Regarding subjective judgments such as determining "What's the tastiest potato chip or the most beautiful painting?", these are not factual assessments about the things themselves, The question itself is misleading, because the thing itself has none of those qualities objectively, Instead, such qualities are OUTPUTs generated by the interaction of our bodies and minds with these INPUT items, the input is quite arbitrary/irrelevant, unlike the highly meaningful & distinct output generated of positive or negative experiences. You might get off more on certain female body part than another, it doesn't matter, the output positives & negatives is more or less same among individuals and that's what's relevant... not what specific fun or hobby gets you or them off or pushes their buttons.
It can be TRUE that a certain food item is the tastiest to that personal individual, or gross to another, and we can talk about intersubjective truths with averages overall. But one's experience of what is tastiest for them doesn't contradict another's, they can both be true for them individually, as you are likely not even sharing the same exact experiences to judge differently. And one's very perception or framing of the experience changes the experience itself, no way around this truth. Some people find bricks tasty or edible, just how their brain is wired.
It's important to recognize that differing opinions of personal taste do not inherently conflict in the way ethical contradictions do. With ethical matters, asserting that two diametrically opposed views are equally valid is problematic, either one is right and the other wrong, or both might be based on flawed reasoning. Pretending 2 opposing ethical views can be both equally right/true/correct is utter contradictory mush, either one of them must be right / wrong, or both are contrived meaningless nothing opinions, just made up. you wouldn't say whether one believes in god or not IS mere personal opinion/preference and such 2 opposing views can be equally right at same time, that's utter contradictory nonsense, by saying 2 opinions that gRAPE is both good & bad at same time are equally right opinons, right loses all meaning and you might as well say neither is right and both are wrong, they each have their own contrived fairytale delusion.
Now with Ethics of right / wrong, it does not depend on one single individual's preference or opinion, but taken as the whole, if you violate one without consent you still have to account for that since you are seemingly putting the weight on the preference otherwise preferences are utterly meaningless and irrelevant.
ALSO, Do you call whatever you prefer what's right, or do you prefer to try to do what is right?
Do you prefer to seek out what is the right most accurate conclusion given all the facts of reality, or contrive right to be what's in your preference/interest or personal gain?
I don't think VG or most these talking heads understand value-realism (problematic events within subjectivity/a non-physical but REAL reality of the mind). Obviously there's no objective divine or otherwise prime-directive moral-rules we must follow. Unfortunately Religion has poisened the conversation so much with archaic ideas and mushy terms like 'Morality'. Understand there is no 'moral truth', let alone an objective one, ofc if you pigeon-hole me or all realists into defending such nonsense it's easy to refute them. What I'm interested in is subject of Ethics, and to start whether or not value/problematic events exist or do not exist.
Here's a silly question by nihilists: "why is suffering bad?"
Response: How do you identify suffering? Based on the fact that it feels bad. (Yes subjectively) Just as we can subjectively understand 2+2 = 4
Or this: "prove suffering bad, objectively"
Also question-begging, obviously it is subjective. If such badness cannot exist mind-independently by definition.
"Prove suffering is bad, objectively"
is begging the question, because...
It strawmans / assumes the badness must be bad mind-independently, it isn't therefore, it isn't bad.
Answer this, evolutionarily do animals PERCEIVE being tortured skinned alive nail in the eye as BAD, or does it impose torture which we RECOGNIZE and define as Bad by definition?
If true PAIN/torture isn't bad then why does it exist evolutionarily? Answer: (problem -> solution) mechanism which functions as ability to learn & improved survival, this mechanism was reinforced over time as it worked.
inmendham & realists like myself argue: it is the case Descriptively, Objectively evolution IMPOSED Prescriptive-value-judgements onto animals which function as a learning/problem solving mechanism. Fact is, the invention of 'PROBLEM' is something I/we/animals had nothing to do with... (no-free-will-choice) but are simply byproduct in observation of this fact.
If real PROBLEM(s) didn't truly exist then Arguably the word and conceptual understanding it points 👉 to wouldn't exist either. As if beings could be truly blind never seeing colors/vision yet pulling the idea out of thin air and conceiving of such a thing, how preposterous, that'd be giving human creativity/imagination way too much credit. The only nihilist argument then is that by evolution we & all feeling organisms are somehow ultimately deluded or have illusion of problem where there is none, which I find deeply implausible. Run the torture study/experiment a million times putting people's arm in the fire "yep still bad". Filtering out people who lack ability to feel pain of course.
As evolutionary biologists even states pain is a message to the animal "don't do that again". Can't get descriptively prescriptive more than that.
Are You Getting It?
The Ought is literally baked in as an IS. The is-ought gap to be bridged is a complete Red-Herring, yes you can't derive an Ought from an IS, because if you oughtn't do something, then it can never be BAD... problematic/BAD/torture can't mean anything if it doesn't scream OUGHT-not.
All you have to agree to is due to evolution it created torture which is decidedly negative/ inherently BAD, by definition. Otherwise it wouldn't feel bad or be torturous at all... THEN ask yourself, how can something be BAD yet it's not BAD to create that BAD?
This is Checkmate. These are irrefutable Facts & Logical deductions.
So much for it all being false-perception, the very fact placebo patients perceive an otherwise harmless laser as BAD/painful makes it so. It's the TRUE reality in their mind and you can't deny that fact. It's also a fact believing a pain isn't really all that bad can make it so, but this doesn't make these value-laden experiences NOT real/true.
As per evolution, your body/brain's mechanisms must generate & impose a prescriptive-value-judgement / problematic event within your mind,
It's nagging, complaining, telling you keeping your hand on the hot stove is a mistake/problematic/bad. (not in itself but as a consequence)
I believe this brain making me write all this... is making an accurate assessment when it observe certain events to be problematic/bad where it's happening which is within subjectivity, where's your evidence my perceptions are fooling me or I'm somehow deluded? I witnessed the crime take place and you were nowhere near the crime scene yet you have the authority to claim otherwise as fact? (You are not simply agnostic to my problem suffering but a De-nihilist)
Once one accepts this evolutionary fact we can move on to more complicated questions regarding ethics, like how do weigh the good & the bad, conflicting preferences, etc. Otherwise, it's all pointless & futile, like arguing bivalves or wild-suffering with a non-vegan. They're just not on that level yet and it's a waste of time.
revised version of my other comment: I believe that many discussions around morality miss a crucial point about value-realism, which acknowledges problematic events within subjectivity, a non-physical but real reality of the mind. It is evident that there are no objective, divine, or prime-directive moral rules we must follow. Unfortunately, religion has muddied the conversation with archaic ideas and terms like 'morality'.
There is no 'moral truth,' especially not an objective one. If critics pigeonhole realists into defending such notions, it becomes easy to refute them. My interest lies in ethics and whether value/problematic events exist.
Consider this question by nihilists: "Why is suffering bad?"
Response: Suffering is identified because it feels bad, subjectively. Just as we subjectively understand 2+2=4, we can recognize suffering through its unpleasant experience.
When asked to "prove suffering is bad, objectively," this is question-begging, as the question assumes that the badness must exist independently of minds, which it does not by definition. This question straw-mans the issue by requiring mind-independent badness, ignoring the subjective nature of suffering. As if the quality of it being BAD must be granted by something outside the experience itself.
Evolutionary Perspective: Animals perceive and react to torture (e.g., being skinned alive) as bad because evolution has imposed mechanisms that signal harm. Pain serves as a problem-solving mechanism, reinforcing behaviors that enhance survival. If pain and suffering weren't inherently problematic, they wouldn’t exist in the form they do.
Realists like myself argue that evolution has objectively imposed prescriptive-value judgments on animals. The concept of 'problem' or 'bad' arises from these evolutionary mechanisms, not from free will. The existence of these concepts indicates the reality of these problematic experiences.
If real problems didn’t exist, neither would the concepts describing them. This is akin to how beings blind from birth wouldn’t conceive of color. Suggesting that evolutionary processes have universally deluded all feeling organisms into perceiving problems where there are none is implausible.
As evolutionary biologists state, pain signals to the animal, "don't do that again," which is descriptively prescriptive. The 'ought' is embedded within the 'is.' Thus, the is-ought gap is a red herring because prescriptive judgments are evolutionarily ingrained.
Again, How do you identify suffering? Based on the fact that it feels bad. (Yes subjectively) Just as we can subjectively understand 2+2 = 4
All you have to agree to is due to evolution it created torture which is decidedly negative/ inherently BAD, by definition. Otherwise it wouldn't feel bad or be torturous at all... THEN ask yourself, how can something be BAD yet it's not BAD to create that BAD?
Conclusion: By acknowledging that evolution created inherently negative experiences like torture, we accept that these experiences are bad by definition. Denying the badness of creating bad experiences is contradictory. Therefore, once recognizing the true reality of subjective experiences, only then we can move on to complex ethical questions about weighing good and bad and addressing conflicting preferences.
playing devil's advocate let's try Steelman their position and then arrive at the logical conclusions of it and then perhaps refute it. If they say: "veganism = right" realize there is no contradiction IF by 'right' they just mean it's literally nothing but their preference...
There's no goal to prefer to know/do what's right, RATHER what's right is whatever matches our personal preferences, so unlike flat earther vs round earth beliefs/CLAIMs which can contradict/conflict with each other since either 1 is right or both are wrong. Individual tastes don't.
Whereas if VG says 9 people gRAPE the 1 kid for fun is WRONG because he's a threshold-deontologist but Also RIGHT to a hedonistic utilitarian, Those views only contradict/conflict if they are making VALUE-claims or recognizing a problematic event take place. However, with VG apparently he would have to say he's not claiming or labelling anything as TRULY problematic at all but merely describing his preferences like flavor of ice cream...
Now, of course, as the realist, I find such a view more deplorable/worse than if they were merely agnostic on right/wrong. Cause it's one thing to say there's a right answer to questions of Ethics but we have no objective scientific basis to determine it yet or lack knowledge VS saying they have knowledge there is absolutely no right or wrong.
Under Anti-realism nihilism, what they mean by wrong/right, is just their preference, if I understand correctly (which I'm quite sure) Anti-realism nihilism reduces the Subject of Ethics down to nothing but you or someone else pontificating/opining (i.e "me no like torture") . It defends some sort of expressivism, emotivism, normative, prescriptive reduction of Ethics. Which I find lubricious and has to be a mistake,
I don't see anyone playing any different game even the nihilists invest their money and plan ahead for self-interest, no one truly signs up for torture for fun like it's no problem, and runs away from pleasure happiness as bad. Further, it stands to reason... since we can recognize objectively evolution created a punishment mechanism to enforce learning and survival, BAD/PROBLEM as a concept is something I/WE/Animals had nothing to do with. We didn't invent it, we recognize it and respond accordingly. Even evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins stated that pain is a message to the organism 'don't do that again!'
We must address further the flawed logic of VG and other nihilists reducing Ethics down to mere arbitrary preferences like potato chip flavor, or how much salt you prefer in the soup. As it is completely disanalogous & dishonest upon reflection. QUOTE: "There's no arguing against Efilism, it's just personal opinion. Like arguing what tastes better... ice-cream or potato chips?"
Say if you believe that the mona-lisa is beautiful, and I personally find it ugly, this conflicts/contradicts nothing because it claims nothing in terms about that object or reality outside of our own minds.
such qualities are OUTPUTs generated by body/mind from these INPUTs, the input is quite arbitrary/irrelevant, unlike the highly meaningful & distinct output generated of positive or negative experiences.
it doesn't matter what specific fun or hobby gets them off or pushes their buttons in order for it MATTER, those differences don't make it any less real OR all mere subjective opinion. the output positives & negatives is more or less same among individuals and that's what's relevant...
It can be TRUE that a certain food item is the tastiest to some personal individual, or gross to another, one's experience of what is tastiest for them doesn't contradict another's, they can both be true for them individually because it is the reality in their mind, Some people find bricks tasty or edible, just how their brain is wired.
while one person may find a certain food delicious, another may find it repulsive, without invalidating each other's experiences because they are true for them individually. both experiences are valid/correct.
However, actions that disregard another's negative experience invalidate their reality. if you find being boiled alive problematic and I do it anyway believing it's ok, I am invalidating your experience as either not real, relevant, doesn't matter, or my preferences are more important (carry more weight) than yours. Or simply believe it's ALL equal or arbitrary and I just prefer to exploit you so I do that.
Positive or negative experiences are largely consistent among people, making them relevant, regardless of the specific stimuli. Individual truths about taste or preference coexist without contradiction, reflecting each person's value-generated reality.
This cannot honestly be applied to one's mere opinion it's fine to boil kids alive, as you are invalidating the fact that it matters to those victims. You saying it doesn't matter or your gain of pleasure outweighs their loss of pain, is a claim about the reality of events going on in their mind, so there is room for conflict/contradiction. They can't both be right/wrong at the exact same time.
A strong non-intuition argument/claim & facts presented render value-nihilism implausible:
It is Descriptively the case, that Evolution IMPOSED Prescriptive-ought statements... of 'PROBLEMATIC sensation/event' on organisms which functioned as a learning mechanism and improved survival.
Therefore, BAD/PROBLEM isn't mere subjective opinion but something I/we/animals had nothing to do with and are mere by-product reacting to an observation.
This is pretty much the only base-axiom needed to ground my own torture as mattering as the original actual value-currency at stake. That paired with the fact I sampled consciousness and know it matters to me whether or not I am tortured, the fact that I personally observe it as problematic makes it the true reality for my own mind...
...AND it's not mere opinion/proclamation / or idea humans creatively invented out of thin air... as if like everyone could be truly blind yet conceptualizing colovision, makes no sense. plus that's giving humanity way too much credit of imagination.
Can't really have thoughts about information that you don't have. The concept of bad/problem arguably wouldn't even exist if it never was so.
Yes, I agree very semantics. I am attempting to shed clarity on this topic. Looking at the word "BAD" purely in a descriptive sense (e.g., that which can be categorically applied to extreme suffering) it loses all meaning if it's not truly consequential (i.e., it matters whether one experiences bad or not). If it doesn't actually matter ("no problemo") then it can't be bad, only an illusion/delusion of it, yet it's an effective one evolution imposed on organisms as a learning/problem-solving mechanism. The value-realists like myself have every reason to believe evolution created the real thing, not some contrived pseudo-problem organisms feel compelled/obligated to solve.
One only requires the axiom of a Descriptive Bad to ground Ethics. Why? Because it can be argued that a descriptive statement of BAD/problem is prescriptive by it's very nature in the meaning the of word/language.(otherwise its psuedo-bad/fake langauge, redefines bad as aversion/mere preference against) Otherwise, it can't mean anything to be bad, torturously obnoxious, unwanted experiential events couldn't mean anything. Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins even state pain is a punishment signal/message to the animal: "Don't do that again!" If those aren't prescriptions imposed, then I don't know what is. The animal doesn't simply decide/prefer to avoid the event and finds it bad, it's told/finds it bad and so prefers to avoid the event/problem. If god or there were some logically or physically possible way it were to be invented how else would it exist?, or what you think evolution's reward & punishment mechanism accomplished? If it didn't synthesize problematic sensations to force organisms to solve?
Evolution prescribes Needs/wants, at the same time imposes a PAIN/PROBLEM of starvation/hunger which by it's very nature is a prescription for solution (i.e. sustenance/relief/comfort.)
By the very nature of "PROBLEM" it prescribes -> "SOLUTION" not merely a contrived or trivial-like on paper math problem, but the origin of why the word even exists: the problem of pain, a true whip/punishment mechanism, real currency to play with, real loss. Idk how you can describe something categorically as a PROBLEM in the true sense of the word if it doesn't come with it a necessary prescription for its solution. Because if there is no NEED for a solution, then it turns into no longer a problem again...
I don't see how it could be any other way because if there's no real game to be playing with value baked into it, then money would be worthless/not even exist, animals wouldn't bother evade standing in the fire, etc.
Saying It is Descriptively the case, that Evolution IMPOSED Prescriptive-ought statements... of 'PROBLEMATIC sensation/event' on organisms which functioned as a learning mechanism and improved survival.
Is the same as saying Evolution IMPOSED torture/BAD, as that's what torture/bad is... a prescribed need for solution to a problem which is some form of relief/comfort.
The prescription arises as a result of accepting step 1. (which nihilists reject/deny) problem solution. The latter does not follow/exist without the former. basic 2+2 = 4 logic. There's no point figuring out the answer to the math equation, if we don't agree first and foremost a problem exists. Nor how to solve a disease, if we don't first and foremost recognize a disease exists. And so, Any debate with nihilists on step 2: of determining what is the most likely solution / right answer becomes irrelevent and a waste of time. Arguing about whether x or y IS the right answer to fixing/preventing diabetes is pointless when they don't even agree the really disease exists. They don't believe an actual real BAD / Problem exists.
VG reduces it down to mere preferences, his reasonings that even if universally sentience prefers not suffebe tortured... Well, just because it is the case descriptively we prefer to avoid suffering doesn't mean we ought/should prevent suffering. He hasn't bridged the IS-OUGHT gap. But he got it backwards,
the claim/argument... ISN'T that because descriptively, sentience universally has a preference to avoid suffering, it is therefore bad,
the claim/argument... IS that it's descriptively bad/problematic, therefore universally there's a deductively logically assigned preference to avoid it,
Again you can't classify/label something as a problem if it's inconsequential whether it is solved or not. The word loses all meaning. If something NEEDs solving/fixing it means there's a problem, if there's a problem it means there's something NEED solving/fixing. Evolution manufactures these needy problems in organisms to manipulate and control them.
Merely what our preferences are IS NOT relevant, preference "frustration" arguably IS. (if preferences couldn't be frustrated "i.e., no value" than it wouldn't matter which way things turned out)
You can have a preference for some art style over another, if we were just programmed non-feeling robots that preferred to avoid standing in the fire, but there was no real kernel of value/bad, then it wouldn't matter.
Let's imagine something was Objectively PROBLEMATIC, an IS statement. What would a real problem look like? something in NEED of a solution. Again, why? because If it doesn't matter whether or not it exists or is Solved or not, it could never be a problem in the first place. So either this problem exists or it doesn't. (NOTE: it doesn't need to be an objective problem to be REAL, "i.e mind-independent")
Next, if ASI or sentient beings were to sample this "problem", would it not be the case they would logically deduce it's in need of a solution? And assign their preferences accordingly to solving it? Cause again otherwise then you just see it as "no-problemo" again.
"If Inmendham's argument is that sentient beings create value, and that the universe has no value without the presence of a sentient being generating it, would it not follow that the ought is inherently built into sensation?" yes but the way VG unfairly reframes it is that we subjectively place value on it, THAT it's entirely subjective, like you prefer salty or sweet, or certain ice cream flavor. emphasizing that it's entirely subjective opinion. Take a look at his unfair silly example: "we can't say pineapple on pizza is objectively tasty or not..." this shows a complete ineptitude in grasping the subject and misrepresenting the argument like crazy, no one is arguing whether Mona Lisa is objectively beautiful or some such thing.
What is being argued: the positive or negative mind-dependent event produced in response to the sensual or perceptual stimuli, the input (object) is irrelevant, only the output (experience) matters and what the value-engine (BRAIN) produced. What pushes your buttons so to speak, blue jelly beans or green jelly beans, could differ between 2 individuals but the shared experience is the same more or less. Whether you wired to find pineapple on pizza tasty or gross is irrelevant, some people find bricks edible.
Main issue is they talking past each other: what inmendham is arguing for was either not expressed as best it could be, and/or VG does not quite comprehend what is being argued... inmendham claims/argues evolution created the real bad/PROBLEM and we respond in recognition of this fact/truth with preferences that follow accordingly, Logic cannot be escaped, once you know 2+2 = 4, you can't will or believe it to be 79. If you know the right answer "torture be Bad M'kay?" obviously you won't act or behave otherwise and say you love it. What could it mean to have a preference against experiencing torture... does such a statement even make any sense? All that is required is a real BAD to exist... and then the preference to avoid it logically follows, an inescapable truth. Unless he thinks I also choose or prefer to believe 2+2 = 4 ?
Essentially VG keeps counter-arguing that: "yes we want to avoid torture, but that's just your preference... just cause universally sentience has a preference against torture (a Descriptive / IS statement) doesn't logically follow some Normative/Prescriptive claim/statement. That just because something IS the case it doesn't follow that we OUGHT / should do X, like help others, prevent suffering, etc. That's a non-sequitur he says. Ultimately it's just a preference." sure but...
His argument only applies/counters a strawman position in his head: Because of this I and other realists can account for / side-step it completely, we aren't attempting to derive an OUGHT from an IS. e.g strawman: "we ALL have preference against torture, Therefore it's BAD." Or "we ALL have preference against torture, Therefore we OUGHT prevent it"
The actual argument is that it's Truly Bad/Problematic by the very nature of the word, Therefore first-hand observation follows universally a deductively logically assigned preference to avoid it. Not the other way around.
"If the only thing that can have meaning in the universe is the experience of a sentient being, ought we not maximize its value just by nature of its experience being the only thing that can matter?" yes the ought is a further logical extension of recognizing it to be a problem, which denotes/demands a solution, otherwise if it doesn't matter to solve it or not then you've turned it into a non-problem again. So it can only be categorically one or the other.
Issue of semantics, different terminology and definitions: as long as VG defines objective as "mind-independent" and sets the goal-post to the realist to find a mind-independent "wrong/bad" as if somehow we need some divine-command or absolute rule in the universe that declares it so... then there is no fruit to the discussion. suffering/bad takes place in the mind/experience, so of course it's unfair to ask one to present a mind-independent suffering/bad in the universe, it is begging the question. To be fair inmendham uses the term objective and could have done better job with defining/pushing his terms "e.g. objective as truth/real/fact" and not let VG impose in his own. However, I don't ascribe a requirement to demonstrate an Objective BAD to ground a BAD as real, valid, and true; it can be entirely based on Subjectivist grounds/axiomatic foundations.
Just because the BAD takes place within subjectivity doesn't make it any less real (non-physical/immaterial sure... but not unreal). VG and nihilists can't understand this. 2+2 = 4 is subjective as is all science ultimately as a root axiomatic-fact... as an observation requires an observer. This doesn't mean realism can't be proven/grounded, it can just like we can know 2+2=4 and the moon exists. If anti-realism is gonna deny subjective truths because it's subjective, then one can't know much of anything and reduces to solipsism. I am more certain I exist and the reality of "perceived" BAD I experience is actually a real BAD... THAN that the moon even exists or any other scientific empirical claim.
PROBLEM is something I/we/animals had Nothing to do with, we didn't invent it.
If Anti-realism nihilism was True and Real "PROBLEMS" didn't exist the word wouldn't exist. It is like being born never knowing or seeing or experiencing vision & color, it's impossible to contrive or imagine it. Some knowledge & information is only accessible through experience.
Even Richard Dawkins stated, "pain is a message to the animal Don't do that again!"
If the ought exists within subjectivity, as preferences, why would them being Subjective vs Objective determine whether or not their violation matters? If one experiences disgust looking at something AND another finds beauty... both are true realities for them, they don't conflict or contradict like empirical or fact claims, but instead both are correct and relevant, not one or the other, BECAUSE when someone says the mona Lisa is beautiful they are just saying it arises in them a sense of beauty, the thing/input is irrelevant whereas the output in mind is what is relevant and true for their reality.
Subjective =/= not true, I don't understand the dichotomy between objective vs subjective ethics, as if there isn't facts to glean about subjectivity.
There's also definition or semantic problems:
objective (mind-independent) vs subjective (mind-dependent)
Under such definition does it make sense to say Objectively evolution created feeling experiencing organisms having sense of taste, smell, sound, hunger, pain, to survive. So can we apply word objective to mind-dependent experiences or not?
And of course under such definition there is no objective mind-independent ethics as without minds there is no feeling subject of concern to even talk about in first place. So how silly...
Yet they take objective to mean True & Subjective made up or mere contrived opinion.
For me these are semantic word games that distract, I just care about what's fact/true. What many don't get is Even science, math is subjective invention, byproduct of subjective tool of language, doesn't mean we can't create an accurate model and picture of reality.
I believe the Is-Ought gap is a red-herring, sure it's true you can't contrive an Ought from just what IS, but with evolution the OUGHT statement is built-in, it's descriptively a prescriptive value statement imposed on me, I/we/animals literally have nothing to do with it, I'm just by-product an observer. This is key understanding.
There exists no objective or divine commandment "you OUGHT do X" written into the fabric of reality, and therefore if you don't that's Bad, No. That's nonsense/impossible logically.
Rather an Descriptive IS statement of X is a real bad/PROBLEM, denotes/demands a solution by it's very nature of the word, otherwise if it doesn't need solving then it becomes into a non-problem again, so either x categorically IS a PROBLEM or it's not.
The claim/argument... Is that it's Descriptively BAD/Problematic, therefore universally there's a deductively logically assigned preference to avoid it. Not the other way around. Our personal preference against torture forever doesn't make it therefore bad. The prescription is built in, forced onto us.
It's like "STOP!" & "GO" What do you say to a dog? "BAD dog!" This is saying it should or shouldn't do something. basically = "No!" "Stop!" That's a prescriptive statement/signal/conveyed message.
Or simply, alls required is Descriptively diagnose Torture as Problematic. Which implies Problem Solution Without necessity of solution there is no problem at all, likewise without problem solution means nothing.
​So you essentially boiled my position down to: "Evolution programmed preference to avoid torture." or "we evolved preference to avoid torture" Does that sound incoherent or what... as if I would make such a silly claim. Keep straw-manning.
Do you think animals have PREFERENCE by default to avoid being tortured burned alive and have sex, or logically preferences are born out of observing problematic negative / positive assigned accordingly through punishment & reward mechanisms aka prescriptions, think long and hard about this one...
This is why value or ethical nihilism is incoherent to me. IF torture be bad, how can it be NOT-bad/neutral to create BAD?
It either is truly BAD or it isn't. It's either real or it's an illusion/delusion and false perception.
Their position must reduce to there is no MEANINGFUL difference between Torture & Bliss. And evolution didn't create any problematic sensation or true punishment whatsoever. Instead, were somehow deluded to view being boiling alive as problematic sensation/BAD, and relief as good, we can't tell the difference or label which is which...
Vegan Gains or any anti-realist needs to substantiate these anti-realist nihilist claims & concede if he agrees with the statements below:
"The value-laden problematic BAD experience of being tortured boiled alive in a vat of acid indefinitely... isn't really bad, evolution didn't successfully impose a real negative punishment mechanism on animals, torture isn't something I/we/animals had nothing to do with and are just byproduct observing the imposition, NO! Instead our opinion has everything to do with it... what's problematic torture, one is merely subjectively interpreting/inventing/proclaiming it to be so! Evolution failed!"
"Animals run from fire cause they irrationally unreasonably subjectively interpret it to be bad/problematic sensation or experience, not cause DNA molecule made it so objectively for evolutionary reasons"
"It is all subjective preference like flavor of potato chips, problematic torturous experience isn't bad you just think it's bad or have preference against it."
"You don't logically recognize intrinsic problematic torturous experience then logically assign solution to problem which is preference to avoid that experience, No, you merely have subjective delusional preference against a nail in your eye and there is no logic to it"
"Good is Bad, and Bad is Good depending on opinion, no right or wrong, all subjective tho"
value anti-realism nihilism. INSANE! WORSE than a flat-earth theory!

i have a girlfriend, we got together last year and this march was our 1st year being together. we were in high school then, now i moved to another country. we're doing ldr.idk when im going to see her again, we used to be so close, she was my first love and i was the first for her. we used to talk a lot, i've never been close to someone like this, including my parents. when i was a kid i used to be alone, no one would talk to me, when i found her i felt something that i never did. i prayed for her to never leave when she left. when her parents found out they told me to leave, now she talks to me without her parents knowing about it. recently her texts are getting dry, i have to ask for everything. she doesnt talk all day, when she goes to sleep she just sends a picture of her, says i love you with some emojis and sleeps. its just that she doesnt talk to me all day, i just cant be the same person i used to be before that, i have attachment issues, and i feel like she doesnt understand that, ive tried explaining but she apologizes every time and never changes it. whenever she goes offline she doesnt say anything and comes back after an hour or two. i have literal breakdowns in that hour, i keep crying i cant control it, i have parents but i dont show it to them. i say that im using the restroom but all i do is cry, and when she comes back its already night for her and its the same thing again, it happens all day and i cant keep doing this. she cries when i ask her to leave me. i cant keep doing this, i dont want to make her cry, i love her. i cant sleep or do anything in peace. i have so much ahead of me, i have good grades, i go to a good college, i have loving parents, but i cant do this relationship thing im so clingy i cant even have my food, its like i ran away from a hospital where they treat patients with mental disorder. i hate being like this all day. i tried everything to not think about anything, but its been a week since i said that and i still cry everyday. i felt like if i had it off my chest it would be somehow better. idk if ill make it to next morning, but i hate doing this everyday.

I have captured all the variants but in the starter selection screen I have only the mono fighting one. Is there a keyboard key that I'm missing that cycles the variants?

~-Conduism-~
Here I would like to explain in further detail the main goals, purpose and structure of the Practice/Understanding of “Conduism”, and its “Curriculum” if you will…
You could say that the “First Aspect” of Conduism begins with the study, practice and comparison of various religions, philosophies, yogic and spiritual practices etc. This lets one begin to develop fundamental, ground level understandings. During this period, one will gather knowledge from a wide range of spiritual/esoteric perspectives, comparing the different understandings from all around the globe and throughout history., connecting the dots and finding that the same core divine knowledge lies at the heart of all these various beliefs…
If one remains “present in the moment” while taking in this knowledge, it soon yields the discovery that ~we as humans are vessels or Conduits of Divinity, who embody a wide range of spiritual forces (Entities, Energies, Archetypal currents~), and that our every Thought, Action, Emotion etc… is the physical and or psychological Effect/Product of a preexisting spiritual cause, which inhabits our body and animates the entirety of our behavior.
Coming to understand this, inevitably leads one to begin getting in touch with the hidden spiritual essence that lies behind every moment in life… coming to find that everything we perceive on the physical plane, ~Animate and Inanimate~, has an active, intelligent and communicable spiritual essence that preexists any physical manifestation.
This realization leads to a gradual awakening and tapping into of one’s spiritual gifts that lie dormant in their DNA, such as various forms of clairvoyance and extra sensory perception, this will be incredibly useful for further development. This period lets one **gain an intimate relationship with spirit and the “Unseen” factors of life (Spiritual, Psychological and Physical).**This “first level” never truly ends as one never stops learning and shaping their understandings.
The “second Aspect” of Conduism would be applying to the different area of their lives, the perspective that one has gained through the process stated above… For example, Students of Conduism are encouraged to ~apply their understanding of the spiritual nature behind all perceivable phenomena, to the many relationships in their lives~. One begins to realize that the relationships which they find themselves engaged within throughout life, are ~reflective of their own internal spiritual nature/Conditions~, and that by resolving and or better understanding these various relationships, they can in turn resolve and better understand the corresponding spiritual essence within themselves… this is the process of Spiritual Alchemy/Alchemical Transmutation. (All forms of relationships… Family, Friends, Lovers, Brief Interactions etc…) Through the active cultivation of one’s ever-growing awareness, they will begin to live an overall higher quality of life through a more in-depth understanding of oneself and of the world around them..., as all is self.
During this period, one will eventually gain the ability to read every circumstance in life with a much more thorough analysis than ever before, ones heightened awareness will grant them personalized insights into every moment of life so they may take as much as possible from any given situation they find themselves within. Techniques learned in this level will also make one more efficient at manifesting their desires and aspirations, unlocking further control of the mechanism that is their mind. All throughout one’s practice they are also encouraged to express their divinity through various forms of art, for the student of knowledge having a creative outlet makes a big difference. This level as well never ends, as one is constantly learning new ways to apply this knowledge to life’s many challenges.
The “Third Aspect” of Conduism is the realization of one’s “spiritual responsibility”. Understanding that being an individual who is awakening to life’s many hidden secrets is an incredibly rare thing in today’s world. This is when one realizes that preservation and application of this divine knowledge is the only way to take the collective conscious into a state of self-knowing, which will in turn reflect a more “mutually efficient” and growth nurturing environment.
During this period, one often gains the urge to offer their assistance wherever it may be needed throughout their daily life. Possessing a more in-depth perspective towards the mechanics of life, allows an Individual the ability of tending to the various circumstances that they regularly come across, in a manner which most cannot... as the student of Conduism can thoroughly address them directly at the Spiritual, psychological and physical levels… This taps one into the importance of the bigger picture, understanding that we as individuals, and as a collective of Individuals, hold the tools necessary for shaping the future of our world.~I hope this was a helpful insight into the essence of “Conduism”.~
Much Love
Gage Timothy Kreps Ramirez-

~-Conduism-~
Here I would like to explain in further detail the main goals, purpose and structure of the Practice/Understanding of “Conduism”, and its “Curriculum” if you will…
You could say that the “First Aspect” of Conduism begins with the study, practice and comparison of various religions, philosophies, yogic and spiritual practices etc. This lets one begin to develop fundamental, ground level understandings. During this period, one will gather knowledge from a wide range of spiritual/esoteric perspectives, comparing the different understandings from all around the globe and throughout history., connecting the dots and finding that the same core divine knowledge lies at the heart of all these various beliefs…
If one remains “present in the moment” while taking in this knowledge, it soon yields the discovery that ~we as humans are vessels or Conduits of Divinity, who embody a wide range of spiritual forces (Entities, Energies, Archetypal currents~), and that our every Thought, Action, Emotion etc… is the physical and or psychological Effect/Product of a preexisting spiritual cause, which inhabits our body and animates the entirety of our behavior.
Coming to understand this, inevitably leads one to begin getting in touch with the hidden spiritual essence that lies behind every moment in life… coming to find that everything we perceive on the physical plane, ~Animate and Inanimate~, has an active, intelligent and communicable spiritual essence that preexists any physical manifestation.
This realization leads to a gradual awakening and tapping into of one’s spiritual gifts that lie dormant in their DNA, such as various forms of clairvoyance and extra sensory perception, this will be incredibly useful for further development. This period lets one **gain an intimate relationship with spirit and the “Unseen” factors of life (Spiritual, Psychological and Physical).**This “first level” never truly ends as one never stops learning and shaping their understandings.
The “second Aspect” of Conduism would be applying to the different area of their lives, the perspective that one has gained through the process stated above… For example, Students of Conduism are encouraged to ~apply their understanding of the spiritual nature behind all perceivable phenomena, to the many relationships in their lives~. One begins to realize that the relationships which they find themselves engaged within throughout life, are ~reflective of their own internal spiritual nature/Conditions~, and that by resolving and or better understanding these various relationships, they can in turn resolve and better understand the corresponding spiritual essence within themselves… this is the process of Spiritual Alchemy/Alchemical Transmutation. (All forms of relationships… Family, Friends, Lovers, Brief Interactions etc…) Through the active cultivation of one’s ever-growing awareness, they will begin to live an overall higher quality of life through a more in-depth understanding of oneself and of the world around them..., as all is self.
During this period, one will eventually gain the ability to read every circumstance in life with a much more thorough analysis than ever before, ones heightened awareness will grant them personalized insights into every moment of life so they may take as much as possible from any given situation they find themselves within. Techniques learned in this level will also make one more efficient at manifesting their desires and aspirations, unlocking further control of the mechanism that is their mind. All throughout one’s practice they are also encouraged to express their divinity through various forms of art, for the student of knowledge having a creative outlet makes a big difference. This level as well never ends, as one is constantly learning new ways to apply this knowledge to life’s many challenges.
The “Third Aspect” of Conduism is the realization of one’s “spiritual responsibility”. Understanding that being an individual who is awakening to life’s many hidden secrets is an incredibly rare thing in today’s world. This is when one realizes that preservation and application of this divine knowledge is the only way to take the collective conscious into a state of self-knowing, which will in turn reflect a more “mutually efficient” and growth nurturing environment.
During this period, one often gains the urge to offer their assistance wherever it may be needed throughout their daily life. Possessing a more in-depth perspective towards the mechanics of life, allows an Individual the ability of tending to the various circumstances that they regularly come across, in a manner which most cannot... as the student of Conduism can thoroughly address them directly at the Spiritual, psychological and physical levels… This taps one into the importance of the bigger picture, understanding that we as individuals, and as a collective of Individuals, hold the tools necessary for shaping the future of our world.~I hope this was a helpful insight into the essence of “Conduism”.~
Much Love
Gage Timothy Kreps Ramirez-

I recently found out about a handy VSCode feature and wanted to try it, but the video was for Win, I am on MacOS. I am looking for the equivialent. Basically all items of the same name are selected and changed, but the case is preserved with an extention.
Here is the vid https://youtube.com/shorts/zDiJpqVbszk?feature=shared
Usually subtituting the ctrl key for cmd is the ticket, but not in my case. Ctrl + d does the same as CMD + d, but not ctrl + shift + L vs cmd + shift + L. And ideas?

I've been working from home as of lately. My cat is very needy, it is also very cold and my room is warmer than the rest of the house, so there's plenty of reason to keep him inside. But he keeps bothering me the entire day jumping on the desk, walking over the keyboard, rubbing his head against my hand while I try to move the mouse around.
If I politely pick him up and place him on the floor he immediately jumps and bothers me again.
I've tried threatening him with water spray, this works, but I feel so bad doing it and idk if it's ruining my cat's trust in me. The next least hostile option is just placing him outside my room and locking the door (he knows how to open doors).
Is there any alternative for telling my cat "I can't interact with you now"?

I've been working from home as of lately. My cat is very needy, it is also very cold and my room is warmer than the rest of the house, so there's plenty of reason to keep him inside. But he keeps bothering me the entire day jumping on the desk, walking over the keyboard, rubbing his head against my hand while I try to move the mouse around.
If I politely pick him up and place him on the floor he immediately jumps and bothers me again.
I've tried threatening him with water spray, this works, but I feel so bad doing it and idk if it's ruining my cat's trust in me. The next least hostile option is just placing him outside my room and locking the door (he knows how to open doors).
Is there any alternative for telling my cat "I can't interact with you now"?

Kotarkov (the main mc of the helper unit arc) entire past and the reason for his goal and atrocities is a core big dark secret and mystery in Sin-Everman, one this mystery is his past and secret in the district 25, 224 wolfen street incident where 41 children of an orphan died do to a fire, there was a record of all of the orphans, they counted and all of the 41 out of 45 died in the fire, minus 4 survived, the other 2 survived the fire and in critical condition and one is entirely isn’t injured, but one is missing, in the ruined orphanage they found a huge basement that is connected to a catacombs with hundreds of skeletons of unidentified origin, but some of the skeleton definitely belong to children, in the dungeon there many cell with many different equipment ranging from torturous to some that is used for psychological uses. There multiple drawings on the wall of orphanages that contains images of a god or what to be thought as a god but all of them is hugely damaged by the fire, but there one small detail that overshadowed all of the other… there a painting of a boy on canvas untouched by the flame, behind the painting is a folder contained the redacted info of the unnamed boy, but in the file it writes he died cause if death[redacted] with some pictures of his corpse horrifically mutilated. all 3 of the children survived beside the burn scar there also weird missing body part and scar like a missing finger or a missing eye and weird looking scar all over their body, but there one other kid who seem to not to be injured at all but only repeat one line “the dead body did it” he is referring to Kotarkov.

~-Conduism-~
Here I would like to explain in further detail the main goals, purpose and structure of the Practice/Understanding of “Conduism”, and its “Curriculum” if you will…
You could say that the “First Aspect” of Conduism begins with the study, practice and comparison of various religions, philosophies, yogic and spiritual practices etc. This lets one begin to develop fundamental, ground level understandings. During this period, one will gather knowledge from a wide range of spiritual/esoteric perspectives, comparing the different understandings from all around the globe and throughout history., connecting the dots and finding that the same core divine knowledge lies at the heart of all these various beliefs…
If one remains “present in the moment” while taking in this knowledge, it soon yields the discovery that ~we as humans are vessels or Conduits of Divinity, who embody a wide range of spiritual forces (Entities, Energies, Archetypal currents~), and that our every Thought, Action, Emotion etc… is the physical and or psychological Effect/Product of a preexisting spiritual cause, which inhabits our body and animates the entirety of our behavior.
Coming to understand this, inevitably leads one to begin getting in touch with the hidden spiritual essence that lies behind every moment in life… coming to find that everything we perceive on the physical plane, ~Animate and Inanimate~, has an active, intelligent and communicable spiritual essence that preexists any physical manifestation.
This realization leads to a gradual awakening and tapping into of one’s spiritual gifts that lie dormant in their DNA, such as various forms of clairvoyance and extra sensory perception, this will be incredibly useful for further development. This period lets one **gain an intimate relationship with spirit and the “Unseen” factors of life (Spiritual, Psychological and Physical).**This “first level” never truly ends as one never stops learning and shaping their understandings.
The “second Aspect” of Conduism would be applying to the different area of their lives, the perspective that one has gained through the process stated above… For example, Students of Conduism are encouraged to ~apply their understanding of the spiritual nature behind all perceivable phenomena, to the many relationships in their lives~. One begins to realize that the relationships which they find themselves engaged within throughout life, are ~reflective of their own internal spiritual nature/Conditions~, and that by resolving and or better understanding these various relationships, they can in turn resolve and better understand the corresponding spiritual essence within themselves… this is the process of Spiritual Alchemy/Alchemical Transmutation. (All forms of relationships… Family, Friends, Lovers, Brief Interactions etc…) Through the active cultivation of one’s ever-growing awareness, they will begin to live an overall higher quality of life through a more in-depth understanding of oneself and of the world around them..., as all is self.
During this period, one will eventually gain the ability to read every circumstance in life with a much more thorough analysis than ever before, ones heightened awareness will grant them personalized insights into every moment of life so they may take as much as possible from any given situation they find themselves within. Techniques learned in this level will also make one more efficient at manifesting their desires and aspirations, unlocking further control of the mechanism that is their mind. All throughout one’s practice they are also encouraged to express their divinity through various forms of art, for the student of knowledge having a creative outlet makes a big difference. This level as well never ends, as one is constantly learning new ways to apply this knowledge to life’s many challenges.
The “Third Aspect” of Conduism is the realization of one’s “spiritual responsibility”. Understanding that being an individual who is awakening to life’s many hidden secrets is an incredibly rare thing in today’s world. This is when one realizes that preservation and application of this divine knowledge is the only way to take the collective conscious into a state of self-knowing, which will in turn reflect a more “mutually efficient” and growth nurturing environment.
During this period, one often gains the urge to offer their assistance wherever it may be needed throughout their daily life. Possessing a more in-depth perspective towards the mechanics of life, allows an Individual the ability of tending to the various circumstances that they regularly come across, in a manner which most cannot... as the student of Conduism can thoroughly address them directly at the Spiritual, psychological and physical levels… This taps one into the importance of the bigger picture, understanding that we as individuals, and as a collective of Individuals, hold the tools necessary for shaping the future of our world.~I hope this was a helpful insight into the essence of “Conduism”.~
Much Love
Gage Timothy Kreps Ramirez-

My friend is on seeking and she just dealt with this guy and I wanted to warn you about him.
So his username is PauldDaddy. He says he is 53 and is from San Francisco, California. He also says that he is looking for a platonic online friendship. That he isn’t looking for intimacy. But when he texts you, he says he is living in turkey.
He will show two pictures of himself and his “ID.” Don’t fall for it. He will then show “his” bank account. Again don’t fall for it.
Afterwards, he will ask for your name and email and will say that he will email you a check. Those are fake checks and they do not work at all. The check will bounce before you do anything.
He will probably use some other excuses too but my friend blocked him the second she noticed he said he would email a check to her. Don’t fall for the guy. Just don’t.
No real sugar daddy would be looking for a platonic online arrangement. In fact very few even look for an online arrangement in general. Just be careful and trust your gut.

Hey everyone,
Since I've been going through most of the stuff you guys are describing here, I hope to ressurect this topic. As I have decided to deep dive into this, below is a TL;DR post but still interesting and informative.
I got into DCS 4-5 months ago from iRacing and simracing in general, with my newly upgraded PC, Intel 14700K i7 and 4090 and OldieButGoldie Reverb G2 v1, suddenly a wish for having a clear and smooth picture while flying has never been stronger.
I have been testing various combinations, and some results are quite surprising, shocking even. It is important to mention that tests have been done on Multi Thread version of DCS (OpenXR is forced by default), and that I have used MSI Afterburner to increase GPU and VRAM clock by 50 as well as I have moved all Power related and sliders to the max.
As I am still fairly indecisive of what exact combination to go for, I will share what I have tried (combinations of OpenXR Toolkit and in-game settings...), and hoping to hear your feedback and suggestions... also hoping to make some of you start tweaking your graphics settings again and sharing valuable feedback. :)
Intel i7 14700K, 4090, 32GB RAM (soon to be 64), HP Reverb G2 v1 at 90Hz
Link for the screenshot containing graphics (DCS System) settings used: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1239832168516026419/1239832447646961715/image.png?ex=664d95f2&is=664c4472&hm=c954db086c37ffc4fc4911f605825c640160cc08bab993d2c1bd30f66905ed18&
Tests have been done on Pretense Syra Modern dynamic campaign by dzsek, with quite a number of units spawned on the map.
So, here it comes:
ATTEMPT NAME: REVOLUTION

Type	Setting	Value
OpenXR Toolkit/System	Resolution Override	4800x4692
OpenXR Toolkit/System	Motion reprojection	Yes
OpenXR Toolkit/System	Lock Motion Reprojection	45.0 fps
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Upscaling/Sharpening	NIS
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Size	75%
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Sharpening	20%
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Fixed foveated rendering	Preset
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Mode	Quality
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Pattern	Wide
OpenXR Toolkit/Menu	Show expert settings	YES

Achieved non-Reprojected FPS: 25-35
Overall experience: Somewhat stuttery/choppy but not too much. Quite visible image distortions, temporal artefacts. Beautiful clarity just for 10-15 seconds, until textures start to collapse, suspecting lack of VRAM... feel free to comment or suggest what might be the cause for this.
Conclusion: Unusable with current hardware, was really nice to see this level of clarity in DCS, at least for a few seconds :)
ATTEMPT NAME: HIGH EXPECTATIONS

Type	Setting	Value
OpenXR Toolkit/System	Resolution Override	4200x4109
OpenXR Toolkit/System	Motion reprojection	Yes
OpenXR Toolkit/System	Lock Motion Reprojection	45.0 fps
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Upscaling/Sharpening	NIS
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Size	75%
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Sharpening	20%
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Fixed foveated rendering	Preset
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Mode	Quality
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Pattern	Wide
OpenXR Toolkit/Menu	Show expert settings	YES

Achieved non-Reprojected FPS: 30-37
Overall experience: Less stuttery/choppy than REVOLUTION attempt. Still visible image distortions, temporal artefacts. Beautiful clarity just for 15-20 seconds, until textures again start to collapse and get blurry, suspecting lack of VRAM... feel free to comment or suggest what might be the cause for this.
Conclusion: Still unusable with current hardware, was really nice to see this level of clarity in DCS, at least for a few seconds :)
ATTEMPT NAME: GROUNDING IN PROGRESS

Type	Setting	Value
DCS Settings/System	Anti Aliasing	DLAA
DCS Settings/System	Upscaling	DLSS
DCS Settings/System	DLSS Perf/Quality	Quality (66% resolution)
DCS Settings/VR	Pixel Density	2.0
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Fixed foveated rendering	Preset
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Mode	Quality
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Pattern	Wide
OpenXR Toolkit/System	Motion reprojection	On
OpenXR Toolkit/System	Lock Motion Reprojection	45.0 fps
OpenXR Toolkit/Menu	Show expert settings	YES

Achieved non-Reprojected FPS: 35-45
Overall experience: A lot Less stuttery/choppy. Visible image distortions, temporal artefacts. Beautiful clarity, ruined by those distortions.
Conclusion: Still unusable with current hardware, was really nice to see this level of clarity in DCS, but distortions are ruining it.
ATTEMPT NAME: REALITY BITES, BITS AND BYTES

Type	Setting	Value
DCS Settings/System	Anti Aliasing	DLAA
DCS Settings/System	Upscaling	DLSS
DCS Settings/System	DLSS Perf/Quality	Quality (66% resolution)
DCS Settings/VR	Pixel Density	1.6
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Fixed foveated rendering	Preset
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Mode	Quality
OpenXR Toolkit/Performance	Pattern	Wide
OpenXR Toolkit/System	Motion reprojection	On
OpenXR Toolkit/System	Lock Motion Reprojection	45.0 fps
OpenXR Toolkit/Menu	Show expert settings	YES

Achieved non-Reprojected FPS: 45 stable
Overall experience: Most of the time very smooth, with a few stutters, when looking on a side. Image is quite crisp, nicely antialiased.
Conclusion: Quite usable, will probably fly like this for a while. Still interested in testing DLSS while manually overriding resolution in OpenXR Toolkit to quite high values again (160%-190% resolution)
GENERAL CONCLUSION:
As already quite known widely, NIS upscaling method is quite obsolete, and stresses the GPU more than DLSS. Results were quite impressive with NIS Upscaling, but I strongly believe, if used right, results can be better with DLSS. Will do a few more attempts with DLSS and higher resolution... hope you guys will find this useful, let's discuss more.
There is a performance sweetspot out there... for each and every one of us. :)