author
stringlengths 3
20
| body
stringlengths 12
18.4k
| normalizedBody
stringlengths 13
17.9k
| subreddit
stringlengths 2
24
| subreddit_id
stringlengths 4
8
| id
stringlengths 3
7
| content
stringlengths 3
17.9k
| summary
stringlengths 1
7.54k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DeeKayBee | A few things:
- I'm sure Benedict has better things to do then browse the internet looking at fanpages for him, us included.
- The purpose of the sign was never to send him here.
- He is not going to care that we spend an entire post talking about his arm veins or whatever. Also, we often have discussions about his work & we clearly admire everything he does.
- The rules stickied to the front page are a pretty good welcome as is all the information in the sidebar, imo. There's not that much else to say to newcomers.
TL;DR He's not browsing r/Cumberbitches in what little free time he has. No need to panic. | A few things:
I'm sure Benedict has better things to do then browse the internet looking at fanpages for him, us included.
The purpose of the sign was never to send him here.
He is not going to care that we spend an entire post talking about his arm veins or whatever. Also, we often have discussions about his work & we clearly admire everything he does.
The rules stickied to the front page are a pretty good welcome as is all the information in the sidebar, imo. There's not that much else to say to newcomers.
TL;DR He's not browsing r/Cumberbitches in what little free time he has. No need to panic.
| Cumberbitches | t5_2tb11 | cicjaf0 | A few things:
I'm sure Benedict has better things to do then browse the internet looking at fanpages for him, us included.
The purpose of the sign was never to send him here.
He is not going to care that we spend an entire post talking about his arm veins or whatever. Also, we often have discussions about his work & we clearly admire everything he does.
The rules stickied to the front page are a pretty good welcome as is all the information in the sidebar, imo. There's not that much else to say to newcomers. | He's not browsing r/Cumberbitches in what little free time he has. No need to panic. |
TheRealAlfredAdler | I hate, hate, *hate* how my field (psychology) is so often appropriated to develop a pseudo-scientific justification for HAES. Just because it's a social science doesn't mean that anything goes. You have to have quality peer-reviewed research to back up your clinical work in order to be a completely valid psychological resource.
And pandering for clients like that on top of the lack of research-supported practices is just plain unethical. No one should have a license to provide psychological services if they aren't going to be completely ethical about it. Ethical practices are *the* gold standard for psychologists.
TL;DR: FA "psychologists" do to psychology what FA "nutritionists" do to dietetics. They're distorting what our fields are actually for. | I hate, hate, hate how my field (psychology) is so often appropriated to develop a pseudo-scientific justification for HAES. Just because it's a social science doesn't mean that anything goes. You have to have quality peer-reviewed research to back up your clinical work in order to be a completely valid psychological resource.
And pandering for clients like that on top of the lack of research-supported practices is just plain unethical. No one should have a license to provide psychological services if they aren't going to be completely ethical about it. Ethical practices are the gold standard for psychologists.
TL;DR: FA "psychologists" do to psychology what FA "nutritionists" do to dietetics. They're distorting what our fields are actually for.
| fatlogic | t5_2wyxm | cickrcu | I hate, hate, hate how my field (psychology) is so often appropriated to develop a pseudo-scientific justification for HAES. Just because it's a social science doesn't mean that anything goes. You have to have quality peer-reviewed research to back up your clinical work in order to be a completely valid psychological resource.
And pandering for clients like that on top of the lack of research-supported practices is just plain unethical. No one should have a license to provide psychological services if they aren't going to be completely ethical about it. Ethical practices are the gold standard for psychologists. | FA "psychologists" do to psychology what FA "nutritionists" do to dietetics. They're distorting what our fields are actually for. |
Mr_Marowak | Waste of a mega. The complete and utter lack of Prankster, OR a buff to its already middling speed is going to hurt it pretty bad. Sure, it has the physical defensive capabilities of the Gods themselves, but a la Shuckle, it'll get worn down all to quickly thanks to its low base HP, which Mega Evolution never changes. Plus, what can it do now to support its team that Prankster Taunt couldn't? Sure, it may hit harder now, but if it dies to a special attack (read: Moonblast, Dazzling Gleam, Pixilate Hyper Voice) before it gets to do anything, it's just death fodder. Normal Sableye could save as many pokemons from status before with Prankster Taunt, which it needed in order to survive any hit off of its pitiful 50 / 75 / 65 bulk. And, even if it gets a Special Attack boost, it will probably still rely on Foul Play and Night Shade, since neither of its attacking stats are any good right now.
TL;DR: It's no better a support than regular Sableye, which doesn't eat up the only Mega slot. | Waste of a mega. The complete and utter lack of Prankster, OR a buff to its already middling speed is going to hurt it pretty bad. Sure, it has the physical defensive capabilities of the Gods themselves, but a la Shuckle, it'll get worn down all to quickly thanks to its low base HP, which Mega Evolution never changes. Plus, what can it do now to support its team that Prankster Taunt couldn't? Sure, it may hit harder now, but if it dies to a special attack (read: Moonblast, Dazzling Gleam, Pixilate Hyper Voice) before it gets to do anything, it's just death fodder. Normal Sableye could save as many pokemons from status before with Prankster Taunt, which it needed in order to survive any hit off of its pitiful 50 / 75 / 65 bulk. And, even if it gets a Special Attack boost, it will probably still rely on Foul Play and Night Shade, since neither of its attacking stats are any good right now.
TL;DR: It's no better a support than regular Sableye, which doesn't eat up the only Mega slot.
| pokemon | t5_2qmeb | cicykbg | Waste of a mega. The complete and utter lack of Prankster, OR a buff to its already middling speed is going to hurt it pretty bad. Sure, it has the physical defensive capabilities of the Gods themselves, but a la Shuckle, it'll get worn down all to quickly thanks to its low base HP, which Mega Evolution never changes. Plus, what can it do now to support its team that Prankster Taunt couldn't? Sure, it may hit harder now, but if it dies to a special attack (read: Moonblast, Dazzling Gleam, Pixilate Hyper Voice) before it gets to do anything, it's just death fodder. Normal Sableye could save as many pokemons from status before with Prankster Taunt, which it needed in order to survive any hit off of its pitiful 50 / 75 / 65 bulk. And, even if it gets a Special Attack boost, it will probably still rely on Foul Play and Night Shade, since neither of its attacking stats are any good right now. | It's no better a support than regular Sableye, which doesn't eat up the only Mega slot. |
crabalab2002 | Isn't a quarterback's job just to fully understand the offense and execute it? Obviously the physical tools of the trade include throw power and accuracy and ability to scramble. But most of effective QBing is understanding and executing the system. Peyton Manning is a great example: he has his own system and is effective running it. Would he really be effective though running another teams offense? That question is silly because when he has moved teams we see that he brought his system with him.
I've watched that game in particular a couple times and often the WR's struggled to get open and the running game did not get into rhythm early.
I'm rewatching the game now keeping an eye out for missed opportunities on Foles' part.
**EDIT:**
**First Half:** First drive didn't involve any impressive throws, but the rolling-right TD toss to Ertz was right on the money. A couple three and outs, in both cases the system elected mostly to run the ball ineffectively instead of letting Foles throw. Makes sense though, considering the amount of pressure Foles was consistently under. Made a lot of dump off passes to avoid/deter the rush. He found the open receivers when they were there, even if the throws admittedly weren't that pretty. The running game couldn't really get going but the Eagles benefited from a couple cardinal turnovers. Riley cooper made a great catch on a Foles overthrow. Also lost a chance at a TD when Chip Kelly (the system) chose to use a Brad Smith-led wildcat play on first down in the red zone. Two minute drill: Foles dropped a beautiful floater (hehe) into Desean Jackson for a big gain. Next throw is similar but falls incomplete. A little off target but a lot of WR-CB contact too. Nice little improvisation to turn a sack into 4 yards via Mccoy. Tosses a near interception into the end zone, Desean Jackson prevents the interception. Throws a good pass to Cooper in the end zone and draws a pass interference call (obviously you could bitch about the fairness of that call, but still a good Folescision.) Foles finds Celek for the TD. Good play, good execution, successful two minute drill.
**Second Half:**
More dump off passes/runs/screens. I don't think Chip liked our WR vs Cards secondary match-up for this game. Foles successfully runs an option for the first down. Michael Vick who? /s Bad throw incomplete behind Cooper, under moderate pressure. THAT WAS A MISSED OPPORTUNITY. Good third down conversion 11 yards to cooper. Insert blown-up screen play gif here. Another good third down conversion 16 yards to Ertz. Incomplete pass hit as he throws. Bad backwards pass on a supposed-to-be screen. THAT WAS A MISSED OPPORTUNITY (probably). Beautiful 22 yard TD pass to ertz immediately following. Next possession: pass batted down by Calais Campbell. Sacked on third down. Can't tell if anyone was open, they didn't do a replay. Next possession: throws incomplete to Celek. Overthrows mccoy. THAT WAS A MISSED OPPORTUNITY. Next possession: throws up a jump ball to Cooper. Questionable decision, but those jump balls to cooper work a lot of the time. Nice pump fake followed by short completion to Celek for first down. Another jump ball to Cooper, but this one was a good decision despite it falling incomplete. Evades some pressure gracefully but is eventually sacked. Sacked again, no time to throw. Next possession: Mostly runs, one bad throw, forced by considerable pressure. POSSIBLY BAD-ISH DECISION. Next possession: running the clock down. One of the announcers said "Play cock". Throws stupid interception under pressure that is called back thanks to defensive holding. DEFINITELY GOT SUPER LUCKY, TERRIBLE DECISION. 7 yard gain on a qb keeper option. Fails on another qb keeper option. HIS LEGS ARE DIFFERENT THAN MICHAEL VICK'S. Defense manages to hold thanks to a couple questionable non-call pass interferences. Looked like Fletcher was playing the ball and the WR hadn't even turned around yet, but still questionable. Some more questionable calls in the Eagles favor and the Eagles win.
**TL;DR IMO:** Foles played really well first half, and did enough/got lucky enough in the second half to win. It wasn't his best game, but it was enough to win. He is without a doubt a better QB than Carson Palmer, and the Cards defense is pretty good. I don't know why /r/Eagles suggested this game in particular. I do not usually endorse the views of r/Eagles. | Isn't a quarterback's job just to fully understand the offense and execute it? Obviously the physical tools of the trade include throw power and accuracy and ability to scramble. But most of effective QBing is understanding and executing the system. Peyton Manning is a great example: he has his own system and is effective running it. Would he really be effective though running another teams offense? That question is silly because when he has moved teams we see that he brought his system with him.
I've watched that game in particular a couple times and often the WR's struggled to get open and the running game did not get into rhythm early.
I'm rewatching the game now keeping an eye out for missed opportunities on Foles' part.
EDIT:
First Half: First drive didn't involve any impressive throws, but the rolling-right TD toss to Ertz was right on the money. A couple three and outs, in both cases the system elected mostly to run the ball ineffectively instead of letting Foles throw. Makes sense though, considering the amount of pressure Foles was consistently under. Made a lot of dump off passes to avoid/deter the rush. He found the open receivers when they were there, even if the throws admittedly weren't that pretty. The running game couldn't really get going but the Eagles benefited from a couple cardinal turnovers. Riley cooper made a great catch on a Foles overthrow. Also lost a chance at a TD when Chip Kelly (the system) chose to use a Brad Smith-led wildcat play on first down in the red zone. Two minute drill: Foles dropped a beautiful floater (hehe) into Desean Jackson for a big gain. Next throw is similar but falls incomplete. A little off target but a lot of WR-CB contact too. Nice little improvisation to turn a sack into 4 yards via Mccoy. Tosses a near interception into the end zone, Desean Jackson prevents the interception. Throws a good pass to Cooper in the end zone and draws a pass interference call (obviously you could bitch about the fairness of that call, but still a good Folescision.) Foles finds Celek for the TD. Good play, good execution, successful two minute drill.
Second Half:
More dump off passes/runs/screens. I don't think Chip liked our WR vs Cards secondary match-up for this game. Foles successfully runs an option for the first down. Michael Vick who? /s Bad throw incomplete behind Cooper, under moderate pressure. THAT WAS A MISSED OPPORTUNITY. Good third down conversion 11 yards to cooper. Insert blown-up screen play gif here. Another good third down conversion 16 yards to Ertz. Incomplete pass hit as he throws. Bad backwards pass on a supposed-to-be screen. THAT WAS A MISSED OPPORTUNITY (probably). Beautiful 22 yard TD pass to ertz immediately following. Next possession: pass batted down by Calais Campbell. Sacked on third down. Can't tell if anyone was open, they didn't do a replay. Next possession: throws incomplete to Celek. Overthrows mccoy. THAT WAS A MISSED OPPORTUNITY. Next possession: throws up a jump ball to Cooper. Questionable decision, but those jump balls to cooper work a lot of the time. Nice pump fake followed by short completion to Celek for first down. Another jump ball to Cooper, but this one was a good decision despite it falling incomplete. Evades some pressure gracefully but is eventually sacked. Sacked again, no time to throw. Next possession: Mostly runs, one bad throw, forced by considerable pressure. POSSIBLY BAD-ISH DECISION. Next possession: running the clock down. One of the announcers said "Play cock". Throws stupid interception under pressure that is called back thanks to defensive holding. DEFINITELY GOT SUPER LUCKY, TERRIBLE DECISION. 7 yard gain on a qb keeper option. Fails on another qb keeper option. HIS LEGS ARE DIFFERENT THAN MICHAEL VICK'S. Defense manages to hold thanks to a couple questionable non-call pass interferences. Looked like Fletcher was playing the ball and the WR hadn't even turned around yet, but still questionable. Some more questionable calls in the Eagles favor and the Eagles win.
TL;DR IMO: Foles played really well first half, and did enough/got lucky enough in the second half to win. It wasn't his best game, but it was enough to win. He is without a doubt a better QB than Carson Palmer, and the Cards defense is pretty good. I don't know why /r/Eagles suggested this game in particular. I do not usually endorse the views of r/Eagles.
| nfl | t5_2qmg3 | cicz2bw | Isn't a quarterback's job just to fully understand the offense and execute it? Obviously the physical tools of the trade include throw power and accuracy and ability to scramble. But most of effective QBing is understanding and executing the system. Peyton Manning is a great example: he has his own system and is effective running it. Would he really be effective though running another teams offense? That question is silly because when he has moved teams we see that he brought his system with him.
I've watched that game in particular a couple times and often the WR's struggled to get open and the running game did not get into rhythm early.
I'm rewatching the game now keeping an eye out for missed opportunities on Foles' part.
EDIT:
First Half: First drive didn't involve any impressive throws, but the rolling-right TD toss to Ertz was right on the money. A couple three and outs, in both cases the system elected mostly to run the ball ineffectively instead of letting Foles throw. Makes sense though, considering the amount of pressure Foles was consistently under. Made a lot of dump off passes to avoid/deter the rush. He found the open receivers when they were there, even if the throws admittedly weren't that pretty. The running game couldn't really get going but the Eagles benefited from a couple cardinal turnovers. Riley cooper made a great catch on a Foles overthrow. Also lost a chance at a TD when Chip Kelly (the system) chose to use a Brad Smith-led wildcat play on first down in the red zone. Two minute drill: Foles dropped a beautiful floater (hehe) into Desean Jackson for a big gain. Next throw is similar but falls incomplete. A little off target but a lot of WR-CB contact too. Nice little improvisation to turn a sack into 4 yards via Mccoy. Tosses a near interception into the end zone, Desean Jackson prevents the interception. Throws a good pass to Cooper in the end zone and draws a pass interference call (obviously you could bitch about the fairness of that call, but still a good Folescision.) Foles finds Celek for the TD. Good play, good execution, successful two minute drill.
Second Half:
More dump off passes/runs/screens. I don't think Chip liked our WR vs Cards secondary match-up for this game. Foles successfully runs an option for the first down. Michael Vick who? /s Bad throw incomplete behind Cooper, under moderate pressure. THAT WAS A MISSED OPPORTUNITY. Good third down conversion 11 yards to cooper. Insert blown-up screen play gif here. Another good third down conversion 16 yards to Ertz. Incomplete pass hit as he throws. Bad backwards pass on a supposed-to-be screen. THAT WAS A MISSED OPPORTUNITY (probably). Beautiful 22 yard TD pass to ertz immediately following. Next possession: pass batted down by Calais Campbell. Sacked on third down. Can't tell if anyone was open, they didn't do a replay. Next possession: throws incomplete to Celek. Overthrows mccoy. THAT WAS A MISSED OPPORTUNITY. Next possession: throws up a jump ball to Cooper. Questionable decision, but those jump balls to cooper work a lot of the time. Nice pump fake followed by short completion to Celek for first down. Another jump ball to Cooper, but this one was a good decision despite it falling incomplete. Evades some pressure gracefully but is eventually sacked. Sacked again, no time to throw. Next possession: Mostly runs, one bad throw, forced by considerable pressure. POSSIBLY BAD-ISH DECISION. Next possession: running the clock down. One of the announcers said "Play cock". Throws stupid interception under pressure that is called back thanks to defensive holding. DEFINITELY GOT SUPER LUCKY, TERRIBLE DECISION. 7 yard gain on a qb keeper option. Fails on another qb keeper option. HIS LEGS ARE DIFFERENT THAN MICHAEL VICK'S. Defense manages to hold thanks to a couple questionable non-call pass interferences. Looked like Fletcher was playing the ball and the WR hadn't even turned around yet, but still questionable. Some more questionable calls in the Eagles favor and the Eagles win. | IMO: Foles played really well first half, and did enough/got lucky enough in the second half to win. It wasn't his best game, but it was enough to win. He is without a doubt a better QB than Carson Palmer, and the Cards defense is pretty good. I don't know why /r/Eagles suggested this game in particular. I do not usually endorse the views of r/Eagles. |
baconforthezombies |
> 1 Is the excessive weight loss a result of too few calories/protein/etc? I have attempted to make most of meals chickpeas, lentils, vegetable, bean dishes and vegetable/tofu curries.
In my opinion it may be a combination of two things. On one hand you need to eat more high calorie foods (nut and nut butters + all the things you mentioned).
On the other hand you need to evaluate your workouts. [Long amounts of cardio works out tends to emphasize slow twitch muscle fibers, where as sprints and high intensity, low duration burst emphasize fast twitch muscle fibers](
One isn't necessarily "better" than the other. The human body adapts to a body type that is more efficient towards what you are using it for. Look at
[marathon runners vs sprinters]( A marathon runner's muscles and body weight is efficient for long distances, and a sprinter's is more efficient towards sprints. That's why you don't see sprinter body types winning at marathons, or marathoner body types winning at sprints.
[Look at Scott Jurek, one of the world's great ultrarunners who set a US record by running 165.7 miles in 24 hours in 2010. Scott only eats plants.](
Unless you are training for marathons, my recommendation is instead of doing so much long distance running, incorporate more short distance and high intensity sprints. Pace yourself. **Don't go 100% at first. Listen to your body and work your way up gradually week by week. Time yourself.** You'll see the results in no time.
Also remember many sprinters choose not to breathe during the duration of the race. 100m races last for 10 seconds at the most and they choose to make the sprinting anaerobic. Thus leading to anaerobic metabolism which produces short duration, high-intensity bursts of energy and is used for a 100 meter sprint.
Compare this to a 3-4mile run. There is no way you are going to not breathe for 3-4 miles.
[A search for high calorie vegan foods gave me a lot of results for tips on gaining weight as a vegan athlete](
**TL;DR: Aerobic (marathon running) vs Anaerobic (sprints) = Slow twitch muscle fibers VS Fast twitch muscle fibers... Low intensity, high duration VS High intensity, low duration.**
Another helpful link:
[I'm a vegetarian athlete and I want to gain weight. How do I start?](
> 2 Is the low testosterone a result of the vegan diet or should I be concerned about something else?
[Vegan Men: More Testosterone But Less Cancer](
Hope this helped.
| > 1 Is the excessive weight loss a result of too few calories/protein/etc? I have attempted to make most of meals chickpeas, lentils, vegetable, bean dishes and vegetable/tofu curries.
In my opinion it may be a combination of two things. On one hand you need to eat more high calorie foods (nut and nut butters + all the things you mentioned).
On the other hand you need to evaluate your workouts. [Long amounts of cardio works out tends to emphasize slow twitch muscle fibers, where as sprints and high intensity, low duration burst emphasize fast twitch muscle fibers](
One isn't necessarily "better" than the other. The human body adapts to a body type that is more efficient towards what you are using it for. Look at
[marathon runners vs sprinters]( A marathon runner's muscles and body weight is efficient for long distances, and a sprinter's is more efficient towards sprints. That's why you don't see sprinter body types winning at marathons, or marathoner body types winning at sprints.
[Look at Scott Jurek, one of the world's great ultrarunners who set a US record by running 165.7 miles in 24 hours in 2010. Scott only eats plants.](
Unless you are training for marathons, my recommendation is instead of doing so much long distance running, incorporate more short distance and high intensity sprints. Pace yourself. Don't go 100% at first. Listen to your body and work your way up gradually week by week. Time yourself. You'll see the results in no time.
Also remember many sprinters choose not to breathe during the duration of the race. 100m races last for 10 seconds at the most and they choose to make the sprinting anaerobic. Thus leading to anaerobic metabolism which produces short duration, high-intensity bursts of energy and is used for a 100 meter sprint.
Compare this to a 3-4mile run. There is no way you are going to not breathe for 3-4 miles.
[A search for high calorie vegan foods gave me a lot of results for tips on gaining weight as a vegan athlete](
TL;DR: Aerobic (marathon running) vs Anaerobic (sprints) = Slow twitch muscle fibers VS Fast twitch muscle fibers... Low intensity, high duration VS High intensity, low duration.
Another helpful link:
[I'm a vegetarian athlete and I want to gain weight. How do I start?](
> 2 Is the low testosterone a result of the vegan diet or should I be concerned about something else?
[Vegan Men: More Testosterone But Less Cancer](
Hope this helped.
| vegan | t5_2qhpm | cidbyvw | 1 Is the excessive weight loss a result of too few calories/protein/etc? I have attempted to make most of meals chickpeas, lentils, vegetable, bean dishes and vegetable/tofu curries.
In my opinion it may be a combination of two things. On one hand you need to eat more high calorie foods (nut and nut butters + all the things you mentioned).
On the other hand you need to evaluate your workouts. [Long amounts of cardio works out tends to emphasize slow twitch muscle fibers, where as sprints and high intensity, low duration burst emphasize fast twitch muscle fibers](
One isn't necessarily "better" than the other. The human body adapts to a body type that is more efficient towards what you are using it for. Look at
[marathon runners vs sprinters]( A marathon runner's muscles and body weight is efficient for long distances, and a sprinter's is more efficient towards sprints. That's why you don't see sprinter body types winning at marathons, or marathoner body types winning at sprints.
[Look at Scott Jurek, one of the world's great ultrarunners who set a US record by running 165.7 miles in 24 hours in 2010. Scott only eats plants.](
Unless you are training for marathons, my recommendation is instead of doing so much long distance running, incorporate more short distance and high intensity sprints. Pace yourself. Don't go 100% at first. Listen to your body and work your way up gradually week by week. Time yourself. You'll see the results in no time.
Also remember many sprinters choose not to breathe during the duration of the race. 100m races last for 10 seconds at the most and they choose to make the sprinting anaerobic. Thus leading to anaerobic metabolism which produces short duration, high-intensity bursts of energy and is used for a 100 meter sprint.
Compare this to a 3-4mile run. There is no way you are going to not breathe for 3-4 miles.
[A search for high calorie vegan foods gave me a lot of results for tips on gaining weight as a vegan athlete]( | Aerobic (marathon running) vs Anaerobic (sprints) = Slow twitch muscle fibers VS Fast twitch muscle fibers... Low intensity, high duration VS High intensity, low duration.
Another helpful link:
[I'm a vegetarian athlete and I want to gain weight. How do I start?](
> 2 Is the low testosterone a result of the vegan diet or should I be concerned about something else?
[Vegan Men: More Testosterone But Less Cancer](
Hope this helped. |
strongcoffee | From the APS paper Salmeron published, in the abstract:
>We conclude that AFM measures the dry friction of ice due to the low scan speed and the squeezing out of the water layer between the sharp AFM tip and the ice surface.
In other words, the AFM tip scratches the semi-liquid layer off the ice thereby measuring the "dry" layer underneath. So his results, if anything, confirm the notion that ice is slippery due to a quazi-liquid layer of water molecules on the surface.
Keep in mind, the Times article is from 2006. Since then, faster and better methods of measuring that surface layer have confirmed the hypothesis. Including this one:
Which, (TL;DR) says that the molecules on the surface are very chaotic, and their motion is considered the major reason for ice being slippery.
| From the APS paper Salmeron published, in the abstract:
>We conclude that AFM measures the dry friction of ice due to the low scan speed and the squeezing out of the water layer between the sharp AFM tip and the ice surface.
In other words, the AFM tip scratches the semi-liquid layer off the ice thereby measuring the "dry" layer underneath. So his results, if anything, confirm the notion that ice is slippery due to a quazi-liquid layer of water molecules on the surface.
Keep in mind, the Times article is from 2006. Since then, faster and better methods of measuring that surface layer have confirmed the hypothesis. Including this one:
Which, (TL;DR) says that the molecules on the surface are very chaotic, and their motion is considered the major reason for ice being slippery.
| todayilearned | t5_2qqjc | cicx86i | From the APS paper Salmeron published, in the abstract:
>We conclude that AFM measures the dry friction of ice due to the low scan speed and the squeezing out of the water layer between the sharp AFM tip and the ice surface.
In other words, the AFM tip scratches the semi-liquid layer off the ice thereby measuring the "dry" layer underneath. So his results, if anything, confirm the notion that ice is slippery due to a quazi-liquid layer of water molecules on the surface.
Keep in mind, the Times article is from 2006. Since then, faster and better methods of measuring that surface layer have confirmed the hypothesis. Including this one:
Which, ( | says that the molecules on the surface are very chaotic, and their motion is considered the major reason for ice being slippery. |
supergalactic | Yeah.
There was a power outage in town (this was about 20 years ago) and 3 of my friends and I decided we were going to scare a strip mall security guard with slingshots by firing wooden pellets near him to make noise. We didn't wanna hurt the guy, but we were young and stupid.
On our way to the strip mall (we were walking) a police car came out of nowhere and pulled up next to us. He got out and asked just what the hell you boys are doing walking around in the middle of a power outage at 11 pm?
I forget what bullshit story we made up but the officer tells us that a vehicle at a nearby apartment complex was broken into and the owner saw **FOUR** men running away from the car. We didn't have a proper alibi to begin with (and let's not forget we had slingshots on us), so naturally they assumed we did it.
The officers (more cruisers had shown up) had gotten a hold of the car's owner and brought him to where we were. They stood us side-by-side on the sidewalk and shone a light on our faces while the guy ID'd us from a cruiser.
That was when the cuffs went on the four of us and we were whisked away to booking and then separate holding cells.
About an hour went by as each of us was separately questioned. We fessed up about trying to scare the security guard so there was proof we never broke into someone's car.
The officers called the car's owner back and asked him if he was *positive* we were the ones he saw. He said no.
Our story checked out so they took the cuffs off and turned us loose. That was my first and only run-in with the boys in blue.
**TL:DR** Falsely accused of a crime and spent a few hours in the hoosegow before being released.
| Yeah.
There was a power outage in town (this was about 20 years ago) and 3 of my friends and I decided we were going to scare a strip mall security guard with slingshots by firing wooden pellets near him to make noise. We didn't wanna hurt the guy, but we were young and stupid.
On our way to the strip mall (we were walking) a police car came out of nowhere and pulled up next to us. He got out and asked just what the hell you boys are doing walking around in the middle of a power outage at 11 pm?
I forget what bullshit story we made up but the officer tells us that a vehicle at a nearby apartment complex was broken into and the owner saw FOUR men running away from the car. We didn't have a proper alibi to begin with (and let's not forget we had slingshots on us), so naturally they assumed we did it.
The officers (more cruisers had shown up) had gotten a hold of the car's owner and brought him to where we were. They stood us side-by-side on the sidewalk and shone a light on our faces while the guy ID'd us from a cruiser.
That was when the cuffs went on the four of us and we were whisked away to booking and then separate holding cells.
About an hour went by as each of us was separately questioned. We fessed up about trying to scare the security guard so there was proof we never broke into someone's car.
The officers called the car's owner back and asked him if he was positive we were the ones he saw. He said no.
Our story checked out so they took the cuffs off and turned us loose. That was my first and only run-in with the boys in blue.
TL:DR Falsely accused of a crime and spent a few hours in the hoosegow before being released.
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | cid3qde | Yeah.
There was a power outage in town (this was about 20 years ago) and 3 of my friends and I decided we were going to scare a strip mall security guard with slingshots by firing wooden pellets near him to make noise. We didn't wanna hurt the guy, but we were young and stupid.
On our way to the strip mall (we were walking) a police car came out of nowhere and pulled up next to us. He got out and asked just what the hell you boys are doing walking around in the middle of a power outage at 11 pm?
I forget what bullshit story we made up but the officer tells us that a vehicle at a nearby apartment complex was broken into and the owner saw FOUR men running away from the car. We didn't have a proper alibi to begin with (and let's not forget we had slingshots on us), so naturally they assumed we did it.
The officers (more cruisers had shown up) had gotten a hold of the car's owner and brought him to where we were. They stood us side-by-side on the sidewalk and shone a light on our faces while the guy ID'd us from a cruiser.
That was when the cuffs went on the four of us and we were whisked away to booking and then separate holding cells.
About an hour went by as each of us was separately questioned. We fessed up about trying to scare the security guard so there was proof we never broke into someone's car.
The officers called the car's owner back and asked him if he was positive we were the ones he saw. He said no.
Our story checked out so they took the cuffs off and turned us loose. That was my first and only run-in with the boys in blue. | Falsely accused of a crime and spent a few hours in the hoosegow before being released. |
Chaomayhem | Hey man,this is a really tough situation and with this post it seems it's only gotten tougher. I will try and help the best I can but i think only a therapist can truly help you. You were right to leave your GF. Its not that she deserved better,its that YOU deserved better. If she loved you then sex shouldn't be her main priority and she would cheat over it. You were also right for letting your anger out on your mother,there's no way that someone could just make it out like it never happened and that's just wrong. Your sister. She was terrible to do what she did to you. She was 12 at the time yes? She doesn't sound like she's the same person anymore. Of course biologically she is still that same person but in terms of emotion and maturity she doesn't sound like she is that same person. From what you told us,all I hear is remorse and anger at herself and I think that you should try and improve your relationship with her. She sounds like she's really sorry and would do anything to undo what happened. I know it may be hard but forgive your sister. She may have been a monster to you but she isn't one anymore and it sounds like she really loves you. So that's about it. This is a sad situation and I really hope it gets better man. Just try and improve you and your sis relationship because it sounds like she wants to move on and I know that will be hard for you but please try
TLDR;OP was right for releasing his anger at his mother and calling it off with his GF. He should try and forgive his sister however. | Hey man,this is a really tough situation and with this post it seems it's only gotten tougher. I will try and help the best I can but i think only a therapist can truly help you. You were right to leave your GF. Its not that she deserved better,its that YOU deserved better. If she loved you then sex shouldn't be her main priority and she would cheat over it. You were also right for letting your anger out on your mother,there's no way that someone could just make it out like it never happened and that's just wrong. Your sister. She was terrible to do what she did to you. She was 12 at the time yes? She doesn't sound like she's the same person anymore. Of course biologically she is still that same person but in terms of emotion and maturity she doesn't sound like she is that same person. From what you told us,all I hear is remorse and anger at herself and I think that you should try and improve your relationship with her. She sounds like she's really sorry and would do anything to undo what happened. I know it may be hard but forgive your sister. She may have been a monster to you but she isn't one anymore and it sounds like she really loves you. So that's about it. This is a sad situation and I really hope it gets better man. Just try and improve you and your sis relationship because it sounds like she wants to move on and I know that will be hard for you but please try
TLDR;OP was right for releasing his anger at his mother and calling it off with his GF. He should try and forgive his sister however.
| confession | t5_2qo2a | cie5szc | Hey man,this is a really tough situation and with this post it seems it's only gotten tougher. I will try and help the best I can but i think only a therapist can truly help you. You were right to leave your GF. Its not that she deserved better,its that YOU deserved better. If she loved you then sex shouldn't be her main priority and she would cheat over it. You were also right for letting your anger out on your mother,there's no way that someone could just make it out like it never happened and that's just wrong. Your sister. She was terrible to do what she did to you. She was 12 at the time yes? She doesn't sound like she's the same person anymore. Of course biologically she is still that same person but in terms of emotion and maturity she doesn't sound like she is that same person. From what you told us,all I hear is remorse and anger at herself and I think that you should try and improve your relationship with her. She sounds like she's really sorry and would do anything to undo what happened. I know it may be hard but forgive your sister. She may have been a monster to you but she isn't one anymore and it sounds like she really loves you. So that's about it. This is a sad situation and I really hope it gets better man. Just try and improve you and your sis relationship because it sounds like she wants to move on and I know that will be hard for you but please try | OP was right for releasing his anger at his mother and calling it off with his GF. He should try and forgive his sister however. |
aaronkush | I only go Stormcloaks for roleplay reasons, ever. Ulfric is a terrible person, who abuses the Thu'um given to him by the Greybeards. He used it as the "ace under his sleeve" to kill the High King, to bring glory to himself. Who said the Empire was unfit to rule Skyrim? Ulfric. Who decided he was fit to rule Skyrim? Ulfric.
There is too much "they aren't doing what I want, so I'm going to rule, make them do what I say, and be an awesome dictator" on the side of the Stormcloaks.
Like, I hate the Empire for trying to kill me in the beginning. That seriously sucks. But if the decision were Hadvar's, instead of the nameless Imperial Captain, I'm fairly certain Hadvar would've said "Whatever, you can go."
If you based your opinion of the Legion simply because they try to cut your head off, then you are sorely short-changing yourself. The only way to get rid of the Thalmor (which, judging by your post, you have no actual idea about) is by making the Empire stronger, not weaker. The Empire controls all of Tamriel (I believe). Removing Skyrim from that is a mistake, because it threatens the Aldmeri Dominion, making the oppression ten-fold. Do you think Talos worship will be allowed just because they kill ONE General Tulius? I think not.
Another way to look at it, is what if it was the Stormcloaks that tried to behead you? "Oh, you were with the Legion, they are my enemies,
so you're guilty by association."
You need to look at both sides of the spectrum. What is it you want here? A weak, divided continent? I mean, hey, that's cool. At least you get to worship Talos now in one country.
Or do you want a strengthened continent, giving the ability to fight back against the Aldmeri Dominion?
Obviously, this post seems biased towards the Imperials. The short answer? It is. The slightly longer answer? I would rather have a united and strengthened continent, rather than a country where everything is in chaos, and everyone is running around like chickens with their heads cut off.
Take this post however you want, this is simply my opinion of the situation.
TL;DR Ulfric is an ass, and killing off the Imperials definitely weakens Skyrim way more than it already is. | I only go Stormcloaks for roleplay reasons, ever. Ulfric is a terrible person, who abuses the Thu'um given to him by the Greybeards. He used it as the "ace under his sleeve" to kill the High King, to bring glory to himself. Who said the Empire was unfit to rule Skyrim? Ulfric. Who decided he was fit to rule Skyrim? Ulfric.
There is too much "they aren't doing what I want, so I'm going to rule, make them do what I say, and be an awesome dictator" on the side of the Stormcloaks.
Like, I hate the Empire for trying to kill me in the beginning. That seriously sucks. But if the decision were Hadvar's, instead of the nameless Imperial Captain, I'm fairly certain Hadvar would've said "Whatever, you can go."
If you based your opinion of the Legion simply because they try to cut your head off, then you are sorely short-changing yourself. The only way to get rid of the Thalmor (which, judging by your post, you have no actual idea about) is by making the Empire stronger, not weaker. The Empire controls all of Tamriel (I believe). Removing Skyrim from that is a mistake, because it threatens the Aldmeri Dominion, making the oppression ten-fold. Do you think Talos worship will be allowed just because they kill ONE General Tulius? I think not.
Another way to look at it, is what if it was the Stormcloaks that tried to behead you? "Oh, you were with the Legion, they are my enemies,
so you're guilty by association."
You need to look at both sides of the spectrum. What is it you want here? A weak, divided continent? I mean, hey, that's cool. At least you get to worship Talos now in one country.
Or do you want a strengthened continent, giving the ability to fight back against the Aldmeri Dominion?
Obviously, this post seems biased towards the Imperials. The short answer? It is. The slightly longer answer? I would rather have a united and strengthened continent, rather than a country where everything is in chaos, and everyone is running around like chickens with their heads cut off.
Take this post however you want, this is simply my opinion of the situation.
TL;DR Ulfric is an ass, and killing off the Imperials definitely weakens Skyrim way more than it already is.
| skyrim | t5_2s837 | cidxyed | I only go Stormcloaks for roleplay reasons, ever. Ulfric is a terrible person, who abuses the Thu'um given to him by the Greybeards. He used it as the "ace under his sleeve" to kill the High King, to bring glory to himself. Who said the Empire was unfit to rule Skyrim? Ulfric. Who decided he was fit to rule Skyrim? Ulfric.
There is too much "they aren't doing what I want, so I'm going to rule, make them do what I say, and be an awesome dictator" on the side of the Stormcloaks.
Like, I hate the Empire for trying to kill me in the beginning. That seriously sucks. But if the decision were Hadvar's, instead of the nameless Imperial Captain, I'm fairly certain Hadvar would've said "Whatever, you can go."
If you based your opinion of the Legion simply because they try to cut your head off, then you are sorely short-changing yourself. The only way to get rid of the Thalmor (which, judging by your post, you have no actual idea about) is by making the Empire stronger, not weaker. The Empire controls all of Tamriel (I believe). Removing Skyrim from that is a mistake, because it threatens the Aldmeri Dominion, making the oppression ten-fold. Do you think Talos worship will be allowed just because they kill ONE General Tulius? I think not.
Another way to look at it, is what if it was the Stormcloaks that tried to behead you? "Oh, you were with the Legion, they are my enemies,
so you're guilty by association."
You need to look at both sides of the spectrum. What is it you want here? A weak, divided continent? I mean, hey, that's cool. At least you get to worship Talos now in one country.
Or do you want a strengthened continent, giving the ability to fight back against the Aldmeri Dominion?
Obviously, this post seems biased towards the Imperials. The short answer? It is. The slightly longer answer? I would rather have a united and strengthened continent, rather than a country where everything is in chaos, and everyone is running around like chickens with their heads cut off.
Take this post however you want, this is simply my opinion of the situation. | Ulfric is an ass, and killing off the Imperials definitely weakens Skyrim way more than it already is. |
qrichi | You are missing the point. the Internet Age sure creates the illusion that we have everything we need at the reach of our hands. What we get is actually mostly condensed and conglomerated information,so much so that it flattens and trivializes our human experience towards it. Being able to download or stream 40 movies and watch them buttnaked in your own room will never emulate the impact that ithad,to queue for hours in front of a cinema and finally find out after 3 anxious years that Luke actually becomes a Jedi Knight and defeats his own father. Neither will an itunes playlist of your favorite Beatles songs come anywhere near the mindblowing experience that it was to actually unfold a vinyl record and playing Sgt Pepper's for ghe first time, being barely able to realize that what you hear will change music forever.
Tl;dr a single real experience is worth more than a 1000 simultaneous emulations | You are missing the point. the Internet Age sure creates the illusion that we have everything we need at the reach of our hands. What we get is actually mostly condensed and conglomerated information,so much so that it flattens and trivializes our human experience towards it. Being able to download or stream 40 movies and watch them buttnaked in your own room will never emulate the impact that ithad,to queue for hours in front of a cinema and finally find out after 3 anxious years that Luke actually becomes a Jedi Knight and defeats his own father. Neither will an itunes playlist of your favorite Beatles songs come anywhere near the mindblowing experience that it was to actually unfold a vinyl record and playing Sgt Pepper's for ghe first time, being barely able to realize that what you hear will change music forever.
Tl;dr a single real experience is worth more than a 1000 simultaneous emulations
| movies | t5_2qh3s | cidi405 | You are missing the point. the Internet Age sure creates the illusion that we have everything we need at the reach of our hands. What we get is actually mostly condensed and conglomerated information,so much so that it flattens and trivializes our human experience towards it. Being able to download or stream 40 movies and watch them buttnaked in your own room will never emulate the impact that ithad,to queue for hours in front of a cinema and finally find out after 3 anxious years that Luke actually becomes a Jedi Knight and defeats his own father. Neither will an itunes playlist of your favorite Beatles songs come anywhere near the mindblowing experience that it was to actually unfold a vinyl record and playing Sgt Pepper's for ghe first time, being barely able to realize that what you hear will change music forever. | a single real experience is worth more than a 1000 simultaneous emulations |
soulstealer1984 | The closest I have had was a fatal crash where both drivers were killed and only one witness. The witness statement was that black car was going east and white car was going west. The black car crosses over to the opposite side of the road and strikes the white car.
Looking at the evidence the black car was facing east and the white car was facing west, at final rest. There were tire marks coming into the area of impact that looked like the car was sliding side ways and the impact was on passenger side of the white car and on the front of the black car. Because of damage to the car i could not figure out how the black car could have been going sideways and still strike the white car with the front of the vehicle. Logically if the black car was coming in sideways you would expect the damage to be on its side not its front.
I then interviewed the family of the white car and found out that he was going to pick up dinner. The food was already in the car so I knew he was traveling from the restaurant to his home which would put the white car going east not west as stated by the witness. The same was true when I interviewed the family of the Black car they should have been traveling west not east.
As it turned out the white car was the one that crossed over the center line not the black car and the white car was the one that began to spin sideways. I feel that the witness pulled up to the crash right after it happened and since the cars had each spun 180 degrees after impact that assumed they were traveling the opposite direction that they were. The witness had the crash completely backwards and blamed the wrong car for the crash.
TLDR: A witness had the crash backwards and made the crash logically impposible. | The closest I have had was a fatal crash where both drivers were killed and only one witness. The witness statement was that black car was going east and white car was going west. The black car crosses over to the opposite side of the road and strikes the white car.
Looking at the evidence the black car was facing east and the white car was facing west, at final rest. There were tire marks coming into the area of impact that looked like the car was sliding side ways and the impact was on passenger side of the white car and on the front of the black car. Because of damage to the car i could not figure out how the black car could have been going sideways and still strike the white car with the front of the vehicle. Logically if the black car was coming in sideways you would expect the damage to be on its side not its front.
I then interviewed the family of the white car and found out that he was going to pick up dinner. The food was already in the car so I knew he was traveling from the restaurant to his home which would put the white car going east not west as stated by the witness. The same was true when I interviewed the family of the Black car they should have been traveling west not east.
As it turned out the white car was the one that crossed over the center line not the black car and the white car was the one that began to spin sideways. I feel that the witness pulled up to the crash right after it happened and since the cars had each spun 180 degrees after impact that assumed they were traveling the opposite direction that they were. The witness had the crash completely backwards and blamed the wrong car for the crash.
TLDR: A witness had the crash backwards and made the crash logically impposible.
| IAmA | t5_2qzb6 | cidh6d5 | The closest I have had was a fatal crash where both drivers were killed and only one witness. The witness statement was that black car was going east and white car was going west. The black car crosses over to the opposite side of the road and strikes the white car.
Looking at the evidence the black car was facing east and the white car was facing west, at final rest. There were tire marks coming into the area of impact that looked like the car was sliding side ways and the impact was on passenger side of the white car and on the front of the black car. Because of damage to the car i could not figure out how the black car could have been going sideways and still strike the white car with the front of the vehicle. Logically if the black car was coming in sideways you would expect the damage to be on its side not its front.
I then interviewed the family of the white car and found out that he was going to pick up dinner. The food was already in the car so I knew he was traveling from the restaurant to his home which would put the white car going east not west as stated by the witness. The same was true when I interviewed the family of the Black car they should have been traveling west not east.
As it turned out the white car was the one that crossed over the center line not the black car and the white car was the one that began to spin sideways. I feel that the witness pulled up to the crash right after it happened and since the cars had each spun 180 degrees after impact that assumed they were traveling the opposite direction that they were. The witness had the crash completely backwards and blamed the wrong car for the crash. | A witness had the crash backwards and made the crash logically impposible. |
w8h | Ich wollte eigentlich Philosophie und Rechtsgeschichte als Schwerpunkt wählen. Nach einer Abwägung, in der ich versucht habe alle relevanten Entscheidungskriterien zu berücksichtigen, bin ich dann allerdings auf Öffentliches Recht als Schwerpunkt gekommen. Ich werde die Entscheidungsfindung im Folgenden nachvollziehen. Vielleicht hilft es ja jemandem, dem "follow your heart" etwas zu flach erscheint.
Als Kriterien habe ich berücksichtigt: persönliches Interesse, Arbeitsaufwand, Notenerwartung, Examensrelevanz.
- Das persönliche Interesse für Philosophie und vor allem Geschichte ist durchaus vorhanden. Allerdings war ich mir insbesondere in der Philosophie nicht sicher, ob ich mit den an meiner kleinen bayerischen Provinzfakultät vertretenen Lehrmeinungen und -methoden glücklich geworden wäre.
- Das persönliche Interesse, im Sinne von Leidenschaftlichkeit, für Öffentliches Recht hält sich doch stark in Grenzen. Allerdings arbeite ich an einem Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht und habe ein Auslandsjahr damit zugebracht Öffentliches Europarecht zu studieren. Habe damit also eine Ausrichtung im Lebenslauf.
- Der Arbeitsaufwand ist in beiden Schwerpunkten nicht ohne. In Philosophie und Rechtsgeschichte muss man sehr viel lesen. In Öffentlichem Recht hat man die größte Menge an Gesetzestext von allen Fächern.
- Man sagt, dass man in Philosophie gute Noten bekommen kann. Allerdings sitzen da auch ein paar Philosophie-*diehards* im Kurs, die sicherlich nicht wenig für die Note tun. Geschenkt bekommt man die gute Note dort auf keinen Fall. In Öffentlichem Recht ist der Notendurchschnitt etwas niedriger, bei aber niedrigerer Durchfallquote, was dafür spricht, dass sich mehr Noten im Mittelfeld konzentrieren und es statistisch weniger Ausreißer nach oben und unten gibt. Als Student, der eher dem Mittelfeld zuzuordnen ist, bringt es nichts danach auszusuchen, in welchem Schwerpunkt die besten Noten geschrieben wurden.
- Die Examensrelevanz von Philosophie und Geschichte ist gleich Null. In Öffentlichem Recht werden 2 der 6 Klausuren geschieben. In Strafrecht wird nur eine geschrieben. In den meisten zivilrechtlichen Schwerpunkten kann man sich nicht sicher sein ob sein Thema überhaupt dran kommt. Familienrecht, Arbeitsrecht, Erbrecht etc. wird meist nur in jedem zweiten Termin überhaupt abgefragt. Öffentliches Recht kommt auf jeden Fall dran. Insbesondere Vorlesungen wie Verwaltungsprozessrecht vertieft und Verwaltungsverfahrensrecht vertieft sind gold wert, da sie in quasi jedem Examen relevant sind. Der Arbeitsaufwand für die Examensvorbereitung verkürzt sich damit auf dem Bereich des ÖRechts enorm, wenn man vorher den Schwerpunkt absolviert hat, da Examens- und Schwerpunktstoff weitestgehend deckungsgleich sind.
Bisher habe ich meine Wahl nicht bereut. Insbesondere für jene, die ihren Schwerpunkt vor dem Examen machen wollen, kann ich die strategische Wahl empfehlen.
**tl;dr: Ich habe nach reichlicher Überlegung strategisch gewählt und bin bisher sehr zufrieden.** | Ich wollte eigentlich Philosophie und Rechtsgeschichte als Schwerpunkt wählen. Nach einer Abwägung, in der ich versucht habe alle relevanten Entscheidungskriterien zu berücksichtigen, bin ich dann allerdings auf Öffentliches Recht als Schwerpunkt gekommen. Ich werde die Entscheidungsfindung im Folgenden nachvollziehen. Vielleicht hilft es ja jemandem, dem "follow your heart" etwas zu flach erscheint.
Als Kriterien habe ich berücksichtigt: persönliches Interesse, Arbeitsaufwand, Notenerwartung, Examensrelevanz.
Das persönliche Interesse für Philosophie und vor allem Geschichte ist durchaus vorhanden. Allerdings war ich mir insbesondere in der Philosophie nicht sicher, ob ich mit den an meiner kleinen bayerischen Provinzfakultät vertretenen Lehrmeinungen und -methoden glücklich geworden wäre.
Das persönliche Interesse, im Sinne von Leidenschaftlichkeit, für Öffentliches Recht hält sich doch stark in Grenzen. Allerdings arbeite ich an einem Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht und habe ein Auslandsjahr damit zugebracht Öffentliches Europarecht zu studieren. Habe damit also eine Ausrichtung im Lebenslauf.
Der Arbeitsaufwand ist in beiden Schwerpunkten nicht ohne. In Philosophie und Rechtsgeschichte muss man sehr viel lesen. In Öffentlichem Recht hat man die größte Menge an Gesetzestext von allen Fächern.
Man sagt, dass man in Philosophie gute Noten bekommen kann. Allerdings sitzen da auch ein paar Philosophie- diehards im Kurs, die sicherlich nicht wenig für die Note tun. Geschenkt bekommt man die gute Note dort auf keinen Fall. In Öffentlichem Recht ist der Notendurchschnitt etwas niedriger, bei aber niedrigerer Durchfallquote, was dafür spricht, dass sich mehr Noten im Mittelfeld konzentrieren und es statistisch weniger Ausreißer nach oben und unten gibt. Als Student, der eher dem Mittelfeld zuzuordnen ist, bringt es nichts danach auszusuchen, in welchem Schwerpunkt die besten Noten geschrieben wurden.
Die Examensrelevanz von Philosophie und Geschichte ist gleich Null. In Öffentlichem Recht werden 2 der 6 Klausuren geschieben. In Strafrecht wird nur eine geschrieben. In den meisten zivilrechtlichen Schwerpunkten kann man sich nicht sicher sein ob sein Thema überhaupt dran kommt. Familienrecht, Arbeitsrecht, Erbrecht etc. wird meist nur in jedem zweiten Termin überhaupt abgefragt. Öffentliches Recht kommt auf jeden Fall dran. Insbesondere Vorlesungen wie Verwaltungsprozessrecht vertieft und Verwaltungsverfahrensrecht vertieft sind gold wert, da sie in quasi jedem Examen relevant sind. Der Arbeitsaufwand für die Examensvorbereitung verkürzt sich damit auf dem Bereich des ÖRechts enorm, wenn man vorher den Schwerpunkt absolviert hat, da Examens- und Schwerpunktstoff weitestgehend deckungsgleich sind.
Bisher habe ich meine Wahl nicht bereut. Insbesondere für jene, die ihren Schwerpunkt vor dem Examen machen wollen, kann ich die strategische Wahl empfehlen.
tl;dr: Ich habe nach reichlicher Überlegung strategisch gewählt und bin bisher sehr zufrieden.
| recht | t5_2zv9z | cidyei4 | Ich wollte eigentlich Philosophie und Rechtsgeschichte als Schwerpunkt wählen. Nach einer Abwägung, in der ich versucht habe alle relevanten Entscheidungskriterien zu berücksichtigen, bin ich dann allerdings auf Öffentliches Recht als Schwerpunkt gekommen. Ich werde die Entscheidungsfindung im Folgenden nachvollziehen. Vielleicht hilft es ja jemandem, dem "follow your heart" etwas zu flach erscheint.
Als Kriterien habe ich berücksichtigt: persönliches Interesse, Arbeitsaufwand, Notenerwartung, Examensrelevanz.
Das persönliche Interesse für Philosophie und vor allem Geschichte ist durchaus vorhanden. Allerdings war ich mir insbesondere in der Philosophie nicht sicher, ob ich mit den an meiner kleinen bayerischen Provinzfakultät vertretenen Lehrmeinungen und -methoden glücklich geworden wäre.
Das persönliche Interesse, im Sinne von Leidenschaftlichkeit, für Öffentliches Recht hält sich doch stark in Grenzen. Allerdings arbeite ich an einem Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht und habe ein Auslandsjahr damit zugebracht Öffentliches Europarecht zu studieren. Habe damit also eine Ausrichtung im Lebenslauf.
Der Arbeitsaufwand ist in beiden Schwerpunkten nicht ohne. In Philosophie und Rechtsgeschichte muss man sehr viel lesen. In Öffentlichem Recht hat man die größte Menge an Gesetzestext von allen Fächern.
Man sagt, dass man in Philosophie gute Noten bekommen kann. Allerdings sitzen da auch ein paar Philosophie- diehards im Kurs, die sicherlich nicht wenig für die Note tun. Geschenkt bekommt man die gute Note dort auf keinen Fall. In Öffentlichem Recht ist der Notendurchschnitt etwas niedriger, bei aber niedrigerer Durchfallquote, was dafür spricht, dass sich mehr Noten im Mittelfeld konzentrieren und es statistisch weniger Ausreißer nach oben und unten gibt. Als Student, der eher dem Mittelfeld zuzuordnen ist, bringt es nichts danach auszusuchen, in welchem Schwerpunkt die besten Noten geschrieben wurden.
Die Examensrelevanz von Philosophie und Geschichte ist gleich Null. In Öffentlichem Recht werden 2 der 6 Klausuren geschieben. In Strafrecht wird nur eine geschrieben. In den meisten zivilrechtlichen Schwerpunkten kann man sich nicht sicher sein ob sein Thema überhaupt dran kommt. Familienrecht, Arbeitsrecht, Erbrecht etc. wird meist nur in jedem zweiten Termin überhaupt abgefragt. Öffentliches Recht kommt auf jeden Fall dran. Insbesondere Vorlesungen wie Verwaltungsprozessrecht vertieft und Verwaltungsverfahrensrecht vertieft sind gold wert, da sie in quasi jedem Examen relevant sind. Der Arbeitsaufwand für die Examensvorbereitung verkürzt sich damit auf dem Bereich des ÖRechts enorm, wenn man vorher den Schwerpunkt absolviert hat, da Examens- und Schwerpunktstoff weitestgehend deckungsgleich sind.
Bisher habe ich meine Wahl nicht bereut. Insbesondere für jene, die ihren Schwerpunkt vor dem Examen machen wollen, kann ich die strategische Wahl empfehlen. | Ich habe nach reichlicher Überlegung strategisch gewählt und bin bisher sehr zufrieden. |
RedAssAg | Posts that are in multiple paragraphs. I just scroll to the TL;DR and read witty comments that follow | Posts that are in multiple paragraphs. I just scroll to the TL;DR and read witty comments that follow
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | cidq5bs | Posts that are in multiple paragraphs. I just scroll to the | and read witty comments that follow |
macfox717 | For new N.A. releases, MM 5 and 6 are great. There's a lot of hate for MM 7 because it's 16bit, the formula changed to have an intro level, and you start with 4 robot masters that eventually opens to 8. That being said, I think it's a great game.
MM zero is pretty good, but I think MM zero 2/3 are better. The first one relies heavily on score for completing the levels, and is pretty difficult.
MMX3 is the most difficult of the SNES X series. It offers a lot of new abilities though. I can't beat it without save states. I enjoyed MMX and MMX2 more.
Tl;dr: MM5 and 6 are just as good. MM7 is a maybe. MMX3 and Zero are maybe, but others in series are better. | For new N.A. releases, MM 5 and 6 are great. There's a lot of hate for MM 7 because it's 16bit, the formula changed to have an intro level, and you start with 4 robot masters that eventually opens to 8. That being said, I think it's a great game.
MM zero is pretty good, but I think MM zero 2/3 are better. The first one relies heavily on score for completing the levels, and is pretty difficult.
MMX3 is the most difficult of the SNES X series. It offers a lot of new abilities though. I can't beat it without save states. I enjoyed MMX and MMX2 more.
Tl;dr: MM5 and 6 are just as good. MM7 is a maybe. MMX3 and Zero are maybe, but others in series are better.
| nintendo | t5_2qhnk | cie0op5 | For new N.A. releases, MM 5 and 6 are great. There's a lot of hate for MM 7 because it's 16bit, the formula changed to have an intro level, and you start with 4 robot masters that eventually opens to 8. That being said, I think it's a great game.
MM zero is pretty good, but I think MM zero 2/3 are better. The first one relies heavily on score for completing the levels, and is pretty difficult.
MMX3 is the most difficult of the SNES X series. It offers a lot of new abilities though. I can't beat it without save states. I enjoyed MMX and MMX2 more. | MM5 and 6 are just as good. MM7 is a maybe. MMX3 and Zero are maybe, but others in series are better. |
JBPBRC | You've been downvoted a bunch as is typical for criticizing Marvel films, but for what its worth I agree with you. While some characters like Thor have valid excuses for not being there, the fact that no one was investigating Killian and/or Extremis after they blew Tony Stark's mansion to smithereens and kidnapped the US president shows just how isolated this "universe" really is.
TL;DR - Less of a cohesive universe, more feature length Avengers commercials. | You've been downvoted a bunch as is typical for criticizing Marvel films, but for what its worth I agree with you. While some characters like Thor have valid excuses for not being there, the fact that no one was investigating Killian and/or Extremis after they blew Tony Stark's mansion to smithereens and kidnapped the US president shows just how isolated this "universe" really is.
TL;DR - Less of a cohesive universe, more feature length Avengers commercials.
| movies | t5_2qh3s | ciepxhf | You've been downvoted a bunch as is typical for criticizing Marvel films, but for what its worth I agree with you. While some characters like Thor have valid excuses for not being there, the fact that no one was investigating Killian and/or Extremis after they blew Tony Stark's mansion to smithereens and kidnapped the US president shows just how isolated this "universe" really is. | Less of a cohesive universe, more feature length Avengers commercials. |
rhodisconnect | Once alcohol goes into your body, and into your cells, it has to be gotten rid of somehow. There is a group of enzymes called alcohol dehydrogenases, which are responsible for breaking ethanol (the type of alcohol you drink) down into something less toxic. Different people can have varying levels of functionality of these enzymes. Sometimes, whole races can have variable function (for example, some Asian people develop a "flush" when drinking due to a decrease in ability to break down alcohol properly). Your enzymes, weight, genetics, etc. all factor in.
*ALSO*: **as you drink more and more regularly, your ability to tolerate the effects of alcohol such as slurring, stumbling, etc. is increased. THIS DOES NOT MEAN YOU ARE LESS DRUNK, IT JUST MEANS YOU ARE GOOD AT ACTING LESS DRUNK.** Even though she brags her tolerance is so high, if you breathalyze her, you may be surprised. You can adapt to the effects better over time. This is one of the reasons people think they are "good to drive" when they're really not even close to legally unimpaired.
-------------
FUN FACT SIDE NOTE!
Ethanol reduces your body's store of glutathione as well as increases production of, binds to, and inhibits an enzyme called CYP2E1, which is the enzyme responsible for one of the steps in breaking down acetaminophen (Tylanol) into smaller pieces. When CYP2E1's functionality is messed up by ethanol, your body makes more CYP2E1, which is then also blocked by ethanol. CYP2E1 breaks down acetaminophen into something called NAPQI. NAPQI is broken down by glutathione (which is already reduced by ethanol.)
When you finally stop drinking, you have a lot of 2E1, and not that much glutathione. The huge amount of 2E1 quickly breaks down ethanol to NAPQI, but there isn't that much glutathione available to breakdown NAPQI into smaller bits at this point.
Now you have a whole lot of NAPQI, more than your body can take care of at once. Unfortunately, NAPQI is hepatotoxic, which means it kills your liver. **Bad news.**
TL;DR: If you take Tylenol (acetaminophen) while or shortly after drinking, you're murdering the *shit* out of your liver. | Once alcohol goes into your body, and into your cells, it has to be gotten rid of somehow. There is a group of enzymes called alcohol dehydrogenases, which are responsible for breaking ethanol (the type of alcohol you drink) down into something less toxic. Different people can have varying levels of functionality of these enzymes. Sometimes, whole races can have variable function (for example, some Asian people develop a "flush" when drinking due to a decrease in ability to break down alcohol properly). Your enzymes, weight, genetics, etc. all factor in.
ALSO : as you drink more and more regularly, your ability to tolerate the effects of alcohol such as slurring, stumbling, etc. is increased. THIS DOES NOT MEAN YOU ARE LESS DRUNK, IT JUST MEANS YOU ARE GOOD AT ACTING LESS DRUNK. Even though she brags her tolerance is so high, if you breathalyze her, you may be surprised. You can adapt to the effects better over time. This is one of the reasons people think they are "good to drive" when they're really not even close to legally unimpaired.
FUN FACT SIDE NOTE!
Ethanol reduces your body's store of glutathione as well as increases production of, binds to, and inhibits an enzyme called CYP2E1, which is the enzyme responsible for one of the steps in breaking down acetaminophen (Tylanol) into smaller pieces. When CYP2E1's functionality is messed up by ethanol, your body makes more CYP2E1, which is then also blocked by ethanol. CYP2E1 breaks down acetaminophen into something called NAPQI. NAPQI is broken down by glutathione (which is already reduced by ethanol.)
When you finally stop drinking, you have a lot of 2E1, and not that much glutathione. The huge amount of 2E1 quickly breaks down ethanol to NAPQI, but there isn't that much glutathione available to breakdown NAPQI into smaller bits at this point.
Now you have a whole lot of NAPQI, more than your body can take care of at once. Unfortunately, NAPQI is hepatotoxic, which means it kills your liver. Bad news.
TL;DR: If you take Tylenol (acetaminophen) while or shortly after drinking, you're murdering the shit out of your liver.
| explainlikeimfive | t5_2sokd | cie66py | Once alcohol goes into your body, and into your cells, it has to be gotten rid of somehow. There is a group of enzymes called alcohol dehydrogenases, which are responsible for breaking ethanol (the type of alcohol you drink) down into something less toxic. Different people can have varying levels of functionality of these enzymes. Sometimes, whole races can have variable function (for example, some Asian people develop a "flush" when drinking due to a decrease in ability to break down alcohol properly). Your enzymes, weight, genetics, etc. all factor in.
ALSO : as you drink more and more regularly, your ability to tolerate the effects of alcohol such as slurring, stumbling, etc. is increased. THIS DOES NOT MEAN YOU ARE LESS DRUNK, IT JUST MEANS YOU ARE GOOD AT ACTING LESS DRUNK. Even though she brags her tolerance is so high, if you breathalyze her, you may be surprised. You can adapt to the effects better over time. This is one of the reasons people think they are "good to drive" when they're really not even close to legally unimpaired.
FUN FACT SIDE NOTE!
Ethanol reduces your body's store of glutathione as well as increases production of, binds to, and inhibits an enzyme called CYP2E1, which is the enzyme responsible for one of the steps in breaking down acetaminophen (Tylanol) into smaller pieces. When CYP2E1's functionality is messed up by ethanol, your body makes more CYP2E1, which is then also blocked by ethanol. CYP2E1 breaks down acetaminophen into something called NAPQI. NAPQI is broken down by glutathione (which is already reduced by ethanol.)
When you finally stop drinking, you have a lot of 2E1, and not that much glutathione. The huge amount of 2E1 quickly breaks down ethanol to NAPQI, but there isn't that much glutathione available to breakdown NAPQI into smaller bits at this point.
Now you have a whole lot of NAPQI, more than your body can take care of at once. Unfortunately, NAPQI is hepatotoxic, which means it kills your liver. Bad news. | If you take Tylenol (acetaminophen) while or shortly after drinking, you're murdering the shit out of your liver. |
YoungFolks | Maybe. Yes, but.
Modern mass communication and social aspects of the Internet and media have made it a lot easier for people to know trans is even a thing, and know what it actually is. So, there is more knowledge, and that will mean more people have access to the things they need to connect the dots. And since young people grow up with the Internet and all it entails, they will be more exposed.
So yes, more people will be able to connect the dots, and probably earlier in life. But that doesn't mean everyone will.
Personally, I knew about trans people from a young age. I grew up in a liberal area, had liberal friends, and was involved in the LGBTetc community since my early teens. I even have several trans friends I've known for ages, male and female and nonbinary. I've been interested in gay and trans culture, and an advocate for gay and trans rights for many, many years. But I didn't figure things out until last year. I had access to every possible source that could set off the realization that I'm trans, but it didn't. It was chance and introspection and a critical mass of clues that made me realize.
TL; DR: In the future, more trans people will realize they are trans at a younger age, because they will have more access to information about transgenderism, however that is not a guarantee. Access helps, but it's not all that is necessary. | Maybe. Yes, but.
Modern mass communication and social aspects of the Internet and media have made it a lot easier for people to know trans is even a thing, and know what it actually is. So, there is more knowledge, and that will mean more people have access to the things they need to connect the dots. And since young people grow up with the Internet and all it entails, they will be more exposed.
So yes, more people will be able to connect the dots, and probably earlier in life. But that doesn't mean everyone will.
Personally, I knew about trans people from a young age. I grew up in a liberal area, had liberal friends, and was involved in the LGBTetc community since my early teens. I even have several trans friends I've known for ages, male and female and nonbinary. I've been interested in gay and trans culture, and an advocate for gay and trans rights for many, many years. But I didn't figure things out until last year. I had access to every possible source that could set off the realization that I'm trans, but it didn't. It was chance and introspection and a critical mass of clues that made me realize.
TL; DR: In the future, more trans people will realize they are trans at a younger age, because they will have more access to information about transgenderism, however that is not a guarantee. Access helps, but it's not all that is necessary.
| asktransgender | t5_2r4b9 | cieibi6 | Maybe. Yes, but.
Modern mass communication and social aspects of the Internet and media have made it a lot easier for people to know trans is even a thing, and know what it actually is. So, there is more knowledge, and that will mean more people have access to the things they need to connect the dots. And since young people grow up with the Internet and all it entails, they will be more exposed.
So yes, more people will be able to connect the dots, and probably earlier in life. But that doesn't mean everyone will.
Personally, I knew about trans people from a young age. I grew up in a liberal area, had liberal friends, and was involved in the LGBTetc community since my early teens. I even have several trans friends I've known for ages, male and female and nonbinary. I've been interested in gay and trans culture, and an advocate for gay and trans rights for many, many years. But I didn't figure things out until last year. I had access to every possible source that could set off the realization that I'm trans, but it didn't. It was chance and introspection and a critical mass of clues that made me realize. | In the future, more trans people will realize they are trans at a younger age, because they will have more access to information about transgenderism, however that is not a guarantee. Access helps, but it's not all that is necessary. |
Doomhammer458 | its a standard thing......
its hard to justify spending $10,000s on stock for a new product line without trying to trademark what you are basing the product line on.
it can go two ways
A. it gets rejected and you can move forward because you feel confident no one else can trademark it.
B. it gets granted, but its a super flimsy trademark. It will at least prevent you from getting sued. you would have to be insane to try to enforce it against someone else but someone would also have to be insane to sue you since you hold the trademark.
TLDR; businesses do things the old school way while we have moved on to the internet age where trademarks are mostly meaningless. | its a standard thing......
its hard to justify spending $10,000s on stock for a new product line without trying to trademark what you are basing the product line on.
it can go two ways
A. it gets rejected and you can move forward because you feel confident no one else can trademark it.
B. it gets granted, but its a super flimsy trademark. It will at least prevent you from getting sued. you would have to be insane to try to enforce it against someone else but someone would also have to be insane to sue you since you hold the trademark.
TLDR; businesses do things the old school way while we have moved on to the internet age where trademarks are mostly meaningless.
| dogecoin | t5_2zcp2 | cif1lup | its a standard thing......
its hard to justify spending $10,000s on stock for a new product line without trying to trademark what you are basing the product line on.
it can go two ways
A. it gets rejected and you can move forward because you feel confident no one else can trademark it.
B. it gets granted, but its a super flimsy trademark. It will at least prevent you from getting sued. you would have to be insane to try to enforce it against someone else but someone would also have to be insane to sue you since you hold the trademark. | businesses do things the old school way while we have moved on to the internet age where trademarks are mostly meaningless. |
throwawaydukes | Reading into that, here's where I believe the boys would have defense:
Definitions:
2c) Reasonable expectation of privacy- A reasonable person would expect privacy in their bathroom, sure. However, she brought the men into the bathroom. Even if that could not be proven, she was aware the men were in the room. She interacted with them, disrobed herself, and discussed the details of her breasts with the men. Would a reasonable person believe that she was not being recorded during that? Most likely.
Then comes the issue of consent once again. She was intoxicated. Can an intoxicated person consent to expose themselves willingly? I would think so, but I admit I do not know case law history in FL related to this issue.
2d) Sexual organ- I don't think breasts would qualify.
Okay so that covers definitions. Let's look at the statute itself:
2a) intentional use- yes. videographer intentionally videotaped. Was it secret? He had it out in the open. Was she aware of it at the time? Could she prove she was not aware of it at the time? Not remembering it =/= not being aware. That'd be a tough thing to prove in court, especially considering she interacted with the videographer in the video. Additionally, it requires the lack of knowledge **and** lack of consent. Consent is muddy and knowledge is muddy also. Could honestly go either way. Regardless, it's only relevant if it happens at a time when the person is "undressing... at a time when that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy." Once again, if she voluntarily strips for them, would she have a reasonable expectation that they would not record her? My best guess is that this statute was enacted to cover issues of voyeurism where people would install cameras inside bathrooms to videotape women changing or using the restroom without their knowledge and consent, hence the wording. I doubt it was crafted with this purpose, but nevertheless could be interpreted as such.
On distribution, it would be a crime if the prior elements were satisfied to qualify as video voyeurism (which, as I said, is gray at best). **And** the distribution must be for the purpose of "amusement, entertainment, sexual arousal, gratification, or profit, or for the purpose of degrading or abusing another person." Their initial distribution would certainly qualify as one of those conditions, whether sexual arousal, entertainment, amusement, etc. However, someone leaking the video to shine light on the true incidents of the night, in order to contest the one-sided reports, along with an explicitly stated reasoning at the time of distribution that accompanies the video **may not qualify under those conditions**.
**TL;DR- Possession is not illegal. Taping it was questionably legal. Dissemination depends on legality of taping, and if guilty of video voyeurism originally, initial dissemination illegal. Subsequent future dissemination for a more legitimate purpose could be potentially illegal, but likely would have more of a defense than the initial taping/dissemination would.** | Reading into that, here's where I believe the boys would have defense:
Definitions:
2c) Reasonable expectation of privacy- A reasonable person would expect privacy in their bathroom, sure. However, she brought the men into the bathroom. Even if that could not be proven, she was aware the men were in the room. She interacted with them, disrobed herself, and discussed the details of her breasts with the men. Would a reasonable person believe that she was not being recorded during that? Most likely.
Then comes the issue of consent once again. She was intoxicated. Can an intoxicated person consent to expose themselves willingly? I would think so, but I admit I do not know case law history in FL related to this issue.
2d) Sexual organ- I don't think breasts would qualify.
Okay so that covers definitions. Let's look at the statute itself:
2a) intentional use- yes. videographer intentionally videotaped. Was it secret? He had it out in the open. Was she aware of it at the time? Could she prove she was not aware of it at the time? Not remembering it =/= not being aware. That'd be a tough thing to prove in court, especially considering she interacted with the videographer in the video. Additionally, it requires the lack of knowledge and lack of consent. Consent is muddy and knowledge is muddy also. Could honestly go either way. Regardless, it's only relevant if it happens at a time when the person is "undressing... at a time when that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy." Once again, if she voluntarily strips for them, would she have a reasonable expectation that they would not record her? My best guess is that this statute was enacted to cover issues of voyeurism where people would install cameras inside bathrooms to videotape women changing or using the restroom without their knowledge and consent, hence the wording. I doubt it was crafted with this purpose, but nevertheless could be interpreted as such.
On distribution, it would be a crime if the prior elements were satisfied to qualify as video voyeurism (which, as I said, is gray at best). And the distribution must be for the purpose of "amusement, entertainment, sexual arousal, gratification, or profit, or for the purpose of degrading or abusing another person." Their initial distribution would certainly qualify as one of those conditions, whether sexual arousal, entertainment, amusement, etc. However, someone leaking the video to shine light on the true incidents of the night, in order to contest the one-sided reports, along with an explicitly stated reasoning at the time of distribution that accompanies the video may not qualify under those conditions .
TL;DR- Possession is not illegal. Taping it was questionably legal. Dissemination depends on legality of taping, and if guilty of video voyeurism originally, initial dissemination illegal. Subsequent future dissemination for a more legitimate purpose could be potentially illegal, but likely would have more of a defense than the initial taping/dissemination would.
| jmu | t5_2sf1w | cigufkk | Reading into that, here's where I believe the boys would have defense:
Definitions:
2c) Reasonable expectation of privacy- A reasonable person would expect privacy in their bathroom, sure. However, she brought the men into the bathroom. Even if that could not be proven, she was aware the men were in the room. She interacted with them, disrobed herself, and discussed the details of her breasts with the men. Would a reasonable person believe that she was not being recorded during that? Most likely.
Then comes the issue of consent once again. She was intoxicated. Can an intoxicated person consent to expose themselves willingly? I would think so, but I admit I do not know case law history in FL related to this issue.
2d) Sexual organ- I don't think breasts would qualify.
Okay so that covers definitions. Let's look at the statute itself:
2a) intentional use- yes. videographer intentionally videotaped. Was it secret? He had it out in the open. Was she aware of it at the time? Could she prove she was not aware of it at the time? Not remembering it =/= not being aware. That'd be a tough thing to prove in court, especially considering she interacted with the videographer in the video. Additionally, it requires the lack of knowledge and lack of consent. Consent is muddy and knowledge is muddy also. Could honestly go either way. Regardless, it's only relevant if it happens at a time when the person is "undressing... at a time when that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy." Once again, if she voluntarily strips for them, would she have a reasonable expectation that they would not record her? My best guess is that this statute was enacted to cover issues of voyeurism where people would install cameras inside bathrooms to videotape women changing or using the restroom without their knowledge and consent, hence the wording. I doubt it was crafted with this purpose, but nevertheless could be interpreted as such.
On distribution, it would be a crime if the prior elements were satisfied to qualify as video voyeurism (which, as I said, is gray at best). And the distribution must be for the purpose of "amusement, entertainment, sexual arousal, gratification, or profit, or for the purpose of degrading or abusing another person." Their initial distribution would certainly qualify as one of those conditions, whether sexual arousal, entertainment, amusement, etc. However, someone leaking the video to shine light on the true incidents of the night, in order to contest the one-sided reports, along with an explicitly stated reasoning at the time of distribution that accompanies the video may not qualify under those conditions . | Possession is not illegal. Taping it was questionably legal. Dissemination depends on legality of taping, and if guilty of video voyeurism originally, initial dissemination illegal. Subsequent future dissemination for a more legitimate purpose could be potentially illegal, but likely would have more of a defense than the initial taping/dissemination would. |
haahaahaa | I'm relatively certain it will only contain the prior site if you clicked on a link in that site to go to it.
For instance, if you click on a link in facebook to go to your company website the webmaster would see that a referral came from facebook. There would be a bit of work to compare the IP assocated with that referral with the IP of a session login and your user ID.
If you type the address of your companies website or click a bookmark to access the page, the link won't contain a referral.
TL:DR They can't see the last page you were on, they see the page that referred you to them. | I'm relatively certain it will only contain the prior site if you clicked on a link in that site to go to it.
For instance, if you click on a link in facebook to go to your company website the webmaster would see that a referral came from facebook. There would be a bit of work to compare the IP assocated with that referral with the IP of a session login and your user ID.
If you type the address of your companies website or click a bookmark to access the page, the link won't contain a referral.
TL:DR They can't see the last page you were on, they see the page that referred you to them.
| techsupport | t5_2qioo | cifeisa | I'm relatively certain it will only contain the prior site if you clicked on a link in that site to go to it.
For instance, if you click on a link in facebook to go to your company website the webmaster would see that a referral came from facebook. There would be a bit of work to compare the IP assocated with that referral with the IP of a session login and your user ID.
If you type the address of your companies website or click a bookmark to access the page, the link won't contain a referral. | They can't see the last page you were on, they see the page that referred you to them. |
DuckTux | If you're just starting don't focus too much on gear. I won't say it's unimportant, but you should definitely work on your playing more than anything else.
That being said, don't buy a $50 piece of crap. But also know that the most important factor is you, and that any decent guitar will work perfectly fine. A good player can make a bad guitar sound good, but a bad player can't do the same with a good guitar. People on this sub focus *wayyyyyy* too much on gear. It's important, but ultimately secondary to the player.
And if down the line once you've developed and matured your skills, you decide you want a nice guitar to compliment you better, that's 100% acceptable. But right now, don't sweat the small stuff. Go for the best guitar in your price range and have fun.
tl;dr: Yes. It's fine. Good luck. | If you're just starting don't focus too much on gear. I won't say it's unimportant, but you should definitely work on your playing more than anything else.
That being said, don't buy a $50 piece of crap. But also know that the most important factor is you, and that any decent guitar will work perfectly fine. A good player can make a bad guitar sound good, but a bad player can't do the same with a good guitar. People on this sub focus wayyyyyy too much on gear. It's important, but ultimately secondary to the player.
And if down the line once you've developed and matured your skills, you decide you want a nice guitar to compliment you better, that's 100% acceptable. But right now, don't sweat the small stuff. Go for the best guitar in your price range and have fun.
tl;dr: Yes. It's fine. Good luck.
| Guitar | t5_2qi79 | cifjgl6 | If you're just starting don't focus too much on gear. I won't say it's unimportant, but you should definitely work on your playing more than anything else.
That being said, don't buy a $50 piece of crap. But also know that the most important factor is you, and that any decent guitar will work perfectly fine. A good player can make a bad guitar sound good, but a bad player can't do the same with a good guitar. People on this sub focus wayyyyyy too much on gear. It's important, but ultimately secondary to the player.
And if down the line once you've developed and matured your skills, you decide you want a nice guitar to compliment you better, that's 100% acceptable. But right now, don't sweat the small stuff. Go for the best guitar in your price range and have fun. | Yes. It's fine. Good luck. |
elastic-craptastic | When you figure out what the laws are in the state you are in where the recording took place and it is a one party consent to record state, make sure you check that the state you are divorcing in will recognize that recording if they are a 2 party state.
I am not a lawyer, but I like to dot my i's and t's. So check with your lawyer and maybe call a few in your home state and just ask on the phone and see if anyone will answer the question. maybe get a few confirmations or even retain a lawyer in the home state... or the whole situation in reverse states depending on how your lawyer/situation is.
tl;dr... you may need to double lawyer up if you wanna use the recording? | When you figure out what the laws are in the state you are in where the recording took place and it is a one party consent to record state, make sure you check that the state you are divorcing in will recognize that recording if they are a 2 party state.
I am not a lawyer, but I like to dot my i's and t's. So check with your lawyer and maybe call a few in your home state and just ask on the phone and see if anyone will answer the question. maybe get a few confirmations or even retain a lawyer in the home state... or the whole situation in reverse states depending on how your lawyer/situation is.
tl;dr... you may need to double lawyer up if you wanna use the recording?
| AdviceAnimals | t5_2s7tt | cifl6h7 | When you figure out what the laws are in the state you are in where the recording took place and it is a one party consent to record state, make sure you check that the state you are divorcing in will recognize that recording if they are a 2 party state.
I am not a lawyer, but I like to dot my i's and t's. So check with your lawyer and maybe call a few in your home state and just ask on the phone and see if anyone will answer the question. maybe get a few confirmations or even retain a lawyer in the home state... or the whole situation in reverse states depending on how your lawyer/situation is. | you may need to double lawyer up if you wanna use the recording? |
Peular | Unfortunately just about every state in the US has pretty strict doctor-patient confidentiality laws. There is no way in hell your therapist would be allowed to testify or reveal anything she said to him/her.
Have you actually discussed this matter with your lawyer? I think you're heading for a rude awakening. If you don't live in a 1-party state the recording won't be admissible. Even if that's not the case, the fact she cheated on you doesn't actually matter. To date, there is no case law that specifically addresses adultery. But the law is very clear that alimony awards have to be based on what is 'just', which means taking into account the obligee's ability to support themselves and the obligor's ability to pay, and that fault can't be considered. Judges have to write alimony orders "without regard to misconduct." This means that the family court can't consider any kind of fault or marital misconduct, including adultery, when it makes decisions about alimony.
What will happen is the family court will want you two to work out an agreement, if you can't come to one the judge will look over all the pertinent information (financial obligations held by either party, standard of living during the marriage, length of marriage, etc). The judge will then determine how much and how long you will have to pay. The goal in the judges decision will be to achieve approximate equality.
**tldr;** You will definitely be paying at least some alimony if what you say about her financial situation is true | Unfortunately just about every state in the US has pretty strict doctor-patient confidentiality laws. There is no way in hell your therapist would be allowed to testify or reveal anything she said to him/her.
Have you actually discussed this matter with your lawyer? I think you're heading for a rude awakening. If you don't live in a 1-party state the recording won't be admissible. Even if that's not the case, the fact she cheated on you doesn't actually matter. To date, there is no case law that specifically addresses adultery. But the law is very clear that alimony awards have to be based on what is 'just', which means taking into account the obligee's ability to support themselves and the obligor's ability to pay, and that fault can't be considered. Judges have to write alimony orders "without regard to misconduct." This means that the family court can't consider any kind of fault or marital misconduct, including adultery, when it makes decisions about alimony.
What will happen is the family court will want you two to work out an agreement, if you can't come to one the judge will look over all the pertinent information (financial obligations held by either party, standard of living during the marriage, length of marriage, etc). The judge will then determine how much and how long you will have to pay. The goal in the judges decision will be to achieve approximate equality.
tldr; You will definitely be paying at least some alimony if what you say about her financial situation is true
| AdviceAnimals | t5_2s7tt | ciflcn1 | Unfortunately just about every state in the US has pretty strict doctor-patient confidentiality laws. There is no way in hell your therapist would be allowed to testify or reveal anything she said to him/her.
Have you actually discussed this matter with your lawyer? I think you're heading for a rude awakening. If you don't live in a 1-party state the recording won't be admissible. Even if that's not the case, the fact she cheated on you doesn't actually matter. To date, there is no case law that specifically addresses adultery. But the law is very clear that alimony awards have to be based on what is 'just', which means taking into account the obligee's ability to support themselves and the obligor's ability to pay, and that fault can't be considered. Judges have to write alimony orders "without regard to misconduct." This means that the family court can't consider any kind of fault or marital misconduct, including adultery, when it makes decisions about alimony.
What will happen is the family court will want you two to work out an agreement, if you can't come to one the judge will look over all the pertinent information (financial obligations held by either party, standard of living during the marriage, length of marriage, etc). The judge will then determine how much and how long you will have to pay. The goal in the judges decision will be to achieve approximate equality. | You will definitely be paying at least some alimony if what you say about her financial situation is true |
Obicount | As a player in this Recorded Round, I'm highly disappointed with the players. Before we actually started, we assured that everyone would have the ability to record, edit and upload. We gave everyone 2 weeks to edit in an intro and to upload 20 minute long videos. Surely that shouldn't be too hard. "Chose not to upload" is honestly the shittest excuse for anything I've ever seen. Having your footage "lost" is another absolutely stupid reason not to upload. Sure, maybe if your harddrive got wiped and you lost your footage that way it would be more acceptable. But no. The people who "lost" their footage are either too pussy to admit that they fucked up, embarrassed about their performance, or simply too lazy to upload. This is bullshit. Surely you would keep a few pieces of fairly important video for about 15 other guys who consider you reliable and really want you to upload them for something that they feel passionate about. Surely you would be more careful with that footage and not fucking delete it. Evidently, some people aren't careful or are just stupid with things like this. "Footage uploading later" This is another stupid excuse. You had 2 weeks to contact bjrs about any uploading problems. You had 2 weeks to upload a **20 minute video** to youtube. An act that took me a total of 60-90 minutes per video, and thats with my shitty internet.
Some people in this group, however, I applaud for overcoming obstacles. Jimmy, for example, lost his sounds, but instead of just being all lazy and leaving it, he did post commentary and put music over the video to help people enjoy the video, even without sound. Well done Jimmy. Curry had rendering problems and couldn't upload. This is annoying since he had ages to do the upload but still, he dealt with the problem, communicated to bjrs that he was having trouble and managed to eventually get the footage uploading instead of saying: "Oh, my footage got corrupted/I'm not gonna upload since my render didn't work". Curry didn't say that. He soldiered on and uploaded. Thank you, Curry.
The biggest reason I am disappointed in this group is that some people had much better excuses not to upload, yet still uploaded on time. For example, I had uploaded my videos 5 days before I was meant to leave for England. I would be using a different computer without the video files. As it turns out, I uploaded the wrong files and I only figured it out on the day I was supposed to leave, about 8 hours before I was to drive to the airport. Did I go on skype and say to bjrs "I can't upload. Sorry". No. I did not. I told bjrs there had been uploading trouble and that I was uploading as fast as my internet would allow. I managed to upload my videos with about an hour to spare. Good. I left to England hoping that everything would be fine with the rest of the group because they were much less rushed than me.
Come the day of the un-privating of videos, I had to wake up at 6AM to make sure my videos were there and that I could un-private them in time. Only to find that we had to redo the post about the RR because not enough links were sent in. We waited another hour all the while discussing what problems people had in skype until, finally, the real post had appeared on the reddit. I opened it excitedly hoping that everyone had worked out their recordings. What do I find? Only one team had all 3 people upload on time. **One team.** That's not good. It means that we have a bad reputation and that nobody will take us seriously. All because a few people "Chose not to upload" or "Lost their footage". This is bullshit. It really is
**Tl;Dr** Uploading is really not that difficult. Man up and get it done. | As a player in this Recorded Round, I'm highly disappointed with the players. Before we actually started, we assured that everyone would have the ability to record, edit and upload. We gave everyone 2 weeks to edit in an intro and to upload 20 minute long videos. Surely that shouldn't be too hard. "Chose not to upload" is honestly the shittest excuse for anything I've ever seen. Having your footage "lost" is another absolutely stupid reason not to upload. Sure, maybe if your harddrive got wiped and you lost your footage that way it would be more acceptable. But no. The people who "lost" their footage are either too pussy to admit that they fucked up, embarrassed about their performance, or simply too lazy to upload. This is bullshit. Surely you would keep a few pieces of fairly important video for about 15 other guys who consider you reliable and really want you to upload them for something that they feel passionate about. Surely you would be more careful with that footage and not fucking delete it. Evidently, some people aren't careful or are just stupid with things like this. "Footage uploading later" This is another stupid excuse. You had 2 weeks to contact bjrs about any uploading problems. You had 2 weeks to upload a 20 minute video to youtube. An act that took me a total of 60-90 minutes per video, and thats with my shitty internet.
Some people in this group, however, I applaud for overcoming obstacles. Jimmy, for example, lost his sounds, but instead of just being all lazy and leaving it, he did post commentary and put music over the video to help people enjoy the video, even without sound. Well done Jimmy. Curry had rendering problems and couldn't upload. This is annoying since he had ages to do the upload but still, he dealt with the problem, communicated to bjrs that he was having trouble and managed to eventually get the footage uploading instead of saying: "Oh, my footage got corrupted/I'm not gonna upload since my render didn't work". Curry didn't say that. He soldiered on and uploaded. Thank you, Curry.
The biggest reason I am disappointed in this group is that some people had much better excuses not to upload, yet still uploaded on time. For example, I had uploaded my videos 5 days before I was meant to leave for England. I would be using a different computer without the video files. As it turns out, I uploaded the wrong files and I only figured it out on the day I was supposed to leave, about 8 hours before I was to drive to the airport. Did I go on skype and say to bjrs "I can't upload. Sorry". No. I did not. I told bjrs there had been uploading trouble and that I was uploading as fast as my internet would allow. I managed to upload my videos with about an hour to spare. Good. I left to England hoping that everything would be fine with the rest of the group because they were much less rushed than me.
Come the day of the un-privating of videos, I had to wake up at 6AM to make sure my videos were there and that I could un-private them in time. Only to find that we had to redo the post about the RR because not enough links were sent in. We waited another hour all the while discussing what problems people had in skype until, finally, the real post had appeared on the reddit. I opened it excitedly hoping that everyone had worked out their recordings. What do I find? Only one team had all 3 people upload on time. One team. That's not good. It means that we have a bad reputation and that nobody will take us seriously. All because a few people "Chose not to upload" or "Lost their footage". This is bullshit. It really is
Tl;Dr Uploading is really not that difficult. Man up and get it done.
| ultrahardcore | t5_2tswi | cifmcxv | As a player in this Recorded Round, I'm highly disappointed with the players. Before we actually started, we assured that everyone would have the ability to record, edit and upload. We gave everyone 2 weeks to edit in an intro and to upload 20 minute long videos. Surely that shouldn't be too hard. "Chose not to upload" is honestly the shittest excuse for anything I've ever seen. Having your footage "lost" is another absolutely stupid reason not to upload. Sure, maybe if your harddrive got wiped and you lost your footage that way it would be more acceptable. But no. The people who "lost" their footage are either too pussy to admit that they fucked up, embarrassed about their performance, or simply too lazy to upload. This is bullshit. Surely you would keep a few pieces of fairly important video for about 15 other guys who consider you reliable and really want you to upload them for something that they feel passionate about. Surely you would be more careful with that footage and not fucking delete it. Evidently, some people aren't careful or are just stupid with things like this. "Footage uploading later" This is another stupid excuse. You had 2 weeks to contact bjrs about any uploading problems. You had 2 weeks to upload a 20 minute video to youtube. An act that took me a total of 60-90 minutes per video, and thats with my shitty internet.
Some people in this group, however, I applaud for overcoming obstacles. Jimmy, for example, lost his sounds, but instead of just being all lazy and leaving it, he did post commentary and put music over the video to help people enjoy the video, even without sound. Well done Jimmy. Curry had rendering problems and couldn't upload. This is annoying since he had ages to do the upload but still, he dealt with the problem, communicated to bjrs that he was having trouble and managed to eventually get the footage uploading instead of saying: "Oh, my footage got corrupted/I'm not gonna upload since my render didn't work". Curry didn't say that. He soldiered on and uploaded. Thank you, Curry.
The biggest reason I am disappointed in this group is that some people had much better excuses not to upload, yet still uploaded on time. For example, I had uploaded my videos 5 days before I was meant to leave for England. I would be using a different computer without the video files. As it turns out, I uploaded the wrong files and I only figured it out on the day I was supposed to leave, about 8 hours before I was to drive to the airport. Did I go on skype and say to bjrs "I can't upload. Sorry". No. I did not. I told bjrs there had been uploading trouble and that I was uploading as fast as my internet would allow. I managed to upload my videos with about an hour to spare. Good. I left to England hoping that everything would be fine with the rest of the group because they were much less rushed than me.
Come the day of the un-privating of videos, I had to wake up at 6AM to make sure my videos were there and that I could un-private them in time. Only to find that we had to redo the post about the RR because not enough links were sent in. We waited another hour all the while discussing what problems people had in skype until, finally, the real post had appeared on the reddit. I opened it excitedly hoping that everyone had worked out their recordings. What do I find? Only one team had all 3 people upload on time. One team. That's not good. It means that we have a bad reputation and that nobody will take us seriously. All because a few people "Chose not to upload" or "Lost their footage". This is bullshit. It really is | Uploading is really not that difficult. Man up and get it done. |
kurnster | Can I reference this brilliant Youtube Video from Extra Credits in terms of how 129 champions is actually helping the balance of the game. It's really important as a Game Designer to understand this concept.
EDIT 1: Importantly, it labels how giving the players a wealth of options (129 champions) actually keeps the meta fresh and equips the player base to solve meta problems.
TLDR, this isn't an 'issue' its a design choice | Can I reference this brilliant Youtube Video from Extra Credits in terms of how 129 champions is actually helping the balance of the game. It's really important as a Game Designer to understand this concept.
EDIT 1: Importantly, it labels how giving the players a wealth of options (129 champions) actually keeps the meta fresh and equips the player base to solve meta problems.
TLDR, this isn't an 'issue' its a design choice
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cifnh8f | Can I reference this brilliant Youtube Video from Extra Credits in terms of how 129 champions is actually helping the balance of the game. It's really important as a Game Designer to understand this concept.
EDIT 1: Importantly, it labels how giving the players a wealth of options (129 champions) actually keeps the meta fresh and equips the player base to solve meta problems. | this isn't an 'issue' its a design choice |
vXvInfinityvXv | Damn, this reflects the situation perfectly! You need more upvotes. It seems like Riot is buffing champions that are easy to play and don't have big "Play-potential" to the point the user just needs to smash his head on the keyboard to win lane/game. I'm looking at champions like: Caitlyn, Nasus, Vel'Koz, Kayle, Lulu... Note that I'm not here to highlight the champs with the highest winratio but the champs that that have way too high effectiveness compared to the actual knowledge and skill you need to play it properly.
Additionally, there are many champs that are deemed skill instensive even tho they aren't. Zed being a perfect example. Having such a good waveclear and all that extra damage for nothing makes him a very easy champ. The difference between a good Zed and a horrible Zed is basicly, that the horrible Zed will MAYBE die after he assassinated the ADC, APC and the other has some more knowledge and even survive the 1v5 dive onto the ADC...
Riot keeps constantly nerfing play-making champs and to be honest it sucks. I would bet a 975 skin one of the next nerfs goes to Katarina. The worst part of it all is the community riding every bandwagon that they are presented. That's actually WHY the community is fucked up. I don't care about toxic kids and heck I'll use strong words when I'm settled up, if someone reports me, well fuck it I report back, cause everyone has a corpse in his cellar. Maybe they didn't flame me directly but I'm sure they did, it's fucking human to do so.
TL;DR - Start reading more. | Damn, this reflects the situation perfectly! You need more upvotes. It seems like Riot is buffing champions that are easy to play and don't have big "Play-potential" to the point the user just needs to smash his head on the keyboard to win lane/game. I'm looking at champions like: Caitlyn, Nasus, Vel'Koz, Kayle, Lulu... Note that I'm not here to highlight the champs with the highest winratio but the champs that that have way too high effectiveness compared to the actual knowledge and skill you need to play it properly.
Additionally, there are many champs that are deemed skill instensive even tho they aren't. Zed being a perfect example. Having such a good waveclear and all that extra damage for nothing makes him a very easy champ. The difference between a good Zed and a horrible Zed is basicly, that the horrible Zed will MAYBE die after he assassinated the ADC, APC and the other has some more knowledge and even survive the 1v5 dive onto the ADC...
Riot keeps constantly nerfing play-making champs and to be honest it sucks. I would bet a 975 skin one of the next nerfs goes to Katarina. The worst part of it all is the community riding every bandwagon that they are presented. That's actually WHY the community is fucked up. I don't care about toxic kids and heck I'll use strong words when I'm settled up, if someone reports me, well fuck it I report back, cause everyone has a corpse in his cellar. Maybe they didn't flame me directly but I'm sure they did, it's fucking human to do so.
TL;DR - Start reading more.
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cifpo0i | Damn, this reflects the situation perfectly! You need more upvotes. It seems like Riot is buffing champions that are easy to play and don't have big "Play-potential" to the point the user just needs to smash his head on the keyboard to win lane/game. I'm looking at champions like: Caitlyn, Nasus, Vel'Koz, Kayle, Lulu... Note that I'm not here to highlight the champs with the highest winratio but the champs that that have way too high effectiveness compared to the actual knowledge and skill you need to play it properly.
Additionally, there are many champs that are deemed skill instensive even tho they aren't. Zed being a perfect example. Having such a good waveclear and all that extra damage for nothing makes him a very easy champ. The difference between a good Zed and a horrible Zed is basicly, that the horrible Zed will MAYBE die after he assassinated the ADC, APC and the other has some more knowledge and even survive the 1v5 dive onto the ADC...
Riot keeps constantly nerfing play-making champs and to be honest it sucks. I would bet a 975 skin one of the next nerfs goes to Katarina. The worst part of it all is the community riding every bandwagon that they are presented. That's actually WHY the community is fucked up. I don't care about toxic kids and heck I'll use strong words when I'm settled up, if someone reports me, well fuck it I report back, cause everyone has a corpse in his cellar. Maybe they didn't flame me directly but I'm sure they did, it's fucking human to do so. | Start reading more. |
Igortheinvincible | He's not. What he's doing is asking them to redirect some of their current trying-to-make-the-game-better-efforts to balancing champions outside of the top tiers.
TLDR; RIOT's already making improvements and "making the game better", he thinks there are better ways to do it. | He's not. What he's doing is asking them to redirect some of their current trying-to-make-the-game-better-efforts to balancing champions outside of the top tiers.
TLDR; RIOT's already making improvements and "making the game better", he thinks there are better ways to do it.
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cifr8vh | He's not. What he's doing is asking them to redirect some of their current trying-to-make-the-game-better-efforts to balancing champions outside of the top tiers. | RIOT's already making improvements and "making the game better", he thinks there are better ways to do it. |
xNIBx | Noone considers lion a weak hero and he is certainly viable and pickable. Io was nerfed(but not overnerfed) and it never had 100% win ratio. So instead of pulling numbers out of our ass, let's talk with actual data from the international 4 qualifiers
244 games, 98 heroes picked out of 103(+4 who arent available for captain's mode because they are new). Io was picked in 31 games(it doesnt show bans though) and had 35.5% win ratio. 35.5% win ratio? My god, Io must suck, it definitely needs a buff /s
Lion was picked in 6 games and has 50% win ratio. Obviously io is more popular than lion but that doesnt mean that it is better. It is just a completely different support hero.
What is strongest, making your carry(and yourself) take 20% less dmg+attack speed, root enemies and being able to teleport yourself+carry anywhere on the map? Or having 2 insane cc(one of which is aoe line) and one nuke that literally 1shots heroes? Both heroes are extremely strong in their own way.
TLDR : There isnt a shit tier hero in dota, just more niche heroes that are awesome under specific situations, lineups, strategies. Noone will tell you "omg noob, why did you pick lion, io is obviously better". | Noone considers lion a weak hero and he is certainly viable and pickable. Io was nerfed(but not overnerfed) and it never had 100% win ratio. So instead of pulling numbers out of our ass, let's talk with actual data from the international 4 qualifiers
244 games, 98 heroes picked out of 103(+4 who arent available for captain's mode because they are new). Io was picked in 31 games(it doesnt show bans though) and had 35.5% win ratio. 35.5% win ratio? My god, Io must suck, it definitely needs a buff /s
Lion was picked in 6 games and has 50% win ratio. Obviously io is more popular than lion but that doesnt mean that it is better. It is just a completely different support hero.
What is strongest, making your carry(and yourself) take 20% less dmg+attack speed, root enemies and being able to teleport yourself+carry anywhere on the map? Or having 2 insane cc(one of which is aoe line) and one nuke that literally 1shots heroes? Both heroes are extremely strong in their own way.
TLDR : There isnt a shit tier hero in dota, just more niche heroes that are awesome under specific situations, lineups, strategies. Noone will tell you "omg noob, why did you pick lion, io is obviously better".
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cifrk4l | Noone considers lion a weak hero and he is certainly viable and pickable. Io was nerfed(but not overnerfed) and it never had 100% win ratio. So instead of pulling numbers out of our ass, let's talk with actual data from the international 4 qualifiers
244 games, 98 heroes picked out of 103(+4 who arent available for captain's mode because they are new). Io was picked in 31 games(it doesnt show bans though) and had 35.5% win ratio. 35.5% win ratio? My god, Io must suck, it definitely needs a buff /s
Lion was picked in 6 games and has 50% win ratio. Obviously io is more popular than lion but that doesnt mean that it is better. It is just a completely different support hero.
What is strongest, making your carry(and yourself) take 20% less dmg+attack speed, root enemies and being able to teleport yourself+carry anywhere on the map? Or having 2 insane cc(one of which is aoe line) and one nuke that literally 1shots heroes? Both heroes are extremely strong in their own way. | There isnt a shit tier hero in dota, just more niche heroes that are awesome under specific situations, lineups, strategies. Noone will tell you "omg noob, why did you pick lion, io is obviously better". |
smokemonmast3r | Just because a champ gets strong doesn't mean people are sheep. This game is complex and the meta shifts to favor certain play-styles.
Ex: TF has seen a large resurgence since some fairly minor buffs. Was he OP all along? No, the meta just shifted to favor laners who have strong waveclear and utility. Late season 3, the meta favored assassins in mid-lane such as Zed and Ahri who had very easy time against him in lane and in teamfights.
TLDR: Just because a champ starts seeing popularity after no changes doesn't mean they were OP all along, this game has lots of moving parts. | Just because a champ gets strong doesn't mean people are sheep. This game is complex and the meta shifts to favor certain play-styles.
Ex: TF has seen a large resurgence since some fairly minor buffs. Was he OP all along? No, the meta just shifted to favor laners who have strong waveclear and utility. Late season 3, the meta favored assassins in mid-lane such as Zed and Ahri who had very easy time against him in lane and in teamfights.
TLDR: Just because a champ starts seeing popularity after no changes doesn't mean they were OP all along, this game has lots of moving parts.
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cifz4ba | Just because a champ gets strong doesn't mean people are sheep. This game is complex and the meta shifts to favor certain play-styles.
Ex: TF has seen a large resurgence since some fairly minor buffs. Was he OP all along? No, the meta just shifted to favor laners who have strong waveclear and utility. Late season 3, the meta favored assassins in mid-lane such as Zed and Ahri who had very easy time against him in lane and in teamfights. | Just because a champ starts seeing popularity after no changes doesn't mean they were OP all along, this game has lots of moving parts. |
ThexAntipop | YEAH RIOT WHY CAN'T YOU MAKE SURE ALL 120 CHAMPS ARE COMPLETELY BALANCED? Oh wait, because that's literally impossible. If we're talking about viability almost every single champion in this game is viable for solo queue which is primarily what the game is balanced around. What is viable in the pro scene is not at all indicative of what's viable in solo queue. Pros only play top tier champs because they are playing at the highest level and need every single advantage they can get. Those champs that are always picked in pro play also are the ones that fit the current meta/team comps people are running because the strategy in those games is completely different. Even if the pro players themselves that do these strategies in LCS tried to do it in soloqueue with all challenger team mates it many of the strats would fail almost every time due to a lack of coordination by the team. Last season I went from Bronze 1 to Gold V in little over a week with Wukong mid at a time when almost NO ONE was playing that. At the time Nightblue himself had said he felt Wu was a better mid than top but still no one played it because it wasn't FoTM and it wasn't getting play in LCS.
TL:DR: there will always be a bell curve for the strength of champions, that doesn't mean the ones on the strongest end of the curve or the ones that get played the most are the only viable ones, it just means it might take a little extra skill to make the other ones just as strong. | YEAH RIOT WHY CAN'T YOU MAKE SURE ALL 120 CHAMPS ARE COMPLETELY BALANCED? Oh wait, because that's literally impossible. If we're talking about viability almost every single champion in this game is viable for solo queue which is primarily what the game is balanced around. What is viable in the pro scene is not at all indicative of what's viable in solo queue. Pros only play top tier champs because they are playing at the highest level and need every single advantage they can get. Those champs that are always picked in pro play also are the ones that fit the current meta/team comps people are running because the strategy in those games is completely different. Even if the pro players themselves that do these strategies in LCS tried to do it in soloqueue with all challenger team mates it many of the strats would fail almost every time due to a lack of coordination by the team. Last season I went from Bronze 1 to Gold V in little over a week with Wukong mid at a time when almost NO ONE was playing that. At the time Nightblue himself had said he felt Wu was a better mid than top but still no one played it because it wasn't FoTM and it wasn't getting play in LCS.
TL:DR: there will always be a bell curve for the strength of champions, that doesn't mean the ones on the strongest end of the curve or the ones that get played the most are the only viable ones, it just means it might take a little extra skill to make the other ones just as strong.
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cig2rg7 | YEAH RIOT WHY CAN'T YOU MAKE SURE ALL 120 CHAMPS ARE COMPLETELY BALANCED? Oh wait, because that's literally impossible. If we're talking about viability almost every single champion in this game is viable for solo queue which is primarily what the game is balanced around. What is viable in the pro scene is not at all indicative of what's viable in solo queue. Pros only play top tier champs because they are playing at the highest level and need every single advantage they can get. Those champs that are always picked in pro play also are the ones that fit the current meta/team comps people are running because the strategy in those games is completely different. Even if the pro players themselves that do these strategies in LCS tried to do it in soloqueue with all challenger team mates it many of the strats would fail almost every time due to a lack of coordination by the team. Last season I went from Bronze 1 to Gold V in little over a week with Wukong mid at a time when almost NO ONE was playing that. At the time Nightblue himself had said he felt Wu was a better mid than top but still no one played it because it wasn't FoTM and it wasn't getting play in LCS. | there will always be a bell curve for the strength of champions, that doesn't mean the ones on the strongest end of the curve or the ones that get played the most are the only viable ones, it just means it might take a little extra skill to make the other ones just as strong. |
RomeoVersace | This is the defining characteristic of Moba vs MMO games though. If you want to truly have no idea go play World of Warcraft, there's 11 classes. 11 options. That's as large of a pool as can be created where in a free for all melee things are level and there is no tier system it's just fire beats water, water beats leaf, leaf beats fire kind of shit.
If your dislike pokemon gameplay and WoW, then play League of Legends where shit's crazy as fuck, there is tiering, there is OP shit, there is underpowered shit, there is amazing plays, there is sweat under your arms after 40 minutes of turrent siege. If it's too much for you to handle, then go play the game where 0.2s actually doesn't matter because you can just polymorph someone for 8s, then silence them for another 4s, then cyclone them for another 8s, then root them for 3s, then re-polymorph them for 4s and so on and so forth.
TL:DR Go fuck yourself and play WoW. | This is the defining characteristic of Moba vs MMO games though. If you want to truly have no idea go play World of Warcraft, there's 11 classes. 11 options. That's as large of a pool as can be created where in a free for all melee things are level and there is no tier system it's just fire beats water, water beats leaf, leaf beats fire kind of shit.
If your dislike pokemon gameplay and WoW, then play League of Legends where shit's crazy as fuck, there is tiering, there is OP shit, there is underpowered shit, there is amazing plays, there is sweat under your arms after 40 minutes of turrent siege. If it's too much for you to handle, then go play the game where 0.2s actually doesn't matter because you can just polymorph someone for 8s, then silence them for another 4s, then cyclone them for another 8s, then root them for 3s, then re-polymorph them for 4s and so on and so forth.
TL:DR Go fuck yourself and play WoW.
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cigd0iq | This is the defining characteristic of Moba vs MMO games though. If you want to truly have no idea go play World of Warcraft, there's 11 classes. 11 options. That's as large of a pool as can be created where in a free for all melee things are level and there is no tier system it's just fire beats water, water beats leaf, leaf beats fire kind of shit.
If your dislike pokemon gameplay and WoW, then play League of Legends where shit's crazy as fuck, there is tiering, there is OP shit, there is underpowered shit, there is amazing plays, there is sweat under your arms after 40 minutes of turrent siege. If it's too much for you to handle, then go play the game where 0.2s actually doesn't matter because you can just polymorph someone for 8s, then silence them for another 4s, then cyclone them for another 8s, then root them for 3s, then re-polymorph them for 4s and so on and so forth. | Go fuck yourself and play WoW. |
abtei | In general, i would Agree with "this guy" on the issue that there are in fact, more than 20 champions in the game yet only those tier1s are seeing the most plays. BUT! i believe this problem to be somewhat limited to the LCS/Challenger (and their publicity) and somewhat Diamond and the Skilllevel that can be found up there, everything below this its more "monkey see monkey do" than anything and has nothing to do with "this champion beats that champion".
Let me Explain.
Champions are like tools/Equipment for those players, they use them in a way and max out their potential to the limits (and sometimes beyond, aka CDR/AP Tryn ololol). These people are so good in this game that in fact, it matters to them those little margins one champion beats another. They can use those advantages. Its like 2 F1 Racecars, one carbon, the other "less" carbon, or a brandname Drill (Bosch Blue f.e) vs. a Storebrand, or even
Now give those Tools to the gold/silver/bronze/whatever 24/7 casual dimwit, and the pro a potato, and he will most likely still wipe the floor with that dimwit up and down every lane on the rift. this holds true to lower elos as well imo.
If your skill increases, your champion pool will either increase, or at least specialize, you will rise, and meet better people and then, at some point that most of us here will never ever ever reach (numbers dont lie, theres like 1 or 2% of the total playerbase competing for chal/dia) it might matter that you pick that Tier1 Champion rather than that below tier1 champion, until then - *doesn't matter had fun*.
The entire argument that "champion X is better than Y" holds only true if you meet equally **high** skilled people where it acutally matters. Tier1 champs in lower elo dont contribute as much to the victory as most of us would believe.
Yes there is a lot more to the whole, but i believe it boils down to a few key things, on of which is:
TL;DR
monkey see monkey do dimwit monkey still fails | In general, i would Agree with "this guy" on the issue that there are in fact, more than 20 champions in the game yet only those tier1s are seeing the most plays. BUT! i believe this problem to be somewhat limited to the LCS/Challenger (and their publicity) and somewhat Diamond and the Skilllevel that can be found up there, everything below this its more "monkey see monkey do" than anything and has nothing to do with "this champion beats that champion".
Let me Explain.
Champions are like tools/Equipment for those players, they use them in a way and max out their potential to the limits (and sometimes beyond, aka CDR/AP Tryn ololol). These people are so good in this game that in fact, it matters to them those little margins one champion beats another. They can use those advantages. Its like 2 F1 Racecars, one carbon, the other "less" carbon, or a brandname Drill (Bosch Blue f.e) vs. a Storebrand, or even
Now give those Tools to the gold/silver/bronze/whatever 24/7 casual dimwit, and the pro a potato, and he will most likely still wipe the floor with that dimwit up and down every lane on the rift. this holds true to lower elos as well imo.
If your skill increases, your champion pool will either increase, or at least specialize, you will rise, and meet better people and then, at some point that most of us here will never ever ever reach (numbers dont lie, theres like 1 or 2% of the total playerbase competing for chal/dia) it might matter that you pick that Tier1 Champion rather than that below tier1 champion, until then - doesn't matter had fun .
The entire argument that "champion X is better than Y" holds only true if you meet equally high skilled people where it acutally matters. Tier1 champs in lower elo dont contribute as much to the victory as most of us would believe.
Yes there is a lot more to the whole, but i believe it boils down to a few key things, on of which is:
TL;DR
monkey see monkey do dimwit monkey still fails
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cifqv1d | In general, i would Agree with "this guy" on the issue that there are in fact, more than 20 champions in the game yet only those tier1s are seeing the most plays. BUT! i believe this problem to be somewhat limited to the LCS/Challenger (and their publicity) and somewhat Diamond and the Skilllevel that can be found up there, everything below this its more "monkey see monkey do" than anything and has nothing to do with "this champion beats that champion".
Let me Explain.
Champions are like tools/Equipment for those players, they use them in a way and max out their potential to the limits (and sometimes beyond, aka CDR/AP Tryn ololol). These people are so good in this game that in fact, it matters to them those little margins one champion beats another. They can use those advantages. Its like 2 F1 Racecars, one carbon, the other "less" carbon, or a brandname Drill (Bosch Blue f.e) vs. a Storebrand, or even
Now give those Tools to the gold/silver/bronze/whatever 24/7 casual dimwit, and the pro a potato, and he will most likely still wipe the floor with that dimwit up and down every lane on the rift. this holds true to lower elos as well imo.
If your skill increases, your champion pool will either increase, or at least specialize, you will rise, and meet better people and then, at some point that most of us here will never ever ever reach (numbers dont lie, theres like 1 or 2% of the total playerbase competing for chal/dia) it might matter that you pick that Tier1 Champion rather than that below tier1 champion, until then - doesn't matter had fun .
The entire argument that "champion X is better than Y" holds only true if you meet equally high skilled people where it acutally matters. Tier1 champs in lower elo dont contribute as much to the victory as most of us would believe.
Yes there is a lot more to the whole, but i believe it boils down to a few key things, on of which is: | monkey see monkey do dimwit monkey still fails |
xeroxxed | Pardon formatting; on mobile.
Worked up until 31 weeks as an AIN which is I think the same dealio. High care facility even though residents ranged from somewhat independent to entirely dependent.
I did 1st and 2nd shift. Most days are 2 AIN to 16ish residents. Some times of day 2 AIN to 30ish oldies.
I asked to not be rostered for the long (0630-1500hrs) shifts because my body struggled with them before growing a human. Bad hips, back & energy levels.
My issues with working:
• kept minties with me for first trimester nausea, muesli bars for hunger
• Sudden intolerance of smelly surprise loose stools (glen20 spray, eucalyptus spray and tea tree spray are all wonderful things).
• Reflux galore. I kept Tums on me at all times.
• Making sure manual handling was done in safest way possible (not always possible but at least try).
• sheer amounts of discomfort and pains
• having to be firm with keeping my belly as my own and not letting people touch me
• soft joints so I had to be super careful by the end of it
• people thinking I was lazy for not wanting to work up until my due date ... Seriously... Stuff that for a joke at my work place.
• actually having to take time to recover the twice I got colds.
• bumping into stuff and not fitting in my work shirts
I was very ready to leave by 31 weeks.
TL;DR: Work as long as you want and know your limits. Look after yourself. | Pardon formatting; on mobile.
Worked up until 31 weeks as an AIN which is I think the same dealio. High care facility even though residents ranged from somewhat independent to entirely dependent.
I did 1st and 2nd shift. Most days are 2 AIN to 16ish residents. Some times of day 2 AIN to 30ish oldies.
I asked to not be rostered for the long (0630-1500hrs) shifts because my body struggled with them before growing a human. Bad hips, back & energy levels.
My issues with working:
• kept minties with me for first trimester nausea, muesli bars for hunger
• Sudden intolerance of smelly surprise loose stools (glen20 spray, eucalyptus spray and tea tree spray are all wonderful things).
• Reflux galore. I kept Tums on me at all times.
• Making sure manual handling was done in safest way possible (not always possible but at least try).
• sheer amounts of discomfort and pains
• having to be firm with keeping my belly as my own and not letting people touch me
• soft joints so I had to be super careful by the end of it
• people thinking I was lazy for not wanting to work up until my due date ... Seriously... Stuff that for a joke at my work place.
• actually having to take time to recover the twice I got colds.
• bumping into stuff and not fitting in my work shirts
I was very ready to leave by 31 weeks.
TL;DR: Work as long as you want and know your limits. Look after yourself.
| BabyBumps | t5_2s7cl | cifr2fn | Pardon formatting; on mobile.
Worked up until 31 weeks as an AIN which is I think the same dealio. High care facility even though residents ranged from somewhat independent to entirely dependent.
I did 1st and 2nd shift. Most days are 2 AIN to 16ish residents. Some times of day 2 AIN to 30ish oldies.
I asked to not be rostered for the long (0630-1500hrs) shifts because my body struggled with them before growing a human. Bad hips, back & energy levels.
My issues with working:
• kept minties with me for first trimester nausea, muesli bars for hunger
• Sudden intolerance of smelly surprise loose stools (glen20 spray, eucalyptus spray and tea tree spray are all wonderful things).
• Reflux galore. I kept Tums on me at all times.
• Making sure manual handling was done in safest way possible (not always possible but at least try).
• sheer amounts of discomfort and pains
• having to be firm with keeping my belly as my own and not letting people touch me
• soft joints so I had to be super careful by the end of it
• people thinking I was lazy for not wanting to work up until my due date ... Seriously... Stuff that for a joke at my work place.
• actually having to take time to recover the twice I got colds.
• bumping into stuff and not fitting in my work shirts
I was very ready to leave by 31 weeks. | Work as long as you want and know your limits. Look after yourself. |
leon3546 | He would rather argue with him because he's right. If you don't have anything substantial to add to the discussion just refrain from participating instead of defaulting to ad hominem.
Since this is an argument of semantics and definitions, how about we look at the definitions to resolve it? Does that sound fair? Hate to be the one who uses dictionary.com in a debate, but apparently that's the only way this is going to be resolved from an unbias standpoint.
Atheist - a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Agnostic - a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.
An atheist denies the existence of a god or gods. An agnostic accepts the fact that it will never be known whether a god or gods exist(s).
tl;dr: Atheists deny existence of supreme beings. Agnostics believe that man will never know whether they exist. Just because someone's flair is Christian does not mean they are wrong. When debating about definitions, look at a dictionary.
| He would rather argue with him because he's right. If you don't have anything substantial to add to the discussion just refrain from participating instead of defaulting to ad hominem.
Since this is an argument of semantics and definitions, how about we look at the definitions to resolve it? Does that sound fair? Hate to be the one who uses dictionary.com in a debate, but apparently that's the only way this is going to be resolved from an unbias standpoint.
Atheist - a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Agnostic - a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.
An atheist denies the existence of a god or gods. An agnostic accepts the fact that it will never be known whether a god or gods exist(s).
tl;dr: Atheists deny existence of supreme beings. Agnostics believe that man will never know whether they exist. Just because someone's flair is Christian does not mean they are wrong. When debating about definitions, look at a dictionary.
| DebateAChristian | t5_2ryd5 | ciicpjv | He would rather argue with him because he's right. If you don't have anything substantial to add to the discussion just refrain from participating instead of defaulting to ad hominem.
Since this is an argument of semantics and definitions, how about we look at the definitions to resolve it? Does that sound fair? Hate to be the one who uses dictionary.com in a debate, but apparently that's the only way this is going to be resolved from an unbias standpoint.
Atheist - a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Agnostic - a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.
An atheist denies the existence of a god or gods. An agnostic accepts the fact that it will never be known whether a god or gods exist(s). | Atheists deny existence of supreme beings. Agnostics believe that man will never know whether they exist. Just because someone's flair is Christian does not mean they are wrong. When debating about definitions, look at a dictionary. |
manthatufear1423 | This is why they tell you not to wear shorts while riding. I was being stupid and was rushing somewhere and didn't stop to take the 2 seconds to put jeans on. I broke my own rule and this is what happens. Luckily it isn't as bad as it could have been. The grime around it is because I just took the medical tape off right before I took the picture and didn't get a chance to clean it off yet. I posted this to remind myself of my own stupidity and to remind everyone that appropriate gear is important.
TL;DR: Don't ride in shorts. | This is why they tell you not to wear shorts while riding. I was being stupid and was rushing somewhere and didn't stop to take the 2 seconds to put jeans on. I broke my own rule and this is what happens. Luckily it isn't as bad as it could have been. The grime around it is because I just took the medical tape off right before I took the picture and didn't get a chance to clean it off yet. I posted this to remind myself of my own stupidity and to remind everyone that appropriate gear is important.
TL;DR: Don't ride in shorts.
| motorcycles | t5_2qi6d | cifsita | This is why they tell you not to wear shorts while riding. I was being stupid and was rushing somewhere and didn't stop to take the 2 seconds to put jeans on. I broke my own rule and this is what happens. Luckily it isn't as bad as it could have been. The grime around it is because I just took the medical tape off right before I took the picture and didn't get a chance to clean it off yet. I posted this to remind myself of my own stupidity and to remind everyone that appropriate gear is important. | Don't ride in shorts. |
Orlonde | The guy who invented [this]( [Dean Kamen]( also invented the [Segway]( Supposedly his company gave Coca Cola the tech behind the machine, which derives from technology developed originally for automated drug dosing, in exchange for Coca Cola's agreeing to [distribute a water purification machine]( to places in need.
I recall listening to an interview with Kamen in which he said that Coca Cola was the only organization that could distribute the machine to all the places where it might do the most good. Evidently, Coca Cola's logistics apparatus reaches more places on earth than any other organization's, public or private. I remember first hearing that factoid mentioned in a novel about the end of the world and the afterlife; terrorists apparently leveraged Coca Cola's distribution system to spread an ultramegavirus around the world that killed off all of humanity, except for one person who happened to be living in a remote Antarctic research station.
TL;DR: [If you don't get the president on the phone, you know what's gonna happen to you?]( | The guy who invented [this]( [Dean Kamen]( also invented the [Segway]( Supposedly his company gave Coca Cola the tech behind the machine, which derives from technology developed originally for automated drug dosing, in exchange for Coca Cola's agreeing to [distribute a water purification machine]( to places in need.
I recall listening to an interview with Kamen in which he said that Coca Cola was the only organization that could distribute the machine to all the places where it might do the most good. Evidently, Coca Cola's logistics apparatus reaches more places on earth than any other organization's, public or private. I remember first hearing that factoid mentioned in a novel about the end of the world and the afterlife; terrorists apparently leveraged Coca Cola's distribution system to spread an ultramegavirus around the world that killed off all of humanity, except for one person who happened to be living in a remote Antarctic research station.
TL;DR: [If you don't get the president on the phone, you know what's gonna happen to you?](
| pics | t5_2qh0u | cig83ea | The guy who invented [this]( [Dean Kamen]( also invented the [Segway]( Supposedly his company gave Coca Cola the tech behind the machine, which derives from technology developed originally for automated drug dosing, in exchange for Coca Cola's agreeing to [distribute a water purification machine]( to places in need.
I recall listening to an interview with Kamen in which he said that Coca Cola was the only organization that could distribute the machine to all the places where it might do the most good. Evidently, Coca Cola's logistics apparatus reaches more places on earth than any other organization's, public or private. I remember first hearing that factoid mentioned in a novel about the end of the world and the afterlife; terrorists apparently leveraged Coca Cola's distribution system to spread an ultramegavirus around the world that killed off all of humanity, except for one person who happened to be living in a remote Antarctic research station. | If you don't get the president on the phone, you know what's gonna happen to you?]( |
dusty_safiri | I hate when the FAers use Marilyn as an example. I went to a museum and saw some of her clothes in person. She was tiny, like a modern size 4. According to one of her seamstresses (from the audio tour), she was obsessed with thinness and insisted on being sewn directly into her clothes to make them as tight as possible.
Marilyn Monroe would be disgusted she is being compared to fatties.
Tl;dr: Marilyn Monroe was tiny and obsessed with how she fit in her clothes. Source: fashion museum trip | I hate when the FAers use Marilyn as an example. I went to a museum and saw some of her clothes in person. She was tiny, like a modern size 4. According to one of her seamstresses (from the audio tour), she was obsessed with thinness and insisted on being sewn directly into her clothes to make them as tight as possible.
Marilyn Monroe would be disgusted she is being compared to fatties.
Tl;dr: Marilyn Monroe was tiny and obsessed with how she fit in her clothes. Source: fashion museum trip
| fatlogic | t5_2wyxm | cigflii | I hate when the FAers use Marilyn as an example. I went to a museum and saw some of her clothes in person. She was tiny, like a modern size 4. According to one of her seamstresses (from the audio tour), she was obsessed with thinness and insisted on being sewn directly into her clothes to make them as tight as possible.
Marilyn Monroe would be disgusted she is being compared to fatties. | Marilyn Monroe was tiny and obsessed with how she fit in her clothes. Source: fashion museum trip |
cjackson_ | No, what I mean is finding the gear to get the corner. Of course you can hear revs but there might be a better way to shift through the corner. I would look at the telemetry to get better at corner. I'm pretty sure you or any other sim player do that. TL:DR; get better at shifting is harder than get better at brake IMO | No, what I mean is finding the gear to get the corner. Of course you can hear revs but there might be a better way to shift through the corner. I would look at the telemetry to get better at corner. I'm pretty sure you or any other sim player do that. TL:DR; get better at shifting is harder than get better at brake IMO
| formula1 | t5_2qimj | cigiuzk | No, what I mean is finding the gear to get the corner. Of course you can hear revs but there might be a better way to shift through the corner. I would look at the telemetry to get better at corner. I'm pretty sure you or any other sim player do that. | get better at shifting is harder than get better at brake IMO |
Texcellence | Its two am on a Saturday. I leave the bar and begin heading home. The pangs of my drunken hunger begin to appear as I crave something fried and greasy. Something that I will doubtless regret tomorrow morning. But hey, I'm already going to regret those four shots of Fireball and I've been eating healthy for the past two days.
In the distance I see a glowing orange and white "W". YES!!! That's the solution to all of my problems. I yell to my DD, "We have to go to Whataburger!" We pull up to the drive thru, and I place my order, "Two honey butter chicken biscuits, please." We pull up to the window and I smell my delectable feast.
I unwrap the first biscuit and I take that first bite. My teeth pass through the warm, buttery biscuit and into the crisply fried chicken strip inside. My tongue is overwhelmed by the sweet flavor of the honey butter drenching the chicken strip. I quickly devour the two biscuits. Crumbs litter my lap and I lick the remnants of the honey butter from the corners of my mouth. This is heaven.
TL/DR: Honey Butter Chicken Biscuits from Whataburger | Its two am on a Saturday. I leave the bar and begin heading home. The pangs of my drunken hunger begin to appear as I crave something fried and greasy. Something that I will doubtless regret tomorrow morning. But hey, I'm already going to regret those four shots of Fireball and I've been eating healthy for the past two days.
In the distance I see a glowing orange and white "W". YES!!! That's the solution to all of my problems. I yell to my DD, "We have to go to Whataburger!" We pull up to the drive thru, and I place my order, "Two honey butter chicken biscuits, please." We pull up to the window and I smell my delectable feast.
I unwrap the first biscuit and I take that first bite. My teeth pass through the warm, buttery biscuit and into the crisply fried chicken strip inside. My tongue is overwhelmed by the sweet flavor of the honey butter drenching the chicken strip. I quickly devour the two biscuits. Crumbs litter my lap and I lick the remnants of the honey butter from the corners of my mouth. This is heaven.
TL/DR: Honey Butter Chicken Biscuits from Whataburger
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | cigcnca | Its two am on a Saturday. I leave the bar and begin heading home. The pangs of my drunken hunger begin to appear as I crave something fried and greasy. Something that I will doubtless regret tomorrow morning. But hey, I'm already going to regret those four shots of Fireball and I've been eating healthy for the past two days.
In the distance I see a glowing orange and white "W". YES!!! That's the solution to all of my problems. I yell to my DD, "We have to go to Whataburger!" We pull up to the drive thru, and I place my order, "Two honey butter chicken biscuits, please." We pull up to the window and I smell my delectable feast.
I unwrap the first biscuit and I take that first bite. My teeth pass through the warm, buttery biscuit and into the crisply fried chicken strip inside. My tongue is overwhelmed by the sweet flavor of the honey butter drenching the chicken strip. I quickly devour the two biscuits. Crumbs litter my lap and I lick the remnants of the honey butter from the corners of my mouth. This is heaven. | Honey Butter Chicken Biscuits from Whataburger |
FuzzyDad | What's the occasion? I'm a riot at parties. Didn't even remember going to a wedding last saturday....
Tl;DR I messed up | What's the occasion? I'm a riot at parties. Didn't even remember going to a wedding last saturday....
Tl;DR I messed up
| cigars | t5_2r090 | cipible | What's the occasion? I'm a riot at parties. Didn't even remember going to a wedding last saturday.... | I messed up |
Jowsh | I just bought a used 280x mining card off eBay. Used for 2/3ish months and never went over 80 degrees C according to the seller. I'm picking the card up today from the Post Office. What things can I do to check that the graphics card is working well?
TL;DR: How to check over a used graphics card | I just bought a used 280x mining card off eBay. Used for 2/3ish months and never went over 80 degrees C according to the seller. I'm picking the card up today from the Post Office. What things can I do to check that the graphics card is working well?
TL;DR: How to check over a used graphics card
| buildapc | t5_2rnve | cigm0j1 | I just bought a used 280x mining card off eBay. Used for 2/3ish months and never went over 80 degrees C according to the seller. I'm picking the card up today from the Post Office. What things can I do to check that the graphics card is working well? | How to check over a used graphics card |
Friendly_Psychopath | I own the case:
**PROS**
* Cable management
* Accoustics
* Looks
**CONS**
* Size, this thing is huge for uATX
* Fan quality is not that good
* Looks, the plastic front bezel looks like plastic.
TL;DR if I could go back I would have gotten a [TJ08-E]( | I own the case:
PROS
Cable management
Accoustics
Looks
CONS
Size, this thing is huge for uATX
Fan quality is not that good
Looks, the plastic front bezel looks like plastic.
TL;DR if I could go back I would have gotten a [TJ08-E](
| buildapc | t5_2rnve | cigs8xy | I own the case:
PROS
Cable management
Accoustics
Looks
CONS
Size, this thing is huge for uATX
Fan quality is not that good
Looks, the plastic front bezel looks like plastic. | if I could go back I would have gotten a [TJ08-E]( |
muppet213 | Nothing I can find in regards to specifically being bred to be hunted, but in the case of the Black Rhinoceros there was a very sensationalized story about something similar to this just a few months ago. The Dallas Safari Club auctioned off the right to kill one of these; listed above as having a population below 5,000 for ~$350,000.
Many conservation groups were very critical of it, and many supportive. The specific rhino was an older non-breeding male who was aggressive towards the younger males and caused concern about future reproduction in the herd.
tl;dr - The right's to shoot and kill an endangered species happened very recently but it was arranged in concert with the Namibian wildlife preserve and raised a substantial sum of money to support the preserve. | Nothing I can find in regards to specifically being bred to be hunted, but in the case of the Black Rhinoceros there was a very sensationalized story about something similar to this just a few months ago. The Dallas Safari Club auctioned off the right to kill one of these; listed above as having a population below 5,000 for ~$350,000.
Many conservation groups were very critical of it, and many supportive. The specific rhino was an older non-breeding male who was aggressive towards the younger males and caused concern about future reproduction in the herd.
tl;dr - The right's to shoot and kill an endangered species happened very recently but it was arranged in concert with the Namibian wildlife preserve and raised a substantial sum of money to support the preserve.
| pics | t5_2qh0u | cih50go | Nothing I can find in regards to specifically being bred to be hunted, but in the case of the Black Rhinoceros there was a very sensationalized story about something similar to this just a few months ago. The Dallas Safari Club auctioned off the right to kill one of these; listed above as having a population below 5,000 for ~$350,000.
Many conservation groups were very critical of it, and many supportive. The specific rhino was an older non-breeding male who was aggressive towards the younger males and caused concern about future reproduction in the herd. | The right's to shoot and kill an endangered species happened very recently but it was arranged in concert with the Namibian wildlife preserve and raised a substantial sum of money to support the preserve. |
noyoukeepthisshit | > Most datacenters don't use consumer SATA drives in their SAN arrays and a datacenter that does is just being cheap and sloppy with data. I certainly wouldn't buy service form them if I cared about my data. I want SAS, I want RAID arrays, I want tape backup, I want a real storage system. This isn't a cloud system though, so Aereo can build what they want.
no but when you are going for cheap and massive, raided sata drives work. In fact they work very well.
>I think it's prohibitively expensive.
you think, have you tried?
>If the micro-antennas really worked as Aereo described, then there absolutely MUST be commercial antennas I can buy at Amazon that are just as small and work on a regular HDTV system.
well thats a wonderfully incorrect idea, there are dozens of systems you cannot even get close to buying as a normal consumer. However in this case there are small form factor antennas available, some are about the 4 inches long.
>You might argue that it's a "trade secret", but there simply isn't that much to an antenna. You could easily reconstruct them from publicly available photos, but nobody seems to have done that. And RF engineers are saying they don't work.
Link me and RF engineer proving they don't work, and I will show you an RF engineer who is a moron.
>Can you explain this secret revolution in antenna technology Aereo has discovered but refused to patent, market, or license which would make them lots of money?
making a smaller antenna is not a patent-able invention, as its not novel.
>You can do this right now, It will just cost you more than $250 a month so it's not a serious competitor to cable tv.
Not necessarily, I pay 100/mo for 2u 3A co-lo here in Indianapolis. Assuming I could get an antenna in my case, and it had decent reception I would have a PVR downtown. This server has the umph to encode a few streams at the same time. dedicated hardware would do it better with less power.
Assuming dedicated hardware like h.264 encoders you could probably get enough hardware in a 2U rack to handle 6-10 people. that's being **very** conservative.
If you would like I could expand on a possible DIY solution for everything but antennas, along with a cost breakdown.
EDIT: for my amusement, I did some research and some math.
42U rack + 1000Mbps here in Indy costs 950/mo
assuming you built everything out of consumer parts a PVR with antenna would cost $120. It would consist of a raspberry pi, 64gb thumb stick, and a usb tv tuner. This is capable of handling 1080p h.264 at 5000kbs bitrate. You could fit ~20 of these in a 6u rack. [source]( assuming 2 for power and management thats 18 pvrs per 6u. outputting ~5Mbs out of each pvr.
7 6Us fit in that rack, thats 126 PVRs, at maximum outputting ~ 630 Mbs so we have easily enough bandwidth.
Oh and storage? easy. that 64gb thumb-stick is roughly ~30 hours of DVR longer than Aereos 20hrs.
assuming usb periphs and the pi use about 10W, which they likely dont we are using 1.26kW of our allotted 1.9kW. easy again.
now a full rack would cost ~15k in hardware and 950/mo. assuming full use, IE 126 customers, and a 1 year ROI ~$17.86 would be the monthly fee. Rounding for end users 20/mo would net me ~$2/mo per user. or about 3K that year. Next year, assuming users stay I would make just over 30K a year.
**TL;DR assuming your only non average consumer purchase is a 42U rack rental you are profitable. Actual custom built hardware would only increase this enormously.**
| > Most datacenters don't use consumer SATA drives in their SAN arrays and a datacenter that does is just being cheap and sloppy with data. I certainly wouldn't buy service form them if I cared about my data. I want SAS, I want RAID arrays, I want tape backup, I want a real storage system. This isn't a cloud system though, so Aereo can build what they want.
no but when you are going for cheap and massive, raided sata drives work. In fact they work very well.
>I think it's prohibitively expensive.
you think, have you tried?
>If the micro-antennas really worked as Aereo described, then there absolutely MUST be commercial antennas I can buy at Amazon that are just as small and work on a regular HDTV system.
well thats a wonderfully incorrect idea, there are dozens of systems you cannot even get close to buying as a normal consumer. However in this case there are small form factor antennas available, some are about the 4 inches long.
>You might argue that it's a "trade secret", but there simply isn't that much to an antenna. You could easily reconstruct them from publicly available photos, but nobody seems to have done that. And RF engineers are saying they don't work.
Link me and RF engineer proving they don't work, and I will show you an RF engineer who is a moron.
>Can you explain this secret revolution in antenna technology Aereo has discovered but refused to patent, market, or license which would make them lots of money?
making a smaller antenna is not a patent-able invention, as its not novel.
>You can do this right now, It will just cost you more than $250 a month so it's not a serious competitor to cable tv.
Not necessarily, I pay 100/mo for 2u 3A co-lo here in Indianapolis. Assuming I could get an antenna in my case, and it had decent reception I would have a PVR downtown. This server has the umph to encode a few streams at the same time. dedicated hardware would do it better with less power.
Assuming dedicated hardware like h.264 encoders you could probably get enough hardware in a 2U rack to handle 6-10 people. that's being very conservative.
If you would like I could expand on a possible DIY solution for everything but antennas, along with a cost breakdown.
EDIT: for my amusement, I did some research and some math.
42U rack + 1000Mbps here in Indy costs 950/mo
assuming you built everything out of consumer parts a PVR with antenna would cost $120. It would consist of a raspberry pi, 64gb thumb stick, and a usb tv tuner. This is capable of handling 1080p h.264 at 5000kbs bitrate. You could fit ~20 of these in a 6u rack. [source]( assuming 2 for power and management thats 18 pvrs per 6u. outputting ~5Mbs out of each pvr.
7 6Us fit in that rack, thats 126 PVRs, at maximum outputting ~ 630 Mbs so we have easily enough bandwidth.
Oh and storage? easy. that 64gb thumb-stick is roughly ~30 hours of DVR longer than Aereos 20hrs.
assuming usb periphs and the pi use about 10W, which they likely dont we are using 1.26kW of our allotted 1.9kW. easy again.
now a full rack would cost ~15k in hardware and 950/mo. assuming full use, IE 126 customers, and a 1 year ROI ~$17.86 would be the monthly fee. Rounding for end users 20/mo would net me ~$2/mo per user. or about 3K that year. Next year, assuming users stay I would make just over 30K a year.
TL;DR assuming your only non average consumer purchase is a 42U rack rental you are profitable. Actual custom built hardware would only increase this enormously.
| technology | t5_2qh16 | citph5n | Most datacenters don't use consumer SATA drives in their SAN arrays and a datacenter that does is just being cheap and sloppy with data. I certainly wouldn't buy service form them if I cared about my data. I want SAS, I want RAID arrays, I want tape backup, I want a real storage system. This isn't a cloud system though, so Aereo can build what they want.
no but when you are going for cheap and massive, raided sata drives work. In fact they work very well.
>I think it's prohibitively expensive.
you think, have you tried?
>If the micro-antennas really worked as Aereo described, then there absolutely MUST be commercial antennas I can buy at Amazon that are just as small and work on a regular HDTV system.
well thats a wonderfully incorrect idea, there are dozens of systems you cannot even get close to buying as a normal consumer. However in this case there are small form factor antennas available, some are about the 4 inches long.
>You might argue that it's a "trade secret", but there simply isn't that much to an antenna. You could easily reconstruct them from publicly available photos, but nobody seems to have done that. And RF engineers are saying they don't work.
Link me and RF engineer proving they don't work, and I will show you an RF engineer who is a moron.
>Can you explain this secret revolution in antenna technology Aereo has discovered but refused to patent, market, or license which would make them lots of money?
making a smaller antenna is not a patent-able invention, as its not novel.
>You can do this right now, It will just cost you more than $250 a month so it's not a serious competitor to cable tv.
Not necessarily, I pay 100/mo for 2u 3A co-lo here in Indianapolis. Assuming I could get an antenna in my case, and it had decent reception I would have a PVR downtown. This server has the umph to encode a few streams at the same time. dedicated hardware would do it better with less power.
Assuming dedicated hardware like h.264 encoders you could probably get enough hardware in a 2U rack to handle 6-10 people. that's being very conservative.
If you would like I could expand on a possible DIY solution for everything but antennas, along with a cost breakdown.
EDIT: for my amusement, I did some research and some math.
42U rack + 1000Mbps here in Indy costs 950/mo
assuming you built everything out of consumer parts a PVR with antenna would cost $120. It would consist of a raspberry pi, 64gb thumb stick, and a usb tv tuner. This is capable of handling 1080p h.264 at 5000kbs bitrate. You could fit ~20 of these in a 6u rack. [source]( assuming 2 for power and management thats 18 pvrs per 6u. outputting ~5Mbs out of each pvr.
7 6Us fit in that rack, thats 126 PVRs, at maximum outputting ~ 630 Mbs so we have easily enough bandwidth.
Oh and storage? easy. that 64gb thumb-stick is roughly ~30 hours of DVR longer than Aereos 20hrs.
assuming usb periphs and the pi use about 10W, which they likely dont we are using 1.26kW of our allotted 1.9kW. easy again.
now a full rack would cost ~15k in hardware and 950/mo. assuming full use, IE 126 customers, and a 1 year ROI ~$17.86 would be the monthly fee. Rounding for end users 20/mo would net me ~$2/mo per user. or about 3K that year. Next year, assuming users stay I would make just over 30K a year. | assuming your only non average consumer purchase is a 42U rack rental you are profitable. Actual custom built hardware would only increase this enormously. |
noyoukeepthisshit | > I don't think Aereo actually worked that way (I don't remember this bit), I think you could have as many recordings scheduled at the same time as you wanted.
>That means, for EACH USER, they needed 50 (or however many channels you could get in say, Atlanta) antennas and more importantly, 50 video capture cards. Again, EACH USER.
Huge misunderstanding you only got one tuner, unless you upgraded to teh 12/mo plan which got you two.
>Not dime size. As I said, this is an idea that would be worth VASTLY more than Aereo's DVR business. Why not sell the antennas?
not really, small antennas are nothing new and are useless outside of close proximity to broadcasters. You dont even need a fucking antenna to get some channels if you live in an area with good reception.
>Yup, exactly the scenario I was thinking of. If you add the hardware cost to that you might be able to get less than $250 a month, but you'd have a lot less content than cable. Still not really competitive.
I already pay under 200/mo for that. It could easily handle multiple tuners, likely 6-12.
>Only ONE USER per system, you don't get to legally share them.
not that it matters, as I clearly posted an edit with a system fully capable of parralel operation per user that would be cheaper.
However assuming you are using individual antennas, and do not rebroadcast using multiple people per system is legal.
EDIT: forgot your engineer, who clearly states he has no fucking clue how it worked as he has never seen it.
Primary issue with his rant, is his dismissal of the **possiblity** the antennas work. Which quite frankly disproves his expertise, or proves he is purposefully ignoring some facts. Anyone with any RF experience knows that everything conductive works as an antenna, for fucks sake a goddamn wire soldered to a raspberry pi board works. They have fucking chip antennas in your goddamn phone. It doesn't have a good signal to noise ratio, unless you are really close to the source, but it fucking works.
[Example]( do you see that copper coil? guess what that is numbnutz thats a 434 mhz receiver antenna.
He assumes you would need a large antenna, because he has always needed a large antenna. Because he was far away from the broadcasters.
He is however correct in one regard I was not aware of was the mux, or multiplex. they used individual tuners on the roof convert to mpeg with ip headers, and pass that through some ethernet connect, which they call a mux, to the pvrs stored in the datacenter. This is in fact likely a few shared 10gb links. Still each device is operating individually, and this is no different than them pushing it through a border router to the individual end user. He is really grasping with that one.
His quote:
>Note also, in the area between the MPEG-2 Mux and Demux, the words “Antenna Transport (N x 10GBase)”. Here is where Aereo’s entire argument falls apart: You can’t receive an MPEG2 stream with an antenna; only a modulated RF channel. Calling a 10 Gigabit Ethernet connection that streams MPEG2 digital video an “antenna transport” is disingenuous.
clearly misunderstand the patent. Aereo isnt claiming to received a muxed mpeg2 stream as an antenna, as that would be rebroadcasting, they are claiming to transport the antenna signal over n x 10Gbase links. Which is likely video over usb, usb through Ethernet. Which is exactly what its describing if you look at the actual [patent](
see those transcode 112-1, 112-2, 112-n? that's each individual transcoder, for spaces sake their respective antenna's, provided by the antenna control system(116), signal is transmitted though some connection type(lets say usb) over ethernet, why ethernet? its capacity and space density.
He is obviously not very aware technically of modern computer capabilities, and that is supported by his notion that tv tuner chips are expensive. That is laughably not true.
Also I would prefer it if you would comment on my adapted raspberry pi solution.
>42U rack + 1000Mbps here in Indy costs 950/mo
>assuming you built everything out of consumer parts a PVR with antenna would cost $120. It would consist of a raspberry pi, 64gb thumb stick, and a usb tv tuner. This is capable of handling 1080p h.264 at 5000kbs bitrate. You could fit ~20 of these in a 6u rack. source assuming 2 for power and management thats 18 pvrs per 6u. outputting ~5Mbs out of each pvr.
>7 6Us fit in that rack, thats 126 PVRs, at maximum outputting ~ 630 Mbs so we have easily enough bandwidth.
>Oh and storage? easy. that 64gb thumb-stick is roughly ~30 hours of DVR longer than Aereos 20hrs.
>assuming usb periphs and the pi use about 10W, which they likely dont we are using 1.26kW of our allotted 1.9kW. easy again.
>now a full rack would cost ~15k in hardware and 950/mo. assuming full use, IE 126 customers, and a 1 year ROI ~$17.86 would be the monthly fee. Rounding for end users 20/mo would net me ~$2/mo per user. or about 3K that year. Next year, assuming users stay I would make just over 30K a year.
>TL;DR assuming your only non average consumer purchase is a 42U rack rental you are profitable. Actual custom built hardware would only increase this enormously.
| > I don't think Aereo actually worked that way (I don't remember this bit), I think you could have as many recordings scheduled at the same time as you wanted.
>That means, for EACH USER, they needed 50 (or however many channels you could get in say, Atlanta) antennas and more importantly, 50 video capture cards. Again, EACH USER.
Huge misunderstanding you only got one tuner, unless you upgraded to teh 12/mo plan which got you two.
>Not dime size. As I said, this is an idea that would be worth VASTLY more than Aereo's DVR business. Why not sell the antennas?
not really, small antennas are nothing new and are useless outside of close proximity to broadcasters. You dont even need a fucking antenna to get some channels if you live in an area with good reception.
>Yup, exactly the scenario I was thinking of. If you add the hardware cost to that you might be able to get less than $250 a month, but you'd have a lot less content than cable. Still not really competitive.
I already pay under 200/mo for that. It could easily handle multiple tuners, likely 6-12.
>Only ONE USER per system, you don't get to legally share them.
not that it matters, as I clearly posted an edit with a system fully capable of parralel operation per user that would be cheaper.
However assuming you are using individual antennas, and do not rebroadcast using multiple people per system is legal.
EDIT: forgot your engineer, who clearly states he has no fucking clue how it worked as he has never seen it.
Primary issue with his rant, is his dismissal of the possiblity the antennas work. Which quite frankly disproves his expertise, or proves he is purposefully ignoring some facts. Anyone with any RF experience knows that everything conductive works as an antenna, for fucks sake a goddamn wire soldered to a raspberry pi board works. They have fucking chip antennas in your goddamn phone. It doesn't have a good signal to noise ratio, unless you are really close to the source, but it fucking works.
[Example]( do you see that copper coil? guess what that is numbnutz thats a 434 mhz receiver antenna.
He assumes you would need a large antenna, because he has always needed a large antenna. Because he was far away from the broadcasters.
He is however correct in one regard I was not aware of was the mux, or multiplex. they used individual tuners on the roof convert to mpeg with ip headers, and pass that through some ethernet connect, which they call a mux, to the pvrs stored in the datacenter. This is in fact likely a few shared 10gb links. Still each device is operating individually, and this is no different than them pushing it through a border router to the individual end user. He is really grasping with that one.
His quote:
>Note also, in the area between the MPEG-2 Mux and Demux, the words “Antenna Transport (N x 10GBase)”. Here is where Aereo’s entire argument falls apart: You can’t receive an MPEG2 stream with an antenna; only a modulated RF channel. Calling a 10 Gigabit Ethernet connection that streams MPEG2 digital video an “antenna transport” is disingenuous.
clearly misunderstand the patent. Aereo isnt claiming to received a muxed mpeg2 stream as an antenna, as that would be rebroadcasting, they are claiming to transport the antenna signal over n x 10Gbase links. Which is likely video over usb, usb through Ethernet. Which is exactly what its describing if you look at the actual [patent](
see those transcode 112-1, 112-2, 112-n? that's each individual transcoder, for spaces sake their respective antenna's, provided by the antenna control system(116), signal is transmitted though some connection type(lets say usb) over ethernet, why ethernet? its capacity and space density.
He is obviously not very aware technically of modern computer capabilities, and that is supported by his notion that tv tuner chips are expensive. That is laughably not true.
Also I would prefer it if you would comment on my adapted raspberry pi solution.
>42U rack + 1000Mbps here in Indy costs 950/mo
>assuming you built everything out of consumer parts a PVR with antenna would cost $120. It would consist of a raspberry pi, 64gb thumb stick, and a usb tv tuner. This is capable of handling 1080p h.264 at 5000kbs bitrate. You could fit ~20 of these in a 6u rack. source assuming 2 for power and management thats 18 pvrs per 6u. outputting ~5Mbs out of each pvr.
>7 6Us fit in that rack, thats 126 PVRs, at maximum outputting ~ 630 Mbs so we have easily enough bandwidth.
>Oh and storage? easy. that 64gb thumb-stick is roughly ~30 hours of DVR longer than Aereos 20hrs.
>assuming usb periphs and the pi use about 10W, which they likely dont we are using 1.26kW of our allotted 1.9kW. easy again.
>now a full rack would cost ~15k in hardware and 950/mo. assuming full use, IE 126 customers, and a 1 year ROI ~$17.86 would be the monthly fee. Rounding for end users 20/mo would net me ~$2/mo per user. or about 3K that year. Next year, assuming users stay I would make just over 30K a year.
>TL;DR assuming your only non average consumer purchase is a 42U rack rental you are profitable. Actual custom built hardware would only increase this enormously.
| technology | t5_2qh16 | cixz8cq | I don't think Aereo actually worked that way (I don't remember this bit), I think you could have as many recordings scheduled at the same time as you wanted.
>That means, for EACH USER, they needed 50 (or however many channels you could get in say, Atlanta) antennas and more importantly, 50 video capture cards. Again, EACH USER.
Huge misunderstanding you only got one tuner, unless you upgraded to teh 12/mo plan which got you two.
>Not dime size. As I said, this is an idea that would be worth VASTLY more than Aereo's DVR business. Why not sell the antennas?
not really, small antennas are nothing new and are useless outside of close proximity to broadcasters. You dont even need a fucking antenna to get some channels if you live in an area with good reception.
>Yup, exactly the scenario I was thinking of. If you add the hardware cost to that you might be able to get less than $250 a month, but you'd have a lot less content than cable. Still not really competitive.
I already pay under 200/mo for that. It could easily handle multiple tuners, likely 6-12.
>Only ONE USER per system, you don't get to legally share them.
not that it matters, as I clearly posted an edit with a system fully capable of parralel operation per user that would be cheaper.
However assuming you are using individual antennas, and do not rebroadcast using multiple people per system is legal.
EDIT: forgot your engineer, who clearly states he has no fucking clue how it worked as he has never seen it.
Primary issue with his rant, is his dismissal of the possiblity the antennas work. Which quite frankly disproves his expertise, or proves he is purposefully ignoring some facts. Anyone with any RF experience knows that everything conductive works as an antenna, for fucks sake a goddamn wire soldered to a raspberry pi board works. They have fucking chip antennas in your goddamn phone. It doesn't have a good signal to noise ratio, unless you are really close to the source, but it fucking works.
[Example]( do you see that copper coil? guess what that is numbnutz thats a 434 mhz receiver antenna.
He assumes you would need a large antenna, because he has always needed a large antenna. Because he was far away from the broadcasters.
He is however correct in one regard I was not aware of was the mux, or multiplex. they used individual tuners on the roof convert to mpeg with ip headers, and pass that through some ethernet connect, which they call a mux, to the pvrs stored in the datacenter. This is in fact likely a few shared 10gb links. Still each device is operating individually, and this is no different than them pushing it through a border router to the individual end user. He is really grasping with that one.
His quote:
>Note also, in the area between the MPEG-2 Mux and Demux, the words “Antenna Transport (N x 10GBase)”. Here is where Aereo’s entire argument falls apart: You can’t receive an MPEG2 stream with an antenna; only a modulated RF channel. Calling a 10 Gigabit Ethernet connection that streams MPEG2 digital video an “antenna transport” is disingenuous.
clearly misunderstand the patent. Aereo isnt claiming to received a muxed mpeg2 stream as an antenna, as that would be rebroadcasting, they are claiming to transport the antenna signal over n x 10Gbase links. Which is likely video over usb, usb through Ethernet. Which is exactly what its describing if you look at the actual [patent](
see those transcode 112-1, 112-2, 112-n? that's each individual transcoder, for spaces sake their respective antenna's, provided by the antenna control system(116), signal is transmitted though some connection type(lets say usb) over ethernet, why ethernet? its capacity and space density.
He is obviously not very aware technically of modern computer capabilities, and that is supported by his notion that tv tuner chips are expensive. That is laughably not true.
Also I would prefer it if you would comment on my adapted raspberry pi solution.
>42U rack + 1000Mbps here in Indy costs 950/mo
>assuming you built everything out of consumer parts a PVR with antenna would cost $120. It would consist of a raspberry pi, 64gb thumb stick, and a usb tv tuner. This is capable of handling 1080p h.264 at 5000kbs bitrate. You could fit ~20 of these in a 6u rack. source assuming 2 for power and management thats 18 pvrs per 6u. outputting ~5Mbs out of each pvr.
>7 6Us fit in that rack, thats 126 PVRs, at maximum outputting ~ 630 Mbs so we have easily enough bandwidth.
>Oh and storage? easy. that 64gb thumb-stick is roughly ~30 hours of DVR longer than Aereos 20hrs.
>assuming usb periphs and the pi use about 10W, which they likely dont we are using 1.26kW of our allotted 1.9kW. easy again.
>now a full rack would cost ~15k in hardware and 950/mo. assuming full use, IE 126 customers, and a 1 year ROI ~$17.86 would be the monthly fee. Rounding for end users 20/mo would net me ~$2/mo per user. or about 3K that year. Next year, assuming users stay I would make just over 30K a year.
> | assuming your only non average consumer purchase is a 42U rack rental you are profitable. Actual custom built hardware would only increase this enormously. |
GuitarPirate | I bought it and I don't regret doing so at all. I'll definitely admit the website does look very dated and cheesy, however the content and information is legit and that's what counts. Once I started using it I honestly found myself overwhelmed with the amount of information they covered, even in the very beginning. It seems like at times the guy is just repeating himself over and over, but he really drives the point home and helps you retain what you learned. I don't know if intermediate or advanced programmers would recommend it as I can't speak on their behalf, but as a beginner looking for a new career change, I definitely feel like I made a great choice. Included are hours and hours of videos, PDFs of outlines and guides, and sample project files.
TL; DR: I'm very impressed and content with my purchase despite my mixed first impression. Especially for 97% off, you can't go wrong. | I bought it and I don't regret doing so at all. I'll definitely admit the website does look very dated and cheesy, however the content and information is legit and that's what counts. Once I started using it I honestly found myself overwhelmed with the amount of information they covered, even in the very beginning. It seems like at times the guy is just repeating himself over and over, but he really drives the point home and helps you retain what you learned. I don't know if intermediate or advanced programmers would recommend it as I can't speak on their behalf, but as a beginner looking for a new career change, I definitely feel like I made a great choice. Included are hours and hours of videos, PDFs of outlines and guides, and sample project files.
TL; DR: I'm very impressed and content with my purchase despite my mixed first impression. Especially for 97% off, you can't go wrong.
| learnprogramming | t5_2r7yd | cjlwcnt | I bought it and I don't regret doing so at all. I'll definitely admit the website does look very dated and cheesy, however the content and information is legit and that's what counts. Once I started using it I honestly found myself overwhelmed with the amount of information they covered, even in the very beginning. It seems like at times the guy is just repeating himself over and over, but he really drives the point home and helps you retain what you learned. I don't know if intermediate or advanced programmers would recommend it as I can't speak on their behalf, but as a beginner looking for a new career change, I definitely feel like I made a great choice. Included are hours and hours of videos, PDFs of outlines and guides, and sample project files. | I'm very impressed and content with my purchase despite my mixed first impression. Especially for 97% off, you can't go wrong. |
diarrheaphragm | As a person who applied many many graphics to women's V-necks I too must respectfully disagree. For a regular collared woman's T 2" or so would be about right for a tall-ish graphic like that. But on a woman's V-neck 2" will make that graphic look too low. When the shirts lying on a table, yes it *looks* like it's too high but that V cuts into the printing area significantly. Women's shirts were always tricky when I printed them. I printed many too low that ended up in the rag box because it *seems* too high but that V. Creates an illusion of being too high. But once someone's wearing it it looks right.
tl;dr: Women's shirts are quite different from men's. V-necks even more so.
edit: This is all assuming OP wants a chest print. Really you can print anywhere you want, it's just preference. If I were printing this shirt I would've put it where OP did. | As a person who applied many many graphics to women's V-necks I too must respectfully disagree. For a regular collared woman's T 2" or so would be about right for a tall-ish graphic like that. But on a woman's V-neck 2" will make that graphic look too low. When the shirts lying on a table, yes it looks like it's too high but that V cuts into the printing area significantly. Women's shirts were always tricky when I printed them. I printed many too low that ended up in the rag box because it seems too high but that V. Creates an illusion of being too high. But once someone's wearing it it looks right.
tl;dr: Women's shirts are quite different from men's. V-necks even more so.
edit: This is all assuming OP wants a chest print. Really you can print anywhere you want, it's just preference. If I were printing this shirt I would've put it where OP did.
| somethingimade | t5_2r4wt | cihp593 | As a person who applied many many graphics to women's V-necks I too must respectfully disagree. For a regular collared woman's T 2" or so would be about right for a tall-ish graphic like that. But on a woman's V-neck 2" will make that graphic look too low. When the shirts lying on a table, yes it looks like it's too high but that V cuts into the printing area significantly. Women's shirts were always tricky when I printed them. I printed many too low that ended up in the rag box because it seems too high but that V. Creates an illusion of being too high. But once someone's wearing it it looks right. | Women's shirts are quite different from men's. V-necks even more so.
edit: This is all assuming OP wants a chest print. Really you can print anywhere you want, it's just preference. If I were printing this shirt I would've put it where OP did. |
diarrheaphragm | I don't think either of us is wrong. You're definitely right about printing that close to the collar being finicky and a major pain in the ass. Especially for multi-color prints. Hitting that "nub" of fabric can warp and distort the print. I've had MANY a frustrating day at work printing on V-neck shirts. I worked for a smaller company on an old school 4-colour manual press. I've never actually used an automatic press but I can imagine from a production standpoint working near that collar being a big pain. Doing it by hand probably allows for more improvisation since you can play around with the angle you hit it with the squeegee and such. I think mostly we're arguing aesthetics. When I google "printed women's vnecks" there's A LOT of lower kinda "belly prints" which are more popular nowadays, I think. Maybe I'm just old(ish) and set in my chest print ways. haha
tl;dr: We're both right and screenprinting is a harsh and cruel mistress, not an exact science. | I don't think either of us is wrong. You're definitely right about printing that close to the collar being finicky and a major pain in the ass. Especially for multi-color prints. Hitting that "nub" of fabric can warp and distort the print. I've had MANY a frustrating day at work printing on V-neck shirts. I worked for a smaller company on an old school 4-colour manual press. I've never actually used an automatic press but I can imagine from a production standpoint working near that collar being a big pain. Doing it by hand probably allows for more improvisation since you can play around with the angle you hit it with the squeegee and such. I think mostly we're arguing aesthetics. When I google "printed women's vnecks" there's A LOT of lower kinda "belly prints" which are more popular nowadays, I think. Maybe I'm just old(ish) and set in my chest print ways. haha
tl;dr: We're both right and screenprinting is a harsh and cruel mistress, not an exact science.
| somethingimade | t5_2r4wt | cihs00w | I don't think either of us is wrong. You're definitely right about printing that close to the collar being finicky and a major pain in the ass. Especially for multi-color prints. Hitting that "nub" of fabric can warp and distort the print. I've had MANY a frustrating day at work printing on V-neck shirts. I worked for a smaller company on an old school 4-colour manual press. I've never actually used an automatic press but I can imagine from a production standpoint working near that collar being a big pain. Doing it by hand probably allows for more improvisation since you can play around with the angle you hit it with the squeegee and such. I think mostly we're arguing aesthetics. When I google "printed women's vnecks" there's A LOT of lower kinda "belly prints" which are more popular nowadays, I think. Maybe I'm just old(ish) and set in my chest print ways. haha | We're both right and screenprinting is a harsh and cruel mistress, not an exact science. |
sawitreddit | Agree. For me the problem is that assault is sometimes balanced...but only if the average standard of player on both teams is good. I lost too many games attacking where my team did nothing for 8mins and I am forced to try an assault, pretty much alone, and often in a TD, while the heavies watch. And then the tomato defenders win by default, even though they've done nothing except sit and dribble. So I turned it off. Kept encounter for variety, though.
Tl;Dr tomatoes too often successfully defend assault because no serious attack is made. | Agree. For me the problem is that assault is sometimes balanced...but only if the average standard of player on both teams is good. I lost too many games attacking where my team did nothing for 8mins and I am forced to try an assault, pretty much alone, and often in a TD, while the heavies watch. And then the tomato defenders win by default, even though they've done nothing except sit and dribble. So I turned it off. Kept encounter for variety, though.
Tl;Dr tomatoes too often successfully defend assault because no serious attack is made.
| WorldofTanks | t5_2s113 | cih2vzx | Agree. For me the problem is that assault is sometimes balanced...but only if the average standard of player on both teams is good. I lost too many games attacking where my team did nothing for 8mins and I am forced to try an assault, pretty much alone, and often in a TD, while the heavies watch. And then the tomato defenders win by default, even though they've done nothing except sit and dribble. So I turned it off. Kept encounter for variety, though. | tomatoes too often successfully defend assault because no serious attack is made. |
Beer_Me_A_Beer | I'm not you, and I don't know you. So, giving you confidence tips that are guaranteed to hit homes is gonna be pretty hard, but allow me to throw in a personal problem I ran into.
One thing that was holding me back from confidence (and wager it holds a lot of people back) is that once you take on the road to self-improvement, you become a negative person in your first impressions. I know that once I started working out and really focusing on improving myself, the way I dress, my work habits, etc. that I was focusing on the things that I felt were wrong that needed to be fixed and began deriving confidence/self-esteem from the wrong places.
I began comparing myself to other people. I wasn't happy for the progress I had made so much as I was happy that other people were still bad at what I was bad at before. If there was a guy who dressed like the slob that I used to be, I would feel better about myself. If there were people in the gym that would come in and do a shorter/easier workout than me, I'd feel better.
So, for me, it was the idea that my improvement came from being critical of myself. And while I was being critical of myself, I found it very easy to be critical of other people as well. And while I never actually would act on it, I still had anxiety while being critical of others because then maybe they were being critical of me.
My tips for confidence? From the first SECOND you meet somebody, try to find the reason why that person is awesome. Maybe the guy you are talking to has cool shirt from your favorite band. Maybe the girl you are talking to has some really unique shoes on. Maybe the guy has a cool record collection. Maybe the girl does volunteer work. Find that reason as QUICKLY as possible to label that person as awesome in your head.
But don't be like "OMG THEY ARE SOOOO GOOD I MUST BE THEIR FRIEND" just be like "yeah, he's the guy who has those loafers I have been looking for" or "she's the cool one who helps kids on the weekend." You slowly lose intimidation for people because you realize that you can very quickly find people awesome. And, if you aren't a guarded, snobby, neckbeard, people will be able to find you awesome quickly too. They won't always find you cool. And, sometimes, people will be a dick to you and you might go on to find them undesireable, but that doesn't mean that you aren't awesome, and that doesn't take away the cool research that girl did on river pollutants last year.
tl;dr - Everybody is at least somewhat awesome in some way. Find it and appreciate it. | I'm not you, and I don't know you. So, giving you confidence tips that are guaranteed to hit homes is gonna be pretty hard, but allow me to throw in a personal problem I ran into.
One thing that was holding me back from confidence (and wager it holds a lot of people back) is that once you take on the road to self-improvement, you become a negative person in your first impressions. I know that once I started working out and really focusing on improving myself, the way I dress, my work habits, etc. that I was focusing on the things that I felt were wrong that needed to be fixed and began deriving confidence/self-esteem from the wrong places.
I began comparing myself to other people. I wasn't happy for the progress I had made so much as I was happy that other people were still bad at what I was bad at before. If there was a guy who dressed like the slob that I used to be, I would feel better about myself. If there were people in the gym that would come in and do a shorter/easier workout than me, I'd feel better.
So, for me, it was the idea that my improvement came from being critical of myself. And while I was being critical of myself, I found it very easy to be critical of other people as well. And while I never actually would act on it, I still had anxiety while being critical of others because then maybe they were being critical of me.
My tips for confidence? From the first SECOND you meet somebody, try to find the reason why that person is awesome. Maybe the guy you are talking to has cool shirt from your favorite band. Maybe the girl you are talking to has some really unique shoes on. Maybe the guy has a cool record collection. Maybe the girl does volunteer work. Find that reason as QUICKLY as possible to label that person as awesome in your head.
But don't be like "OMG THEY ARE SOOOO GOOD I MUST BE THEIR FRIEND" just be like "yeah, he's the guy who has those loafers I have been looking for" or "she's the cool one who helps kids on the weekend." You slowly lose intimidation for people because you realize that you can very quickly find people awesome. And, if you aren't a guarded, snobby, neckbeard, people will be able to find you awesome quickly too. They won't always find you cool. And, sometimes, people will be a dick to you and you might go on to find them undesireable, but that doesn't mean that you aren't awesome, and that doesn't take away the cool research that girl did on river pollutants last year.
tl;dr - Everybody is at least somewhat awesome in some way. Find it and appreciate it.
| TheRedPill | t5_2ve1u | cih27a2 | I'm not you, and I don't know you. So, giving you confidence tips that are guaranteed to hit homes is gonna be pretty hard, but allow me to throw in a personal problem I ran into.
One thing that was holding me back from confidence (and wager it holds a lot of people back) is that once you take on the road to self-improvement, you become a negative person in your first impressions. I know that once I started working out and really focusing on improving myself, the way I dress, my work habits, etc. that I was focusing on the things that I felt were wrong that needed to be fixed and began deriving confidence/self-esteem from the wrong places.
I began comparing myself to other people. I wasn't happy for the progress I had made so much as I was happy that other people were still bad at what I was bad at before. If there was a guy who dressed like the slob that I used to be, I would feel better about myself. If there were people in the gym that would come in and do a shorter/easier workout than me, I'd feel better.
So, for me, it was the idea that my improvement came from being critical of myself. And while I was being critical of myself, I found it very easy to be critical of other people as well. And while I never actually would act on it, I still had anxiety while being critical of others because then maybe they were being critical of me.
My tips for confidence? From the first SECOND you meet somebody, try to find the reason why that person is awesome. Maybe the guy you are talking to has cool shirt from your favorite band. Maybe the girl you are talking to has some really unique shoes on. Maybe the guy has a cool record collection. Maybe the girl does volunteer work. Find that reason as QUICKLY as possible to label that person as awesome in your head.
But don't be like "OMG THEY ARE SOOOO GOOD I MUST BE THEIR FRIEND" just be like "yeah, he's the guy who has those loafers I have been looking for" or "she's the cool one who helps kids on the weekend." You slowly lose intimidation for people because you realize that you can very quickly find people awesome. And, if you aren't a guarded, snobby, neckbeard, people will be able to find you awesome quickly too. They won't always find you cool. And, sometimes, people will be a dick to you and you might go on to find them undesireable, but that doesn't mean that you aren't awesome, and that doesn't take away the cool research that girl did on river pollutants last year. | Everybody is at least somewhat awesome in some way. Find it and appreciate it. |
SLChrisse | I think the problem with this "soultion" would be that pug's would then only run bronze, 'cause someone will surely do the math and proclaim that doing a bronze run 3 times in the same timespan as one gold run is the most efficient way to get gear.
True, the completition rate would maybe go up, but then you'd have the same problem like in other games, where optional, good content is skipped because it's not hte best time/loot ratio.
And if you are not the tank and ask for extra bosses/objectives/what have you you get screamed at, or kicked...
People (at least pug's) will always ALWAYS go the way of least resistance
I think an option would be to, say, give the chance at epic loot on each level, and for extra objectives/bosses/better performance give more elder points or something on that line.
So the people who only want to grab the loot have a shot at it, even at bronze level, but for better performance you get more elder points.
But the greatest problem I see is the pug-community is clearly corrupted by all the easy give-aways from other games, an the time is money mentality, so you have to play for the best efficiency and not for fun.
TL; DR: Don't give safe epics for bronze, people will only run bronze for it's better time/loot ration - instead make other incentives like giving a chance at epic on every level (bronze to gold) but more elder points/better loot-chances or something like that for better performance | I think the problem with this "soultion" would be that pug's would then only run bronze, 'cause someone will surely do the math and proclaim that doing a bronze run 3 times in the same timespan as one gold run is the most efficient way to get gear.
True, the completition rate would maybe go up, but then you'd have the same problem like in other games, where optional, good content is skipped because it's not hte best time/loot ratio.
And if you are not the tank and ask for extra bosses/objectives/what have you you get screamed at, or kicked...
People (at least pug's) will always ALWAYS go the way of least resistance
I think an option would be to, say, give the chance at epic loot on each level, and for extra objectives/bosses/better performance give more elder points or something on that line.
So the people who only want to grab the loot have a shot at it, even at bronze level, but for better performance you get more elder points.
But the greatest problem I see is the pug-community is clearly corrupted by all the easy give-aways from other games, an the time is money mentality, so you have to play for the best efficiency and not for fun.
TL; DR: Don't give safe epics for bronze, people will only run bronze for it's better time/loot ration - instead make other incentives like giving a chance at epic on every level (bronze to gold) but more elder points/better loot-chances or something like that for better performance
| WildStar | t5_2sqwc | cihe3bi | I think the problem with this "soultion" would be that pug's would then only run bronze, 'cause someone will surely do the math and proclaim that doing a bronze run 3 times in the same timespan as one gold run is the most efficient way to get gear.
True, the completition rate would maybe go up, but then you'd have the same problem like in other games, where optional, good content is skipped because it's not hte best time/loot ratio.
And if you are not the tank and ask for extra bosses/objectives/what have you you get screamed at, or kicked...
People (at least pug's) will always ALWAYS go the way of least resistance
I think an option would be to, say, give the chance at epic loot on each level, and for extra objectives/bosses/better performance give more elder points or something on that line.
So the people who only want to grab the loot have a shot at it, even at bronze level, but for better performance you get more elder points.
But the greatest problem I see is the pug-community is clearly corrupted by all the easy give-aways from other games, an the time is money mentality, so you have to play for the best efficiency and not for fun. | Don't give safe epics for bronze, people will only run bronze for it's better time/loot ration - instead make other incentives like giving a chance at epic on every level (bronze to gold) but more elder points/better loot-chances or something like that for better performance |
cincodenada | This isn't actually RES's doing. It's due to the subreddit style, and is because of this rather overreaching CSS rule:
* {
border-radius: 0!important;
}
Which gets rid of any rounded edges in any element in the page. Since the RES throbber is just a square with rounded edges, take off the rounded edges, and it becomes a square.
The circles on either side, on the other hand, are psuedo-elements (:before and :after), and apparently they aren't subject to the * global style.
**TL;DR:** Looks like, in a rather ham-handed effort to get rid of all rounded edges, the /r/oddlysatisfying mods have inadvertently done this to themselves!
| This isn't actually RES's doing. It's due to the subreddit style, and is because of this rather overreaching CSS rule:
* {
border-radius: 0!important;
}
Which gets rid of any rounded edges in any element in the page. Since the RES throbber is just a square with rounded edges, take off the rounded edges, and it becomes a square.
The circles on either side, on the other hand, are psuedo-elements (:before and :after), and apparently they aren't subject to the * global style.
TL;DR: Looks like, in a rather ham-handed effort to get rid of all rounded edges, the /r/oddlysatisfying mods have inadvertently done this to themselves!
| oddlysatisfying | t5_2x93b | cihsn09 | This isn't actually RES's doing. It's due to the subreddit style, and is because of this rather overreaching CSS rule:
* {
border-radius: 0!important;
}
Which gets rid of any rounded edges in any element in the page. Since the RES throbber is just a square with rounded edges, take off the rounded edges, and it becomes a square.
The circles on either side, on the other hand, are psuedo-elements (:before and :after), and apparently they aren't subject to the * global style. | Looks like, in a rather ham-handed effort to get rid of all rounded edges, the /r/oddlysatisfying mods have inadvertently done this to themselves! |
eric_twinge | My brothers are into this shit and one of them tipped me off to instagram as the 'next big thing' before it even lauched. I registered my account on the day it went live.
It's been a headache really. I get tagged in a fuckton of photos because people can't do it right (they cut off their friend's name and it tags me), I get password reset emails all the time. I've got like 10 pictures on there and all of them have comments begging for my account or asking @instagram to remove me and give it to them because I'm not active enough. I just saw last night that someone offered me $250 for my account. I thought about it for a minute but annoying people is worth more than that to me.
tl;dr: I don't really get it either. | My brothers are into this shit and one of them tipped me off to instagram as the 'next big thing' before it even lauched. I registered my account on the day it went live.
It's been a headache really. I get tagged in a fuckton of photos because people can't do it right (they cut off their friend's name and it tags me), I get password reset emails all the time. I've got like 10 pictures on there and all of them have comments begging for my account or asking @instagram to remove me and give it to them because I'm not active enough. I just saw last night that someone offered me $250 for my account. I thought about it for a minute but annoying people is worth more than that to me.
tl;dr: I don't really get it either.
| fitnesscirclejerk | t5_2rybl | cihpoq9 | My brothers are into this shit and one of them tipped me off to instagram as the 'next big thing' before it even lauched. I registered my account on the day it went live.
It's been a headache really. I get tagged in a fuckton of photos because people can't do it right (they cut off their friend's name and it tags me), I get password reset emails all the time. I've got like 10 pictures on there and all of them have comments begging for my account or asking @instagram to remove me and give it to them because I'm not active enough. I just saw last night that someone offered me $250 for my account. I thought about it for a minute but annoying people is worth more than that to me. | I don't really get it either. |
Koeryn | Longish story ahead: A while ago, we were spell jamming, and our fighter got swallowed by a Leviathan (massive creature of pure chaos magic). She survived but became infused with chaos (which she hates as she's lawful good in her own horrifying ways). One of the abilities she got from this was the ability to y tell the universe NO. When she does, whatever was happening that she said no to gets written out of existence.
This is a hilariously powerful ability. In the for years since she's had it, it has been used exactly twice. Which is where we get to my cleric!
Back from spell jamming, we are gearing up for what may well turn into a new dragon war. Part of that was setting up a short of gnomish early detection system, involving magic / gnomish pylons that had to be placed between our keep and a dragon gate. Everyone made their rolls to properly install theirs.
Except my cleric and his dragon.
Cleric and Dragon got atomized in the ensuing blast (everyone else was far enough away from Ground Zero to just get knocked about by the over pressure. Chaos the Lawful Fighter told the universe NO, and suddenly my Cleric and Dragon actually had never been atomized, but because they totally had and Chaos Magic, they are now ridiculously infused with Chaos, and aren't just soul-bound, they are the same being in two different bodies.
So now his crossbow has chaos effects, he has a Chaos breath weapon, his Sap of the Drunken Sailor (which makes people REALLY drunk if he hits them while singing the song) now has a 5% chance of atomizing whatever he hits with it (and a 1% chance of making them significantly stronger). I've got like, two pages dedicated to the things his armour and weapons do, and my GM has the full Effects List that six people put together for him. 33% Negative effects to the player, 33% Neutral, 33% positive, and 1% reroll.
He was a Neutral / Neutral Cleric of Korin (god of the seas), now he's a wonderfully Chaotic Neutral Cleric of Korin. Good times.
TLDR: Fighter told the universe "NO" when Cleric got atomized, now Cleric has Chaos Powers. | Longish story ahead: A while ago, we were spell jamming, and our fighter got swallowed by a Leviathan (massive creature of pure chaos magic). She survived but became infused with chaos (which she hates as she's lawful good in her own horrifying ways). One of the abilities she got from this was the ability to y tell the universe NO. When she does, whatever was happening that she said no to gets written out of existence.
This is a hilariously powerful ability. In the for years since she's had it, it has been used exactly twice. Which is where we get to my cleric!
Back from spell jamming, we are gearing up for what may well turn into a new dragon war. Part of that was setting up a short of gnomish early detection system, involving magic / gnomish pylons that had to be placed between our keep and a dragon gate. Everyone made their rolls to properly install theirs.
Except my cleric and his dragon.
Cleric and Dragon got atomized in the ensuing blast (everyone else was far enough away from Ground Zero to just get knocked about by the over pressure. Chaos the Lawful Fighter told the universe NO, and suddenly my Cleric and Dragon actually had never been atomized, but because they totally had and Chaos Magic, they are now ridiculously infused with Chaos, and aren't just soul-bound, they are the same being in two different bodies.
So now his crossbow has chaos effects, he has a Chaos breath weapon, his Sap of the Drunken Sailor (which makes people REALLY drunk if he hits them while singing the song) now has a 5% chance of atomizing whatever he hits with it (and a 1% chance of making them significantly stronger). I've got like, two pages dedicated to the things his armour and weapons do, and my GM has the full Effects List that six people put together for him. 33% Negative effects to the player, 33% Neutral, 33% positive, and 1% reroll.
He was a Neutral / Neutral Cleric of Korin (god of the seas), now he's a wonderfully Chaotic Neutral Cleric of Korin. Good times.
TLDR: Fighter told the universe "NO" when Cleric got atomized, now Cleric has Chaos Powers.
| rpg | t5_2qh2s | ciiv6zc | Longish story ahead: A while ago, we were spell jamming, and our fighter got swallowed by a Leviathan (massive creature of pure chaos magic). She survived but became infused with chaos (which she hates as she's lawful good in her own horrifying ways). One of the abilities she got from this was the ability to y tell the universe NO. When she does, whatever was happening that she said no to gets written out of existence.
This is a hilariously powerful ability. In the for years since she's had it, it has been used exactly twice. Which is where we get to my cleric!
Back from spell jamming, we are gearing up for what may well turn into a new dragon war. Part of that was setting up a short of gnomish early detection system, involving magic / gnomish pylons that had to be placed between our keep and a dragon gate. Everyone made their rolls to properly install theirs.
Except my cleric and his dragon.
Cleric and Dragon got atomized in the ensuing blast (everyone else was far enough away from Ground Zero to just get knocked about by the over pressure. Chaos the Lawful Fighter told the universe NO, and suddenly my Cleric and Dragon actually had never been atomized, but because they totally had and Chaos Magic, they are now ridiculously infused with Chaos, and aren't just soul-bound, they are the same being in two different bodies.
So now his crossbow has chaos effects, he has a Chaos breath weapon, his Sap of the Drunken Sailor (which makes people REALLY drunk if he hits them while singing the song) now has a 5% chance of atomizing whatever he hits with it (and a 1% chance of making them significantly stronger). I've got like, two pages dedicated to the things his armour and weapons do, and my GM has the full Effects List that six people put together for him. 33% Negative effects to the player, 33% Neutral, 33% positive, and 1% reroll.
He was a Neutral / Neutral Cleric of Korin (god of the seas), now he's a wonderfully Chaotic Neutral Cleric of Korin. Good times. | Fighter told the universe "NO" when Cleric got atomized, now Cleric has Chaos Powers. |
yuv9 | That's true. The restrictions are to help protect the TL:DR crowd from themselves more than anything. | That's true. The restrictions are to help protect the TL:DR crowd from themselves more than anything.
| SteamGameSwap | t5_2skv6 | ciido2v | That's true. The restrictions are to help protect the | crowd from themselves more than anything. |
jdtbfan | Last night my SO and I went to McDonald's for a late night snack. We were waiting in line, and the drive thru attendant was leaning out the window. My SO mentioned that she knew him from high school, so I engaged him in conversation. We talk for a minute, and out of nowhere he says, "Hey, do you like Monty Python?"
I told him that I was a big fan.
"Do you want this?" He asked, showing me the DVD in the picture. Turns out someone had randomly given it to him in the drive-thru and he didn't want it. Best snack run ever.
TL;DR: Went to McDonald's, got one of my favorite movies for free. | Last night my SO and I went to McDonald's for a late night snack. We were waiting in line, and the drive thru attendant was leaning out the window. My SO mentioned that she knew him from high school, so I engaged him in conversation. We talk for a minute, and out of nowhere he says, "Hey, do you like Monty Python?"
I told him that I was a big fan.
"Do you want this?" He asked, showing me the DVD in the picture. Turns out someone had randomly given it to him in the drive-thru and he didn't want it. Best snack run ever.
TL;DR: Went to McDonald's, got one of my favorite movies for free.
| funny | t5_2qh33 | cii0ine | Last night my SO and I went to McDonald's for a late night snack. We were waiting in line, and the drive thru attendant was leaning out the window. My SO mentioned that she knew him from high school, so I engaged him in conversation. We talk for a minute, and out of nowhere he says, "Hey, do you like Monty Python?"
I told him that I was a big fan.
"Do you want this?" He asked, showing me the DVD in the picture. Turns out someone had randomly given it to him in the drive-thru and he didn't want it. Best snack run ever. | Went to McDonald's, got one of my favorite movies for free. |
Aederrex | I disagree. The B-52 will be about a century old by their expected retirement date, and that's not even newly build planes with an old design, the last B-52 rolled off the line in the early sixties. Hell, my personal car turned fifty this year, and while it's entering Ship of Theseus levels of repair and restoration, it's still more reliable than a lot of my friends much newer cars.
TL;DR, a well maintained machine will work pretty much indefinitely. | I disagree. The B-52 will be about a century old by their expected retirement date, and that's not even newly build planes with an old design, the last B-52 rolled off the line in the early sixties. Hell, my personal car turned fifty this year, and while it's entering Ship of Theseus levels of repair and restoration, it's still more reliable than a lot of my friends much newer cars.
TL;DR, a well maintained machine will work pretty much indefinitely.
| starcitizen | t5_2v94d | ciianj2 | I disagree. The B-52 will be about a century old by their expected retirement date, and that's not even newly build planes with an old design, the last B-52 rolled off the line in the early sixties. Hell, my personal car turned fifty this year, and while it's entering Ship of Theseus levels of repair and restoration, it's still more reliable than a lot of my friends much newer cars. | a well maintained machine will work pretty much indefinitely. |
RedThursday | As other posters have said already, kill it with fire. they will eventually defoliate the tree. You *can* lop off the affected branches, if you can reach them, but the idea is to *save* the tree, not prune it in to oblivion. A burning rag/torch works but a weed burner or propane torch works the best. I use a [propane torch]( lashed to the end of a pole to reach the upper branches. But the reason I replied in addition to several other perfectly good responses is because no one mentioned that you need to KEEP A HOSE HANDY. I'm a volunteer firefighter and we get calls all the time for wildland and structure fires that started from basic backyard activities and "just got out of control". Again, you're trying to *save* the tree, not burn it down along with your yard, the neighbor's fence, etc.
TL;DR Kill it with fire, but KEEP A HOSE HANDY! | As other posters have said already, kill it with fire. they will eventually defoliate the tree. You can lop off the affected branches, if you can reach them, but the idea is to save the tree, not prune it in to oblivion. A burning rag/torch works but a weed burner or propane torch works the best. I use a [propane torch]( lashed to the end of a pole to reach the upper branches. But the reason I replied in addition to several other perfectly good responses is because no one mentioned that you need to KEEP A HOSE HANDY. I'm a volunteer firefighter and we get calls all the time for wildland and structure fires that started from basic backyard activities and "just got out of control". Again, you're trying to save the tree, not burn it down along with your yard, the neighbor's fence, etc.
TL;DR Kill it with fire, but KEEP A HOSE HANDY!
| whatisthisthing | t5_2s3kh | ciiwcjc | As other posters have said already, kill it with fire. they will eventually defoliate the tree. You can lop off the affected branches, if you can reach them, but the idea is to save the tree, not prune it in to oblivion. A burning rag/torch works but a weed burner or propane torch works the best. I use a [propane torch]( lashed to the end of a pole to reach the upper branches. But the reason I replied in addition to several other perfectly good responses is because no one mentioned that you need to KEEP A HOSE HANDY. I'm a volunteer firefighter and we get calls all the time for wildland and structure fires that started from basic backyard activities and "just got out of control". Again, you're trying to save the tree, not burn it down along with your yard, the neighbor's fence, etc. | Kill it with fire, but KEEP A HOSE HANDY! |
zedgrrrl | Number #1 CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR GRADUATION!
Number #2 Right now, you have nothing but options. You can do anything.
Relevant Story:
When I finished high school, I was known to be an introverted library mouse and a hanger-on. A few months later I had the opportunity to pursue post secondary education (yes, I understand that might not be on your radar but that's not my point). During Frosh Week/Orientation week, I was a nobody, none of my friends or family, to my knowledge, had applied to the same school. I decided to emerge from my introverted bubble and put myself out there and conquer my fears and self-perceived social awkwardness.
On the second day of Orientation, I did actually run into a fellow high school student, this person must have felt out of his element because he approached me; the irony of this is the fact that this person was VERY much a Bully to me and to others before, he wouldn't offer a bottled water if I was on fire.
I apologized and said: sorry, I'm late to find my new friends.
Incidentally, this was 17 years ago. To this day, I treasure those moments where I bravely stepped outside myself and embraced life as a grand adventure.
**TL;DR:**
**Don't be afraid to try something new, you'll learn a lot about your self.
Nothing Changes without Change.
**
/hugz | Number #1 CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR GRADUATION!
Number #2 Right now, you have nothing but options. You can do anything.
Relevant Story:
When I finished high school, I was known to be an introverted library mouse and a hanger-on. A few months later I had the opportunity to pursue post secondary education (yes, I understand that might not be on your radar but that's not my point). During Frosh Week/Orientation week, I was a nobody, none of my friends or family, to my knowledge, had applied to the same school. I decided to emerge from my introverted bubble and put myself out there and conquer my fears and self-perceived social awkwardness.
On the second day of Orientation, I did actually run into a fellow high school student, this person must have felt out of his element because he approached me; the irony of this is the fact that this person was VERY much a Bully to me and to others before, he wouldn't offer a bottled water if I was on fire.
I apologized and said: sorry, I'm late to find my new friends.
Incidentally, this was 17 years ago. To this day, I treasure those moments where I bravely stepped outside myself and embraced life as a grand adventure.
TL;DR:
**Don't be afraid to try something new, you'll learn a lot about your self.
Nothing Changes without Change.
**
/hugz
| SuicideWatch | t5_2qpzs | cijdjyr | Number #1 CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR GRADUATION!
Number #2 Right now, you have nothing but options. You can do anything.
Relevant Story:
When I finished high school, I was known to be an introverted library mouse and a hanger-on. A few months later I had the opportunity to pursue post secondary education (yes, I understand that might not be on your radar but that's not my point). During Frosh Week/Orientation week, I was a nobody, none of my friends or family, to my knowledge, had applied to the same school. I decided to emerge from my introverted bubble and put myself out there and conquer my fears and self-perceived social awkwardness.
On the second day of Orientation, I did actually run into a fellow high school student, this person must have felt out of his element because he approached me; the irony of this is the fact that this person was VERY much a Bully to me and to others before, he wouldn't offer a bottled water if I was on fire.
I apologized and said: sorry, I'm late to find my new friends.
Incidentally, this was 17 years ago. To this day, I treasure those moments where I bravely stepped outside myself and embraced life as a grand adventure. | Don't be afraid to try something new, you'll learn a lot about your self.
Nothing Changes without Change.
**
/hugz |
SomeNorCalGuy | Oh. My. God. Seriously, dude? The whole country is a little rough around the edges right now but we have faced [much]( [much]( [much]( [much]( worse situations and come out of it all better than before and better than ever. The price of gas versus income is less than it was in the 70's and despite being very climate rapey, we have never produced more of our own fuel. Housing prices are still down from 7, 8 years ago. It's a lot harder to get a loan for a house now - as it should be. More people should be renting and not owning anyway. Food prices are stable and the cost keeps going down. _Transportation_ of the food is more expensive, because gas is more expensive... but that's just a good reason to buy local. And college is expensive, that's true. And it is a little hard to get a good job out of college right now. But over your life the cost of college versus the exponential increase in your lifetime wages make it worth every bit of the investment.
TLDR; Stop being such a whiny little puss. America is a fine damn country and if you can't stand a little debt and $4 a gallon gas you need to read up on what actual fucking hardship is. | Oh. My. God. Seriously, dude? The whole country is a little rough around the edges right now but we have faced [much]( [much]( [much]( [much]( worse situations and come out of it all better than before and better than ever. The price of gas versus income is less than it was in the 70's and despite being very climate rapey, we have never produced more of our own fuel. Housing prices are still down from 7, 8 years ago. It's a lot harder to get a loan for a house now - as it should be. More people should be renting and not owning anyway. Food prices are stable and the cost keeps going down. Transportation of the food is more expensive, because gas is more expensive... but that's just a good reason to buy local. And college is expensive, that's true. And it is a little hard to get a good job out of college right now. But over your life the cost of college versus the exponential increase in your lifetime wages make it worth every bit of the investment.
TLDR; Stop being such a whiny little puss. America is a fine damn country and if you can't stand a little debt and $4 a gallon gas you need to read up on what actual fucking hardship is.
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | cij5124 | Oh. My. God. Seriously, dude? The whole country is a little rough around the edges right now but we have faced [much]( [much]( [much]( [much]( worse situations and come out of it all better than before and better than ever. The price of gas versus income is less than it was in the 70's and despite being very climate rapey, we have never produced more of our own fuel. Housing prices are still down from 7, 8 years ago. It's a lot harder to get a loan for a house now - as it should be. More people should be renting and not owning anyway. Food prices are stable and the cost keeps going down. Transportation of the food is more expensive, because gas is more expensive... but that's just a good reason to buy local. And college is expensive, that's true. And it is a little hard to get a good job out of college right now. But over your life the cost of college versus the exponential increase in your lifetime wages make it worth every bit of the investment. | Stop being such a whiny little puss. America is a fine damn country and if you can't stand a little debt and $4 a gallon gas you need to read up on what actual fucking hardship is. |
AzireVG | The concept of the game is still amazing and with today's technology and if some bigger companies worked together I think it could be redone to be kind of a life simulator. Think of the epicocity of a realistic version of Spore where in the beginning you could manage how your species developed, less like actually playing as a specimen but more like giving them godly directions. Then later on you could become the leader of already sentient species and guide them to becoming a space civilization while battling other players civilizations or making trade with them.
TL;DR life simulator not "teaching kids how evolution basically works" | The concept of the game is still amazing and with today's technology and if some bigger companies worked together I think it could be redone to be kind of a life simulator. Think of the epicocity of a realistic version of Spore where in the beginning you could manage how your species developed, less like actually playing as a specimen but more like giving them godly directions. Then later on you could become the leader of already sentient species and guide them to becoming a space civilization while battling other players civilizations or making trade with them.
TL;DR life simulator not "teaching kids how evolution basically works"
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | cijbsa1 | The concept of the game is still amazing and with today's technology and if some bigger companies worked together I think it could be redone to be kind of a life simulator. Think of the epicocity of a realistic version of Spore where in the beginning you could manage how your species developed, less like actually playing as a specimen but more like giving them godly directions. Then later on you could become the leader of already sentient species and guide them to becoming a space civilization while battling other players civilizations or making trade with them. | life simulator not "teaching kids how evolution basically works" |
ThatDertyyyGuy | There are significant (fixable) issues with GMO's but it's surprising that 9/10 anti-GMO people don't know them.
The first is allergens - AFAIK food allergies are caused by proteins that cannot be correctly broken down. If the GMO has new proteins (most do), one may be an allergen. Testing this is completely possible with microbes and petri dishes, but can only offer an estimate of the potential for the GMO to cause allergies.
The second is a threat of foreign species - if GMO crops cross-pollinate with wild plants it may lead to the extinction of plant species. This would occur in a similar way to invasive species: the new strain of whatever would competitively exclude previous plants and eventually lead to extinction of the old plant.
The third is legislation - it is a massive pain to say who-owns-what when in the farming industry seeds are so freely mixed and cross-pollination is such a large possibility. Farmers today face lawsuits when growing new crops from seeds they purchased; the seeds were intended to be unmodified organisms but were mixed with modified seeds and as such infringe on the IP(i think) of companies that sell the GMO's. This is a nightmare for farmers who are now suffering for a mistake that was not their own.
Overall, the issue of allergens can be solved with extensive testing and labeling of GMO foods. The issue of cross-pollination is a little tougher. Sterile plants may be a viable solution but I honestly don't know. IP issues could be solved by open-sourcing the GMO's themselves, I can't remember the name but I know a group is trying to do just that.
TL;DR - Anti-GMO people are largely ignorant but GMO's do have SOME problems that would require attention before they can be fully utilized.
| There are significant (fixable) issues with GMO's but it's surprising that 9/10 anti-GMO people don't know them.
The first is allergens - AFAIK food allergies are caused by proteins that cannot be correctly broken down. If the GMO has new proteins (most do), one may be an allergen. Testing this is completely possible with microbes and petri dishes, but can only offer an estimate of the potential for the GMO to cause allergies.
The second is a threat of foreign species - if GMO crops cross-pollinate with wild plants it may lead to the extinction of plant species. This would occur in a similar way to invasive species: the new strain of whatever would competitively exclude previous plants and eventually lead to extinction of the old plant.
The third is legislation - it is a massive pain to say who-owns-what when in the farming industry seeds are so freely mixed and cross-pollination is such a large possibility. Farmers today face lawsuits when growing new crops from seeds they purchased; the seeds were intended to be unmodified organisms but were mixed with modified seeds and as such infringe on the IP(i think) of companies that sell the GMO's. This is a nightmare for farmers who are now suffering for a mistake that was not their own.
Overall, the issue of allergens can be solved with extensive testing and labeling of GMO foods. The issue of cross-pollination is a little tougher. Sterile plants may be a viable solution but I honestly don't know. IP issues could be solved by open-sourcing the GMO's themselves, I can't remember the name but I know a group is trying to do just that.
TL;DR - Anti-GMO people are largely ignorant but GMO's do have SOME problems that would require attention before they can be fully utilized.
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | ciji4pw | There are significant (fixable) issues with GMO's but it's surprising that 9/10 anti-GMO people don't know them.
The first is allergens - AFAIK food allergies are caused by proteins that cannot be correctly broken down. If the GMO has new proteins (most do), one may be an allergen. Testing this is completely possible with microbes and petri dishes, but can only offer an estimate of the potential for the GMO to cause allergies.
The second is a threat of foreign species - if GMO crops cross-pollinate with wild plants it may lead to the extinction of plant species. This would occur in a similar way to invasive species: the new strain of whatever would competitively exclude previous plants and eventually lead to extinction of the old plant.
The third is legislation - it is a massive pain to say who-owns-what when in the farming industry seeds are so freely mixed and cross-pollination is such a large possibility. Farmers today face lawsuits when growing new crops from seeds they purchased; the seeds were intended to be unmodified organisms but were mixed with modified seeds and as such infringe on the IP(i think) of companies that sell the GMO's. This is a nightmare for farmers who are now suffering for a mistake that was not their own.
Overall, the issue of allergens can be solved with extensive testing and labeling of GMO foods. The issue of cross-pollination is a little tougher. Sterile plants may be a viable solution but I honestly don't know. IP issues could be solved by open-sourcing the GMO's themselves, I can't remember the name but I know a group is trying to do just that. | Anti-GMO people are largely ignorant but GMO's do have SOME problems that would require attention before they can be fully utilized. |
ThatsSoWombat | My wife volunteers at an abortion clinic, so this decision has a direct impact her, and through her, on me. I am also a strong supporter of a woman's right to choose. Still, I support the Court's decision because I think that it was well-reasoned and intelligently thought through.
Before I get into why I think the decision makes sense, I'd like to explain the decision a little. For those of you who would rather read a somewhat longer plain-English summary of the Court's decision, SCOTUSBlog has a really good [article]( on it. And [here's]( the link to the decision itself.
First, I'd like to point out what the decision does *not* say. It does not say that protestors at abortion clinics can get up in the faces of people coming to get an abortion. In fact, the Court specifically pointed out that under existing Massachusetts law, the state may arrest and prosecute anyone who harasses people trying to get an abortion or blocks the entrance to the abortion clinic.
The abortion protestors in this particular case described themselves as wanting to provide quiet counseling to people entering the abortion clinic. The facts of the case state that the protestors who brought the case limited themselves to quietly passing out literature and saying things like, "Good morning, may I give you my literature? Is there anything I can do for you? I'm available if you have any questions." (This is a quote from the case itself.) In fact, the Court found it particularly troubling that the buffer zones essentially forced protestors to scream if they wanted to be heard, instead of quietly handing out literature and offering counseling, as these particular protestors wished to do.
The Court put particular emphasis on Massachusetts' other alternatives to the buffer zone---alternatives that would have protected the rights of the abortion clinic's patients while still allowing quiet street counseling. Part of the law that was not struck down prohibits getting in people's way as they are trying to enter the abortion clinic, or harassing them, or intimidating them. The Court did not strike down these parts of the law. People who violate this part of the law can be arrested, prosecuted, and jailed.
Because the law made it much harder than necessary for people to express their opinions to others, the Court struck it down. I think that this makes sense. People entering an abortion clinic may be in a particularly vulnerable place mentally, but the whole point of the First Amendment is to allow public discourse on issues, and to allow people to hear speech that they may not want to hear. That was, in fact, the Court's point: modern life is full of instances where we can just turn off speech that we don't like (change the channel, leave the website, etc.); the public streets are one of the only exceptions to this rule. The Court therefore acted to protect speech while still leaving open options for dealing with people who are abusive or threatening.
**TL;DR Because Massachusetts could use other parts of the law to protect people seeking abortions, and because public streets are one of the last places left where one can actually hear contrary opinions, the Supreme Court was right to strike down the buffer zones.** | My wife volunteers at an abortion clinic, so this decision has a direct impact her, and through her, on me. I am also a strong supporter of a woman's right to choose. Still, I support the Court's decision because I think that it was well-reasoned and intelligently thought through.
Before I get into why I think the decision makes sense, I'd like to explain the decision a little. For those of you who would rather read a somewhat longer plain-English summary of the Court's decision, SCOTUSBlog has a really good [article]( on it. And [here's]( the link to the decision itself.
First, I'd like to point out what the decision does not say. It does not say that protestors at abortion clinics can get up in the faces of people coming to get an abortion. In fact, the Court specifically pointed out that under existing Massachusetts law, the state may arrest and prosecute anyone who harasses people trying to get an abortion or blocks the entrance to the abortion clinic.
The abortion protestors in this particular case described themselves as wanting to provide quiet counseling to people entering the abortion clinic. The facts of the case state that the protestors who brought the case limited themselves to quietly passing out literature and saying things like, "Good morning, may I give you my literature? Is there anything I can do for you? I'm available if you have any questions." (This is a quote from the case itself.) In fact, the Court found it particularly troubling that the buffer zones essentially forced protestors to scream if they wanted to be heard, instead of quietly handing out literature and offering counseling, as these particular protestors wished to do.
The Court put particular emphasis on Massachusetts' other alternatives to the buffer zone---alternatives that would have protected the rights of the abortion clinic's patients while still allowing quiet street counseling. Part of the law that was not struck down prohibits getting in people's way as they are trying to enter the abortion clinic, or harassing them, or intimidating them. The Court did not strike down these parts of the law. People who violate this part of the law can be arrested, prosecuted, and jailed.
Because the law made it much harder than necessary for people to express their opinions to others, the Court struck it down. I think that this makes sense. People entering an abortion clinic may be in a particularly vulnerable place mentally, but the whole point of the First Amendment is to allow public discourse on issues, and to allow people to hear speech that they may not want to hear. That was, in fact, the Court's point: modern life is full of instances where we can just turn off speech that we don't like (change the channel, leave the website, etc.); the public streets are one of the only exceptions to this rule. The Court therefore acted to protect speech while still leaving open options for dealing with people who are abusive or threatening.
TL;DR Because Massachusetts could use other parts of the law to protect people seeking abortions, and because public streets are one of the last places left where one can actually hear contrary opinions, the Supreme Court was right to strike down the buffer zones.
| TwoXChromosomes | t5_2r2jt | cijqgyb | My wife volunteers at an abortion clinic, so this decision has a direct impact her, and through her, on me. I am also a strong supporter of a woman's right to choose. Still, I support the Court's decision because I think that it was well-reasoned and intelligently thought through.
Before I get into why I think the decision makes sense, I'd like to explain the decision a little. For those of you who would rather read a somewhat longer plain-English summary of the Court's decision, SCOTUSBlog has a really good [article]( on it. And [here's]( the link to the decision itself.
First, I'd like to point out what the decision does not say. It does not say that protestors at abortion clinics can get up in the faces of people coming to get an abortion. In fact, the Court specifically pointed out that under existing Massachusetts law, the state may arrest and prosecute anyone who harasses people trying to get an abortion or blocks the entrance to the abortion clinic.
The abortion protestors in this particular case described themselves as wanting to provide quiet counseling to people entering the abortion clinic. The facts of the case state that the protestors who brought the case limited themselves to quietly passing out literature and saying things like, "Good morning, may I give you my literature? Is there anything I can do for you? I'm available if you have any questions." (This is a quote from the case itself.) In fact, the Court found it particularly troubling that the buffer zones essentially forced protestors to scream if they wanted to be heard, instead of quietly handing out literature and offering counseling, as these particular protestors wished to do.
The Court put particular emphasis on Massachusetts' other alternatives to the buffer zone---alternatives that would have protected the rights of the abortion clinic's patients while still allowing quiet street counseling. Part of the law that was not struck down prohibits getting in people's way as they are trying to enter the abortion clinic, or harassing them, or intimidating them. The Court did not strike down these parts of the law. People who violate this part of the law can be arrested, prosecuted, and jailed.
Because the law made it much harder than necessary for people to express their opinions to others, the Court struck it down. I think that this makes sense. People entering an abortion clinic may be in a particularly vulnerable place mentally, but the whole point of the First Amendment is to allow public discourse on issues, and to allow people to hear speech that they may not want to hear. That was, in fact, the Court's point: modern life is full of instances where we can just turn off speech that we don't like (change the channel, leave the website, etc.); the public streets are one of the only exceptions to this rule. The Court therefore acted to protect speech while still leaving open options for dealing with people who are abusive or threatening. | Because Massachusetts could use other parts of the law to protect people seeking abortions, and because public streets are one of the last places left where one can actually hear contrary opinions, the Supreme Court was right to strike down the buffer zones. |
oshio_kusanagi | The reason why everyone says pre-built is bad is because they put crapy components and overcharge you for it. I can say this with experience. When I was getting my PC a few years back, I didn't know anything about computers. A friend recommended me to check out ibuypower website. Checked it out and saw one that I liked that was close to my budget and was close to buying it, but then I decided to do some research on the components that it came with to see what I was getting out of it. The pre-built came with a Radeon HD 5450(I forget which one) graphics card, and after checking out some YouTube videos of it, I knew I could get something better. So I decided to build one myself with the parts that I wanted and got better performance then what I was going to get pre-built. (Got a Radeon HD 6870)
TL;DR I was going to buy a pre-built PC because I didn't know anything about computers. Did some research and decided to build one. Got a better performing PC for my buck. | The reason why everyone says pre-built is bad is because they put crapy components and overcharge you for it. I can say this with experience. When I was getting my PC a few years back, I didn't know anything about computers. A friend recommended me to check out ibuypower website. Checked it out and saw one that I liked that was close to my budget and was close to buying it, but then I decided to do some research on the components that it came with to see what I was getting out of it. The pre-built came with a Radeon HD 5450(I forget which one) graphics card, and after checking out some YouTube videos of it, I knew I could get something better. So I decided to build one myself with the parts that I wanted and got better performance then what I was going to get pre-built. (Got a Radeon HD 6870)
TL;DR I was going to buy a pre-built PC because I didn't know anything about computers. Did some research and decided to build one. Got a better performing PC for my buck.
| gamingpc | t5_2sq2y | cijd30f | The reason why everyone says pre-built is bad is because they put crapy components and overcharge you for it. I can say this with experience. When I was getting my PC a few years back, I didn't know anything about computers. A friend recommended me to check out ibuypower website. Checked it out and saw one that I liked that was close to my budget and was close to buying it, but then I decided to do some research on the components that it came with to see what I was getting out of it. The pre-built came with a Radeon HD 5450(I forget which one) graphics card, and after checking out some YouTube videos of it, I knew I could get something better. So I decided to build one myself with the parts that I wanted and got better performance then what I was going to get pre-built. (Got a Radeon HD 6870) | I was going to buy a pre-built PC because I didn't know anything about computers. Did some research and decided to build one. Got a better performing PC for my buck. |
soulure | I believe this happened to you, I also believe it happens regularly to millions of other people in the world of all different faiths. What you felt was either indigestion, the timing sounds dead on after laying down, or most likely the endorphins resulting from the come down after a stressful event. There are explanations for your physical symptoms, odd that you would quickly attribute them to a supernatural source and presume that somehow means it is a message about mormonism. Maybe it was a message telling you your wife is an emotional maniplator and that you got played, hard.
tl;dr: Nachos man, fucking nachos. They get you every time. | I believe this happened to you, I also believe it happens regularly to millions of other people in the world of all different faiths. What you felt was either indigestion, the timing sounds dead on after laying down, or most likely the endorphins resulting from the come down after a stressful event. There are explanations for your physical symptoms, odd that you would quickly attribute them to a supernatural source and presume that somehow means it is a message about mormonism. Maybe it was a message telling you your wife is an emotional maniplator and that you got played, hard.
tl;dr: Nachos man, fucking nachos. They get you every time.
| exmormon | t5_2r0gj | cijfpye | I believe this happened to you, I also believe it happens regularly to millions of other people in the world of all different faiths. What you felt was either indigestion, the timing sounds dead on after laying down, or most likely the endorphins resulting from the come down after a stressful event. There are explanations for your physical symptoms, odd that you would quickly attribute them to a supernatural source and presume that somehow means it is a message about mormonism. Maybe it was a message telling you your wife is an emotional maniplator and that you got played, hard. | Nachos man, fucking nachos. They get you every time. |
kevinrex | Be proud of yourself. I'm 50 and it took that long to figure out that TLDR you summarized with. | Be proud of yourself. I'm 50 and it took that long to figure out that TLDR you summarized with.
| exmormon | t5_2r0gj | cijaxs3 | Be proud of yourself. I'm 50 and it took that long to figure out that | you summarized with. |
Aegrit | I think it's very difficult to carry as a jungler if you're not playing a carry-type jungler, you will have to rely on your teamplay more than your individual play and that may mean giving kills to your lanes more if possible. The problem with beginning to give over kills to your lanes is that the opponents will escape with a sliver of health, which is frustrating, but you will improve and realize when you have to finish the kill yourself. I feel like giving the kill over to the lane is an exception and not the rule, especially below diamond or plat.
There are a lot of good times to give over a kill, when your laner is low is not a good time, they might get outplayed and you end up feeding the other guy. If it is a snowball lane either way, like a riven/jax top lane, its a good idea to give over the kill and snowball it in your team's favor. More importantly, what to do after a successful gank? When your laner is low after a gank and you are still healthy make sure to push the lane unless something emergent is happening elsewhere. Just push the minions into the tower, hit it if you can, destroy it if you can. You'll get decent farm and deny a minion wave to the enemy laner you just ganked, just look out for the enemy gank while you're doing it.
What to do to handle feeders? Example, enemy Riven dumps on my top lane Gangplank(sigh GP), I was playing Zac and getting ahead from successful ganks, so I built randuin's & haunting guise to fight Riven. I was actually the same level as Riven from pushing lanes after ganking. I told my GP to leave lane, go roam, jungle, w/e and I'll take over top, this was when he was at around 8 deaths and it was about 20 or 25 mins into game. Riven was seeing red from GP feeding, tower dove me and died easily. So, that story is that you can do your best to try and build to fight the fed enemy. What your laner needs to do is stay in the game, try to shore up his tower, and just keep feeding while your team gets strong enough and itemized enough to deal with the fed enemy. What I think your laner normally does is quit(sigh), leaving you few options.
When you're ahead try to buy a couple of wards also, if you're not already. Try to look at the movement patterns of your enemy, I've only played in Silver recently on my smurf and the way people move is VERY transparent. If you're really far ahead you can likely pick people off solo in the jungle. Apply map pressure, ward, and the enemy is almost guaranteed to waste time chasing you around. If you simply keep pressure on your enemy(maintain initiative, meaning they are responding to threats you are making that cannot be ignored) then they will make a mistake, you will have a high chance of your enemy responding incorrectly and you can punish them for it.
TL;DR - Especially try to give kills to snowball lanes, but other than that this is not number 1 priority in Silver. Push lanes after ganks, understand how important that minion wave is. When someone on your team is feeding it is their responsibility to keep feeding and try to shore up their towers, in the mean time your team needs to get ahead elsewhere, most likely YOU have to build something specifically to fight the fed opponent. Also, maintain initiative and pressure the map. When people are under pressure their mistakes will shine through. | I think it's very difficult to carry as a jungler if you're not playing a carry-type jungler, you will have to rely on your teamplay more than your individual play and that may mean giving kills to your lanes more if possible. The problem with beginning to give over kills to your lanes is that the opponents will escape with a sliver of health, which is frustrating, but you will improve and realize when you have to finish the kill yourself. I feel like giving the kill over to the lane is an exception and not the rule, especially below diamond or plat.
There are a lot of good times to give over a kill, when your laner is low is not a good time, they might get outplayed and you end up feeding the other guy. If it is a snowball lane either way, like a riven/jax top lane, its a good idea to give over the kill and snowball it in your team's favor. More importantly, what to do after a successful gank? When your laner is low after a gank and you are still healthy make sure to push the lane unless something emergent is happening elsewhere. Just push the minions into the tower, hit it if you can, destroy it if you can. You'll get decent farm and deny a minion wave to the enemy laner you just ganked, just look out for the enemy gank while you're doing it.
What to do to handle feeders? Example, enemy Riven dumps on my top lane Gangplank(sigh GP), I was playing Zac and getting ahead from successful ganks, so I built randuin's & haunting guise to fight Riven. I was actually the same level as Riven from pushing lanes after ganking. I told my GP to leave lane, go roam, jungle, w/e and I'll take over top, this was when he was at around 8 deaths and it was about 20 or 25 mins into game. Riven was seeing red from GP feeding, tower dove me and died easily. So, that story is that you can do your best to try and build to fight the fed enemy. What your laner needs to do is stay in the game, try to shore up his tower, and just keep feeding while your team gets strong enough and itemized enough to deal with the fed enemy. What I think your laner normally does is quit(sigh), leaving you few options.
When you're ahead try to buy a couple of wards also, if you're not already. Try to look at the movement patterns of your enemy, I've only played in Silver recently on my smurf and the way people move is VERY transparent. If you're really far ahead you can likely pick people off solo in the jungle. Apply map pressure, ward, and the enemy is almost guaranteed to waste time chasing you around. If you simply keep pressure on your enemy(maintain initiative, meaning they are responding to threats you are making that cannot be ignored) then they will make a mistake, you will have a high chance of your enemy responding incorrectly and you can punish them for it.
TL;DR - Especially try to give kills to snowball lanes, but other than that this is not number 1 priority in Silver. Push lanes after ganks, understand how important that minion wave is. When someone on your team is feeding it is their responsibility to keep feeding and try to shore up their towers, in the mean time your team needs to get ahead elsewhere, most likely YOU have to build something specifically to fight the fed opponent. Also, maintain initiative and pressure the map. When people are under pressure their mistakes will shine through.
| summonerschool | t5_2t9x3 | cijc2a8 | I think it's very difficult to carry as a jungler if you're not playing a carry-type jungler, you will have to rely on your teamplay more than your individual play and that may mean giving kills to your lanes more if possible. The problem with beginning to give over kills to your lanes is that the opponents will escape with a sliver of health, which is frustrating, but you will improve and realize when you have to finish the kill yourself. I feel like giving the kill over to the lane is an exception and not the rule, especially below diamond or plat.
There are a lot of good times to give over a kill, when your laner is low is not a good time, they might get outplayed and you end up feeding the other guy. If it is a snowball lane either way, like a riven/jax top lane, its a good idea to give over the kill and snowball it in your team's favor. More importantly, what to do after a successful gank? When your laner is low after a gank and you are still healthy make sure to push the lane unless something emergent is happening elsewhere. Just push the minions into the tower, hit it if you can, destroy it if you can. You'll get decent farm and deny a minion wave to the enemy laner you just ganked, just look out for the enemy gank while you're doing it.
What to do to handle feeders? Example, enemy Riven dumps on my top lane Gangplank(sigh GP), I was playing Zac and getting ahead from successful ganks, so I built randuin's & haunting guise to fight Riven. I was actually the same level as Riven from pushing lanes after ganking. I told my GP to leave lane, go roam, jungle, w/e and I'll take over top, this was when he was at around 8 deaths and it was about 20 or 25 mins into game. Riven was seeing red from GP feeding, tower dove me and died easily. So, that story is that you can do your best to try and build to fight the fed enemy. What your laner needs to do is stay in the game, try to shore up his tower, and just keep feeding while your team gets strong enough and itemized enough to deal with the fed enemy. What I think your laner normally does is quit(sigh), leaving you few options.
When you're ahead try to buy a couple of wards also, if you're not already. Try to look at the movement patterns of your enemy, I've only played in Silver recently on my smurf and the way people move is VERY transparent. If you're really far ahead you can likely pick people off solo in the jungle. Apply map pressure, ward, and the enemy is almost guaranteed to waste time chasing you around. If you simply keep pressure on your enemy(maintain initiative, meaning they are responding to threats you are making that cannot be ignored) then they will make a mistake, you will have a high chance of your enemy responding incorrectly and you can punish them for it. | Especially try to give kills to snowball lanes, but other than that this is not number 1 priority in Silver. Push lanes after ganks, understand how important that minion wave is. When someone on your team is feeding it is their responsibility to keep feeding and try to shore up their towers, in the mean time your team needs to get ahead elsewhere, most likely YOU have to build something specifically to fight the fed opponent. Also, maintain initiative and pressure the map. When people are under pressure their mistakes will shine through. |
TheOnlyArtifex | They do get addicted to 'good' things. An addiction is never considered good though. Addiction means you can't go without anymore, you crave it. Not like air, because you need air to survive, but like coffee. You don't need it, yet a coffee addict can't go without anymore. Similarly, you can be addicted to giving to charity. It is just that the 'bad' things tend to show. Gambling, drinking, they are things that others take offence to.
TL;DR: 'Good' addicts don't bother others, 'bad' addicts do. That's why it looks like people only get addicted to bad things. | They do get addicted to 'good' things. An addiction is never considered good though. Addiction means you can't go without anymore, you crave it. Not like air, because you need air to survive, but like coffee. You don't need it, yet a coffee addict can't go without anymore. Similarly, you can be addicted to giving to charity. It is just that the 'bad' things tend to show. Gambling, drinking, they are things that others take offence to.
TL;DR: 'Good' addicts don't bother others, 'bad' addicts do. That's why it looks like people only get addicted to bad things.
| explainlikeimfive | t5_2sokd | cijf5jr | They do get addicted to 'good' things. An addiction is never considered good though. Addiction means you can't go without anymore, you crave it. Not like air, because you need air to survive, but like coffee. You don't need it, yet a coffee addict can't go without anymore. Similarly, you can be addicted to giving to charity. It is just that the 'bad' things tend to show. Gambling, drinking, they are things that others take offence to. | Good' addicts don't bother others, 'bad' addicts do. That's why it looks like people only get addicted to bad things. |
Jarraxus | Well if you want something more in depth: I think the Officers were in the wrong for ambushing OP at the door with guns drawn, yelling at him to get on the ground. Sure, smoking weed is illegal in most states, but that doesn't mean that someone smoking is violent or armed.
The way I've handled it several times is simply approaching the person reported and calmly explaining that we received a report that he/she seemed to be doing <whatever>. In this situation (pretend I don't know anything about vaping, because I know lots about vaping...) I'd simply ask about the device in question. If he/she is willing to show me the device, great. Otherwise unless I smelt weed I really wouldn't have any legal justification to search without consent.
TL;DR - OP's Officers handled it with too much control. | Well if you want something more in depth: I think the Officers were in the wrong for ambushing OP at the door with guns drawn, yelling at him to get on the ground. Sure, smoking weed is illegal in most states, but that doesn't mean that someone smoking is violent or armed.
The way I've handled it several times is simply approaching the person reported and calmly explaining that we received a report that he/she seemed to be doing <whatever>. In this situation (pretend I don't know anything about vaping, because I know lots about vaping...) I'd simply ask about the device in question. If he/she is willing to show me the device, great. Otherwise unless I smelt weed I really wouldn't have any legal justification to search without consent.
TL;DR - OP's Officers handled it with too much control.
| electronic_cigarette | t5_2qmlu | cikbf2m | Well if you want something more in depth: I think the Officers were in the wrong for ambushing OP at the door with guns drawn, yelling at him to get on the ground. Sure, smoking weed is illegal in most states, but that doesn't mean that someone smoking is violent or armed.
The way I've handled it several times is simply approaching the person reported and calmly explaining that we received a report that he/she seemed to be doing <whatever>. In this situation (pretend I don't know anything about vaping, because I know lots about vaping...) I'd simply ask about the device in question. If he/she is willing to show me the device, great. Otherwise unless I smelt weed I really wouldn't have any legal justification to search without consent. | OP's Officers handled it with too much control. |
IceRollMenu2 | OK, although this sounds a bit like a standard "gotcha!" question, here we go.
*Do vegans kill bugs in their house?* Some sure do. Maybe some take precautions to get pests out of their house in the most nonviolent way possible. But it's certainly not the standard case of animal exploitation that veganism is against (maybe it is a fringe case, or no case of exploitation at all, depending on the case).
*Do I get my house sprayed down with pesticides?* I luckily never had to. But if it was necessary somehow I guess it would again depend on the nature of the problem and the options available. Letting my house fall apart from termites isn't a viable form of boycott against animal exploitation, so there would be no point really. In other cases, refraining from killing pests may be an option.
*Do I only eat non-GMO produce?* The GMO stuff isn't as common in Europe as in the US I believe, and as far as I know I just happen to buy non-GMO. Again, this is certainly not the standard case of vegan opposition against animal exploitation, but it can be one. I guess there are general reasons for vegans to prefer environmentally friendly ways of agriculture, but it all depends on the options available whether boycott is in order.
**TL;DR:** These are not clear or central cases of deliberate animal exploitation. Depending on the alternatives available and the nature of the problem, killing off pests isn't nonvegan. It all depends on whether boycott is possible and makes sense. | OK, although this sounds a bit like a standard "gotcha!" question, here we go.
Do vegans kill bugs in their house? Some sure do. Maybe some take precautions to get pests out of their house in the most nonviolent way possible. But it's certainly not the standard case of animal exploitation that veganism is against (maybe it is a fringe case, or no case of exploitation at all, depending on the case).
Do I get my house sprayed down with pesticides? I luckily never had to. But if it was necessary somehow I guess it would again depend on the nature of the problem and the options available. Letting my house fall apart from termites isn't a viable form of boycott against animal exploitation, so there would be no point really. In other cases, refraining from killing pests may be an option.
Do I only eat non-GMO produce? The GMO stuff isn't as common in Europe as in the US I believe, and as far as I know I just happen to buy non-GMO. Again, this is certainly not the standard case of vegan opposition against animal exploitation, but it can be one. I guess there are general reasons for vegans to prefer environmentally friendly ways of agriculture, but it all depends on the options available whether boycott is in order.
TL;DR: These are not clear or central cases of deliberate animal exploitation. Depending on the alternatives available and the nature of the problem, killing off pests isn't nonvegan. It all depends on whether boycott is possible and makes sense.
| vegan | t5_2qhpm | cijxlhz | OK, although this sounds a bit like a standard "gotcha!" question, here we go.
Do vegans kill bugs in their house? Some sure do. Maybe some take precautions to get pests out of their house in the most nonviolent way possible. But it's certainly not the standard case of animal exploitation that veganism is against (maybe it is a fringe case, or no case of exploitation at all, depending on the case).
Do I get my house sprayed down with pesticides? I luckily never had to. But if it was necessary somehow I guess it would again depend on the nature of the problem and the options available. Letting my house fall apart from termites isn't a viable form of boycott against animal exploitation, so there would be no point really. In other cases, refraining from killing pests may be an option.
Do I only eat non-GMO produce? The GMO stuff isn't as common in Europe as in the US I believe, and as far as I know I just happen to buy non-GMO. Again, this is certainly not the standard case of vegan opposition against animal exploitation, but it can be one. I guess there are general reasons for vegans to prefer environmentally friendly ways of agriculture, but it all depends on the options available whether boycott is in order. | These are not clear or central cases of deliberate animal exploitation. Depending on the alternatives available and the nature of the problem, killing off pests isn't nonvegan. It all depends on whether boycott is possible and makes sense. |
Oops_killsteal | We don't.
Tl;dr No. | We don't.
Tl;dr No.
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cijybj4 | We don't. | No. |
Bralnor | Apparently something that is not funny for *you* anymore is not funny for anyone at all.
TL;DR: You decide what's funny.
/s | Apparently something that is not funny for you anymore is not funny for anyone at all.
TL;DR: You decide what's funny.
/s
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cikmnwt | Apparently something that is not funny for you anymore is not funny for anyone at all. | You decide what's funny.
/s |
kewpie_mayo | This went from cool idea, to overly photoshopped, to cheesy, then redeemed slightly by that bikini.
TL;DR: just skip to the boobs | This went from cool idea, to overly photoshopped, to cheesy, then redeemed slightly by that bikini.
TL;DR: just skip to the boobs
| PerfectTiming | t5_2t7te | cik3lye | This went from cool idea, to overly photoshopped, to cheesy, then redeemed slightly by that bikini. | just skip to the boobs |
twwwy | i'll assume you're coming from an earnest place and i'll give as earnest a response as possible here.
feminists are called 'feminists' because their focus/emphasis is on dealing with the WOMEN'S ISSUES. otherwise, they'd call themselves 'humanists', and they don't, Bummer, :|
the 'most feminists who care' are not the ones you see in mainstream media, or the ones running the social/social-media campaigns, or the high-ranking ones or the ones who've governmental/policy-making control/power/mainstream-media-appeal. the ones who do are the rad-fem types and whether we like it or not: they're the ones calling the shots. bummer, :|.
and, i also don't particularly agree with the poisonous masculinity discussion from feminists either, :|. that's like guys discussing what type of pads/tampons are better or how it is to be pregnant. feminism/sts might not be as competent to solve men's problems as they might be, Bummer, :|.
and, most feminists or the ones calling the shots as i said above, aren't looking for equality, they're looking for 'equality': as in the equality which benefits the women, Bummer, :|.
**TL;DR: Bummer, :|.** | i'll assume you're coming from an earnest place and i'll give as earnest a response as possible here.
feminists are called 'feminists' because their focus/emphasis is on dealing with the WOMEN'S ISSUES. otherwise, they'd call themselves 'humanists', and they don't, Bummer, :|
the 'most feminists who care' are not the ones you see in mainstream media, or the ones running the social/social-media campaigns, or the high-ranking ones or the ones who've governmental/policy-making control/power/mainstream-media-appeal. the ones who do are the rad-fem types and whether we like it or not: they're the ones calling the shots. bummer, :|.
and, i also don't particularly agree with the poisonous masculinity discussion from feminists either, :|. that's like guys discussing what type of pads/tampons are better or how it is to be pregnant. feminism/sts might not be as competent to solve men's problems as they might be, Bummer, :|.
and, most feminists or the ones calling the shots as i said above, aren't looking for equality, they're looking for 'equality': as in the equality which benefits the women, Bummer, :|.
TL;DR: Bummer, :|.
| AskMen | t5_2s30g | cikfdi5 | i'll assume you're coming from an earnest place and i'll give as earnest a response as possible here.
feminists are called 'feminists' because their focus/emphasis is on dealing with the WOMEN'S ISSUES. otherwise, they'd call themselves 'humanists', and they don't, Bummer, :|
the 'most feminists who care' are not the ones you see in mainstream media, or the ones running the social/social-media campaigns, or the high-ranking ones or the ones who've governmental/policy-making control/power/mainstream-media-appeal. the ones who do are the rad-fem types and whether we like it or not: they're the ones calling the shots. bummer, :|.
and, i also don't particularly agree with the poisonous masculinity discussion from feminists either, :|. that's like guys discussing what type of pads/tampons are better or how it is to be pregnant. feminism/sts might not be as competent to solve men's problems as they might be, Bummer, :|.
and, most feminists or the ones calling the shots as i said above, aren't looking for equality, they're looking for 'equality': as in the equality which benefits the women, Bummer, :|. | Bummer, :|. |
viKKyo | Oh sure, and Deadalus Point wasn't the most broken map ever in favour of Protoss? Yes it was. No terrans played that map AT ALL due to the fact that blink builds were simply OP as shit.
tl;dr don't reference Daedalus Point for 'good' map design - it's a fucking awful map | Oh sure, and Deadalus Point wasn't the most broken map ever in favour of Protoss? Yes it was. No terrans played that map AT ALL due to the fact that blink builds were simply OP as shit.
tl;dr don't reference Daedalus Point for 'good' map design - it's a fucking awful map
| starcraft | t5_2qpp6 | cil2ovn | Oh sure, and Deadalus Point wasn't the most broken map ever in favour of Protoss? Yes it was. No terrans played that map AT ALL due to the fact that blink builds were simply OP as shit. | don't reference Daedalus Point for 'good' map design - it's a fucking awful map |
LPanaflex | The flags are great. Have you been to it? They're a Glastonbury-specific cultural phenomenon that doesn't really happen elsewhere. The logic I've heard is that people do it because there is 'a belief that Michael Eavis (the organiser) has a fondness for flags'. He's one of us. They add to the atmosphere and are handy pointers for friends when they're trying to find you in a big crowd. And they're good fun at the campsites.
How are you getting upvotes on a vexillology sub for complaining about flags? Especially when they're great. The organisers have flags all over the place too - they opened a new area a few years back called flagtopia for heaven's sakes.
TL;DR Flags are good and good at Glastonbury | The flags are great. Have you been to it? They're a Glastonbury-specific cultural phenomenon that doesn't really happen elsewhere. The logic I've heard is that people do it because there is 'a belief that Michael Eavis (the organiser) has a fondness for flags'. He's one of us. They add to the atmosphere and are handy pointers for friends when they're trying to find you in a big crowd. And they're good fun at the campsites.
How are you getting upvotes on a vexillology sub for complaining about flags? Especially when they're great. The organisers have flags all over the place too - they opened a new area a few years back called flagtopia for heaven's sakes.
TL;DR Flags are good and good at Glastonbury
| vexillology | t5_2rygj | cikosdq | The flags are great. Have you been to it? They're a Glastonbury-specific cultural phenomenon that doesn't really happen elsewhere. The logic I've heard is that people do it because there is 'a belief that Michael Eavis (the organiser) has a fondness for flags'. He's one of us. They add to the atmosphere and are handy pointers for friends when they're trying to find you in a big crowd. And they're good fun at the campsites.
How are you getting upvotes on a vexillology sub for complaining about flags? Especially when they're great. The organisers have flags all over the place too - they opened a new area a few years back called flagtopia for heaven's sakes. | Flags are good and good at Glastonbury |
NeoKabuto | I think the real issue is that the orbital drones are kind of vaguely written. In real life, just rendezvousing with a spacecraft is a difficult and time-sensitive task, but it just says they change orbits of things (with no explanation of fuel required or thrust available). It also isn't clear on if it's things in the orbital path of your body (which makes them really powerful for stations and asteroids; should something at a Lagrange point give you control over the body the point belongs to?), or things in orbit around what you own (which makes them worthless for asteroids and stations).
This is also a setting with FTL drives that "jump", meaning they can skip right over the belt if they have the resources to. | I think the real issue is that the orbital drones are kind of vaguely written. In real life, just rendezvousing with a spacecraft is a difficult and time-sensitive task, but it just says they change orbits of things (with no explanation of fuel required or thrust available). It also isn't clear on if it's things in the orbital path of your body (which makes them really powerful for stations and asteroids; should something at a Lagrange point give you control over the body the point belongs to?), or things in orbit around what you own (which makes them worthless for asteroids and stations).
This is also a setting with FTL drives that "jump", meaning they can skip right over the belt if they have the resources to.
| makeyourchoice | t5_2w8em | cil0t8c | I think the real issue is that the orbital drones are kind of vaguely written. In real life, just rendezvousing with a spacecraft is a difficult and time-sensitive task, but it just says they change orbits of things (with no explanation of fuel required or thrust available). It also isn't clear on if it's things in the orbital path of your body (which makes them really powerful for stations and asteroids; should something at a Lagrange point give you control over the body the point belongs to?), or things in orbit around what you own (which makes them worthless for asteroids and stations).
This is also a setting with F | ives that "jump", meaning they can skip right over the belt if they have the resources to. |
TheDoctorMouse | Time to ramble like the pedantic college undergrad that I am.
You're asking if we give the game the old "Literature professor" treatment.
Of course. That happens to any form of artistic media (and even some non-artistic non-media ones... talking to you, sociologists!).
Maybe *Animal Farm* is a not-too-subtle allegory about the USSR in the post-Lenin era. Maybe literally everybody in *The Sound and the Fury* wants to bone Caddie, including Quentin, who also wants to bone one of the guys who boned Caddie. One of these suggestions is practically (if not actually) confirmed by the author, the other was made as a random suggestion from my lit professor during a lull in the discussion ^(hint: ^*Animal ^Farm* ^is ^totally ^an ^allegory).
Both suggestions are equally valid, as long as they can be backed up by the contents of the work. This is doubly so in the post-modern *la mort de l'auteur* period of art [i.e., it is industry standard in certain circles to ignore the author]. A little underwhelming maybe, but that's art.
So the question of whether the symbolism and conclusions present being part of the author's grand design is an unhelpful question a lot of the time. The only valid to ask in response to assertions of lore or symbolism is "can you back it up?"
It's a really solipsistic and existentialist way of thinking. Rather than considering the author's intent, you focus on your own responses to the work (since art is made to evoke responses). The only wrong interpretation is one that lacks evidence.
So to answer your question, of course not all the lore and symbolism are planned. It's hard enough to write a perfect intentional allegory; the idea that the lore and symbolism of such an open-ended game are actually completely planned is absurd. Some lore is planned of course, but other bits rise from the chaos due to obsessives and people good at pattern recognition.
But to answer the question that you didn't ask, one's experience with an accidental bit of lore or a phantom piece of symbolism does not negate the experience itself. Such things are nevertheless constructed by the consumer of the art in response to its presence.
**tl;dr: The lore's not as planned as we pretend it is, but nobody should give a shit-- keep reading between the lines is it helps you sleep at night.**
edit: Plenty of late-night spelling and grammar errors. | Time to ramble like the pedantic college undergrad that I am.
You're asking if we give the game the old "Literature professor" treatment.
Of course. That happens to any form of artistic media (and even some non-artistic non-media ones... talking to you, sociologists!).
Maybe Animal Farm is a not-too-subtle allegory about the USSR in the post-Lenin era. Maybe literally everybody in The Sound and the Fury wants to bone Caddie, including Quentin, who also wants to bone one of the guys who boned Caddie. One of these suggestions is practically (if not actually) confirmed by the author, the other was made as a random suggestion from my lit professor during a lull in the discussion ^(hint: ^ Animal ^Farm ^is ^totally ^an ^allegory).
Both suggestions are equally valid, as long as they can be backed up by the contents of the work. This is doubly so in the post-modern la mort de l'auteur period of art [i.e., it is industry standard in certain circles to ignore the author]. A little underwhelming maybe, but that's art.
So the question of whether the symbolism and conclusions present being part of the author's grand design is an unhelpful question a lot of the time. The only valid to ask in response to assertions of lore or symbolism is "can you back it up?"
It's a really solipsistic and existentialist way of thinking. Rather than considering the author's intent, you focus on your own responses to the work (since art is made to evoke responses). The only wrong interpretation is one that lacks evidence.
So to answer your question, of course not all the lore and symbolism are planned. It's hard enough to write a perfect intentional allegory; the idea that the lore and symbolism of such an open-ended game are actually completely planned is absurd. Some lore is planned of course, but other bits rise from the chaos due to obsessives and people good at pattern recognition.
But to answer the question that you didn't ask, one's experience with an accidental bit of lore or a phantom piece of symbolism does not negate the experience itself. Such things are nevertheless constructed by the consumer of the art in response to its presence.
tl;dr: The lore's not as planned as we pretend it is, but nobody should give a shit-- keep reading between the lines is it helps you sleep at night.
edit: Plenty of late-night spelling and grammar errors.
| DarkSouls2 | t5_2vqni | cikjhek | Time to ramble like the pedantic college undergrad that I am.
You're asking if we give the game the old "Literature professor" treatment.
Of course. That happens to any form of artistic media (and even some non-artistic non-media ones... talking to you, sociologists!).
Maybe Animal Farm is a not-too-subtle allegory about the USSR in the post-Lenin era. Maybe literally everybody in The Sound and the Fury wants to bone Caddie, including Quentin, who also wants to bone one of the guys who boned Caddie. One of these suggestions is practically (if not actually) confirmed by the author, the other was made as a random suggestion from my lit professor during a lull in the discussion ^(hint: ^ Animal ^Farm ^is ^totally ^an ^allegory).
Both suggestions are equally valid, as long as they can be backed up by the contents of the work. This is doubly so in the post-modern la mort de l'auteur period of art [i.e., it is industry standard in certain circles to ignore the author]. A little underwhelming maybe, but that's art.
So the question of whether the symbolism and conclusions present being part of the author's grand design is an unhelpful question a lot of the time. The only valid to ask in response to assertions of lore or symbolism is "can you back it up?"
It's a really solipsistic and existentialist way of thinking. Rather than considering the author's intent, you focus on your own responses to the work (since art is made to evoke responses). The only wrong interpretation is one that lacks evidence.
So to answer your question, of course not all the lore and symbolism are planned. It's hard enough to write a perfect intentional allegory; the idea that the lore and symbolism of such an open-ended game are actually completely planned is absurd. Some lore is planned of course, but other bits rise from the chaos due to obsessives and people good at pattern recognition.
But to answer the question that you didn't ask, one's experience with an accidental bit of lore or a phantom piece of symbolism does not negate the experience itself. Such things are nevertheless constructed by the consumer of the art in response to its presence. | The lore's not as planned as we pretend it is, but nobody should give a shit-- keep reading between the lines is it helps you sleep at night.
edit: Plenty of late-night spelling and grammar errors. |
Imthedaddy11 | i'm fine now, finished in mid-february, but i am good now thanks for asking, when they removed my gallbladder, they fucked up because i am slightly mutated, and my hepatic artery was wrapped around my gall bladder and i have wierd extra ducts and shit like that, but when they misplaced a clamp because of my mutantness, my bile duct ruptured and i started literally dissolving from the inside out, finally got fixed, took 4 whole months total and 4 weeks just in the hospital
TL;DR doctors fuck up, start dissolving from the inside out | i'm fine now, finished in mid-february, but i am good now thanks for asking, when they removed my gallbladder, they fucked up because i am slightly mutated, and my hepatic artery was wrapped around my gall bladder and i have wierd extra ducts and shit like that, but when they misplaced a clamp because of my mutantness, my bile duct ruptured and i started literally dissolving from the inside out, finally got fixed, took 4 whole months total and 4 weeks just in the hospital
TL;DR doctors fuck up, start dissolving from the inside out
| fatpeoplestories | t5_2vzax | cilar1j | i'm fine now, finished in mid-february, but i am good now thanks for asking, when they removed my gallbladder, they fucked up because i am slightly mutated, and my hepatic artery was wrapped around my gall bladder and i have wierd extra ducts and shit like that, but when they misplaced a clamp because of my mutantness, my bile duct ruptured and i started literally dissolving from the inside out, finally got fixed, took 4 whole months total and 4 weeks just in the hospital | doctors fuck up, start dissolving from the inside out |
HellionDez | i think gaming is still a little too young (at least in the west) to have much if any psychiatrists but maybe soon as the generation comming now is filled with gamers, i know some nurses and such that play league though, but for me personally i think its made me better, i used to be a person that thought i couldnt get anywhere in life because of other people/situations when i seriously started wanting to learn this game first thing i learned was the reason i cant win is because of myself. At first i only applied that to this game still hating my life and things that happened in it but once that concept really sunk in i realised it just didnt apply to this game but to basicly everything, nothing is completely out of your control (maybe only some genetic things.. maybe) and if theres something wrong with my life its cause im directly not actively trying to improve/change it so i feel league helped improved my mental state a great deal and my life has been going on a far better track then it had been before i played league
TL;DR I personally feel this game can be good on mental health for people who really want to learn this game cause some of the lessons learned in this game can easily translate to irl | i think gaming is still a little too young (at least in the west) to have much if any psychiatrists but maybe soon as the generation comming now is filled with gamers, i know some nurses and such that play league though, but for me personally i think its made me better, i used to be a person that thought i couldnt get anywhere in life because of other people/situations when i seriously started wanting to learn this game first thing i learned was the reason i cant win is because of myself. At first i only applied that to this game still hating my life and things that happened in it but once that concept really sunk in i realised it just didnt apply to this game but to basicly everything, nothing is completely out of your control (maybe only some genetic things.. maybe) and if theres something wrong with my life its cause im directly not actively trying to improve/change it so i feel league helped improved my mental state a great deal and my life has been going on a far better track then it had been before i played league
TL;DR I personally feel this game can be good on mental health for people who really want to learn this game cause some of the lessons learned in this game can easily translate to irl
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | ciko9fc | i think gaming is still a little too young (at least in the west) to have much if any psychiatrists but maybe soon as the generation comming now is filled with gamers, i know some nurses and such that play league though, but for me personally i think its made me better, i used to be a person that thought i couldnt get anywhere in life because of other people/situations when i seriously started wanting to learn this game first thing i learned was the reason i cant win is because of myself. At first i only applied that to this game still hating my life and things that happened in it but once that concept really sunk in i realised it just didnt apply to this game but to basicly everything, nothing is completely out of your control (maybe only some genetic things.. maybe) and if theres something wrong with my life its cause im directly not actively trying to improve/change it so i feel league helped improved my mental state a great deal and my life has been going on a far better track then it had been before i played league | I personally feel this game can be good on mental health for people who really want to learn this game cause some of the lessons learned in this game can easily translate to irl |
throwawayforsadstuff | I'm also 14 and I have to say is that my mind is really fucked up. I can't give you great advice but I can tell you that life, is really fucking difficult. Dude what I'm trying to say is, don't go looking for death, it'll come to all of us. We'll all die. That's a fact so you speeding up the process of your death isn't helping yourself. You get one chance to live from what we know so just fucking deal with all the stupid bullshit.
Here's a pro tip on how to cope with all the fucked up stuff in your head, smoke a shit ton of pot. That's what I do. It clears my head. Chills me out. Puts only one thing in my head at a time and it's usually how many pizzas I'm going to eat or how soft my cat is.
TL;DR: Life fucking sucks but you only get one go so just deal with your shit or don't. Either way, killing yourself isn't going to help anyone, including yourself. Also smoke a lot weed. | I'm also 14 and I have to say is that my mind is really fucked up. I can't give you great advice but I can tell you that life, is really fucking difficult. Dude what I'm trying to say is, don't go looking for death, it'll come to all of us. We'll all die. That's a fact so you speeding up the process of your death isn't helping yourself. You get one chance to live from what we know so just fucking deal with all the stupid bullshit.
Here's a pro tip on how to cope with all the fucked up stuff in your head, smoke a shit ton of pot. That's what I do. It clears my head. Chills me out. Puts only one thing in my head at a time and it's usually how many pizzas I'm going to eat or how soft my cat is.
TL;DR: Life fucking sucks but you only get one go so just deal with your shit or don't. Either way, killing yourself isn't going to help anyone, including yourself. Also smoke a lot weed.
| SuicideWatch | t5_2qpzs | cikqd66 | I'm also 14 and I have to say is that my mind is really fucked up. I can't give you great advice but I can tell you that life, is really fucking difficult. Dude what I'm trying to say is, don't go looking for death, it'll come to all of us. We'll all die. That's a fact so you speeding up the process of your death isn't helping yourself. You get one chance to live from what we know so just fucking deal with all the stupid bullshit.
Here's a pro tip on how to cope with all the fucked up stuff in your head, smoke a shit ton of pot. That's what I do. It clears my head. Chills me out. Puts only one thing in my head at a time and it's usually how many pizzas I'm going to eat or how soft my cat is. | Life fucking sucks but you only get one go so just deal with your shit or don't. Either way, killing yourself isn't going to help anyone, including yourself. Also smoke a lot weed. |
so_carelessly_here | El e de părere că dacă nu urăşti nişte oameni, o faci pentru că aşa e *cool* -- să nu-i urăşti. Nu ai cum să nu urăşti oamenii ăia, nu eşti *realist* dacă nu îi urăşti, înţelegi? Nu există *niciun alt motiv* pentru care un om ar putea să nu urască nişte oameni, în afară de motivul coolness-ului, al propriului egoism, să se simtă el bine cu el.
El ştie adevărul şi nu îi e frică să recunoască.
El nu e hipster politically correct, umanitate, oameni, egalitate, drepturi, bullshit din ăsta ieftin. Nu, frate, termenii ăştia sunt pentru homosexuali.
tl;dr nu cred că a citit nimic | El e de părere că dacă nu urăşti nişte oameni, o faci pentru că aşa e cool -- să nu-i urăşti. Nu ai cum să nu urăşti oamenii ăia, nu eşti realist dacă nu îi urăşti, înţelegi? Nu există niciun alt motiv pentru care un om ar putea să nu urască nişte oameni, în afară de motivul coolness-ului, al propriului egoism, să se simtă el bine cu el.
El ştie adevărul şi nu îi e frică să recunoască.
El nu e hipster politically correct, umanitate, oameni, egalitate, drepturi, bullshit din ăsta ieftin. Nu, frate, termenii ăştia sunt pentru homosexuali.
tl;dr nu cred că a citit nimic
| Romania | t5_2qm35 | cilllnc | El e de părere că dacă nu urăşti nişte oameni, o faci pentru că aşa e cool -- să nu-i urăşti. Nu ai cum să nu urăşti oamenii ăia, nu eşti realist dacă nu îi urăşti, înţelegi? Nu există niciun alt motiv pentru care un om ar putea să nu urască nişte oameni, în afară de motivul coolness-ului, al propriului egoism, să se simtă el bine cu el.
El ştie adevărul şi nu îi e frică să recunoască.
El nu e hipster politically correct, umanitate, oameni, egalitate, drepturi, bullshit din ăsta ieftin. Nu, frate, termenii ăştia sunt pentru homosexuali. | nu cred că a citit nimic |
turkeyfox | 1. Humble Bundle gifts are safe.
2. The US is in fact in the ROW region. Even if it wasn't you'd be fine though.
TL;DR no need to be so paranoid |
Humble Bundle gifts are safe.
The US is in fact in the ROW region. Even if it wasn't you'd be fine though.
TL;DR no need to be so paranoid
| SteamGameSwap | t5_2skv6 | cil6mmk | Humble Bundle gifts are safe.
The US is in fact in the ROW region. Even if it wasn't you'd be fine though. | no need to be so paranoid |
Danleyson | I live in a small town and almost nothing is done about legitimate crimes in the area. Even so, the local police set up speed traps everywhere, make arbitrary stops at a moment's notice, and write catalogs of minor tickets to be paid by an unsuspecting class of otherwise law-abiding citizens. Our roads are dangerously deteriorating and major crimes, but our men in blue always have the newest, professionally-tuned squad cars for "proactive law enforcement."
Rant time: A close acquaintance of mine used to live across the street from a deputy. She told me that she heard screaming outside her house one night and saw a woman running over to the deputy's house for help (I forget if it was robbery or sexual assault, but she was in dire need of assistance nevertheless). However, as she was crying for help and banging on the man's door, he refused to answer and gestured through the window for her to leave. Nothing was done about the crime following the event. Furthermore, one of the same houses on the block was--is--known to be a drop house, but the police force has done nothing to interfere.
I personally have witnessed the lethargic sense of justice. Earlier this year, my car was robbed in one of the area's many rough neighborhoods. There were multiple witnesses who saw the event and could identify the person and even gave his name to the officer filing the report. No results or punishment then or since.
TL;DR Police corruption and apathy is not exclusive to low-crime areas. We all deal with it on a day-to-day basis. | I live in a small town and almost nothing is done about legitimate crimes in the area. Even so, the local police set up speed traps everywhere, make arbitrary stops at a moment's notice, and write catalogs of minor tickets to be paid by an unsuspecting class of otherwise law-abiding citizens. Our roads are dangerously deteriorating and major crimes, but our men in blue always have the newest, professionally-tuned squad cars for "proactive law enforcement."
Rant time: A close acquaintance of mine used to live across the street from a deputy. She told me that she heard screaming outside her house one night and saw a woman running over to the deputy's house for help (I forget if it was robbery or sexual assault, but she was in dire need of assistance nevertheless). However, as she was crying for help and banging on the man's door, he refused to answer and gestured through the window for her to leave. Nothing was done about the crime following the event. Furthermore, one of the same houses on the block was--is--known to be a drop house, but the police force has done nothing to interfere.
I personally have witnessed the lethargic sense of justice. Earlier this year, my car was robbed in one of the area's many rough neighborhoods. There were multiple witnesses who saw the event and could identify the person and even gave his name to the officer filing the report. No results or punishment then or since.
TL;DR Police corruption and apathy is not exclusive to low-crime areas. We all deal with it on a day-to-day basis.
| AdviceAnimals | t5_2s7tt | cili8ct | I live in a small town and almost nothing is done about legitimate crimes in the area. Even so, the local police set up speed traps everywhere, make arbitrary stops at a moment's notice, and write catalogs of minor tickets to be paid by an unsuspecting class of otherwise law-abiding citizens. Our roads are dangerously deteriorating and major crimes, but our men in blue always have the newest, professionally-tuned squad cars for "proactive law enforcement."
Rant time: A close acquaintance of mine used to live across the street from a deputy. She told me that she heard screaming outside her house one night and saw a woman running over to the deputy's house for help (I forget if it was robbery or sexual assault, but she was in dire need of assistance nevertheless). However, as she was crying for help and banging on the man's door, he refused to answer and gestured through the window for her to leave. Nothing was done about the crime following the event. Furthermore, one of the same houses on the block was--is--known to be a drop house, but the police force has done nothing to interfere.
I personally have witnessed the lethargic sense of justice. Earlier this year, my car was robbed in one of the area's many rough neighborhoods. There were multiple witnesses who saw the event and could identify the person and even gave his name to the officer filing the report. No results or punishment then or since. | Police corruption and apathy is not exclusive to low-crime areas. We all deal with it on a day-to-day basis. |
Markus148 | This is just full of bullshit. As a traffic collision investigator I can assure you that speeding is most defiantly a factor in most collisions. The reason behind this is reaction distance and slide to stop ratios. The faster you go the longer you travel before your foot hits the brakes.
Signs are placed adequate distances for the *gasp* speed limit reactions!!! Who would have guessed! Part of our job is to ensure that those signs are set up so that people can adequately react as opposed to the engineers that set them up. If traffic patterns show a certain area is high on crashes we are sent to investigate why. Sometimes a patrol car is all that is needed to stop people from speeding. Less speed means better reaction distance and, you guessed it, less crashes.
Fear of apprehension outweighs the fear of the penalty in 75% of cases of people.
TL, DR? Your full of shit. Stop spewing your police state bullshit unless you actually know what you're talking about. | This is just full of bullshit. As a traffic collision investigator I can assure you that speeding is most defiantly a factor in most collisions. The reason behind this is reaction distance and slide to stop ratios. The faster you go the longer you travel before your foot hits the brakes.
Signs are placed adequate distances for the gasp speed limit reactions!!! Who would have guessed! Part of our job is to ensure that those signs are set up so that people can adequately react as opposed to the engineers that set them up. If traffic patterns show a certain area is high on crashes we are sent to investigate why. Sometimes a patrol car is all that is needed to stop people from speeding. Less speed means better reaction distance and, you guessed it, less crashes.
Fear of apprehension outweighs the fear of the penalty in 75% of cases of people.
TL, DR? Your full of shit. Stop spewing your police state bullshit unless you actually know what you're talking about.
| AdviceAnimals | t5_2s7tt | cilntzw | This is just full of bullshit. As a traffic collision investigator I can assure you that speeding is most defiantly a factor in most collisions. The reason behind this is reaction distance and slide to stop ratios. The faster you go the longer you travel before your foot hits the brakes.
Signs are placed adequate distances for the gasp speed limit reactions!!! Who would have guessed! Part of our job is to ensure that those signs are set up so that people can adequately react as opposed to the engineers that set them up. If traffic patterns show a certain area is high on crashes we are sent to investigate why. Sometimes a patrol car is all that is needed to stop people from speeding. Less speed means better reaction distance and, you guessed it, less crashes.
Fear of apprehension outweighs the fear of the penalty in 75% of cases of people. | Your full of shit. Stop spewing your police state bullshit unless you actually know what you're talking about. |
randyd93 | First off , if you're a smart shopper ( don't really have to be since there's soooo many deals out there) then you will technically not spend those $100 on the kinect. And probably get a couple free games. . ( again technically.)
Secondly, I was on the same boat. Thought I would never need the kinect ! I would boast to my friends that I was gonna get the $400 xbox one without the "stupid" kinect. .
Then I discovered Netflix with the kinect . Holy Guacamole man . The ability to pause/play/etc. is life changing, you will not be disappointed.
That being said, the kinect isn't only good for netflix. Haha. And I'm sure as time goes by there will be more kinect integration in a lot of apps and games.
TL;DR Get the damn kinect. Many deals out there . (Paid $430 for mine with forza and ghosts.) You won't be disappointed. | First off , if you're a smart shopper ( don't really have to be since there's soooo many deals out there) then you will technically not spend those $100 on the kinect. And probably get a couple free games. . ( again technically.)
Secondly, I was on the same boat. Thought I would never need the kinect ! I would boast to my friends that I was gonna get the $400 xbox one without the "stupid" kinect. .
Then I discovered Netflix with the kinect . Holy Guacamole man . The ability to pause/play/etc. is life changing, you will not be disappointed.
That being said, the kinect isn't only good for netflix. Haha. And I'm sure as time goes by there will be more kinect integration in a lot of apps and games.
TL;DR Get the damn kinect. Many deals out there . (Paid $430 for mine with forza and ghosts.) You won't be disappointed.
| xboxone | t5_2xbci | cilkgz9 | First off , if you're a smart shopper ( don't really have to be since there's soooo many deals out there) then you will technically not spend those $100 on the kinect. And probably get a couple free games. . ( again technically.)
Secondly, I was on the same boat. Thought I would never need the kinect ! I would boast to my friends that I was gonna get the $400 xbox one without the "stupid" kinect. .
Then I discovered Netflix with the kinect . Holy Guacamole man . The ability to pause/play/etc. is life changing, you will not be disappointed.
That being said, the kinect isn't only good for netflix. Haha. And I'm sure as time goes by there will be more kinect integration in a lot of apps and games. | Get the damn kinect. Many deals out there . (Paid $430 for mine with forza and ghosts.) You won't be disappointed. |
returned_from_shadow | First your source is entirely unreliable as it amounts to heavily biased Cold War propaganda. It fails to cite specific sources for the numbers stated, and does not list specific engagements or reasons for those deaths. The figures and tables linked have **no** sources for them.
>Given the extent and detail of these books, the reader may be surprised that the primary purpose was not to describe democide itself, but to determine its nature and amount in order to test the theory that democracies are inherently nonviolent.
Here, the author displays his lack of any semblance of credibility because he does not include anything about the nearly ten million people killed by the US, [see here](
Considering that your source cannot be taken seriously at this time.
Additionally, the Soviet Union under Stalin is vastly different than the Russian Federation. You can't compare the two, or attribute those deaths to any modern policies.
Deaths in China from the Great Leap forward or governmental transition are entirely irrelevant. The link you gave me doesn't differentiate and is to a book which I can't read because the whole book is not on that website, so you need to cite specific instance where China has invaded other countries, and not instances where they defended themselves and aided popular reform movements.
You don't even need proper sources, just tell me specific instances from memory and I will look them up.
TLDR: Your comment proves nothing as your source is incomplete and fucking sucks.
*I see you edited your post, I will look through what you have again.
**All your links are to the exact same content and source but just on different pages.
| First your source is entirely unreliable as it amounts to heavily biased Cold War propaganda. It fails to cite specific sources for the numbers stated, and does not list specific engagements or reasons for those deaths. The figures and tables linked have no sources for them.
>Given the extent and detail of these books, the reader may be surprised that the primary purpose was not to describe democide itself, but to determine its nature and amount in order to test the theory that democracies are inherently nonviolent.
Here, the author displays his lack of any semblance of credibility because he does not include anything about the nearly ten million people killed by the US, [see here](
Considering that your source cannot be taken seriously at this time.
Additionally, the Soviet Union under Stalin is vastly different than the Russian Federation. You can't compare the two, or attribute those deaths to any modern policies.
Deaths in China from the Great Leap forward or governmental transition are entirely irrelevant. The link you gave me doesn't differentiate and is to a book which I can't read because the whole book is not on that website, so you need to cite specific instance where China has invaded other countries, and not instances where they defended themselves and aided popular reform movements.
You don't even need proper sources, just tell me specific instances from memory and I will look them up.
TLDR: Your comment proves nothing as your source is incomplete and fucking sucks.
*I see you edited your post, I will look through what you have again.
**All your links are to the exact same content and source but just on different pages.
| worldnews | t5_2qh13 | cimatjc | First your source is entirely unreliable as it amounts to heavily biased Cold War propaganda. It fails to cite specific sources for the numbers stated, and does not list specific engagements or reasons for those deaths. The figures and tables linked have no sources for them.
>Given the extent and detail of these books, the reader may be surprised that the primary purpose was not to describe democide itself, but to determine its nature and amount in order to test the theory that democracies are inherently nonviolent.
Here, the author displays his lack of any semblance of credibility because he does not include anything about the nearly ten million people killed by the US, [see here](
Considering that your source cannot be taken seriously at this time.
Additionally, the Soviet Union under Stalin is vastly different than the Russian Federation. You can't compare the two, or attribute those deaths to any modern policies.
Deaths in China from the Great Leap forward or governmental transition are entirely irrelevant. The link you gave me doesn't differentiate and is to a book which I can't read because the whole book is not on that website, so you need to cite specific instance where China has invaded other countries, and not instances where they defended themselves and aided popular reform movements.
You don't even need proper sources, just tell me specific instances from memory and I will look them up. | Your comment proves nothing as your source is incomplete and fucking sucks.
*I see you edited your post, I will look through what you have again.
**All your links are to the exact same content and source but just on different pages. |
MaltyBeverage | My source is after the coldwar and it is an edu source. You saying it doesnt count doesnt make it so. By all means you are free to disprove it using sources, but you saying, "Your source proves me wrong so it doesnt count because I said so," doesnt work friend.
Your source doesnt count because I said so. See how stupid that sounds?
Your source doesnt even support your claim.Your source is not saying the US is responsible for those deaths. It is saying the US supported those regimes. And in most of those cases the USSR, and sometimes CHina was just as involved. So what you are doing is misrepresenting your source to make a claim it never made, nor does it support. Furthermore you are ignoring the role Russia, and sometimes, played in all of these events in your source. So in addition to 100+ million they killed they are to blame with the US in all of those instances which further proves my point.
You can say that 100 million murders is irrelevant. 99% of the world will disagree with you but taht is your opinion. You need to learn history.
My academic source is also much stronger than your source, which btw doesnt even support your argument. You just misrepresented your source.
I didnt add your numbers up but ill take your argument of 10 million. Since Russia and China have equal responsibility we can those to their kill count. So here is where we stand.
Russia: 110 million
China: 110 MILLION (although 20-30 million could be deducted before Russia helped overthrow their government)
US: 10 million (in response to Russia and China)
I rest my case.
TL;DR your comments prove nothing, your source doesnt support your argument, and your source works against you as Russia, and sometimes China, were involved in those deaths and problems of your source, along with the US, as well as the 100+ million they killed. You ignoring facts you dont like doesnt disprove them. Feel free to disprove my source until then my point is proven. | My source is after the coldwar and it is an edu source. You saying it doesnt count doesnt make it so. By all means you are free to disprove it using sources, but you saying, "Your source proves me wrong so it doesnt count because I said so," doesnt work friend.
Your source doesnt count because I said so. See how stupid that sounds?
Your source doesnt even support your claim.Your source is not saying the US is responsible for those deaths. It is saying the US supported those regimes. And in most of those cases the USSR, and sometimes CHina was just as involved. So what you are doing is misrepresenting your source to make a claim it never made, nor does it support. Furthermore you are ignoring the role Russia, and sometimes, played in all of these events in your source. So in addition to 100+ million they killed they are to blame with the US in all of those instances which further proves my point.
You can say that 100 million murders is irrelevant. 99% of the world will disagree with you but taht is your opinion. You need to learn history.
My academic source is also much stronger than your source, which btw doesnt even support your argument. You just misrepresented your source.
I didnt add your numbers up but ill take your argument of 10 million. Since Russia and China have equal responsibility we can those to their kill count. So here is where we stand.
Russia: 110 million
China: 110 MILLION (although 20-30 million could be deducted before Russia helped overthrow their government)
US: 10 million (in response to Russia and China)
I rest my case.
TL;DR your comments prove nothing, your source doesnt support your argument, and your source works against you as Russia, and sometimes China, were involved in those deaths and problems of your source, along with the US, as well as the 100+ million they killed. You ignoring facts you dont like doesnt disprove them. Feel free to disprove my source until then my point is proven.
| worldnews | t5_2qh13 | cimb22m | My source is after the coldwar and it is an edu source. You saying it doesnt count doesnt make it so. By all means you are free to disprove it using sources, but you saying, "Your source proves me wrong so it doesnt count because I said so," doesnt work friend.
Your source doesnt count because I said so. See how stupid that sounds?
Your source doesnt even support your claim.Your source is not saying the US is responsible for those deaths. It is saying the US supported those regimes. And in most of those cases the USSR, and sometimes CHina was just as involved. So what you are doing is misrepresenting your source to make a claim it never made, nor does it support. Furthermore you are ignoring the role Russia, and sometimes, played in all of these events in your source. So in addition to 100+ million they killed they are to blame with the US in all of those instances which further proves my point.
You can say that 100 million murders is irrelevant. 99% of the world will disagree with you but taht is your opinion. You need to learn history.
My academic source is also much stronger than your source, which btw doesnt even support your argument. You just misrepresented your source.
I didnt add your numbers up but ill take your argument of 10 million. Since Russia and China have equal responsibility we can those to their kill count. So here is where we stand.
Russia: 110 million
China: 110 MILLION (although 20-30 million could be deducted before Russia helped overthrow their government)
US: 10 million (in response to Russia and China)
I rest my case. | your comments prove nothing, your source doesnt support your argument, and your source works against you as Russia, and sometimes China, were involved in those deaths and problems of your source, along with the US, as well as the 100+ million they killed. You ignoring facts you dont like doesnt disprove them. Feel free to disprove my source until then my point is proven. |
buzz1089 | Stupid? Now if someone told her beforehand and she did it anyway, that's stupid. But not knowing beforehand? That's ignorance not stupidity. You can't get mad at someone for being ignorant because they don't usually have control over it. I never knew tattoo's like that were a thing in the holocaust until this thread. You calling her stupid is similar to calling me stupid. Are you saying that I'm stupid because I've never come across this before? No one ever told me about it and I can't do research on something I don't know about.
tl:dr Calling her fucking stupid because she was ignorant in a way she had no control over just shows how fucking stupid you are. | Stupid? Now if someone told her beforehand and she did it anyway, that's stupid. But not knowing beforehand? That's ignorance not stupidity. You can't get mad at someone for being ignorant because they don't usually have control over it. I never knew tattoo's like that were a thing in the holocaust until this thread. You calling her stupid is similar to calling me stupid. Are you saying that I'm stupid because I've never come across this before? No one ever told me about it and I can't do research on something I don't know about.
tl:dr Calling her fucking stupid because she was ignorant in a way she had no control over just shows how fucking stupid you are.
| AdviceAnimals | t5_2s7tt | cim28nd | Stupid? Now if someone told her beforehand and she did it anyway, that's stupid. But not knowing beforehand? That's ignorance not stupidity. You can't get mad at someone for being ignorant because they don't usually have control over it. I never knew tattoo's like that were a thing in the holocaust until this thread. You calling her stupid is similar to calling me stupid. Are you saying that I'm stupid because I've never come across this before? No one ever told me about it and I can't do research on something I don't know about. | Calling her fucking stupid because she was ignorant in a way she had no control over just shows how fucking stupid you are. |
somerandomguy1 | One of those battlefield injuries was considered by the surgeons to be mortal, due to the fact that Chamberlain refused to leave the field to seek aid for several hours, resulting in significant blood loss. On his "death bed," he was given a promotion that was considered to be, for all intents and purposes, posthumous. He survived, and despite being urged by friends and family to resign, he retook command of his unit a few months later.
At the surrender ceremony, Chamberlain ordered his men to salute the parading Confederate soldiers, a move that was very controversial at the time, but has been lauded by history as a sign of respect and reconciliation.
TL;DR Damn, I need a Joshua Chamberlain mug. | One of those battlefield injuries was considered by the surgeons to be mortal, due to the fact that Chamberlain refused to leave the field to seek aid for several hours, resulting in significant blood loss. On his "death bed," he was given a promotion that was considered to be, for all intents and purposes, posthumous. He survived, and despite being urged by friends and family to resign, he retook command of his unit a few months later.
At the surrender ceremony, Chamberlain ordered his men to salute the parading Confederate soldiers, a move that was very controversial at the time, but has been lauded by history as a sign of respect and reconciliation.
TL;DR Damn, I need a Joshua Chamberlain mug.
| food | t5_2qh55 | cilzu88 | One of those battlefield injuries was considered by the surgeons to be mortal, due to the fact that Chamberlain refused to leave the field to seek aid for several hours, resulting in significant blood loss. On his "death bed," he was given a promotion that was considered to be, for all intents and purposes, posthumous. He survived, and despite being urged by friends and family to resign, he retook command of his unit a few months later.
At the surrender ceremony, Chamberlain ordered his men to salute the parading Confederate soldiers, a move that was very controversial at the time, but has been lauded by history as a sign of respect and reconciliation. | Damn, I need a Joshua Chamberlain mug. |
m404 | huh ?
how is paying 5 USD (the approx. monthly fee) to get an "inexpensive 15 USD game" possibly considered _not getting much out of_ ?
it's not like you get Don't Starve, and don't get anything else the month afterwards … the fact you personally don't like the selection of games is a completely different story, but one of taste, and not one of value …
tl;dr:
Q - "What am I missing?"
A - The fact that taste is individual, and your appearently is not compatible with the majority. | huh ?
how is paying 5 USD (the approx. monthly fee) to get an "inexpensive 15 USD game" possibly considered not getting much out of ?
it's not like you get Don't Starve, and don't get anything else the month afterwards … the fact you personally don't like the selection of games is a completely different story, but one of taste, and not one of value …
tl;dr:
Q - "What am I missing?"
A - The fact that taste is individual, and your appearently is not compatible with the majority.
| PS4 | t5_2rrlp | cimlbst | huh ?
how is paying 5 USD (the approx. monthly fee) to get an "inexpensive 15 USD game" possibly considered not getting much out of ?
it's not like you get Don't Starve, and don't get anything else the month afterwards … the fact you personally don't like the selection of games is a completely different story, but one of taste, and not one of value … | Q - "What am I missing?"
A - The fact that taste is individual, and your appearently is not compatible with the majority. |
Cluedd | I've had my SP3 for a few weeks now and started using it for my class notes (summer classes woo) and it's amazing. Palm rejection is spot on and once you play around with settings on OneNote, taking notes is quick and easy. I have never used Evernote though, so I cannot comment on the difference.
I'm a Business and Math major - so it's great to have my notes all in one place. I type up my Business notes and sometimes annotate PDFs or Powerpoints that I've imported. For my math I have everything nicely written out, OneNote has a lot of presets you can use.
I'm really happy with mine, this is a game changer for my class notes. Speaking as a student, it's very much worth it.
TL;DR: best way to take notes for a student that needs to handwrite notes | I've had my SP3 for a few weeks now and started using it for my class notes (summer classes woo) and it's amazing. Palm rejection is spot on and once you play around with settings on OneNote, taking notes is quick and easy. I have never used Evernote though, so I cannot comment on the difference.
I'm a Business and Math major - so it's great to have my notes all in one place. I type up my Business notes and sometimes annotate PDFs or Powerpoints that I've imported. For my math I have everything nicely written out, OneNote has a lot of presets you can use.
I'm really happy with mine, this is a game changer for my class notes. Speaking as a student, it's very much worth it.
TL;DR: best way to take notes for a student that needs to handwrite notes
| Surface | t5_2u5h1 | ciqcdc8 | I've had my SP3 for a few weeks now and started using it for my class notes (summer classes woo) and it's amazing. Palm rejection is spot on and once you play around with settings on OneNote, taking notes is quick and easy. I have never used Evernote though, so I cannot comment on the difference.
I'm a Business and Math major - so it's great to have my notes all in one place. I type up my Business notes and sometimes annotate PDFs or Powerpoints that I've imported. For my math I have everything nicely written out, OneNote has a lot of presets you can use.
I'm really happy with mine, this is a game changer for my class notes. Speaking as a student, it's very much worth it. | best way to take notes for a student that needs to handwrite notes |
Sceptile90 | I was ten at the time. A bully named Jack tormented me day after day. One day, I brought In a spoon for my yoghurt and skinned the motherfucker alive. I threw his now skinless body against a wall and beat him with the spoon. (In case you're wondering, it was a teaspoon.) I hit him until he eventually bled to death. I tossed his body to his house where the mother would find her dead son. I walked home casually, ignoring the fact that my coat was covered in blood. I made my way home and thought about who my next victim would be... I don't regret this decision at all.
TL:DR: Bully bullies me, I skin him alive with a teaspoon and beat him to death, throw his now skinless body at his front door and walk home happily. | I was ten at the time. A bully named Jack tormented me day after day. One day, I brought In a spoon for my yoghurt and skinned the motherfucker alive. I threw his now skinless body against a wall and beat him with the spoon. (In case you're wondering, it was a teaspoon.) I hit him until he eventually bled to death. I tossed his body to his house where the mother would find her dead son. I walked home casually, ignoring the fact that my coat was covered in blood. I made my way home and thought about who my next victim would be... I don't regret this decision at all.
TL:DR: Bully bullies me, I skin him alive with a teaspoon and beat him to death, throw his now skinless body at his front door and walk home happily.
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | cim28mq | I was ten at the time. A bully named Jack tormented me day after day. One day, I brought In a spoon for my yoghurt and skinned the motherfucker alive. I threw his now skinless body against a wall and beat him with the spoon. (In case you're wondering, it was a teaspoon.) I hit him until he eventually bled to death. I tossed his body to his house where the mother would find her dead son. I walked home casually, ignoring the fact that my coat was covered in blood. I made my way home and thought about who my next victim would be... I don't regret this decision at all. | Bully bullies me, I skin him alive with a teaspoon and beat him to death, throw his now skinless body at his front door and walk home happily. |
abishekjamez | I still feel bad about this.
There was this one kid in my neighbor hood. Let say his name is Timmy. Timmy was a bully. He was 2 years older than me and 5 years older than my brother. He would would beat up both me and my brother. But we would put up with him. Then one week he took it to another level. Me , my brother and our other friend were in the park. We were playing with our Pokemon cards when Timmy and his friend come and takes our cards and starts ripping them apart. We try to fight them, but they were just stronger. I was enraged. My little brother started crying. They were laughing while this 7 yr-old (my little brother) is sobbing. This made my blood boil. Later we went to tell on him to his Mom, but she wouldn't believe us. I still hate her to this day . I guess it was hard for her, being a single mom and all. She was like" That's not how I raised Timmy, he is a good boy". Like we were rotten kids for telling on him. So later that night, at dinner I told my parents about it. My Dad told me , his mom was crazy. He had gone to her before , and try to talk to her about Timmy's behavior , but she wouldn't believe him or any other parent, since a couple of parents had complained. So my uncle had joined us that day for dinner and he asks my dad " Are you talking about the adopted kid?". My mom gets mad at my uncle and tells us not to mention it in front of Timmy, regardless of how mad we were. I went home and me and my brother started making jokes about Timmy being adopted. But I told him, never to say it to Timmy. I loved my parents, so I assumed, it would be pretty bad to make jokes about adoption.
The next day, me and my brother were at the park. We were kicking the ball around when Timmy comes and starts taunting us. He goes " does the little baby miss his Pokemon cards" to my little brother. Timmy is a little chubby,so i go " get lost fatty". This pisses Timmy off, he pushes me to the ground and starts kicking me. My little brother tries to help me out, so Timmy slaps him , on the side of the head. My little brother is crying. So i get really pissed and punch him on the stomach. He clutches his stomach , and now his mom comes and shouts at us. I am not sure how much she saw , but she tell us to stop picking on Timmy. He is taller and fatter than us, but she still thinks he is the victim. So while she pulls him away, he get a cheap shot in. I try to retaliate, but she pushes me away. That when I said the one of the worst things I ever said:
"Bitch , you can have your ugly bastard child. I hope he dies , you ugly bitch. There is a a reason why you have no husband, because of your ugly and fat. Plus your son is a piece of shit. I hope you have a refund coupon at the adoption shop, because they gave you something made of shit." Then I look at Timmy " That's right Timmy, you were adopted. Your mad of shit because , you came out of your mom's butthole. But since you were shit , you parent's didn't want you. So they gave you away. That's also the reason you parent's got divorced. Because your Dad doesn't like shit."
After finishing it , me and my brother ran , while Timmy asked his Mom if he was adopted and if that's why his Dad left. I still feel bad about saying it. It was pretty shitty of my. His Mom later called that night sobbing and told on me. My dad whopped me that night, but also explained to me the power of words. He explained to me how hurtful what I said was. That made me feel worse than the whopping. He also told me to apologize to Timmy. Timmy was not the same after that either. He got a lot more mellow after that and eventually just looked sad. Eventually they left our neighborhood
TL;DR: Older kid rips our pokemon card and whoops my little brother. Told him he was adopted(he did'nt know) and the reason why his Dad left him mom | I still feel bad about this.
There was this one kid in my neighbor hood. Let say his name is Timmy. Timmy was a bully. He was 2 years older than me and 5 years older than my brother. He would would beat up both me and my brother. But we would put up with him. Then one week he took it to another level. Me , my brother and our other friend were in the park. We were playing with our Pokemon cards when Timmy and his friend come and takes our cards and starts ripping them apart. We try to fight them, but they were just stronger. I was enraged. My little brother started crying. They were laughing while this 7 yr-old (my little brother) is sobbing. This made my blood boil. Later we went to tell on him to his Mom, but she wouldn't believe us. I still hate her to this day . I guess it was hard for her, being a single mom and all. She was like" That's not how I raised Timmy, he is a good boy". Like we were rotten kids for telling on him. So later that night, at dinner I told my parents about it. My Dad told me , his mom was crazy. He had gone to her before , and try to talk to her about Timmy's behavior , but she wouldn't believe him or any other parent, since a couple of parents had complained. So my uncle had joined us that day for dinner and he asks my dad " Are you talking about the adopted kid?". My mom gets mad at my uncle and tells us not to mention it in front of Timmy, regardless of how mad we were. I went home and me and my brother started making jokes about Timmy being adopted. But I told him, never to say it to Timmy. I loved my parents, so I assumed, it would be pretty bad to make jokes about adoption.
The next day, me and my brother were at the park. We were kicking the ball around when Timmy comes and starts taunting us. He goes " does the little baby miss his Pokemon cards" to my little brother. Timmy is a little chubby,so i go " get lost fatty". This pisses Timmy off, he pushes me to the ground and starts kicking me. My little brother tries to help me out, so Timmy slaps him , on the side of the head. My little brother is crying. So i get really pissed and punch him on the stomach. He clutches his stomach , and now his mom comes and shouts at us. I am not sure how much she saw , but she tell us to stop picking on Timmy. He is taller and fatter than us, but she still thinks he is the victim. So while she pulls him away, he get a cheap shot in. I try to retaliate, but she pushes me away. That when I said the one of the worst things I ever said:
"Bitch , you can have your ugly bastard child. I hope he dies , you ugly bitch. There is a a reason why you have no husband, because of your ugly and fat. Plus your son is a piece of shit. I hope you have a refund coupon at the adoption shop, because they gave you something made of shit." Then I look at Timmy " That's right Timmy, you were adopted. Your mad of shit because , you came out of your mom's butthole. But since you were shit , you parent's didn't want you. So they gave you away. That's also the reason you parent's got divorced. Because your Dad doesn't like shit."
After finishing it , me and my brother ran , while Timmy asked his Mom if he was adopted and if that's why his Dad left. I still feel bad about saying it. It was pretty shitty of my. His Mom later called that night sobbing and told on me. My dad whopped me that night, but also explained to me the power of words. He explained to me how hurtful what I said was. That made me feel worse than the whopping. He also told me to apologize to Timmy. Timmy was not the same after that either. He got a lot more mellow after that and eventually just looked sad. Eventually they left our neighborhood
TL;DR: Older kid rips our pokemon card and whoops my little brother. Told him he was adopted(he did'nt know) and the reason why his Dad left him mom
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | cim0kn5 | I still feel bad about this.
There was this one kid in my neighbor hood. Let say his name is Timmy. Timmy was a bully. He was 2 years older than me and 5 years older than my brother. He would would beat up both me and my brother. But we would put up with him. Then one week he took it to another level. Me , my brother and our other friend were in the park. We were playing with our Pokemon cards when Timmy and his friend come and takes our cards and starts ripping them apart. We try to fight them, but they were just stronger. I was enraged. My little brother started crying. They were laughing while this 7 yr-old (my little brother) is sobbing. This made my blood boil. Later we went to tell on him to his Mom, but she wouldn't believe us. I still hate her to this day . I guess it was hard for her, being a single mom and all. She was like" That's not how I raised Timmy, he is a good boy". Like we were rotten kids for telling on him. So later that night, at dinner I told my parents about it. My Dad told me , his mom was crazy. He had gone to her before , and try to talk to her about Timmy's behavior , but she wouldn't believe him or any other parent, since a couple of parents had complained. So my uncle had joined us that day for dinner and he asks my dad " Are you talking about the adopted kid?". My mom gets mad at my uncle and tells us not to mention it in front of Timmy, regardless of how mad we were. I went home and me and my brother started making jokes about Timmy being adopted. But I told him, never to say it to Timmy. I loved my parents, so I assumed, it would be pretty bad to make jokes about adoption.
The next day, me and my brother were at the park. We were kicking the ball around when Timmy comes and starts taunting us. He goes " does the little baby miss his Pokemon cards" to my little brother. Timmy is a little chubby,so i go " get lost fatty". This pisses Timmy off, he pushes me to the ground and starts kicking me. My little brother tries to help me out, so Timmy slaps him , on the side of the head. My little brother is crying. So i get really pissed and punch him on the stomach. He clutches his stomach , and now his mom comes and shouts at us. I am not sure how much she saw , but she tell us to stop picking on Timmy. He is taller and fatter than us, but she still thinks he is the victim. So while she pulls him away, he get a cheap shot in. I try to retaliate, but she pushes me away. That when I said the one of the worst things I ever said:
"Bitch , you can have your ugly bastard child. I hope he dies , you ugly bitch. There is a a reason why you have no husband, because of your ugly and fat. Plus your son is a piece of shit. I hope you have a refund coupon at the adoption shop, because they gave you something made of shit." Then I look at Timmy " That's right Timmy, you were adopted. Your mad of shit because , you came out of your mom's butthole. But since you were shit , you parent's didn't want you. So they gave you away. That's also the reason you parent's got divorced. Because your Dad doesn't like shit."
After finishing it , me and my brother ran , while Timmy asked his Mom if he was adopted and if that's why his Dad left. I still feel bad about saying it. It was pretty shitty of my. His Mom later called that night sobbing and told on me. My dad whopped me that night, but also explained to me the power of words. He explained to me how hurtful what I said was. That made me feel worse than the whopping. He also told me to apologize to Timmy. Timmy was not the same after that either. He got a lot more mellow after that and eventually just looked sad. Eventually they left our neighborhood | Older kid rips our pokemon card and whoops my little brother. Told him he was adopted(he did'nt know) and the reason why his Dad left him mom |
childfreewedding1 | Stuck around long enough to watch them defeat themselves. Snarly faced, frizzy haired, mean little girl. We'll call her Angelica. Angelica was always teasing me for being poor, and fat, and stole my crayons and told other kids to not play with a loser. She gave the creative nickname "Ms. Piggy". We went through our entire adolescence in the same school district. So while she got pimply, loose, and was a D student, I slimmed out, made new friends, and got As. I think the best part was when she blew some guy at our high school, and poked her eye so bad she had to wear an eye patch. This got her the nickname "goggles". Even today, when talking to old classmates I say "Oh you remember Angelica?" and they reply "who??? OH! You mean goggles?"
TL;DR - Childhood bully called me miss piggy. Her adult nickname is now goggles | Stuck around long enough to watch them defeat themselves. Snarly faced, frizzy haired, mean little girl. We'll call her Angelica. Angelica was always teasing me for being poor, and fat, and stole my crayons and told other kids to not play with a loser. She gave the creative nickname "Ms. Piggy". We went through our entire adolescence in the same school district. So while she got pimply, loose, and was a D student, I slimmed out, made new friends, and got As. I think the best part was when she blew some guy at our high school, and poked her eye so bad she had to wear an eye patch. This got her the nickname "goggles". Even today, when talking to old classmates I say "Oh you remember Angelica?" and they reply "who??? OH! You mean goggles?"
TL;DR - Childhood bully called me miss piggy. Her adult nickname is now goggles
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | cim1t64 | Stuck around long enough to watch them defeat themselves. Snarly faced, frizzy haired, mean little girl. We'll call her Angelica. Angelica was always teasing me for being poor, and fat, and stole my crayons and told other kids to not play with a loser. She gave the creative nickname "Ms. Piggy". We went through our entire adolescence in the same school district. So while she got pimply, loose, and was a D student, I slimmed out, made new friends, and got As. I think the best part was when she blew some guy at our high school, and poked her eye so bad she had to wear an eye patch. This got her the nickname "goggles". Even today, when talking to old classmates I say "Oh you remember Angelica?" and they reply "who??? OH! You mean goggles?" | Childhood bully called me miss piggy. Her adult nickname is now goggles |
PizzaPlanetCool | Honestly, Houston. If you added LeBron to that roster, he could probably floor general his way into a 4peat. It's a pretty young team, and LeBron would probably organize or demand SOME sort of defensive scheme. Not sure how McHale would fare.
tldr: LeBron/harden/Howard+ Houston bench > LeBron/wade/bosh+ Miami bench | Honestly, Houston. If you added LeBron to that roster, he could probably floor general his way into a 4peat. It's a pretty young team, and LeBron would probably organize or demand SOME sort of defensive scheme. Not sure how McHale would fare.
tldr: LeBron/harden/Howard+ Houston bench > LeBron/wade/bosh+ Miami bench
| nba | t5_2qo4s | cim83dj | Honestly, Houston. If you added LeBron to that roster, he could probably floor general his way into a 4peat. It's a pretty young team, and LeBron would probably organize or demand SOME sort of defensive scheme. Not sure how McHale would fare. | LeBron/harden/Howard+ Houston bench > LeBron/wade/bosh+ Miami bench |
diepud | Commenter are correct that you cannot assign this debt without permission from the holder of the debt.
It was then suggested that the corporation take out a business loan and pay off the debt. Ignoring the criminal implications, which are plentiful, the likely result in a bankruptcy would be an adversary proceeding (mini case within the bankruptcy case) filed against you seeking to have the business loan declared to be your debt and nondischargeable. Since the corp was formed to pay your debts and not for business purposes, the law can ignore it's separate legal existence (called alter ego theory) and treat it as you. Since you had no intention of paying the debt, it would fall within an exception to the discharge of your debts (11 usc s 523 for the curious).
TLDR: you will have swapped one nondischargeable debt for another, plus 5 to 10k in attorney fees.
Source: I am a bankruptcy attorney. | Commenter are correct that you cannot assign this debt without permission from the holder of the debt.
It was then suggested that the corporation take out a business loan and pay off the debt. Ignoring the criminal implications, which are plentiful, the likely result in a bankruptcy would be an adversary proceeding (mini case within the bankruptcy case) filed against you seeking to have the business loan declared to be your debt and nondischargeable. Since the corp was formed to pay your debts and not for business purposes, the law can ignore it's separate legal existence (called alter ego theory) and treat it as you. Since you had no intention of paying the debt, it would fall within an exception to the discharge of your debts (11 usc s 523 for the curious).
TLDR: you will have swapped one nondischargeable debt for another, plus 5 to 10k in attorney fees.
Source: I am a bankruptcy attorney.
| explainlikeimfive | t5_2sokd | cime1e0 | Commenter are correct that you cannot assign this debt without permission from the holder of the debt.
It was then suggested that the corporation take out a business loan and pay off the debt. Ignoring the criminal implications, which are plentiful, the likely result in a bankruptcy would be an adversary proceeding (mini case within the bankruptcy case) filed against you seeking to have the business loan declared to be your debt and nondischargeable. Since the corp was formed to pay your debts and not for business purposes, the law can ignore it's separate legal existence (called alter ego theory) and treat it as you. Since you had no intention of paying the debt, it would fall within an exception to the discharge of your debts (11 usc s 523 for the curious). | you will have swapped one nondischargeable debt for another, plus 5 to 10k in attorney fees.
Source: I am a bankruptcy attorney. |
teckreddit | The people who investigate and prosecute these kinds of things are very smart and are not so easily fooled. You'll also find that judges and juries, especially in the post-Madoff climate, are highly unlikely to let you slip through a loophole, even if one did exist.
TL;DR - no. You'd be liable for the debt plus fines for wasting the legal system's time, plus the plaintiff's legal fees, plus your legal fees if you hired a lawyer.
| The people who investigate and prosecute these kinds of things are very smart and are not so easily fooled. You'll also find that judges and juries, especially in the post-Madoff climate, are highly unlikely to let you slip through a loophole, even if one did exist.
TL;DR - no. You'd be liable for the debt plus fines for wasting the legal system's time, plus the plaintiff's legal fees, plus your legal fees if you hired a lawyer.
| explainlikeimfive | t5_2sokd | cimjz5e | The people who investigate and prosecute these kinds of things are very smart and are not so easily fooled. You'll also find that judges and juries, especially in the post-Madoff climate, are highly unlikely to let you slip through a loophole, even if one did exist. | no. You'd be liable for the debt plus fines for wasting the legal system's time, plus the plaintiff's legal fees, plus your legal fees if you hired a lawyer. |
desdelgadillo | Only been a fan for about a year. My sister was going through an "All things British" phase and she watched Doctor Who and forced me to watch it with her. She's moved on and I have been hooked ever since. I've watched the reboot through twice now, and have watched the first four seasons (the classic episodes). Doctor Who just has elements of everything that I like: history, time travel, space travel, moral conflict, and, usually, great storytelling.
I can't wait for Capaldi's hopefully more sinister take on the Doctor, which would be an interesting departure from the mostly fun-loving Tennant and Smith doctors.
TL;DR: Been watching for about a year and watched reboot twice and first 4 classic seasons. Can't wait for a darker version of the Doctor. | Only been a fan for about a year. My sister was going through an "All things British" phase and she watched Doctor Who and forced me to watch it with her. She's moved on and I have been hooked ever since. I've watched the reboot through twice now, and have watched the first four seasons (the classic episodes). Doctor Who just has elements of everything that I like: history, time travel, space travel, moral conflict, and, usually, great storytelling.
I can't wait for Capaldi's hopefully more sinister take on the Doctor, which would be an interesting departure from the mostly fun-loving Tennant and Smith doctors.
TL;DR: Been watching for about a year and watched reboot twice and first 4 classic seasons. Can't wait for a darker version of the Doctor.
| doctorwho | t5_2qhek | cindlw6 | Only been a fan for about a year. My sister was going through an "All things British" phase and she watched Doctor Who and forced me to watch it with her. She's moved on and I have been hooked ever since. I've watched the reboot through twice now, and have watched the first four seasons (the classic episodes). Doctor Who just has elements of everything that I like: history, time travel, space travel, moral conflict, and, usually, great storytelling.
I can't wait for Capaldi's hopefully more sinister take on the Doctor, which would be an interesting departure from the mostly fun-loving Tennant and Smith doctors. | Been watching for about a year and watched reboot twice and first 4 classic seasons. Can't wait for a darker version of the Doctor. |
notsocreative3001 | It's quite funny you mention both Beasley & Yedlin.
Beasley is a vet & played for PSV Eindhoven as a left winger, I was really fond of him back in those days.
Somewhat a month before the start of the world cup I was talking with an American friend of mine & I mentioned the name Yedlin who I came across on youtube randomly browsing videos. I told my friend about that Yedlin compilation. He's physically a beast, great offensive runs, what's your view on his defensive end? TL;DR: So yes, I had heard of both of them.
| It's quite funny you mention both Beasley & Yedlin.
Beasley is a vet & played for PSV Eindhoven as a left winger, I was really fond of him back in those days.
Somewhat a month before the start of the world cup I was talking with an American friend of mine & I mentioned the name Yedlin who I came across on youtube randomly browsing videos. I told my friend about that Yedlin compilation. He's physically a beast, great offensive runs, what's your view on his defensive end? TL;DR: So yes, I had heard of both of them.
| worldcup | t5_2rdrs | cimtrun | It's quite funny you mention both Beasley & Yedlin.
Beasley is a vet & played for PSV Eindhoven as a left winger, I was really fond of him back in those days.
Somewhat a month before the start of the world cup I was talking with an American friend of mine & I mentioned the name Yedlin who I came across on youtube randomly browsing videos. I told my friend about that Yedlin compilation. He's physically a beast, great offensive runs, what's your view on his defensive end? | So yes, I had heard of both of them. |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.