Datasets:

webis

/

tldr-17

like 39

xachariah

I don't want to be mean to the guy but I totally agree. First hit I get for 'unity what is a gameobject' is It actually has a boldeded header that says... >**What are GameObjects?** >Every object in your game is a GameObject. However, GameObjects... Then it gives an description of it. Within the first 5 hits for 'unity local world camera space' is a unity3d answers page that 100% explains each of the three. I assume all the other answers are heavily documented as well as having write up pages and additional answer pages. tldr; Google.

I don't want to be mean to the guy but I totally agree. First hit I get for 'unity what is a gameobject' is It actually has a boldeded header that says... > What are GameObjects? >Every object in your game is a GameObject. However, GameObjects... Then it gives an description of it. Within the first 5 hits for 'unity local world camera space' is a unity3d answers page that 100% explains each of the three. I assume all the other answers are heavily documented as well as having write up pages and additional answer pages. tldr; Google.

gamedev

t5_2qi0a

cg979c4

I don't want to be mean to the guy but I totally agree. First hit I get for 'unity what is a gameobject' is It actually has a boldeded header that says... > What are GameObjects? >Every object in your game is a GameObject. However, GameObjects... Then it gives an description of it. Within the first 5 hits for 'unity local world camera space' is a unity3d answers page that 100% explains each of the three. I assume all the other answers are heavily documented as well as having write up pages and additional answer pages.

Google.

bigkuhr

You didn't pay $40 for it, did you?! That is a CE4 style ecig. See in the tank out the wicks lead to the top? That's where your coil is at. It's very close to the mouth piece. I had the same experience a year and a half ago when I first started vaping. Once I moved to an ego style I never had the hot vape issue again. That's a good starter that you have, mine lasted a few months before I moved up to something that suited me better. Tl;dr: it's the tank

You didn't pay $40 for it, did you?! That is a CE4 style ecig. See in the tank out the wicks lead to the top? That's where your coil is at. It's very close to the mouth piece. I had the same experience a year and a half ago when I first started vaping. Once I moved to an ego style I never had the hot vape issue again. That's a good starter that you have, mine lasted a few months before I moved up to something that suited me better. Tl;dr: it's the tank

electronic_cigarette

t5_2qmlu

cg9aef1

You didn't pay $40 for it, did you?! That is a CE4 style ecig. See in the tank out the wicks lead to the top? That's where your coil is at. It's very close to the mouth piece. I had the same experience a year and a half ago when I first started vaping. Once I moved to an ego style I never had the hot vape issue again. That's a good starter that you have, mine lasted a few months before I moved up to something that suited me better.

it's the tank

bassdee

I'm not sure if his case has the options for one, but a friend of mine is missing his bottom jaw since he had cancer in grade 3. He's had a bunch of surgeries but complications and infections happen and they've had to remove it before. If I wasn't on my phone I would link his blog where he writes about it along with his day to day life TL; DR titanium jaws exist, but they might not always work out

I'm not sure if his case has the options for one, but a friend of mine is missing his bottom jaw since he had cancer in grade 3. He's had a bunch of surgeries but complications and infections happen and they've had to remove it before. If I wasn't on my phone I would link his blog where he writes about it along with his day to day life TL; DR titanium jaws exist, but they might not always work out

WTF

t5_2qh61

cg9nawu

I'm not sure if his case has the options for one, but a friend of mine is missing his bottom jaw since he had cancer in grade 3. He's had a bunch of surgeries but complications and infections happen and they've had to remove it before. If I wasn't on my phone I would link his blog where he writes about it along with his day to day life

titanium jaws exist, but they might not always work out

skreereer

It's not necessary or logical anymore, but it's still a tradition that shows you're respectful of parents. It's also nice to know you have her parents' support in your decision. And a lot of women have traditional values and would appreciate that gesture as well. I'm sure he would still propose without the blessing, but it's more meaningful with their support. TL;DR: we have a lot of weird traditions that are outdated. This is one of them. It's just a nice thing to do.

It's not necessary or logical anymore, but it's still a tradition that shows you're respectful of parents. It's also nice to know you have her parents' support in your decision. And a lot of women have traditional values and would appreciate that gesture as well. I'm sure he would still propose without the blessing, but it's more meaningful with their support. TL;DR: we have a lot of weird traditions that are outdated. This is one of them. It's just a nice thing to do.

AdviceAnimals

t5_2s7tt

cg9jra1

It's not necessary or logical anymore, but it's still a tradition that shows you're respectful of parents. It's also nice to know you have her parents' support in your decision. And a lot of women have traditional values and would appreciate that gesture as well. I'm sure he would still propose without the blessing, but it's more meaningful with their support.

we have a lot of weird traditions that are outdated. This is one of them. It's just a nice thing to do.

adeadhead

Well now. Not my last birthday, but the bithday before that? I had no water. For 3 days. We were sea kayaking off the coast of chile, and there were no meltwater streams. Incredible storm. We flip. I break one of my two cameras. This is unfortunate. Waves are too large to land safety, so we have a crash course in surf landings(no actual crashing happened). It is the day before my 20th birthday. Our camp site is a little strip of beach on the inside of a jutting cliff of rock, all fist sized pebbles. Setting up tents and tarps is more difficult than usual. Now heres me. I love the outdoors. I'm always positive. "Pain is mandatory, suffering is option". I'm also a big fan of being active. I'm a computer science major, so i spend lots of time motionless, but when I'm active, I'm active. I feel most alive when I'm active, doing things my body isn't used to. Our camp site's water source is a pool, fed by a pretty active stream/waterfall. That night, three of us decide to take a night hike up the waterfall. This was the bit which was the best moment of my life. This waterfall was everything you could ever want from a real life video game. Untouched wilderness, there were levels to beat. You were jumping, running, balancing, hanging, climbing up, around, over. A living jungle gym, with glacial meltwater flowing everywhere. When it got too crowded to move, you climbed up to the next story, the dense rainforest provided enough support to have an almost mario-like second floor that you could cautiously walk on. There were no obstacles that got in our way. We climbed and we moved, as we had learned to do in such incredibly difficult terrain. We eventually found an obstacle that stopped us. On both sides, sheer rock faces. In front of us, a deep pool of water. We sat there for a while. Had drinks. Then i stood up. I jumped forward, grabbed a branch of a tree in the middle, propelled myself up to the next ledge. The others with me didn't wish to come, so I took some pictures and videos, and came back down. In that moment, everything was just amazing. We climbed down, went to sleep on uneven rocks, and carried on for my birthday paddle. TL:DR; OP does dangerous things and thinks that a rainforest is a jungle-gym. Enjoys it.

Well now. Not my last birthday, but the bithday before that? I had no water. For 3 days. We were sea kayaking off the coast of chile, and there were no meltwater streams. Incredible storm. We flip. I break one of my two cameras. This is unfortunate. Waves are too large to land safety, so we have a crash course in surf landings(no actual crashing happened). It is the day before my 20th birthday. Our camp site is a little strip of beach on the inside of a jutting cliff of rock, all fist sized pebbles. Setting up tents and tarps is more difficult than usual. Now heres me. I love the outdoors. I'm always positive. "Pain is mandatory, suffering is option". I'm also a big fan of being active. I'm a computer science major, so i spend lots of time motionless, but when I'm active, I'm active. I feel most alive when I'm active, doing things my body isn't used to. Our camp site's water source is a pool, fed by a pretty active stream/waterfall. That night, three of us decide to take a night hike up the waterfall. This was the bit which was the best moment of my life. This waterfall was everything you could ever want from a real life video game. Untouched wilderness, there were levels to beat. You were jumping, running, balancing, hanging, climbing up, around, over. A living jungle gym, with glacial meltwater flowing everywhere. When it got too crowded to move, you climbed up to the next story, the dense rainforest provided enough support to have an almost mario-like second floor that you could cautiously walk on. There were no obstacles that got in our way. We climbed and we moved, as we had learned to do in such incredibly difficult terrain. We eventually found an obstacle that stopped us. On both sides, sheer rock faces. In front of us, a deep pool of water. We sat there for a while. Had drinks. Then i stood up. I jumped forward, grabbed a branch of a tree in the middle, propelled myself up to the next ledge. The others with me didn't wish to come, so I took some pictures and videos, and came back down. In that moment, everything was just amazing. We climbed down, went to sleep on uneven rocks, and carried on for my birthday paddle. TL:DR; OP does dangerous things and thinks that a rainforest is a jungle-gym. Enjoys it.

Random_Acts_Of_Amazon

t5_2tx47

cg9kh3q

Well now. Not my last birthday, but the bithday before that? I had no water. For 3 days. We were sea kayaking off the coast of chile, and there were no meltwater streams. Incredible storm. We flip. I break one of my two cameras. This is unfortunate. Waves are too large to land safety, so we have a crash course in surf landings(no actual crashing happened). It is the day before my 20th birthday. Our camp site is a little strip of beach on the inside of a jutting cliff of rock, all fist sized pebbles. Setting up tents and tarps is more difficult than usual. Now heres me. I love the outdoors. I'm always positive. "Pain is mandatory, suffering is option". I'm also a big fan of being active. I'm a computer science major, so i spend lots of time motionless, but when I'm active, I'm active. I feel most alive when I'm active, doing things my body isn't used to. Our camp site's water source is a pool, fed by a pretty active stream/waterfall. That night, three of us decide to take a night hike up the waterfall. This was the bit which was the best moment of my life. This waterfall was everything you could ever want from a real life video game. Untouched wilderness, there were levels to beat. You were jumping, running, balancing, hanging, climbing up, around, over. A living jungle gym, with glacial meltwater flowing everywhere. When it got too crowded to move, you climbed up to the next story, the dense rainforest provided enough support to have an almost mario-like second floor that you could cautiously walk on. There were no obstacles that got in our way. We climbed and we moved, as we had learned to do in such incredibly difficult terrain. We eventually found an obstacle that stopped us. On both sides, sheer rock faces. In front of us, a deep pool of water. We sat there for a while. Had drinks. Then i stood up. I jumped forward, grabbed a branch of a tree in the middle, propelled myself up to the next ledge. The others with me didn't wish to come, so I took some pictures and videos, and came back down. In that moment, everything was just amazing. We climbed down, went to sleep on uneven rocks, and carried on for my birthday paddle.

OP does dangerous things and thinks that a rainforest is a jungle-gym. Enjoys it.

feelingfroggy123

What? Yes Men and Women are the same. My ownership of a vagina doesn't mean that I'm a slut if I do you on the first date while you are the man for doing the same. It's bullshit like that that prevents equality for everyone Men and women. We are either on the same playing field or we are not. One gender is not better than the other. TLDR: If I sleep with 10 guys and you sleep with 10 girls we are the SAME and anyone that says otherwise is a damn hypocrite. Period.

What? Yes Men and Women are the same. My ownership of a vagina doesn't mean that I'm a slut if I do you on the first date while you are the man for doing the same. It's bullshit like that that prevents equality for everyone Men and women. We are either on the same playing field or we are not. One gender is not better than the other. TLDR: If I sleep with 10 guys and you sleep with 10 girls we are the SAME and anyone that says otherwise is a damn hypocrite. Period.

AskMen

t5_2s30g

cg9z4z8

What? Yes Men and Women are the same. My ownership of a vagina doesn't mean that I'm a slut if I do you on the first date while you are the man for doing the same. It's bullshit like that that prevents equality for everyone Men and women. We are either on the same playing field or we are not. One gender is not better than the other.

If I sleep with 10 guys and you sleep with 10 girls we are the SAME and anyone that says otherwise is a damn hypocrite. Period.

dvallej

short answer: yes Long answer: yessssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss TL;DR: yep

short answer: yes Long answer: yessssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss TL;DR: yep

AskMen

t5_2s30g

cg9u9st

short answer: yes Long answer: yessssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss

yep

Aevum1

Mediatek is the Chinese Soc manufacturer of the moment, Like rockchip or allwinner before them. But major manufactuerers tend to avoid their devices becuase of bad kernel development, legal issues and troublesome implementation, A snapdragon 800 costs 49 US dollars, a Mediatek 6592 (their flagship chip) is 20 dollars, so it makes you think it might be worth it, but consider the total cost of the device 30 bucks isnt much, especialy considering that the mediatek delivers around 75% of the performance overall and that number goes down to 50% when it comes to Video decoding and 3D, No LTE and not forgetting the problems Mediateks source code policy could bring them while trying to paddle their products in a country with proper IP legislation. Now some manufacturers like Sony and LG have adpoted Mediatek chipsets for lower end devices or chinese market devices, and we have manufacturers like Wiko, BQ and Blu which bring Mediatek devices, but they are slowly finding out that when you actually try to implement those products in a market where you are held to diferent standards the price might not be as low, The chinese phones that made Mediatek devices famous we usualy built in non compliance with western work regulation, without paying proper IP licenses major manufacturers are forced to pay, and reciving chinese export subcidies and in many cases shipped so they would avoid european or US customs. So if you actually tried to sell your Jiayu or Zopo made Mediatek phone in a europan or US market, After having it EC and FCC certified, Paying all the equipment and software licenses, provide proper documentation in the local language, support, warranty, Import and sales taxes... would it still be cheaper then an equivalent from a major manufacturer ? TL;DR : Mediateks fame is due to horribly built cheap chinese cellphones which would cost the same or only be marignaly cheaper if actually built to US or EU specs, and the money saved would hardly excuse the drop in quality, performance and poor software support.

Mediatek is the Chinese Soc manufacturer of the moment, Like rockchip or allwinner before them. But major manufactuerers tend to avoid their devices becuase of bad kernel development, legal issues and troublesome implementation, A snapdragon 800 costs 49 US dollars, a Mediatek 6592 (their flagship chip) is 20 dollars, so it makes you think it might be worth it, but consider the total cost of the device 30 bucks isnt much, especialy considering that the mediatek delivers around 75% of the performance overall and that number goes down to 50% when it comes to Video decoding and 3D, No LTE and not forgetting the problems Mediateks source code policy could bring them while trying to paddle their products in a country with proper IP legislation. Now some manufacturers like Sony and LG have adpoted Mediatek chipsets for lower end devices or chinese market devices, and we have manufacturers like Wiko, BQ and Blu which bring Mediatek devices, but they are slowly finding out that when you actually try to implement those products in a market where you are held to diferent standards the price might not be as low, The chinese phones that made Mediatek devices famous we usualy built in non compliance with western work regulation, without paying proper IP licenses major manufacturers are forced to pay, and reciving chinese export subcidies and in many cases shipped so they would avoid european or US customs. So if you actually tried to sell your Jiayu or Zopo made Mediatek phone in a europan or US market, After having it EC and FCC certified, Paying all the equipment and software licenses, provide proper documentation in the local language, support, warranty, Import and sales taxes... would it still be cheaper then an equivalent from a major manufacturer ? TL;DR : Mediateks fame is due to horribly built cheap chinese cellphones which would cost the same or only be marignaly cheaper if actually built to US or EU specs, and the money saved would hardly excuse the drop in quality, performance and poor software support.

Android

t5_2qlqh

cg9voic

Mediatek is the Chinese Soc manufacturer of the moment, Like rockchip or allwinner before them. But major manufactuerers tend to avoid their devices becuase of bad kernel development, legal issues and troublesome implementation, A snapdragon 800 costs 49 US dollars, a Mediatek 6592 (their flagship chip) is 20 dollars, so it makes you think it might be worth it, but consider the total cost of the device 30 bucks isnt much, especialy considering that the mediatek delivers around 75% of the performance overall and that number goes down to 50% when it comes to Video decoding and 3D, No LTE and not forgetting the problems Mediateks source code policy could bring them while trying to paddle their products in a country with proper IP legislation. Now some manufacturers like Sony and LG have adpoted Mediatek chipsets for lower end devices or chinese market devices, and we have manufacturers like Wiko, BQ and Blu which bring Mediatek devices, but they are slowly finding out that when you actually try to implement those products in a market where you are held to diferent standards the price might not be as low, The chinese phones that made Mediatek devices famous we usualy built in non compliance with western work regulation, without paying proper IP licenses major manufacturers are forced to pay, and reciving chinese export subcidies and in many cases shipped so they would avoid european or US customs. So if you actually tried to sell your Jiayu or Zopo made Mediatek phone in a europan or US market, After having it EC and FCC certified, Paying all the equipment and software licenses, provide proper documentation in the local language, support, warranty, Import and sales taxes... would it still be cheaper then an equivalent from a major manufacturer ?

Mediateks fame is due to horribly built cheap chinese cellphones which would cost the same or only be marignaly cheaper if actually built to US or EU specs, and the money saved would hardly excuse the drop in quality, performance and poor software support.

Moosje

You guys really do impress me sometimes. I mean the hating on Buttner a few days ago was just annoying. The Buttner hate when people saw he'd been selected for West Ham was confusing (do you really think you know more than the coaching staff?) but the Buttner hate after he's proved he can competently play in the hardest league in the world is just... there are no words. TL;DR There's surely a reason why we're not using Vermijl and sticking with Buttner, and it's maybe the fact that the people choosing the team watch them almost daily.

You guys really do impress me sometimes. I mean the hating on Buttner a few days ago was just annoying. The Buttner hate when people saw he'd been selected for West Ham was confusing (do you really think you know more than the coaching staff?) but the Buttner hate after he's proved he can competently play in the hardest league in the world is just... there are no words. TL;DR There's surely a reason why we're not using Vermijl and sticking with Buttner, and it's maybe the fact that the people choosing the team watch them almost daily.

reddevils

t5_2rxse

cg9todg

You guys really do impress me sometimes. I mean the hating on Buttner a few days ago was just annoying. The Buttner hate when people saw he'd been selected for West Ham was confusing (do you really think you know more than the coaching staff?) but the Buttner hate after he's proved he can competently play in the hardest league in the world is just... there are no words.

There's surely a reason why we're not using Vermijl and sticking with Buttner, and it's maybe the fact that the people choosing the team watch them almost daily.

kittyfaces

Hannah's choice to tell Adam about grad school on his big opening night should not be a shock to anyone. It (her behavior) was foreshadowed in the episode where Hannah's grandma is about to die, and I think a lot of people missed that.. or maybe it was too subtle? The scene where Hannah and her cousin are in the hospital and the three sisters pitch a bitch fest is indicative of Hannah's narcissism overall, but especially in the finale. Her mom and one of the aunts were seemingly competing in who is the bigger victim, meanwhile grandma is dying and their kids are all fucked up from a car crash. With all of that in mind, it's hard for me to say if Hannah purposely told Adam about grad school to make things about her, or if she was just reacting in a way that has always been normal in her family. Either way, it was a stupid call to make on her part but that's just Hannah. ------------- **TL;DR Hannah in the finale should not be a surprise to anyone, as the apple does not fall far from the family tree.**

Hannah's choice to tell Adam about grad school on his big opening night should not be a shock to anyone. It (her behavior) was foreshadowed in the episode where Hannah's grandma is about to die, and I think a lot of people missed that.. or maybe it was too subtle? The scene where Hannah and her cousin are in the hospital and the three sisters pitch a bitch fest is indicative of Hannah's narcissism overall, but especially in the finale. Her mom and one of the aunts were seemingly competing in who is the bigger victim, meanwhile grandma is dying and their kids are all fucked up from a car crash. With all of that in mind, it's hard for me to say if Hannah purposely told Adam about grad school to make things about her, or if she was just reacting in a way that has always been normal in her family. Either way, it was a stupid call to make on her part but that's just Hannah. TL;DR Hannah in the finale should not be a surprise to anyone, as the apple does not fall far from the family tree.

girls

t5_2qj0h

cgagfp0

Hannah's choice to tell Adam about grad school on his big opening night should not be a shock to anyone. It (her behavior) was foreshadowed in the episode where Hannah's grandma is about to die, and I think a lot of people missed that.. or maybe it was too subtle? The scene where Hannah and her cousin are in the hospital and the three sisters pitch a bitch fest is indicative of Hannah's narcissism overall, but especially in the finale. Her mom and one of the aunts were seemingly competing in who is the bigger victim, meanwhile grandma is dying and their kids are all fucked up from a car crash. With all of that in mind, it's hard for me to say if Hannah purposely told Adam about grad school to make things about her, or if she was just reacting in a way that has always been normal in her family. Either way, it was a stupid call to make on her part but that's just Hannah.

Hannah in the finale should not be a surprise to anyone, as the apple does not fall far from the family tree.

Crazee108

Exactly. As a social worker -- I find that the way the therapist made judgement calls like, >that he would probably never be happy unless he chooses a very passive woman who will do what he says and not challenge him. >Therapist: "Well are you prepared to change?" Him: "No" Therapist: "Well are you prepared to be alone?" Him: "Well..... (contemplative silence) ... Well, I guess" was so uncalled for! I think they should not have used the word CHANGE, if he is quite black/white rigid in his demeanor. And people always hear the "you shouldn't change for anyone" -- so of course he'll say no. Should have asked something like, if he is willing to try something different, or to re-adjust in order to find a better "fit" with his partner. Honestly OP, please don't take this therapist's view as gospel... it's only ONE perspective and one way to approach you relationship. The therapist pretty much said to your SO, "You need to change or you will be forever alone because no one - unless they were completely passive - will be able to deal with you". WTF kind of message is that to send to someone? They should have tried to work on his "rigidity" and finding different techniques/skills that could work for you both. TLDR: Bad therapist, get a consult with another.

Exactly. As a social worker -- I find that the way the therapist made judgement calls like, >that he would probably never be happy unless he chooses a very passive woman who will do what he says and not challenge him. >Therapist: "Well are you prepared to change?" Him: "No" Therapist: "Well are you prepared to be alone?" Him: "Well..... (contemplative silence) ... Well, I guess" was so uncalled for! I think they should not have used the word CHANGE, if he is quite black/white rigid in his demeanor. And people always hear the "you shouldn't change for anyone" -- so of course he'll say no. Should have asked something like, if he is willing to try something different, or to re-adjust in order to find a better "fit" with his partner. Honestly OP, please don't take this therapist's view as gospel... it's only ONE perspective and one way to approach you relationship. The therapist pretty much said to your SO, "You need to change or you will be forever alone because no one - unless they were completely passive - will be able to deal with you". WTF kind of message is that to send to someone? They should have tried to work on his "rigidity" and finding different techniques/skills that could work for you both. TLDR: Bad therapist, get a consult with another.

relationships

t5_2qjvn

cgahxre

Exactly. As a social worker -- I find that the way the therapist made judgement calls like, >that he would probably never be happy unless he chooses a very passive woman who will do what he says and not challenge him. >Therapist: "Well are you prepared to change?" Him: "No" Therapist: "Well are you prepared to be alone?" Him: "Well..... (contemplative silence) ... Well, I guess" was so uncalled for! I think they should not have used the word CHANGE, if he is quite black/white rigid in his demeanor. And people always hear the "you shouldn't change for anyone" -- so of course he'll say no. Should have asked something like, if he is willing to try something different, or to re-adjust in order to find a better "fit" with his partner. Honestly OP, please don't take this therapist's view as gospel... it's only ONE perspective and one way to approach you relationship. The therapist pretty much said to your SO, "You need to change or you will be forever alone because no one - unless they were completely passive - will be able to deal with you". WTF kind of message is that to send to someone? They should have tried to work on his "rigidity" and finding different techniques/skills that could work for you both.

Bad therapist, get a consult with another.

Made_you_read_penis

I agree completely on both hands. Both are possible. I'd also like to point out that the therapist might not be right... Years ago my then fiance and I went to couples therapy over a lack of sex due to stress. The therapist started seeing her privately as well once she revealed that she had some MAJOR issues with her parents that needed navigating unrelated to me. In those sessions the therapist straight out advised her to break up with me rather than talking about her controlling parents. I wasn't there, but I had been with this woman for eight years (she had been putting off marriage for fear of her parents) and lived with her. I *know* when she's stretching the truth, and she was not. She trusted him so much that she called after an appointment and told me that we needed time apart as he instructed. I said okay calmly, because I was in shock. I decided to be a man about it and make it peaceful. An hour into the conversation we agreed that a break meant broken up, but re evaluating the situation later. I made it clear I was going to casually date. She flipped out and said she wasn't cool with that, and I asked what she expected to happen in a separation. I had been waiting to get married for five years already. That's when it all came out. She suddenly told me why this was happening. The doc would praise our relationship while I was in the room, then make the whole private sessions about why we needed to break up *now*. He was a devout born again, and I an atheist that believes in just being a good person. She immediately withdrew her break up, but I said that we needed to think about the whole thing because I didn't know what to do now. We hung up with no promises. She then went and finally confronted her issues with her parents *on her own* and told them that we wanted to get married and how it all got shot to shit just a moment before arriving. They told her to call, tell me that they loved me (unlike them), and to go home and fix it. She and I finally talked in person, hugged, cried, and quit that piece of shit therapist. That night we had sex for the first time in a year. We are now married, and will be celebrating 16 years as a couple in June. We have sex three times a week minimum and *she* complains that we don't have enough. If you love each other find a different therapist. There's a pretty big chance you found a rotten one. Oh, and since that day her parents stopped manipulating and controlling her. It's like they aren't even the same people. I mean, they *never* did it again. They even paid for our wedding and didn't demand a thing. TL;DR: my wife was manipulated by a therapist, and within an hour of snapping out of it she pulled an all time badass move and fixed all of her relationships in one day. Permanently. Edit: sorry this was so long. I'm awake because my dog had a seizure. I'm just passing time.

I agree completely on both hands. Both are possible. I'd also like to point out that the therapist might not be right... Years ago my then fiance and I went to couples therapy over a lack of sex due to stress. The therapist started seeing her privately as well once she revealed that she had some MAJOR issues with her parents that needed navigating unrelated to me. In those sessions the therapist straight out advised her to break up with me rather than talking about her controlling parents. I wasn't there, but I had been with this woman for eight years (she had been putting off marriage for fear of her parents) and lived with her. I know when she's stretching the truth, and she was not. She trusted him so much that she called after an appointment and told me that we needed time apart as he instructed. I said okay calmly, because I was in shock. I decided to be a man about it and make it peaceful. An hour into the conversation we agreed that a break meant broken up, but re evaluating the situation later. I made it clear I was going to casually date. She flipped out and said she wasn't cool with that, and I asked what she expected to happen in a separation. I had been waiting to get married for five years already. That's when it all came out. She suddenly told me why this was happening. The doc would praise our relationship while I was in the room, then make the whole private sessions about why we needed to break up now . He was a devout born again, and I an atheist that believes in just being a good person. She immediately withdrew her break up, but I said that we needed to think about the whole thing because I didn't know what to do now. We hung up with no promises. She then went and finally confronted her issues with her parents on her own and told them that we wanted to get married and how it all got shot to shit just a moment before arriving. They told her to call, tell me that they loved me (unlike them), and to go home and fix it. She and I finally talked in person, hugged, cried, and quit that piece of shit therapist. That night we had sex for the first time in a year. We are now married, and will be celebrating 16 years as a couple in June. We have sex three times a week minimum and she complains that we don't have enough. If you love each other find a different therapist. There's a pretty big chance you found a rotten one. Oh, and since that day her parents stopped manipulating and controlling her. It's like they aren't even the same people. I mean, they never did it again. They even paid for our wedding and didn't demand a thing. TL;DR: my wife was manipulated by a therapist, and within an hour of snapping out of it she pulled an all time badass move and fixed all of her relationships in one day. Permanently. Edit: sorry this was so long. I'm awake because my dog had a seizure. I'm just passing time.

relationships

t5_2qjvn

cgajtpe

I agree completely on both hands. Both are possible. I'd also like to point out that the therapist might not be right... Years ago my then fiance and I went to couples therapy over a lack of sex due to stress. The therapist started seeing her privately as well once she revealed that she had some MAJOR issues with her parents that needed navigating unrelated to me. In those sessions the therapist straight out advised her to break up with me rather than talking about her controlling parents. I wasn't there, but I had been with this woman for eight years (she had been putting off marriage for fear of her parents) and lived with her. I know when she's stretching the truth, and she was not. She trusted him so much that she called after an appointment and told me that we needed time apart as he instructed. I said okay calmly, because I was in shock. I decided to be a man about it and make it peaceful. An hour into the conversation we agreed that a break meant broken up, but re evaluating the situation later. I made it clear I was going to casually date. She flipped out and said she wasn't cool with that, and I asked what she expected to happen in a separation. I had been waiting to get married for five years already. That's when it all came out. She suddenly told me why this was happening. The doc would praise our relationship while I was in the room, then make the whole private sessions about why we needed to break up now . He was a devout born again, and I an atheist that believes in just being a good person. She immediately withdrew her break up, but I said that we needed to think about the whole thing because I didn't know what to do now. We hung up with no promises. She then went and finally confronted her issues with her parents on her own and told them that we wanted to get married and how it all got shot to shit just a moment before arriving. They told her to call, tell me that they loved me (unlike them), and to go home and fix it. She and I finally talked in person, hugged, cried, and quit that piece of shit therapist. That night we had sex for the first time in a year. We are now married, and will be celebrating 16 years as a couple in June. We have sex three times a week minimum and she complains that we don't have enough. If you love each other find a different therapist. There's a pretty big chance you found a rotten one. Oh, and since that day her parents stopped manipulating and controlling her. It's like they aren't even the same people. I mean, they never did it again. They even paid for our wedding and didn't demand a thing.

my wife was manipulated by a therapist, and within an hour of snapping out of it she pulled an all time badass move and fixed all of her relationships in one day. Permanently. Edit: sorry this was so long. I'm awake because my dog had a seizure. I'm just passing time.

Landohh

Currently, I am the only one of my friends with the PS4. I waited for 9 hours in line on release day to buy it. At first, the lineup was pretty meh. Most of the titles were last gen just prettier, and Killzone was fun, but not something I'd expected from all the hype. I will say though, I do play all of the games I bought from launch pretty consistently (NFS, KZ, BF4, Knack, ACIV, Resogun). People used to argue that there were no games. There were, but not quality "next gen games". Fast forward to now. I am amazed by how quickly the library is growing for the system. Not only indie games (Strider, Don't Starve, Super Motherload, Awesomenauts (all of which are quality titles)), but this past week saw the release of 2 big studio games with MGS: GZ and Infamous. Metal Gear is simply amazing. Seeing the beauty of the 60fps Fox engine at work truly blew my mind. The open world stealth is a great concept that will blossom immensely with the release of The Phantom Pain. And inFamous (your title in question) is gorgeous. The character models are top notch. Lighting is exact and realistic. Combat is addictive and the story is intriguing. I played it every second I could this weekend. It's a great game. TLDR; I wouldn't buy a PS4 just for inFamous, but I'd buy one for the full library of games AS WELL AS what's the come. The console is growing fast and the PS4 is easily now and henceforth my go-to system.

Currently, I am the only one of my friends with the PS4. I waited for 9 hours in line on release day to buy it. At first, the lineup was pretty meh. Most of the titles were last gen just prettier, and Killzone was fun, but not something I'd expected from all the hype. I will say though, I do play all of the games I bought from launch pretty consistently (NFS, KZ, BF4, Knack, ACIV, Resogun). People used to argue that there were no games. There were, but not quality "next gen games". Fast forward to now. I am amazed by how quickly the library is growing for the system. Not only indie games (Strider, Don't Starve, Super Motherload, Awesomenauts (all of which are quality titles)), but this past week saw the release of 2 big studio games with MGS: GZ and Infamous. Metal Gear is simply amazing. Seeing the beauty of the 60fps Fox engine at work truly blew my mind. The open world stealth is a great concept that will blossom immensely with the release of The Phantom Pain. And inFamous (your title in question) is gorgeous. The character models are top notch. Lighting is exact and realistic. Combat is addictive and the story is intriguing. I played it every second I could this weekend. It's a great game. TLDR; I wouldn't buy a PS4 just for inFamous, but I'd buy one for the full library of games AS WELL AS what's the come. The console is growing fast and the PS4 is easily now and henceforth my go-to system.

PS4

t5_2rrlp

cgaj1jq

Currently, I am the only one of my friends with the PS4. I waited for 9 hours in line on release day to buy it. At first, the lineup was pretty meh. Most of the titles were last gen just prettier, and Killzone was fun, but not something I'd expected from all the hype. I will say though, I do play all of the games I bought from launch pretty consistently (NFS, KZ, BF4, Knack, ACIV, Resogun). People used to argue that there were no games. There were, but not quality "next gen games". Fast forward to now. I am amazed by how quickly the library is growing for the system. Not only indie games (Strider, Don't Starve, Super Motherload, Awesomenauts (all of which are quality titles)), but this past week saw the release of 2 big studio games with MGS: GZ and Infamous. Metal Gear is simply amazing. Seeing the beauty of the 60fps Fox engine at work truly blew my mind. The open world stealth is a great concept that will blossom immensely with the release of The Phantom Pain. And inFamous (your title in question) is gorgeous. The character models are top notch. Lighting is exact and realistic. Combat is addictive and the story is intriguing. I played it every second I could this weekend. It's a great game.

I wouldn't buy a PS4 just for inFamous, but I'd buy one for the full library of games AS WELL AS what's the come. The console is growing fast and the PS4 is easily now and henceforth my go-to system.

thelastdeskontheleft

You know I had mostly just heard that from word of mouth and it seems like it would make sense. Your body HAS to have some kind of limit. So since I'm bored at work I decided to investigate. WebMD (I know not a real source) bases [this]( off of the FDA recommendation for an average person daily intake. 70 grams looking on the higher end. But that's not for athletes. So looking for something more specific to absorption I found [this]( article that links to [this study]( The study basically found that protein DOES help increase muscle building (duh) but the benefits increased until the 30 gram limit. At this point they just stopped. The article actually says they tested up to 90 grams and there was no difference between the 30 and the 90... Now that's just one meal. There are body builders that specifically design diets that are up to [300-350 grams of protein a day]( That is kind of ridiculous! But hey they are the outliers. For a professional body builder I would imagine they would want to stay at that maximum constantly. Even then... would there really be a big difference between 200 grams and 300 grams? Or 300 and 350? Probably more of that would be how well spread out it was. For the average gym bro you aren't going to want to spend that kind of money. Protein averages about 1$ per serving (usually 20-30 grams) so that's 10 servings or 10$ a day... or 300$ a month just in protein powder! That's not reasonable or practical for most people. Looks like the 30 gram per sitting is a solid point to base it on. However I couldn't find anything comparing a similar limit for total day intake. TL;DR : Brotein farts limit you to 30 grams for a single sitting.

You know I had mostly just heard that from word of mouth and it seems like it would make sense. Your body HAS to have some kind of limit. So since I'm bored at work I decided to investigate. WebMD (I know not a real source) bases [this]( off of the FDA recommendation for an average person daily intake. 70 grams looking on the higher end. But that's not for athletes. So looking for something more specific to absorption I found [this]( article that links to [this study]( The study basically found that protein DOES help increase muscle building (duh) but the benefits increased until the 30 gram limit. At this point they just stopped. The article actually says they tested up to 90 grams and there was no difference between the 30 and the 90... Now that's just one meal. There are body builders that specifically design diets that are up to [300-350 grams of protein a day]( That is kind of ridiculous! But hey they are the outliers. For a professional body builder I would imagine they would want to stay at that maximum constantly. Even then... would there really be a big difference between 200 grams and 300 grams? Or 300 and 350? Probably more of that would be how well spread out it was. For the average gym bro you aren't going to want to spend that kind of money. Protein averages about 1$ per serving (usually 20-30 grams) so that's 10 servings or 10$ a day... or 300$ a month just in protein powder! That's not reasonable or practical for most people. Looks like the 30 gram per sitting is a solid point to base it on. However I couldn't find anything comparing a similar limit for total day intake. TL;DR : Brotein farts limit you to 30 grams for a single sitting.

Fitness

t5_2qhx4

cgbhdf0

You know I had mostly just heard that from word of mouth and it seems like it would make sense. Your body HAS to have some kind of limit. So since I'm bored at work I decided to investigate. WebMD (I know not a real source) bases [this]( off of the FDA recommendation for an average person daily intake. 70 grams looking on the higher end. But that's not for athletes. So looking for something more specific to absorption I found [this]( article that links to [this study]( The study basically found that protein DOES help increase muscle building (duh) but the benefits increased until the 30 gram limit. At this point they just stopped. The article actually says they tested up to 90 grams and there was no difference between the 30 and the 90... Now that's just one meal. There are body builders that specifically design diets that are up to [300-350 grams of protein a day]( That is kind of ridiculous! But hey they are the outliers. For a professional body builder I would imagine they would want to stay at that maximum constantly. Even then... would there really be a big difference between 200 grams and 300 grams? Or 300 and 350? Probably more of that would be how well spread out it was. For the average gym bro you aren't going to want to spend that kind of money. Protein averages about 1$ per serving (usually 20-30 grams) so that's 10 servings or 10$ a day... or 300$ a month just in protein powder! That's not reasonable or practical for most people. Looks like the 30 gram per sitting is a solid point to base it on. However I couldn't find anything comparing a similar limit for total day intake.

Brotein farts limit you to 30 grams for a single sitting.

laktoastandtolerance

You had a legit reason for preferring the power rack, so no reason for you to move. In the future, I would offer him to rotate in (albeit, more difficult here, but possible). If you were there first and offered to rotate, that's about as much as you can do. tl;dr Hagrid

You had a legit reason for preferring the power rack, so no reason for you to move. In the future, I would offer him to rotate in (albeit, more difficult here, but possible). If you were there first and offered to rotate, that's about as much as you can do. tl;dr Hagrid

Fitness

t5_2qhx4

cgamfok

You had a legit reason for preferring the power rack, so no reason for you to move. In the future, I would offer him to rotate in (albeit, more difficult here, but possible). If you were there first and offered to rotate, that's about as much as you can do.

Hagrid

criosist

I find that when calculating it using the 30% protein way and my TDEE is was at about a 700 deficit so found I could up the numbers a little, it obviously differs person to person but my TDEE is 2700ish and my daily intake if I eat perfect every day is 1900 (but I suck at being strict) which gives me a good headway for a bad snack. So TL;DR not really if your trying to lose some fat I would definitely stick with this as it works out but with bulking I expect you would be more 45/25/30 as you would need the calories.

I find that when calculating it using the 30% protein way and my TDEE is was at about a 700 deficit so found I could up the numbers a little, it obviously differs person to person but my TDEE is 2700ish and my daily intake if I eat perfect every day is 1900 (but I suck at being strict) which gives me a good headway for a bad snack. So TL;DR not really if your trying to lose some fat I would definitely stick with this as it works out but with bulking I expect you would be more 45/25/30 as you would need the calories.

Fitness

t5_2qhx4

cgakqns

I find that when calculating it using the 30% protein way and my TDEE is was at about a 700 deficit so found I could up the numbers a little, it obviously differs person to person but my TDEE is 2700ish and my daily intake if I eat perfect every day is 1900 (but I suck at being strict) which gives me a good headway for a bad snack. So

not really if your trying to lose some fat I would definitely stick with this as it works out but with bulking I expect you would be more 45/25/30 as you would need the calories.

TheDrunkenChud

>You seem like an angry dude who was upset that not everyone was unanimous in crowning Cabrera MVP for the past 2 season. not at all. if your reading comprehension were up to snuff,you'd see that i state that trout is a great player. i'll go one further, i think he's probably the best player in the league right now. but when MVP talks come up and people start talking trout, it's amazing how they work themselves into a fervor. yes, he's great, but his team hasn't been able to finish a season in 4 years, and he's been there for what? 2 seasons now? you just don't get to be MVP on a mediocre team unless you did something amazing, like go 28-0 as a pitcher for the astros. but the trouters will have none of it. he's the lord and savior, and the MVP of the world. the guy's awesome. yes. but not league MVP status. yet. tl;dr: i don't hate trout. i think he's amazing. i don't care if miggy wins MVP or if Saltalamachia does. trout's cult like followers are the ones who annoy me.

>You seem like an angry dude who was upset that not everyone was unanimous in crowning Cabrera MVP for the past 2 season. not at all. if your reading comprehension were up to snuff,you'd see that i state that trout is a great player. i'll go one further, i think he's probably the best player in the league right now. but when MVP talks come up and people start talking trout, it's amazing how they work themselves into a fervor. yes, he's great, but his team hasn't been able to finish a season in 4 years, and he's been there for what? 2 seasons now? you just don't get to be MVP on a mediocre team unless you did something amazing, like go 28-0 as a pitcher for the astros. but the trouters will have none of it. he's the lord and savior, and the MVP of the world. the guy's awesome. yes. but not league MVP status. yet. tl;dr: i don't hate trout. i think he's amazing. i don't care if miggy wins MVP or if Saltalamachia does. trout's cult like followers are the ones who annoy me.

baseball

t5_2qm7u

cgarh3k

You seem like an angry dude who was upset that not everyone was unanimous in crowning Cabrera MVP for the past 2 season. not at all. if your reading comprehension were up to snuff,you'd see that i state that trout is a great player. i'll go one further, i think he's probably the best player in the league right now. but when MVP talks come up and people start talking trout, it's amazing how they work themselves into a fervor. yes, he's great, but his team hasn't been able to finish a season in 4 years, and he's been there for what? 2 seasons now? you just don't get to be MVP on a mediocre team unless you did something amazing, like go 28-0 as a pitcher for the astros. but the trouters will have none of it. he's the lord and savior, and the MVP of the world. the guy's awesome. yes. but not league MVP status. yet.

i don't hate trout. i think he's amazing. i don't care if miggy wins MVP or if Saltalamachia does. trout's cult like followers are the ones who annoy me.

snackburros

You're making 3 assumptions that, evidently, a fair amount of people think are inherently wrong. a) That the MVP award can only be given to someone on a winning team. This is debatable but your worldview is certainly not the only valid one and his MVP credentials should not be discounted merely because you personally don't agree with them. b) That anyone who supports Trout for MVP is in some mindless cult situation. Plenty of people support Trout for MVP on the quality of his playing alone and not on the quality of the team around him. Again, which viewpoint you want to undertake is up to you, but merely because people support a different viewpoint doesn't mean that they're in a cult and is wrong, nor are their rationale inherently invalid merely because you don't agree with them. c) Music is inherently subjective and there are no statistical measurements that shows how "good" or "bad" music is, so any argument would only exist on the plane of "well, I like it" or "well, I didn't", in its variations. Baseball runs on statistics and that's a perfectly valid way of analyzing whether a player is good or not. Merely because you don't like it doesn't mean that anyone needs to shut up. tl:dr just because you don't like it doesn't mean you're right and everyone else is wrong and just because people don't support your viewpoint doesn't mean that their viewpoint has no merit and all are cultist trying to suck someone's dick. chill out, have a burrito.

You're making 3 assumptions that, evidently, a fair amount of people think are inherently wrong. a) That the MVP award can only be given to someone on a winning team. This is debatable but your worldview is certainly not the only valid one and his MVP credentials should not be discounted merely because you personally don't agree with them. b) That anyone who supports Trout for MVP is in some mindless cult situation. Plenty of people support Trout for MVP on the quality of his playing alone and not on the quality of the team around him. Again, which viewpoint you want to undertake is up to you, but merely because people support a different viewpoint doesn't mean that they're in a cult and is wrong, nor are their rationale inherently invalid merely because you don't agree with them. c) Music is inherently subjective and there are no statistical measurements that shows how "good" or "bad" music is, so any argument would only exist on the plane of "well, I like it" or "well, I didn't", in its variations. Baseball runs on statistics and that's a perfectly valid way of analyzing whether a player is good or not. Merely because you don't like it doesn't mean that anyone needs to shut up. tl:dr just because you don't like it doesn't mean you're right and everyone else is wrong and just because people don't support your viewpoint doesn't mean that their viewpoint has no merit and all are cultist trying to suck someone's dick. chill out, have a burrito.

baseball

t5_2qm7u

cgavo7u

You're making 3 assumptions that, evidently, a fair amount of people think are inherently wrong. a) That the MVP award can only be given to someone on a winning team. This is debatable but your worldview is certainly not the only valid one and his MVP credentials should not be discounted merely because you personally don't agree with them. b) That anyone who supports Trout for MVP is in some mindless cult situation. Plenty of people support Trout for MVP on the quality of his playing alone and not on the quality of the team around him. Again, which viewpoint you want to undertake is up to you, but merely because people support a different viewpoint doesn't mean that they're in a cult and is wrong, nor are their rationale inherently invalid merely because you don't agree with them. c) Music is inherently subjective and there are no statistical measurements that shows how "good" or "bad" music is, so any argument would only exist on the plane of "well, I like it" or "well, I didn't", in its variations. Baseball runs on statistics and that's a perfectly valid way of analyzing whether a player is good or not. Merely because you don't like it doesn't mean that anyone needs to shut up.

just because you don't like it doesn't mean you're right and everyone else is wrong and just because people don't support your viewpoint doesn't mean that their viewpoint has no merit and all are cultist trying to suck someone's dick. chill out, have a burrito.

EGOtyst

This is a terribly written article with an inflammatory, spurious headline. This article does little or nothing to explain the actual cases. It only gets on a soapbox regarding Corporate Personhood. The arguments put forth in this thread are inane drivel, also. The Civil Rights Amendment has no bearing on this case, because the companies aren't barring anything from their customers, as in the cases Woolworth's was so famously crucified for. These cases are about the companies being forced to include specific medical care in the health benefits package the Affordable Health Care Act (a law who's constitutionality is questionable in the first place) is forcing them to offer their ***employees***. Additionally, the bias and malice this piece is written with is just a bad example of journalism. So many instances of chiding, childish writing, that is obviously inflammatory and non-constructive. This seems to be one of the first cases that the Supreme Court is going to try that really calls the Affordable Care Act's constitutionality into question, in addition to bringing a new angle on the corporate personhood debate. It is an interesting and rich topic to debate, with great cases on both sides of the argument. However, it is overshadowed by shitty journalism that whips people who can't read/critically think up into a frenzy on both sides of the fence: the "How dare my rights get discriminated against by corporations?!" crowd and, funnily enough, the "How dare my rights get trampled on by the government?!" crowd. Articles like these, and the ignorant, one-sided comments below, are the reason we keep electing shitty people who make shitty laws. The populous is easily baited into these ridiculous discussions, and only care about these easily digestible headlines that they can immediately agree or disagree with. This headline has about as much to do with the story as **Government Law discriminate you and religion!** and everyone in here lost there shit. This is exactly why our congressmen and senators speak on TV in soundbites, add pork-bellies to laws that no one ever reads if the name has Patriot or Civil Rights in the title, and basically debate with each other while waving their heads and snapping back and forth. They *speak down* to America because people eat this shit like McDonald's, loving every minute of it, while they jerk each other off and point at everyone else who is wrong. We get spoon-fed this shit because we profess to like it, with our Facebook thumbs-ups and constant bickering. If you think for a second that the people who are in the House aren't shrewd enough to realize, and take advantage, of this, you are delusional (which is why you love and comment on this article). I implore you, read this article and try to not get incensed one way or the other. You will realize that the article is drivel. IT DOESN'T EVEN FRAME OUT IT'S OWN HEADLINE! Just analyzing the headline, businesses are only turning You away if you are trying to get a job there. And they aren't even turning You away unless you are getting a job. And they aren't even turning you away, they are just not wanting to pay for your healthcare. And it isn't even the healthcare, just contraceptives. And it isn't just contraceptives, just 4 out of 26 required by the Affordable Care act. If you really want to have an opinion on this case, that doesn't sound like dumb-ass, [read this article in the Washington Post.]( It offers a much more unbiased look at the actual issues being heard. It might even make you go "Hmm", something, honestly, that almost ANY case presented before the Supreme Court should do (you know, since they have made it past all of the other courts to get there, and been argued out and judged on, most of the time in different ways, by smart as shit people with a lot to lose). TL:DR This subreddit loves to post inflammatory, shitty articles. These articles, and the lack of thought, that goes into the responses posted here, are ridiculous and a leading case/example of the general stupidity of the race. Please raise your personal level of quality, if not that of this subreddit, and post real articles, and real discussion. Not drivel. I hate you, Dan Schneider, writer for Vice.com, and the people who think this is good news.

This is a terribly written article with an inflammatory, spurious headline. This article does little or nothing to explain the actual cases. It only gets on a soapbox regarding Corporate Personhood. The arguments put forth in this thread are inane drivel, also. The Civil Rights Amendment has no bearing on this case, because the companies aren't barring anything from their customers, as in the cases Woolworth's was so famously crucified for. These cases are about the companies being forced to include specific medical care in the health benefits package the Affordable Health Care Act (a law who's constitutionality is questionable in the first place) is forcing them to offer their employees . Additionally, the bias and malice this piece is written with is just a bad example of journalism. So many instances of chiding, childish writing, that is obviously inflammatory and non-constructive. This seems to be one of the first cases that the Supreme Court is going to try that really calls the Affordable Care Act's constitutionality into question, in addition to bringing a new angle on the corporate personhood debate. It is an interesting and rich topic to debate, with great cases on both sides of the argument. However, it is overshadowed by shitty journalism that whips people who can't read/critically think up into a frenzy on both sides of the fence: the "How dare my rights get discriminated against by corporations?!" crowd and, funnily enough, the "How dare my rights get trampled on by the government?!" crowd. Articles like these, and the ignorant, one-sided comments below, are the reason we keep electing shitty people who make shitty laws. The populous is easily baited into these ridiculous discussions, and only care about these easily digestible headlines that they can immediately agree or disagree with. This headline has about as much to do with the story as Government Law discriminate you and religion! and everyone in here lost there shit. This is exactly why our congressmen and senators speak on TV in soundbites, add pork-bellies to laws that no one ever reads if the name has Patriot or Civil Rights in the title, and basically debate with each other while waving their heads and snapping back and forth. They speak down to America because people eat this shit like McDonald's, loving every minute of it, while they jerk each other off and point at everyone else who is wrong. We get spoon-fed this shit because we profess to like it, with our Facebook thumbs-ups and constant bickering. If you think for a second that the people who are in the House aren't shrewd enough to realize, and take advantage, of this, you are delusional (which is why you love and comment on this article). I implore you, read this article and try to not get incensed one way or the other. You will realize that the article is drivel. IT DOESN'T EVEN FRAME OUT IT'S OWN HEADLINE! Just analyzing the headline, businesses are only turning You away if you are trying to get a job there. And they aren't even turning You away unless you are getting a job. And they aren't even turning you away, they are just not wanting to pay for your healthcare. And it isn't even the healthcare, just contraceptives. And it isn't just contraceptives, just 4 out of 26 required by the Affordable Care act. If you really want to have an opinion on this case, that doesn't sound like dumb-ass, read this article in the Washington Post. . TL:DR This subreddit loves to post inflammatory, shitty articles. These articles, and the lack of thought, that goes into the responses posted here, are ridiculous and a leading case/example of the general stupidity of the race. Please raise your personal level of quality, if not that of this subreddit, and post real articles, and real discussion. Not drivel. I hate you, Dan Schneider, writer for Vice.com, and the people who think this is good news.

politics

t5_2cneq

cgaui6m

This is a terribly written article with an inflammatory, spurious headline. This article does little or nothing to explain the actual cases. It only gets on a soapbox regarding Corporate Personhood. The arguments put forth in this thread are inane drivel, also. The Civil Rights Amendment has no bearing on this case, because the companies aren't barring anything from their customers, as in the cases Woolworth's was so famously crucified for. These cases are about the companies being forced to include specific medical care in the health benefits package the Affordable Health Care Act (a law who's constitutionality is questionable in the first place) is forcing them to offer their employees . Additionally, the bias and malice this piece is written with is just a bad example of journalism. So many instances of chiding, childish writing, that is obviously inflammatory and non-constructive. This seems to be one of the first cases that the Supreme Court is going to try that really calls the Affordable Care Act's constitutionality into question, in addition to bringing a new angle on the corporate personhood debate. It is an interesting and rich topic to debate, with great cases on both sides of the argument. However, it is overshadowed by shitty journalism that whips people who can't read/critically think up into a frenzy on both sides of the fence: the "How dare my rights get discriminated against by corporations?!" crowd and, funnily enough, the "How dare my rights get trampled on by the government?!" crowd. Articles like these, and the ignorant, one-sided comments below, are the reason we keep electing shitty people who make shitty laws. The populous is easily baited into these ridiculous discussions, and only care about these easily digestible headlines that they can immediately agree or disagree with. This headline has about as much to do with the story as Government Law discriminate you and religion! and everyone in here lost there shit. This is exactly why our congressmen and senators speak on TV in soundbites, add pork-bellies to laws that no one ever reads if the name has Patriot or Civil Rights in the title, and basically debate with each other while waving their heads and snapping back and forth. They speak down to America because people eat this shit like McDonald's, loving every minute of it, while they jerk each other off and point at everyone else who is wrong. We get spoon-fed this shit because we profess to like it, with our Facebook thumbs-ups and constant bickering. If you think for a second that the people who are in the House aren't shrewd enough to realize, and take advantage, of this, you are delusional (which is why you love and comment on this article). I implore you, read this article and try to not get incensed one way or the other. You will realize that the article is drivel. IT DOESN'T EVEN FRAME OUT IT'S OWN HEADLINE! Just analyzing the headline, businesses are only turning You away if you are trying to get a job there. And they aren't even turning You away unless you are getting a job. And they aren't even turning you away, they are just not wanting to pay for your healthcare. And it isn't even the healthcare, just contraceptives. And it isn't just contraceptives, just 4 out of 26 required by the Affordable Care act. If you really want to have an opinion on this case, that doesn't sound like dumb-ass, read this article in the Washington Post. .

This subreddit loves to post inflammatory, shitty articles. These articles, and the lack of thought, that goes into the responses posted here, are ridiculous and a leading case/example of the general stupidity of the race. Please raise your personal level of quality, if not that of this subreddit, and post real articles, and real discussion. Not drivel. I hate you, Dan Schneider, writer for Vice.com, and the people who think this is good news.

therespoutineinmyear

The Fulham result was the point where I said "it's on." We bucked the trend of big win, shit draw which was threatening to keep us in the fight for fourth. What's happened since? Well, that was win 2/6 in a row and in every interview since, Stevie's looked five years younger, full of piss and vinegar. That celebration after the 3-2 was the last huge outburst of emotion we've seen from him and the first good one in a long while, like we'd just gotten over the hump. After that, we've looked professional and ruthless (read: title contenders, like City and Chelsea) after huge wins while Arsenal hangs around the pitch taking selfies and dancing with the fans like they've won the Champion's League. On paper, we are pretty inexperienced, certainly up at this end of the Premier League table, but Stevie, Brendan, and I think Suarez are keeping these boys in line and playing for only one thing. No selfies. No dancing. Pump your fist, give it a war cry, and on to the next one. I really believe, as awesome as beating Arsenal was, everyone was still thinking "yeah, yeah, but remember the draws against Wigan, City, and Stoke in 09? The loss to Boro? Remember January, with fucking Villa and WBA? Hull in December? The goal is fourth. The goal is fourth. The goal is fourth." Things changed after Fulham. There's no doubt in mind that's when the players realized "holy fuck, it's on. Let's go do this thing." TL;DR: Fulham was when Stevie started to believe and when he starts to believe, we start to dream.

The Fulham result was the point where I said "it's on." We bucked the trend of big win, shit draw which was threatening to keep us in the fight for fourth. What's happened since? Well, that was win 2/6 in a row and in every interview since, Stevie's looked five years younger, full of piss and vinegar. That celebration after the 3-2 was the last huge outburst of emotion we've seen from him and the first good one in a long while, like we'd just gotten over the hump. After that, we've looked professional and ruthless (read: title contenders, like City and Chelsea) after huge wins while Arsenal hangs around the pitch taking selfies and dancing with the fans like they've won the Champion's League. On paper, we are pretty inexperienced, certainly up at this end of the Premier League table, but Stevie, Brendan, and I think Suarez are keeping these boys in line and playing for only one thing. No selfies. No dancing. Pump your fist, give it a war cry, and on to the next one. I really believe, as awesome as beating Arsenal was, everyone was still thinking "yeah, yeah, but remember the draws against Wigan, City, and Stoke in 09? The loss to Boro? Remember January, with fucking Villa and WBA? Hull in December? The goal is fourth. The goal is fourth. The goal is fourth." Things changed after Fulham. There's no doubt in mind that's when the players realized "holy fuck, it's on. Let's go do this thing." TL;DR: Fulham was when Stevie started to believe and when he starts to believe, we start to dream.

LiverpoolFC

t5_2qn0o

cgbiz77

The Fulham result was the point where I said "it's on." We bucked the trend of big win, shit draw which was threatening to keep us in the fight for fourth. What's happened since? Well, that was win 2/6 in a row and in every interview since, Stevie's looked five years younger, full of piss and vinegar. That celebration after the 3-2 was the last huge outburst of emotion we've seen from him and the first good one in a long while, like we'd just gotten over the hump. After that, we've looked professional and ruthless (read: title contenders, like City and Chelsea) after huge wins while Arsenal hangs around the pitch taking selfies and dancing with the fans like they've won the Champion's League. On paper, we are pretty inexperienced, certainly up at this end of the Premier League table, but Stevie, Brendan, and I think Suarez are keeping these boys in line and playing for only one thing. No selfies. No dancing. Pump your fist, give it a war cry, and on to the next one. I really believe, as awesome as beating Arsenal was, everyone was still thinking "yeah, yeah, but remember the draws against Wigan, City, and Stoke in 09? The loss to Boro? Remember January, with fucking Villa and WBA? Hull in December? The goal is fourth. The goal is fourth. The goal is fourth." Things changed after Fulham. There's no doubt in mind that's when the players realized "holy fuck, it's on. Let's go do this thing."

Fulham was when Stevie started to believe and when he starts to believe, we start to dream.

AdwokatDiabel

> The Perry class was an excellent ship for blue water convoy work. There's almost no chance of needing to do that these days. For inshore work, it's a sitting duck with no ability to perform the mission. Not true, it had the capability in that mission, especially once they took the rotary launcher out and put a 25mm cannon up front. > Against FIACs (note the I there), LCS is very well armed. Long-range missiles would be a liability, not an asset, in that role. For ASW, the LCS will carry an excellent towed array sonar and two anti-submarine helicopters. That's pretty much as good as it gets. For mine warfare, the LCS stands off and deploys unmanned assets. Entering the minefield is a mug's game, and has been for a decade or so. Re: FIACs, I disagree completely. It lacks the armor and firepower for that type of fight. Re: ASW, again, you're not using a towed array in Littoral, and if you are, it's out in the open ocean where a platform like the OHP does it better. Re: Mine warfare, stand-off capability can be added to other assets. > Yes, LCS's function depends on offboard assets: it's designed to get those assets into position to do their work. Deploying it without them is precisely like deploying a CVN without an air wing. Great, except its crippled by lack of survivability, firepower, and bluewater performance. Not to mention any ship can do that. The OHP can do what an LCS does and still do a convoy escort role (which is not an outdated role). There are also other options out there that do this job in a 21st century way. Like the Norwegian Nansen class... which also retains airwarfare/air defense. Not to mention: **WHY THE FUCK ARE WE LAUNCHING TWO CLASSES OF THESE FUCKING THINGS?** It's one thing to build two and see which works better, it's another to fund two classes as what? A fucking make-work program? Pick one shitty ship and produce it. TL;DR - The USN is retarded when it comes to building anything that isn't a carrier or a submarine... DD(X) and now this turd.

> The Perry class was an excellent ship for blue water convoy work. There's almost no chance of needing to do that these days. For inshore work, it's a sitting duck with no ability to perform the mission. Not true, it had the capability in that mission, especially once they took the rotary launcher out and put a 25mm cannon up front. > Against FIACs (note the I there), LCS is very well armed. Long-range missiles would be a liability, not an asset, in that role. For ASW, the LCS will carry an excellent towed array sonar and two anti-submarine helicopters. That's pretty much as good as it gets. For mine warfare, the LCS stands off and deploys unmanned assets. Entering the minefield is a mug's game, and has been for a decade or so. Re: FIACs, I disagree completely. It lacks the armor and firepower for that type of fight. Re: ASW, again, you're not using a towed array in Littoral, and if you are, it's out in the open ocean where a platform like the OHP does it better. Re: Mine warfare, stand-off capability can be added to other assets. > Yes, LCS's function depends on offboard assets: it's designed to get those assets into position to do their work. Deploying it without them is precisely like deploying a CVN without an air wing. Great, except its crippled by lack of survivability, firepower, and bluewater performance. Not to mention any ship can do that. The OHP can do what an LCS does and still do a convoy escort role (which is not an outdated role). There are also other options out there that do this job in a 21st century way. Like the Norwegian Nansen class... which also retains airwarfare/air defense. Not to mention: WHY THE FUCK ARE WE LAUNCHING TWO CLASSES OF THESE FUCKING THINGS? It's one thing to build two and see which works better, it's another to fund two classes as what? A fucking make-work program? Pick one shitty ship and produce it. TL;DR - The USN is retarded when it comes to building anything that isn't a carrier or a submarine... DD(X) and now this turd.

WarshipPorn

t5_2tg3p

cgbo20i

The Perry class was an excellent ship for blue water convoy work. There's almost no chance of needing to do that these days. For inshore work, it's a sitting duck with no ability to perform the mission. Not true, it had the capability in that mission, especially once they took the rotary launcher out and put a 25mm cannon up front. > Against FIACs (note the I there), LCS is very well armed. Long-range missiles would be a liability, not an asset, in that role. For ASW, the LCS will carry an excellent towed array sonar and two anti-submarine helicopters. That's pretty much as good as it gets. For mine warfare, the LCS stands off and deploys unmanned assets. Entering the minefield is a mug's game, and has been for a decade or so. Re: FIACs, I disagree completely. It lacks the armor and firepower for that type of fight. Re: ASW, again, you're not using a towed array in Littoral, and if you are, it's out in the open ocean where a platform like the OHP does it better. Re: Mine warfare, stand-off capability can be added to other assets. > Yes, LCS's function depends on offboard assets: it's designed to get those assets into position to do their work. Deploying it without them is precisely like deploying a CVN without an air wing. Great, except its crippled by lack of survivability, firepower, and bluewater performance. Not to mention any ship can do that. The OHP can do what an LCS does and still do a convoy escort role (which is not an outdated role). There are also other options out there that do this job in a 21st century way. Like the Norwegian Nansen class... which also retains airwarfare/air defense. Not to mention: WHY THE FUCK ARE WE LAUNCHING TWO CLASSES OF THESE FUCKING THINGS? It's one thing to build two and see which works better, it's another to fund two classes as what? A fucking make-work program? Pick one shitty ship and produce it.

The USN is retarded when it comes to building anything that isn't a carrier or a submarine... DD(X) and now this turd.

AdwokatDiabel

I think DD(X) is far worse than LCS because the Navy even went ahead with the idea thinking it was viable. 1. If you're gonna build a battleship, just fucking say so. This nonsense of calling it a Destroyer is well... nonsense. 2. If you're building a ship for the express purpose of fire support for the USMC, then you really don't need it to be stealthy, because it'll need to operate so close to land with so much air coverage that it's irrelevant. 3. If you're gonna do fire support, get something bigger than 2x155mm gun batteries YOU FUCKING SQUID PUSSIES. 4. If you're building a fire-support vessel, don't make it multi-role. Do what the Ruskies did with the Kirov and simplify: Fire-support, anti-ship, and anti-air. Basically a 21st century Iowa-class battleship with Aegis, armored to hell with overlapping active air defenses. Don't bother with ASW, chopppers, etc. There are other hulls that do that role better. 5. Build 2 to 6 of these platforms and call it a day, maybe replacing one ever 25 years like we do with carriers. **What DD(X) should've been:** It should've been a hull-size similar to the current Arleigh Burkes with a focus on leveraging existing technology and incrementing it to the current level of technological maturity: 1. Improving the radar system and upgrading the electronics/signal processing/software as well as minimizing the size of the equipment and antennae 2. Improving upon the stealth features of the ship to further minimize the cross-section. 3. Do what the Brits did and go from 5" guns to 155MM US Army guns. Even the DD(X) can't use US Army ammo in it's 155... which boggles my mind. 4. Use Peripheral VLS (the one feature on DD(X) which makes some sense) and open up internal spaces and improve survivability. 5. Hold 2 chopppers 6. Be able to do ASW 7. Have an anti-ship capability (which current Burkes lack because they no longer carry Harpoons). 8. Have CIWS/RAM... which for some reason was deleted on later Burkes? Why? Because the Navy thought "lasers" or something retarded like that. I'm all about incremental improvements to the tech base, but the DD(X) I desire would be on par with modern designs being launched in Europe today. TL;DR - upgrade your shit at a walking pace, not by leaps and bounds into the unknown.

I think DD(X) is far worse than LCS because the Navy even went ahead with the idea thinking it was viable. If you're gonna build a battleship, just fucking say so. This nonsense of calling it a Destroyer is well... nonsense. If you're building a ship for the express purpose of fire support for the USMC, then you really don't need it to be stealthy, because it'll need to operate so close to land with so much air coverage that it's irrelevant. If you're gonna do fire support, get something bigger than 2x155mm gun batteries YOU FUCKING SQUID PUSSIES. If you're building a fire-support vessel, don't make it multi-role. Do what the Ruskies did with the Kirov and simplify: Fire-support, anti-ship, and anti-air. Basically a 21st century Iowa-class battleship with Aegis, armored to hell with overlapping active air defenses. Don't bother with ASW, chopppers, etc. There are other hulls that do that role better. Build 2 to 6 of these platforms and call it a day, maybe replacing one ever 25 years like we do with carriers. What DD(X) should've been: It should've been a hull-size similar to the current Arleigh Burkes with a focus on leveraging existing technology and incrementing it to the current level of technological maturity: Improving the radar system and upgrading the electronics/signal processing/software as well as minimizing the size of the equipment and antennae Improving upon the stealth features of the ship to further minimize the cross-section. Do what the Brits did and go from 5" guns to 155MM US Army guns. Even the DD(X) can't use US Army ammo in it's 155... which boggles my mind. Use Peripheral VLS (the one feature on DD(X) which makes some sense) and open up internal spaces and improve survivability. Hold 2 chopppers Be able to do ASW Have an anti-ship capability (which current Burkes lack because they no longer carry Harpoons). Have CIWS/RAM... which for some reason was deleted on later Burkes? Why? Because the Navy thought "lasers" or something retarded like that. I'm all about incremental improvements to the tech base, but the DD(X) I desire would be on par with modern designs being launched in Europe today. TL;DR - upgrade your shit at a walking pace, not by leaps and bounds into the unknown.

WarshipPorn

t5_2tg3p

cgbwdrg

I think DD(X) is far worse than LCS because the Navy even went ahead with the idea thinking it was viable. If you're gonna build a battleship, just fucking say so. This nonsense of calling it a Destroyer is well... nonsense. If you're building a ship for the express purpose of fire support for the USMC, then you really don't need it to be stealthy, because it'll need to operate so close to land with so much air coverage that it's irrelevant. If you're gonna do fire support, get something bigger than 2x155mm gun batteries YOU FUCKING SQUID PUSSIES. If you're building a fire-support vessel, don't make it multi-role. Do what the Ruskies did with the Kirov and simplify: Fire-support, anti-ship, and anti-air. Basically a 21st century Iowa-class battleship with Aegis, armored to hell with overlapping active air defenses. Don't bother with ASW, chopppers, etc. There are other hulls that do that role better. Build 2 to 6 of these platforms and call it a day, maybe replacing one ever 25 years like we do with carriers. What DD(X) should've been: It should've been a hull-size similar to the current Arleigh Burkes with a focus on leveraging existing technology and incrementing it to the current level of technological maturity: Improving the radar system and upgrading the electronics/signal processing/software as well as minimizing the size of the equipment and antennae Improving upon the stealth features of the ship to further minimize the cross-section. Do what the Brits did and go from 5" guns to 155MM US Army guns. Even the DD(X) can't use US Army ammo in it's 155... which boggles my mind. Use Peripheral VLS (the one feature on DD(X) which makes some sense) and open up internal spaces and improve survivability. Hold 2 chopppers Be able to do ASW Have an anti-ship capability (which current Burkes lack because they no longer carry Harpoons). Have CIWS/RAM... which for some reason was deleted on later Burkes? Why? Because the Navy thought "lasers" or something retarded like that. I'm all about incremental improvements to the tech base, but the DD(X) I desire would be on par with modern designs being launched in Europe today.

upgrade your shit at a walking pace, not by leaps and bounds into the unknown.

loudcris

I personally feel that the effects of Marijuana/THC like most other chemicals, depend on the specific users chemistry. I live with a bunch of roommates who smoke and we are all very different while sober, and we react differently to smoking too. Consider: * How you smoke; bowl vs papers vs bong all make a difference * The amount you smoke; clearly will effect your mood/state of mind * The type of bud; indica/sativa ratio (I know it's hard to get this info) * When you smoke; night -vs- day -vs- all other times of the day * Where you smoke; indoor, outdoor is it safe and comfortable or illegal and causing you panic/worry All of these are just a few examples of small factors that will effect each session, there are plenty more. Below are several types of reactions/personalities after smoking. Some people jump around depending on the situation while others almost always fall into the same category. (I have them dumb name, for fun) Reactions: * Couch King - Gets lazy, stays on couch doesn't talk much, watches/listen without joining in, might pass out * Media Master - Everything is funny, fun, interesting, watches movies or music and talks about what they are doing seeing or enjoying * Artsy Chick - Gets creative, draws, paints, makes music or sings, wants to look at interesting things * Heavy Lifter - Gets energized to hike, bike, gym and generally wants to be moving around * The Explora' - Wants to wander, to explore new areas, to see touch and feel things * Mr Clean - Cleans the house, gets papers done, writes that work report, this person finds great focus and drive * Marx Plato - Likes to get deep, talks about politics, education, religion, rights and all the things people usually avoid in general conversation I have personally been every single one of these people, and am usually a combo of a few on any given night. The key is to not just fall into directly into the "Couch King" status every time you smoke. Truthfully, there is no answer to this. Maybe it did nudge you into depression a bit, but your depression likely also has other underlying causes relating to both your personal life and the natural chemical balance in your body. Not everything works for everyone, but one day if you are truly happy in your life (not depressed) I cannot see marijuana interfering much and actually helping in many ways, when used appropriately. TLDR: Maybe it did effect your depression, I doubt it **caused** it though. There are many chemical/personality reactions when smoking Marijuana don't assume yours will always be the same.

I personally feel that the effects of Marijuana/THC like most other chemicals, depend on the specific users chemistry. I live with a bunch of roommates who smoke and we are all very different while sober, and we react differently to smoking too. Consider: How you smoke; bowl vs papers vs bong all make a difference The amount you smoke; clearly will effect your mood/state of mind The type of bud; indica/sativa ratio (I know it's hard to get this info) When you smoke; night -vs- day -vs- all other times of the day Where you smoke; indoor, outdoor is it safe and comfortable or illegal and causing you panic/worry All of these are just a few examples of small factors that will effect each session, there are plenty more. Below are several types of reactions/personalities after smoking. Some people jump around depending on the situation while others almost always fall into the same category. (I have them dumb name, for fun) Reactions: Couch King - Gets lazy, stays on couch doesn't talk much, watches/listen without joining in, might pass out Media Master - Everything is funny, fun, interesting, watches movies or music and talks about what they are doing seeing or enjoying Artsy Chick - Gets creative, draws, paints, makes music or sings, wants to look at interesting things Heavy Lifter - Gets energized to hike, bike, gym and generally wants to be moving around The Explora' - Wants to wander, to explore new areas, to see touch and feel things Mr Clean - Cleans the house, gets papers done, writes that work report, this person finds great focus and drive Marx Plato - Likes to get deep, talks about politics, education, religion, rights and all the things people usually avoid in general conversation I have personally been every single one of these people, and am usually a combo of a few on any given night. The key is to not just fall into directly into the "Couch King" status every time you smoke. Truthfully, there is no answer to this. Maybe it did nudge you into depression a bit, but your depression likely also has other underlying causes relating to both your personal life and the natural chemical balance in your body. Not everything works for everyone, but one day if you are truly happy in your life (not depressed) I cannot see marijuana interfering much and actually helping in many ways, when used appropriately. TLDR: Maybe it did effect your depression, I doubt it caused it though. There are many chemical/personality reactions when smoking Marijuana don't assume yours will always be the same.

changemyview

t5_2w2s8

cgbllku

I personally feel that the effects of Marijuana/THC like most other chemicals, depend on the specific users chemistry. I live with a bunch of roommates who smoke and we are all very different while sober, and we react differently to smoking too. Consider: How you smoke; bowl vs papers vs bong all make a difference The amount you smoke; clearly will effect your mood/state of mind The type of bud; indica/sativa ratio (I know it's hard to get this info) When you smoke; night -vs- day -vs- all other times of the day Where you smoke; indoor, outdoor is it safe and comfortable or illegal and causing you panic/worry All of these are just a few examples of small factors that will effect each session, there are plenty more. Below are several types of reactions/personalities after smoking. Some people jump around depending on the situation while others almost always fall into the same category. (I have them dumb name, for fun) Reactions: Couch King - Gets lazy, stays on couch doesn't talk much, watches/listen without joining in, might pass out Media Master - Everything is funny, fun, interesting, watches movies or music and talks about what they are doing seeing or enjoying Artsy Chick - Gets creative, draws, paints, makes music or sings, wants to look at interesting things Heavy Lifter - Gets energized to hike, bike, gym and generally wants to be moving around The Explora' - Wants to wander, to explore new areas, to see touch and feel things Mr Clean - Cleans the house, gets papers done, writes that work report, this person finds great focus and drive Marx Plato - Likes to get deep, talks about politics, education, religion, rights and all the things people usually avoid in general conversation I have personally been every single one of these people, and am usually a combo of a few on any given night. The key is to not just fall into directly into the "Couch King" status every time you smoke. Truthfully, there is no answer to this. Maybe it did nudge you into depression a bit, but your depression likely also has other underlying causes relating to both your personal life and the natural chemical balance in your body. Not everything works for everyone, but one day if you are truly happy in your life (not depressed) I cannot see marijuana interfering much and actually helping in many ways, when used appropriately.

Maybe it did effect your depression, I doubt it caused it though. There are many chemical/personality reactions when smoking Marijuana don't assume yours will always be the same.

Rockchurch

Goalies have a responsibility above and beyond the skaters. The goalie *must* show up. It's fun, but it's also a job. If you don't show, 20+ guys are out of a game. There are times where something will come up, you'll feel sick, or otherwise not want to go at the last minute. As a skater, you can just bail, and 99% of the time the other guys don't care, or even prefer the extra ice time. In net the arrangement is different. You take on more responsibility, so you are compensated with free ice. **TL;DR:** You can expect that the goalie *must* show, or you can expect the goalie to pay the same as everybody else. Not both.

Goalies have a responsibility above and beyond the skaters. The goalie must show up. It's fun, but it's also a job. If you don't show, 20+ guys are out of a game. There are times where something will come up, you'll feel sick, or otherwise not want to go at the last minute. As a skater, you can just bail, and 99% of the time the other guys don't care, or even prefer the extra ice time. In net the arrangement is different. You take on more responsibility, so you are compensated with free ice. TL;DR: You can expect that the goalie must show, or you can expect the goalie to pay the same as everybody else. Not both.

hockeygoalies

t5_2tf80

cgbl5w9

Goalies have a responsibility above and beyond the skaters. The goalie must show up. It's fun, but it's also a job. If you don't show, 20+ guys are out of a game. There are times where something will come up, you'll feel sick, or otherwise not want to go at the last minute. As a skater, you can just bail, and 99% of the time the other guys don't care, or even prefer the extra ice time. In net the arrangement is different. You take on more responsibility, so you are compensated with free ice.

You can expect that the goalie must show, or you can expect the goalie to pay the same as everybody else. Not both.

Eltargrim

Oh, the paramagnetic Mn will have a similar effect, I'm hoping that they have longer relaxation times and won't be as strongly affected. I'm not sure about the relaxation times of 13C and 15N, but I believe that they're longer. Explanation time! I'm going to preface this by saying that I do solid-state NMR, so some things might not be totally applicable to liquids, but this should be fairly translatable. Paramagnetics don't actually destroy signal; your signal is still there! NMR has two types of relaxation: spin-lattice relaxation (T1) and spin-spin relaxation (T2). There are a number of different mechanisms through which these relaxations occur, but the general idea is that T1 effects your z-magnetization (how long the system takes to return to thermal equilibrium) and T2 effects your lineshape. Paramagnetic electrons offer a spectacularly efficient pathway for both T1 and T2 relaxation, meaning that your system returns to thermal equilibrium more quickly, and that the T2 becomes very short. It is here where it is important to remember that NMR spectra are in the frequency domain, being Fourier transformed from the time domain. The important relationship to remember here is that f = 1/t: therefore, short times translate into large frequencies. More specifically, short times translate into broad frequency *ranges*, or very wide peaks. Every bit of your proton signal is there, it's probably just hidden in the baseline. Other posters have suggested widening your spectral window: this is particularly important for 1H, as it's typically collected in a very narrow window. Widening your window and collecting more scans (to help distinguish your signal from your baseline) are the two steps which are most likely to help you observe 1H signal. Furthermore, some signal may also be shifted to positive frequencies. Widening your window will likely be very productive. I caution you to not be too optimistic, because it is very likely that each site will be significantly broadened. Depending on your spectrum your resolution could be bad to terrible, but you should be able to see *something*. The water signal isn't affected due to the difference in relative number of spins (much more water in the system), and the fact that any given 1H in water isn't particularly likely to be close enough to the Mn to couple. tl;dr: Widen your window and add more transients. EDIT: If you'd like to learn more about NMR, I think that *Spin Dynamics* by Malcolm Levitt is a good introductory text. It's very concepts-based without going too deeply into the math. I'd check your library for a copy.

Oh, the paramagnetic Mn will have a similar effect, I'm hoping that they have longer relaxation times and won't be as strongly affected. I'm not sure about the relaxation times of 13C and 15N, but I believe that they're longer. Explanation time! I'm going to preface this by saying that I do solid-state NMR, so some things might not be totally applicable to liquids, but this should be fairly translatable. Paramagnetics don't actually destroy signal; your signal is still there! NMR has two types of relaxation: spin-lattice relaxation (T1) and spin-spin relaxation (T2). There are a number of different mechanisms through which these relaxations occur, but the general idea is that T1 effects your z-magnetization (how long the system takes to return to thermal equilibrium) and T2 effects your lineshape. Paramagnetic electrons offer a spectacularly efficient pathway for both T1 and T2 relaxation, meaning that your system returns to thermal equilibrium more quickly, and that the T2 becomes very short. It is here where it is important to remember that NMR spectra are in the frequency domain, being Fourier transformed from the time domain. The important relationship to remember here is that f = 1/t: therefore, short times translate into large frequencies. More specifically, short times translate into broad frequency ranges , or very wide peaks. Every bit of your proton signal is there, it's probably just hidden in the baseline. Other posters have suggested widening your spectral window: this is particularly important for 1H, as it's typically collected in a very narrow window. Widening your window and collecting more scans (to help distinguish your signal from your baseline) are the two steps which are most likely to help you observe 1H signal. Furthermore, some signal may also be shifted to positive frequencies. Widening your window will likely be very productive. I caution you to not be too optimistic, because it is very likely that each site will be significantly broadened. Depending on your spectrum your resolution could be bad to terrible, but you should be able to see something . The water signal isn't affected due to the difference in relative number of spins (much more water in the system), and the fact that any given 1H in water isn't particularly likely to be close enough to the Mn to couple. tl;dr: Widen your window and add more transients. EDIT: If you'd like to learn more about NMR, I think that Spin Dynamics by Malcolm Levitt is a good introductory text. It's very concepts-based without going too deeply into the math. I'd check your library for a copy.

chemistry

t5_2qhf9

cgbztg8

Oh, the paramagnetic Mn will have a similar effect, I'm hoping that they have longer relaxation times and won't be as strongly affected. I'm not sure about the relaxation times of 13C and 15N, but I believe that they're longer. Explanation time! I'm going to preface this by saying that I do solid-state NMR, so some things might not be totally applicable to liquids, but this should be fairly translatable. Paramagnetics don't actually destroy signal; your signal is still there! NMR has two types of relaxation: spin-lattice relaxation (T1) and spin-spin relaxation (T2). There are a number of different mechanisms through which these relaxations occur, but the general idea is that T1 effects your z-magnetization (how long the system takes to return to thermal equilibrium) and T2 effects your lineshape. Paramagnetic electrons offer a spectacularly efficient pathway for both T1 and T2 relaxation, meaning that your system returns to thermal equilibrium more quickly, and that the T2 becomes very short. It is here where it is important to remember that NMR spectra are in the frequency domain, being Fourier transformed from the time domain. The important relationship to remember here is that f = 1/t: therefore, short times translate into large frequencies. More specifically, short times translate into broad frequency ranges , or very wide peaks. Every bit of your proton signal is there, it's probably just hidden in the baseline. Other posters have suggested widening your spectral window: this is particularly important for 1H, as it's typically collected in a very narrow window. Widening your window and collecting more scans (to help distinguish your signal from your baseline) are the two steps which are most likely to help you observe 1H signal. Furthermore, some signal may also be shifted to positive frequencies. Widening your window will likely be very productive. I caution you to not be too optimistic, because it is very likely that each site will be significantly broadened. Depending on your spectrum your resolution could be bad to terrible, but you should be able to see something . The water signal isn't affected due to the difference in relative number of spins (much more water in the system), and the fact that any given 1H in water isn't particularly likely to be close enough to the Mn to couple.

Widen your window and add more transients. EDIT: If you'd like to learn more about NMR, I think that Spin Dynamics by Malcolm Levitt is a good introductory text. It's very concepts-based without going too deeply into the math. I'd check your library for a copy.

fukitok

>why are we able to travel through space, but we don't even know how to optimize our own bodies? TBH, we aren't that good at traveling through space... it's not like you could just up and "go to space" tomorrow. Otherwise I don't have a great answer for you. I think these questions would need to be resolved by medical journals, and "does soreness help you build muscle?" isn't as hot a topic as "is this an effective means of treating cancer?" Also a lot of the conflicting evidence comes from studies being conducted on the layperson vs. the trained athlete. Trained athletes may make progress without getting sore (maybe they're slightly desensitized, their bodies process lactic acid better/heal faster, etc.), while the layperson always measures progress in soreness. I think it's also hard to get a really good representative sample in that line of research, again, because it's just not hot so the funding isn't there. If you get a sample of 30 people, that's hardly representative if you compare 15 and 15. Then if you try to get a matched sample for a paired t-test comparison, that's even tougher/more expensive. So the **tl;dr** from me: funding.

>why are we able to travel through space, but we don't even know how to optimize our own bodies? TBH, we aren't that good at traveling through space... it's not like you could just up and "go to space" tomorrow. Otherwise I don't have a great answer for you. I think these questions would need to be resolved by medical journals, and "does soreness help you build muscle?" isn't as hot a topic as "is this an effective means of treating cancer?" Also a lot of the conflicting evidence comes from studies being conducted on the layperson vs. the trained athlete. Trained athletes may make progress without getting sore (maybe they're slightly desensitized, their bodies process lactic acid better/heal faster, etc.), while the layperson always measures progress in soreness. I think it's also hard to get a really good representative sample in that line of research, again, because it's just not hot so the funding isn't there. If you get a sample of 30 people, that's hardly representative if you compare 15 and 15. Then if you try to get a matched sample for a paired t-test comparison, that's even tougher/more expensive. So the tl;dr from me: funding.

AskScienceDiscussion

t5_2vlah

cgcowyj

why are we able to travel through space, but we don't even know how to optimize our own bodies? TBH, we aren't that good at traveling through space... it's not like you could just up and "go to space" tomorrow. Otherwise I don't have a great answer for you. I think these questions would need to be resolved by medical journals, and "does soreness help you build muscle?" isn't as hot a topic as "is this an effective means of treating cancer?" Also a lot of the conflicting evidence comes from studies being conducted on the layperson vs. the trained athlete. Trained athletes may make progress without getting sore (maybe they're slightly desensitized, their bodies process lactic acid better/heal faster, etc.), while the layperson always measures progress in soreness. I think it's also hard to get a really good representative sample in that line of research, again, because it's just not hot so the funding isn't there. If you get a sample of 30 people, that's hardly representative if you compare 15 and 15. Then if you try to get a matched sample for a paired t-test comparison, that's even tougher/more expensive. So the

from me: funding.

tremulantadagio

I think Gremmy's power has to do with more than just imagination. It seems that it has to do with a certain level of the opponent's doubt as well. Take Rose and Kensei for example. When Gremmy told Isane that they were dead, she, for a moment, doubted what Gremmy had said. That doubt let in the idea, the possibility, that they were in fact dead. So of course she runs over to check their vitals and WHAT DO YOU KNOW THEM FUCKERS BE DEAD. And Yachiru. Gremmy says "your bones are made of cookies" and for a moment Yachiru questions the idea that her bones are made of cookies, then WOOPS A FRAGILE, DELICIOUS, BAKED TREAT NOW COMPOSES HER SKELETAL SYSTEM. Basically, Gremmy's imagination powers need the opposing person who is having the idea projected upon them to, if only for a moment, doubt what they think and open up to the idea that Gremmy is proposing. Of course, Gremmy has to tailor his projection to the person. If had said "imagine your left humerus has a major fracture that splits it in half" to Yachiru, she probably would have gone "the fuck you talking about stand still so I can kill you please". It all amounts to the will power of the person fighting Gremmy. But Kenpachi's different. Not that he has some invincible will beyond any doubt or persuasion (the giant block of water can tell you that), but rather, he has no problem dealing with the projection and going in for the kill. So yeah, Gremmy could propose that Kenpachi's skin is made of acid or that he has no kidneys or something. But Kenpachi don't give no fucks. And of course, thanks to isolating the battle, Gremmy has given himself a major handicap. TL;DR: Gremmy's power isn't really that absolute, IMO, Kenny don't give a fuck either way, expect Gremmy dead after a volstandig reveal and a shikai reveal ( not necessarily in that order)

I think Gremmy's power has to do with more than just imagination. It seems that it has to do with a certain level of the opponent's doubt as well. Take Rose and Kensei for example. When Gremmy told Isane that they were dead, she, for a moment, doubted what Gremmy had said. That doubt let in the idea, the possibility, that they were in fact dead. So of course she runs over to check their vitals and WHAT DO YOU KNOW THEM FUCKERS BE DEAD. And Yachiru. Gremmy says "your bones are made of cookies" and for a moment Yachiru questions the idea that her bones are made of cookies, then WOOPS A FRAGILE, DELICIOUS, BAKED TREAT NOW COMPOSES HER SKELETAL SYSTEM. Basically, Gremmy's imagination powers need the opposing person who is having the idea projected upon them to, if only for a moment, doubt what they think and open up to the idea that Gremmy is proposing. Of course, Gremmy has to tailor his projection to the person. If had said "imagine your left humerus has a major fracture that splits it in half" to Yachiru, she probably would have gone "the fuck you talking about stand still so I can kill you please". It all amounts to the will power of the person fighting Gremmy. But Kenpachi's different. Not that he has some invincible will beyond any doubt or persuasion (the giant block of water can tell you that), but rather, he has no problem dealing with the projection and going in for the kill. So yeah, Gremmy could propose that Kenpachi's skin is made of acid or that he has no kidneys or something. But Kenpachi don't give no fucks. And of course, thanks to isolating the battle, Gremmy has given himself a major handicap. TL;DR: Gremmy's power isn't really that absolute, IMO, Kenny don't give a fuck either way, expect Gremmy dead after a volstandig reveal and a shikai reveal ( not necessarily in that order)

bleach

t5_2rk7q

cgctkfd

I think Gremmy's power has to do with more than just imagination. It seems that it has to do with a certain level of the opponent's doubt as well. Take Rose and Kensei for example. When Gremmy told Isane that they were dead, she, for a moment, doubted what Gremmy had said. That doubt let in the idea, the possibility, that they were in fact dead. So of course she runs over to check their vitals and WHAT DO YOU KNOW THEM FUCKERS BE DEAD. And Yachiru. Gremmy says "your bones are made of cookies" and for a moment Yachiru questions the idea that her bones are made of cookies, then WOOPS A FRAGILE, DELICIOUS, BAKED TREAT NOW COMPOSES HER SKELETAL SYSTEM. Basically, Gremmy's imagination powers need the opposing person who is having the idea projected upon them to, if only for a moment, doubt what they think and open up to the idea that Gremmy is proposing. Of course, Gremmy has to tailor his projection to the person. If had said "imagine your left humerus has a major fracture that splits it in half" to Yachiru, she probably would have gone "the fuck you talking about stand still so I can kill you please". It all amounts to the will power of the person fighting Gremmy. But Kenpachi's different. Not that he has some invincible will beyond any doubt or persuasion (the giant block of water can tell you that), but rather, he has no problem dealing with the projection and going in for the kill. So yeah, Gremmy could propose that Kenpachi's skin is made of acid or that he has no kidneys or something. But Kenpachi don't give no fucks. And of course, thanks to isolating the battle, Gremmy has given himself a major handicap.

Gremmy's power isn't really that absolute, IMO, Kenny don't give a fuck either way, expect Gremmy dead after a volstandig reveal and a shikai reveal ( not necessarily in that order)

BarbaGramm

*Instead of discussing character motivations, plot implications, metaphors, character analysis, etc. people are quick to just coming up with fan theories, pointing out fridge logic points in the plot, and dismissing a character's actions as 'written wrong' when the character goes outside the paradigm of how that person thinks the character should act.* I feel like this is the key to the relationship viewers maintain with the "intelligence" of the programming. It happens quite often in other disciplines, as well a media studies, that a new piece of data will disrupt the entirety of a hypothesis. After spending hours with a character, it's easier to simply dismiss her sudden action as something poorly written or out of the range of expected behaviors, and explain it as an error on the part of the writer than to go back and amend our previously established belief. But the shrewd observer takes the extra effort and ponders a little longer on what that detail does to the whole of the characterization and, in turn, the narrative. The literary critic Roland Barthes, described the kind of literature that forces the reader to derive meaning from the play of images and phrases as "writerly" [(a brief outline, if you're interested)]( as opposed to readerly. The terms he uses sound counter-intuitive, but basically, *Sherlock,* based on your description, is a readerly text (i.e. what you see is what you get), and the viewer is a passive subject to whom everything is explained outright. There is little room for interpretation--though interpretation can be undertaken on any and every creative iteration--in the type of show you describe Sherlock as being. Your description of Hannibal fits the description of the writerly text (What it sounds like you mean by "intelligent"). It's the kind of show that's embedded with rich imagery and a sophisticated interplay of signifiers. This play of meaning cannot be delineated in the show itself, as it would require loads of explanatory supplementation. This is where metaphors are puzzling and require interpretation, but then another strange metaphor arises, but, finally they both seem to be speaking to one another at an even deeper level than either operate at alone. In this way, the viewer becomes a participant in the narrative, and for those who are drawn to such narratives, the odd characterization becomes more playful world building. The meaning doesn't "end" in the script itself, but is merely presented. The meaning, therefore, is "built" by the viewer. All this is to say, that the second type of "text" (in this case, obviously a T.V. show), is the more challenging. Those who like that kind of show rarely bother even calling it "intelligent," since that subjective identifier tends to operate as a congratulatory referent. A careful PR campaign might play off an audience's expectations of both the show and the hopes for itself, and call the show such things to garner higher ratings. Calling Sherlock "intelligent," would tip me off that someone wants me to think it is intelligent. Is the script tight? Yes. Are there some contemporary elements that might merit further investigation? I love doing this, so obviously. Does the show make me more intelligent? No, but if I'm not careful, I might fall victim to the hype surrounding it and be lulled into thinking *I'm* intelligent for watching it. Sherlock is not nearly as challenging as, say, the most recent adaptation of the trope it's predecessor invented, *True Detective,* but it's accessible enough for a wider audience. That wider audience wants to be congratulated, but not always have to do the actual work of critical analysis. This is common everywhere and in every popular format of every field. If the show requires too much engagement, the audience simply tunes out. The best way that I've found to approach this situation is to continually engage the show people are talking about. As I said earlier, you can find an interpretive path into anything, so why not start where people already are, and then engage the show they love at the deeper level? If they acquire a taste for such things, they may start to wonder what else is out there that presents an even deeper challenge, and now you have a friend (or audience) with whom you can engage that second, deeper show with. Show how fan theories (which are actually observations, often without sufficient context) actually contribute to the curiosities writhing beneath the immediate surface of the show. *TL;DR It sounds like what you mean by "intelligent" might suggest that the show requires less effort. Those shows are easier to "get," so when we read that they are intelligent, it's like free mind karma from bona fide critics! What is often overlooked requires more audience participation and often deeper critical engagement, which makes everyone's job harder.*

Instead of discussing character motivations, plot implications, metaphors, character analysis, etc. people are quick to just coming up with fan theories, pointing out fridge logic points in the plot, and dismissing a character's actions as 'written wrong' when the character goes outside the paradigm of how that person thinks the character should act. I feel like this is the key to the relationship viewers maintain with the "intelligence" of the programming. It happens quite often in other disciplines, as well a media studies, that a new piece of data will disrupt the entirety of a hypothesis. After spending hours with a character, it's easier to simply dismiss her sudden action as something poorly written or out of the range of expected behaviors, and explain it as an error on the part of the writer than to go back and amend our previously established belief. But the shrewd observer takes the extra effort and ponders a little longer on what that detail does to the whole of the characterization and, in turn, the narrative. The literary critic Roland Barthes, described the kind of literature that forces the reader to derive meaning from the play of images and phrases as "writerly" (a brief outline, if you're interested) , and the viewer is a passive subject to whom everything is explained outright. There is little room for interpretation--though interpretation can be undertaken on any and every creative iteration--in the type of show you describe Sherlock as being. Your description of Hannibal fits the description of the writerly text (What it sounds like you mean by "intelligent"). It's the kind of show that's embedded with rich imagery and a sophisticated interplay of signifiers. This play of meaning cannot be delineated in the show itself, as it would require loads of explanatory supplementation. This is where metaphors are puzzling and require interpretation, but then another strange metaphor arises, but, finally they both seem to be speaking to one another at an even deeper level than either operate at alone. In this way, the viewer becomes a participant in the narrative, and for those who are drawn to such narratives, the odd characterization becomes more playful world building. The meaning doesn't "end" in the script itself, but is merely presented. The meaning, therefore, is "built" by the viewer. All this is to say, that the second type of "text" (in this case, obviously a T.V. show), is the more challenging. Those who like that kind of show rarely bother even calling it "intelligent," since that subjective identifier tends to operate as a congratulatory referent. A careful PR campaign might play off an audience's expectations of both the show and the hopes for itself, and call the show such things to garner higher ratings. Calling Sherlock "intelligent," would tip me off that someone wants me to think it is intelligent. Is the script tight? Yes. Are there some contemporary elements that might merit further investigation? I love doing this, so obviously. Does the show make me more intelligent? No, but if I'm not careful, I might fall victim to the hype surrounding it and be lulled into thinking I'm intelligent for watching it. Sherlock is not nearly as challenging as, say, the most recent adaptation of the trope it's predecessor invented, True Detective, but it's accessible enough for a wider audience. That wider audience wants to be congratulated, but not always have to do the actual work of critical analysis. This is common everywhere and in every popular format of every field. If the show requires too much engagement, the audience simply tunes out. The best way that I've found to approach this situation is to continually engage the show people are talking about. As I said earlier, you can find an interpretive path into anything, so why not start where people already are, and then engage the show they love at the deeper level? If they acquire a taste for such things, they may start to wonder what else is out there that presents an even deeper challenge, and now you have a friend (or audience) with whom you can engage that second, deeper show with. Show how fan theories (which are actually observations, often without sufficient context) actually contribute to the curiosities writhing beneath the immediate surface of the show. TL;DR It sounds like what you mean by "intelligent" might suggest that the show requires less effort. Those shows are easier to "get," so when we read that they are intelligent, it's like free mind karma from bona fide critics! What is often overlooked requires more audience participation and often deeper critical engagement, which makes everyone's job harder.

TrueSeries

t5_3113o

cgct1ih

Instead of discussing character motivations, plot implications, metaphors, character analysis, etc. people are quick to just coming up with fan theories, pointing out fridge logic points in the plot, and dismissing a character's actions as 'written wrong' when the character goes outside the paradigm of how that person thinks the character should act. I feel like this is the key to the relationship viewers maintain with the "intelligence" of the programming. It happens quite often in other disciplines, as well a media studies, that a new piece of data will disrupt the entirety of a hypothesis. After spending hours with a character, it's easier to simply dismiss her sudden action as something poorly written or out of the range of expected behaviors, and explain it as an error on the part of the writer than to go back and amend our previously established belief. But the shrewd observer takes the extra effort and ponders a little longer on what that detail does to the whole of the characterization and, in turn, the narrative. The literary critic Roland Barthes, described the kind of literature that forces the reader to derive meaning from the play of images and phrases as "writerly" (a brief outline, if you're interested) , and the viewer is a passive subject to whom everything is explained outright. There is little room for interpretation--though interpretation can be undertaken on any and every creative iteration--in the type of show you describe Sherlock as being. Your description of Hannibal fits the description of the writerly text (What it sounds like you mean by "intelligent"). It's the kind of show that's embedded with rich imagery and a sophisticated interplay of signifiers. This play of meaning cannot be delineated in the show itself, as it would require loads of explanatory supplementation. This is where metaphors are puzzling and require interpretation, but then another strange metaphor arises, but, finally they both seem to be speaking to one another at an even deeper level than either operate at alone. In this way, the viewer becomes a participant in the narrative, and for those who are drawn to such narratives, the odd characterization becomes more playful world building. The meaning doesn't "end" in the script itself, but is merely presented. The meaning, therefore, is "built" by the viewer. All this is to say, that the second type of "text" (in this case, obviously a T.V. show), is the more challenging. Those who like that kind of show rarely bother even calling it "intelligent," since that subjective identifier tends to operate as a congratulatory referent. A careful PR campaign might play off an audience's expectations of both the show and the hopes for itself, and call the show such things to garner higher ratings. Calling Sherlock "intelligent," would tip me off that someone wants me to think it is intelligent. Is the script tight? Yes. Are there some contemporary elements that might merit further investigation? I love doing this, so obviously. Does the show make me more intelligent? No, but if I'm not careful, I might fall victim to the hype surrounding it and be lulled into thinking I'm intelligent for watching it. Sherlock is not nearly as challenging as, say, the most recent adaptation of the trope it's predecessor invented, True Detective, but it's accessible enough for a wider audience. That wider audience wants to be congratulated, but not always have to do the actual work of critical analysis. This is common everywhere and in every popular format of every field. If the show requires too much engagement, the audience simply tunes out. The best way that I've found to approach this situation is to continually engage the show people are talking about. As I said earlier, you can find an interpretive path into anything, so why not start where people already are, and then engage the show they love at the deeper level? If they acquire a taste for such things, they may start to wonder what else is out there that presents an even deeper challenge, and now you have a friend (or audience) with whom you can engage that second, deeper show with. Show how fan theories (which are actually observations, often without sufficient context) actually contribute to the curiosities writhing beneath the immediate surface of the show.

It sounds like what you mean by "intelligent" might suggest that the show requires less effort. Those shows are easier to "get," so when we read that they are intelligent, it's like free mind karma from bona fide critics! What is often overlooked requires more audience participation and often deeper critical engagement, which makes everyone's job harder.

2in2out

Similar thing happened to me about a year ago, right around the time when the later phases of unemployment got revoked across most of the country. At this point I desperately needed a job as my income was about to be non-existent. I applied online to C&S Wholesale Grocers, a distribution warehouse. A short while goes by and I don't hear from them. I went a few days without checking my email and upon doing so I noticed I had a few missed from their HR Department. By a few I mean one every day INSISTING I contact HR asap. I follow up with a call and we chat, HR telling me that they want me as an asset and to make sure my profile on the application was up to date. So I made sure everything was fine profile wise. Then a few weeks go by, the whole time I'm attempting contact them, just sent to HR extensions voicemail and no responses from my emails. About a month a after I spoke with HR on the phone I got some generalized email about how they were "looking into other candidates". BULLSHIT, don't persistently email me offering a job just to shit on my hopes. TLDR: Sorry man, similar thing happened to me. FUCK C&S

Similar thing happened to me about a year ago, right around the time when the later phases of unemployment got revoked across most of the country. At this point I desperately needed a job as my income was about to be non-existent. I applied online to C&S Wholesale Grocers, a distribution warehouse. A short while goes by and I don't hear from them. I went a few days without checking my email and upon doing so I noticed I had a few missed from their HR Department. By a few I mean one every day INSISTING I contact HR asap. I follow up with a call and we chat, HR telling me that they want me as an asset and to make sure my profile on the application was up to date. So I made sure everything was fine profile wise. Then a few weeks go by, the whole time I'm attempting contact them, just sent to HR extensions voicemail and no responses from my emails. About a month a after I spoke with HR on the phone I got some generalized email about how they were "looking into other candidates". BULLSHIT, don't persistently email me offering a job just to shit on my hopes. TLDR: Sorry man, similar thing happened to me. FUCK C&S

AdviceAnimals

t5_2s7tt

cgdrc0n

Similar thing happened to me about a year ago, right around the time when the later phases of unemployment got revoked across most of the country. At this point I desperately needed a job as my income was about to be non-existent. I applied online to C&S Wholesale Grocers, a distribution warehouse. A short while goes by and I don't hear from them. I went a few days without checking my email and upon doing so I noticed I had a few missed from their HR Department. By a few I mean one every day INSISTING I contact HR asap. I follow up with a call and we chat, HR telling me that they want me as an asset and to make sure my profile on the application was up to date. So I made sure everything was fine profile wise. Then a few weeks go by, the whole time I'm attempting contact them, just sent to HR extensions voicemail and no responses from my emails. About a month a after I spoke with HR on the phone I got some generalized email about how they were "looking into other candidates". BULLSHIT, don't persistently email me offering a job just to shit on my hopes.

Sorry man, similar thing happened to me. FUCK C&S

RDandersen

The idea of pre-orders is to secure that a copy is available when you expect it to on release. That sort of goes out the window with a digital product where available is a non-issue. Instead, *especially* in games, pre-orders are now used a metric to gauge popularity of games. That is to say, the success of a game is, in part being determined by a tonne of people who have never played the game. This matters quite a bit in the game industry because when it comes to digital products there's either no or a really shitty return policy. That means if you were one of the people who were affected by, for instance, the Battlefield 4 launch issues that could render the game unplayable to you, when Dice were looking at numbers for establishing launch models and future products, they will look at you with your broken game and determine it as a positive because you pre-ordered. BF4 is actually a bad example because Origin has one of the best return policies of the digital platforms, but I figured it's one of the more widespread examples in recent history of a game launch that went oh, so horrible. **TL;DR** - Pre-ordering a digital product is a fundamentally anti-consumer measure with the downsides hidden by 10% discounts and a free in-game item. If you prefer video, [here's one from TotalBiscuit]( where he talks about a lot of the same point. Also, pre-order if you feel like it, obviously.

The idea of pre-orders is to secure that a copy is available when you expect it to on release. That sort of goes out the window with a digital product where available is a non-issue. Instead, especially in games, pre-orders are now used a metric to gauge popularity of games. That is to say, the success of a game is, in part being determined by a tonne of people who have never played the game. This matters quite a bit in the game industry because when it comes to digital products there's either no or a really shitty return policy. That means if you were one of the people who were affected by, for instance, the Battlefield 4 launch issues that could render the game unplayable to you, when Dice were looking at numbers for establishing launch models and future products, they will look at you with your broken game and determine it as a positive because you pre-ordered. BF4 is actually a bad example because Origin has one of the best return policies of the digital platforms, but I figured it's one of the more widespread examples in recent history of a game launch that went oh, so horrible. TL;DR - Pre-ordering a digital product is a fundamentally anti-consumer measure with the downsides hidden by 10% discounts and a free in-game item. If you prefer video, [here's one from TotalBiscuit]( where he talks about a lot of the same point. Also, pre-order if you feel like it, obviously.

GirlGamers

t5_2rfec

cgdk520

The idea of pre-orders is to secure that a copy is available when you expect it to on release. That sort of goes out the window with a digital product where available is a non-issue. Instead, especially in games, pre-orders are now used a metric to gauge popularity of games. That is to say, the success of a game is, in part being determined by a tonne of people who have never played the game. This matters quite a bit in the game industry because when it comes to digital products there's either no or a really shitty return policy. That means if you were one of the people who were affected by, for instance, the Battlefield 4 launch issues that could render the game unplayable to you, when Dice were looking at numbers for establishing launch models and future products, they will look at you with your broken game and determine it as a positive because you pre-ordered. BF4 is actually a bad example because Origin has one of the best return policies of the digital platforms, but I figured it's one of the more widespread examples in recent history of a game launch that went oh, so horrible.

Pre-ordering a digital product is a fundamentally anti-consumer measure with the downsides hidden by 10% discounts and a free in-game item. If you prefer video, [here's one from TotalBiscuit]( where he talks about a lot of the same point. Also, pre-order if you feel like it, obviously.

sundriedrainbow

Well you have the challenge log. But /u/ninjapro is mostly right, 2.2 is a vertical increase, not a somewhat horizontal one like 2.1 was. The biggest change is you'll be getting a lot of your 50+ gear from dungeon chests instead of tomes for awhile. Unlock Wanderer's Palace, Amdapor Keep, Haukke Manor (Hard), Copperbell Mines (Hard), and Pharos Sirius and start running them for myth and darklight armor drops. As you gear up, you can take on Ifrit HM (can do that at ilvl 50ish), Garuda HM and King Moggle Mog HM (I would go for around ilvl 60) and Titan HM (I would try to be at least ilvl 70, though it's doable lower). The *most* important piece of gear to upgrade is your weapon. Moogle weapons are the strongest before Titan weapons/relics, and Titan tends to be much more of a roadblock than Garuda or Moggle Mog. Once you have your relic and you're mostly in darklight gear (or i90 myth gear you buy with tomes) you can start in on coil and extreme primals. When you start getting really comfortable with the endgame fights, jump into Leviathan and Moggle Mog EX. *tl;dr* theoretically you can access everything but you're gonna want to build your gear up before you get into the 2.2 endgame content.

Well you have the challenge log. But /u/ninjapro is mostly right, 2.2 is a vertical increase, not a somewhat horizontal one like 2.1 was. The biggest change is you'll be getting a lot of your 50+ gear from dungeon chests instead of tomes for awhile. Unlock Wanderer's Palace, Amdapor Keep, Haukke Manor (Hard), Copperbell Mines (Hard), and Pharos Sirius and start running them for myth and darklight armor drops. As you gear up, you can take on Ifrit HM (can do that at ilvl 50ish), Garuda HM and King Moggle Mog HM (I would go for around ilvl 60) and Titan HM (I would try to be at least ilvl 70, though it's doable lower). The most important piece of gear to upgrade is your weapon. Moogle weapons are the strongest before Titan weapons/relics, and Titan tends to be much more of a roadblock than Garuda or Moggle Mog. Once you have your relic and you're mostly in darklight gear (or i90 myth gear you buy with tomes) you can start in on coil and extreme primals. When you start getting really comfortable with the endgame fights, jump into Leviathan and Moggle Mog EX. tl;dr theoretically you can access everything but you're gonna want to build your gear up before you get into the 2.2 endgame content.

ffxiv

t5_2rgs7

cgdduw6

Well you have the challenge log. But /u/ninjapro is mostly right, 2.2 is a vertical increase, not a somewhat horizontal one like 2.1 was. The biggest change is you'll be getting a lot of your 50+ gear from dungeon chests instead of tomes for awhile. Unlock Wanderer's Palace, Amdapor Keep, Haukke Manor (Hard), Copperbell Mines (Hard), and Pharos Sirius and start running them for myth and darklight armor drops. As you gear up, you can take on Ifrit HM (can do that at ilvl 50ish), Garuda HM and King Moggle Mog HM (I would go for around ilvl 60) and Titan HM (I would try to be at least ilvl 70, though it's doable lower). The most important piece of gear to upgrade is your weapon. Moogle weapons are the strongest before Titan weapons/relics, and Titan tends to be much more of a roadblock than Garuda or Moggle Mog. Once you have your relic and you're mostly in darklight gear (or i90 myth gear you buy with tomes) you can start in on coil and extreme primals. When you start getting really comfortable with the endgame fights, jump into Leviathan and Moggle Mog EX.

theoretically you can access everything but you're gonna want to build your gear up before you get into the 2.2 endgame content.

Darkaero

I'm hoping to pick up the game for PS4 when it's released. I used to play FFXI (a lot) and I briefly played FFXIV when it was first released and (like many others I assume) found it underwhelming. So, when I heard about the PS4 beta I jumped on the chance to try it out. After I completed the starting quests and finally made it out of the city I was already sold. So my questions are: What are some good active NA servers I should look into starting my character on? Are there any active guilds for a newbie like me that could help me get started and meet new friends while I get the hang of things? I'm not looking for people to hold my hand but I know community is a huge part in MMOs like FF and I'd rather not be complete on my own as I'm starting out. Feel free to PM me if you have any suggestions. TL;DR: Noob looking for a place to fit in.

I'm hoping to pick up the game for PS4 when it's released. I used to play FFXI (a lot) and I briefly played FFXIV when it was first released and (like many others I assume) found it underwhelming. So, when I heard about the PS4 beta I jumped on the chance to try it out. After I completed the starting quests and finally made it out of the city I was already sold. So my questions are: What are some good active NA servers I should look into starting my character on? Are there any active guilds for a newbie like me that could help me get started and meet new friends while I get the hang of things? I'm not looking for people to hold my hand but I know community is a huge part in MMOs like FF and I'd rather not be complete on my own as I'm starting out. Feel free to PM me if you have any suggestions. TL;DR: Noob looking for a place to fit in.

ffxiv

t5_2rgs7

cgdfiwf

I'm hoping to pick up the game for PS4 when it's released. I used to play FFXI (a lot) and I briefly played FFXIV when it was first released and (like many others I assume) found it underwhelming. So, when I heard about the PS4 beta I jumped on the chance to try it out. After I completed the starting quests and finally made it out of the city I was already sold. So my questions are: What are some good active NA servers I should look into starting my character on? Are there any active guilds for a newbie like me that could help me get started and meet new friends while I get the hang of things? I'm not looking for people to hold my hand but I know community is a huge part in MMOs like FF and I'd rather not be complete on my own as I'm starting out. Feel free to PM me if you have any suggestions.

Noob looking for a place to fit in.

chocoboy93

Just came back to the game after taking a break in December of 2013 (or right before 2.1, whichever came first) - I hopped on and decided to level my 20 LNC and ported over to South Shroud, assuming I'd get into some FATE grinding. To my surprise, no one was FATE grinding, not even Hive! I know I have a lot to catch up on (my highest is my MAR/WAR 37) but **what is the most efficient way to level now?** I've decided to get my 20 LNC up to at least 37 then decide if I'll take it or MAR to 50 first. Also, what are the important additions of 2.1 and 2.2 that are applicable to a character still leveling? **TL;DR - haven't played since 2.0 and don't know: the fastest way to lvl / any additions to the game relevant to a low lvl** Thanks!

Just came back to the game after taking a break in December of 2013 (or right before 2.1, whichever came first) - I hopped on and decided to level my 20 LNC and ported over to South Shroud, assuming I'd get into some FATE grinding. To my surprise, no one was FATE grinding, not even Hive! I know I have a lot to catch up on (my highest is my MAR/WAR 37) but what is the most efficient way to level now? I've decided to get my 20 LNC up to at least 37 then decide if I'll take it or MAR to 50 first. Also, what are the important additions of 2.1 and 2.2 that are applicable to a character still leveling? TL;DR - haven't played since 2.0 and don't know: the fastest way to lvl / any additions to the game relevant to a low lvl Thanks!

ffxiv

t5_2rgs7

cgdudgd

Just came back to the game after taking a break in December of 2013 (or right before 2.1, whichever came first) - I hopped on and decided to level my 20 LNC and ported over to South Shroud, assuming I'd get into some FATE grinding. To my surprise, no one was FATE grinding, not even Hive! I know I have a lot to catch up on (my highest is my MAR/WAR 37) but what is the most efficient way to level now? I've decided to get my 20 LNC up to at least 37 then decide if I'll take it or MAR to 50 first. Also, what are the important additions of 2.1 and 2.2 that are applicable to a character still leveling?

haven't played since 2.0 and don't know: the fastest way to lvl / any additions to the game relevant to a low lvl Thanks!

PavFeira

Luckily, 2.2 made this ilvl range a lot less awkward than it used to be. Your first priority should be your relic. Full or almost-full Darklight is fine for that. Most PF groups are doing Coil or EX fights, true, but you should have plenty of luck in DF. 2.2 added all of the HM fights you need into a new Trials Roulette, meaning you should get some i90+ party members. And in the event you do wipe, you'll get the new Echo buff, sending your stats through the roof. Once you get your relic, gather the Myth to turn it into Zenith. Next you'll want to get about i75 or so, so that you can start doing Turn 1 and 2. Hard and Expert dungeons, plus your daily roulettes, for a few Myth gear and possibly a Sol gear, and you should be more than set. CT is up to you: the gear is only i80, but that small boost could help you get into Turn 4 quicker, and you're still getting 100 Myth a run. I guess, tl;dr, don't be afraid to use Duty Finder :P Once you catch up to new content in 2.2, you should have an easier time finding PF groups for that.

Luckily, 2.2 made this ilvl range a lot less awkward than it used to be. Your first priority should be your relic. Full or almost-full Darklight is fine for that. Most PF groups are doing Coil or EX fights, true, but you should have plenty of luck in DF. 2.2 added all of the HM fights you need into a new Trials Roulette, meaning you should get some i90+ party members. And in the event you do wipe, you'll get the new Echo buff, sending your stats through the roof. Once you get your relic, gather the Myth to turn it into Zenith. Next you'll want to get about i75 or so, so that you can start doing Turn 1 and 2. Hard and Expert dungeons, plus your daily roulettes, for a few Myth gear and possibly a Sol gear, and you should be more than set. CT is up to you: the gear is only i80, but that small boost could help you get into Turn 4 quicker, and you're still getting 100 Myth a run. I guess, tl;dr, don't be afraid to use Duty Finder :P Once you catch up to new content in 2.2, you should have an easier time finding PF groups for that.

ffxiv

t5_2rgs7

cgdj9sa

Luckily, 2.2 made this ilvl range a lot less awkward than it used to be. Your first priority should be your relic. Full or almost-full Darklight is fine for that. Most PF groups are doing Coil or EX fights, true, but you should have plenty of luck in DF. 2.2 added all of the HM fights you need into a new Trials Roulette, meaning you should get some i90+ party members. And in the event you do wipe, you'll get the new Echo buff, sending your stats through the roof. Once you get your relic, gather the Myth to turn it into Zenith. Next you'll want to get about i75 or so, so that you can start doing Turn 1 and 2. Hard and Expert dungeons, plus your daily roulettes, for a few Myth gear and possibly a Sol gear, and you should be more than set. CT is up to you: the gear is only i80, but that small boost could help you get into Turn 4 quicker, and you're still getting 100 Myth a run. I guess,

don't be afraid to use Duty Finder :P Once you catch up to new content in 2.2, you should have an easier time finding PF groups for that.

Falahan

I never understood this, why does everyone whine about people driving with their lights off, those who have the time to call in to Q104 always mention it, yet I have only ever seen 2 cars in total in my 2 years of driving with rush hour. I find people are way more likely to drive 1/2 the speed limit with their 4-ways on in anything over 20km winds that's not 100% sunny. TL;DR I have rarely seen this issue, is it really that big of a deal?

I never understood this, why does everyone whine about people driving with their lights off, those who have the time to call in to Q104 always mention it, yet I have only ever seen 2 cars in total in my 2 years of driving with rush hour. I find people are way more likely to drive 1/2 the speed limit with their 4-ways on in anything over 20km winds that's not 100% sunny. TL;DR I have rarely seen this issue, is it really that big of a deal?

halifax

t5_2r77k

cgdbcmv

I never understood this, why does everyone whine about people driving with their lights off, those who have the time to call in to Q104 always mention it, yet I have only ever seen 2 cars in total in my 2 years of driving with rush hour. I find people are way more likely to drive 1/2 the speed limit with their 4-ways on in anything over 20km winds that's not 100% sunny.

I have rarely seen this issue, is it really that big of a deal?

wonderdog17

I have an odd story about this. When I was 15 or so, I was working for a friend of my moms, helping at her oriental rug and furniture store. It was a really fun job and I had a lot of cool guys to look up to. I also learned about fancy rugs, which is great when I meet peoples parents sometimes, but I digress. We were making a delivery in Philadelphia, in a very nice neighborhood. We stopped at a yard sale on the way back and started talking to a nice, older gentleman. We asked him about his tattoo and he told us. The piece was an old Navy style thing, with USS Missouri and some dates underneath it, and a big ship coming out of the wreath. Totally classic. The guy was a squad leader or something, in charge of like 6 guys. He told us the story of the day the Japanese surrendered. They got to the ship and were ready to get the ceremony underway, but didn't have a table. So one of the officers went down and asked if they could use this guys mess table. Of course he said yes. So, that little table in there, I met the dude who ate off it. Not the most exciting, just a funny weird way to meet some one. He was so proud of himself, he showed us all his stuff and knocked off some dollars from our purchases. tl;dr : old guys with tats have great stories.

I have an odd story about this. When I was 15 or so, I was working for a friend of my moms, helping at her oriental rug and furniture store. It was a really fun job and I had a lot of cool guys to look up to. I also learned about fancy rugs, which is great when I meet peoples parents sometimes, but I digress. We were making a delivery in Philadelphia, in a very nice neighborhood. We stopped at a yard sale on the way back and started talking to a nice, older gentleman. We asked him about his tattoo and he told us. The piece was an old Navy style thing, with USS Missouri and some dates underneath it, and a big ship coming out of the wreath. Totally classic. The guy was a squad leader or something, in charge of like 6 guys. He told us the story of the day the Japanese surrendered. They got to the ship and were ready to get the ceremony underway, but didn't have a table. So one of the officers went down and asked if they could use this guys mess table. Of course he said yes. So, that little table in there, I met the dude who ate off it. Not the most exciting, just a funny weird way to meet some one. He was so proud of himself, he showed us all his stuff and knocked off some dollars from our purchases. tl;dr : old guys with tats have great stories.

WarshipPorn

t5_2tg3p

cgdpsoa

I have an odd story about this. When I was 15 or so, I was working for a friend of my moms, helping at her oriental rug and furniture store. It was a really fun job and I had a lot of cool guys to look up to. I also learned about fancy rugs, which is great when I meet peoples parents sometimes, but I digress. We were making a delivery in Philadelphia, in a very nice neighborhood. We stopped at a yard sale on the way back and started talking to a nice, older gentleman. We asked him about his tattoo and he told us. The piece was an old Navy style thing, with USS Missouri and some dates underneath it, and a big ship coming out of the wreath. Totally classic. The guy was a squad leader or something, in charge of like 6 guys. He told us the story of the day the Japanese surrendered. They got to the ship and were ready to get the ceremony underway, but didn't have a table. So one of the officers went down and asked if they could use this guys mess table. Of course he said yes. So, that little table in there, I met the dude who ate off it. Not the most exciting, just a funny weird way to meet some one. He was so proud of himself, he showed us all his stuff and knocked off some dollars from our purchases.

old guys with tats have great stories.

BillyInFourC

Folks are welcome to disagree with me. I don't pretend to have all the answers. And I don't use a single method of evaluation for anyone. Not sure where you get that impression. When people offer polite comments, ask thoughtful questions, and generally behave themselves, then I try to comment as openly and honestly as possible. I like interacting with people. But when users like /u/CommanderAndChief levy personal attacks or make baseless criticisms, I make every effort to stand by my writing and my opinions. TL;DR - If you're polite and respectful to me, I'm polite and respectful to you.

Folks are welcome to disagree with me. I don't pretend to have all the answers. And I don't use a single method of evaluation for anyone. Not sure where you get that impression. When people offer polite comments, ask thoughtful questions, and generally behave themselves, then I try to comment as openly and honestly as possible. I like interacting with people. But when users like /u/CommanderAndChief levy personal attacks or make baseless criticisms, I make every effort to stand by my writing and my opinions. TL;DR - If you're polite and respectful to me, I'm polite and respectful to you.

Flyers

t5_2ribt

cgednuj

Folks are welcome to disagree with me. I don't pretend to have all the answers. And I don't use a single method of evaluation for anyone. Not sure where you get that impression. When people offer polite comments, ask thoughtful questions, and generally behave themselves, then I try to comment as openly and honestly as possible. I like interacting with people. But when users like /u/CommanderAndChief levy personal attacks or make baseless criticisms, I make every effort to stand by my writing and my opinions.

If you're polite and respectful to me, I'm polite and respectful to you.

NotaManMohanSingh

Mate, there is a difference in a quick stare, or even a longish stare at an attractive woman (let's face it, political correctness aside, if you are unattractive, you are hardly going to be stared at) or an exposed body part if said woman is unattractive. The stares that a lot of the Indian men give out is fuckin overpowering in it's...creepiness. It is a weird feeling to be stared at like that. That being said, it brings to mind a funny story from one of my first dates...I had made a post about it on Reddit somewhere. >This can also have...funnier repercurssions. On one of my first dates (I was a reasonably shy 17 year old), I was given the sage advice to "always make eye contact, and never stare at her....chestal region" My date (my wife now) was wearing a, rather low cut top (that was the most I had seen a pair in their natural environment), and the hormone ravaged teen that I was I kept telling myself, "must.make.eye contact". I stared at her till she could stand it no longer and burst out laughing and said it was ok to look once in a while. 16 years later, she still doesn't let me live it down. Tl;dr, eye contact can also mark you for a psychopathic serial killer. Edit : typos.

Mate, there is a difference in a quick stare, or even a longish stare at an attractive woman (let's face it, political correctness aside, if you are unattractive, you are hardly going to be stared at) or an exposed body part if said woman is unattractive. The stares that a lot of the Indian men give out is fuckin overpowering in it's...creepiness. It is a weird feeling to be stared at like that. That being said, it brings to mind a funny story from one of my first dates...I had made a post about it on Reddit somewhere. >This can also have...funnier repercurssions. On one of my first dates (I was a reasonably shy 17 year old), I was given the sage advice to "always make eye contact, and never stare at her....chestal region" My date (my wife now) was wearing a, rather low cut top (that was the most I had seen a pair in their natural environment), and the hormone ravaged teen that I was I kept telling myself, "must.make.eye contact". I stared at her till she could stand it no longer and burst out laughing and said it was ok to look once in a while. 16 years later, she still doesn't let me live it down. Tl;dr, eye contact can also mark you for a psychopathic serial killer. Edit : typos.

india

t5_2qh1q

cge1h1r

Mate, there is a difference in a quick stare, or even a longish stare at an attractive woman (let's face it, political correctness aside, if you are unattractive, you are hardly going to be stared at) or an exposed body part if said woman is unattractive. The stares that a lot of the Indian men give out is fuckin overpowering in it's...creepiness. It is a weird feeling to be stared at like that. That being said, it brings to mind a funny story from one of my first dates...I had made a post about it on Reddit somewhere. >This can also have...funnier repercurssions. On one of my first dates (I was a reasonably shy 17 year old), I was given the sage advice to "always make eye contact, and never stare at her....chestal region" My date (my wife now) was wearing a, rather low cut top (that was the most I had seen a pair in their natural environment), and the hormone ravaged teen that I was I kept telling myself, "must.make.eye contact". I stared at her till she could stand it no longer and burst out laughing and said it was ok to look once in a while. 16 years later, she still doesn't let me live it down.

eye contact can also mark you for a psychopathic serial killer. Edit : typos.

iwishihadafriend

I can't remember who formed the theory but it has been mathematically worked out that after an individual dies they will slowly become more supernatural. That is to say, the stories about that person will get wilder and wilder. However in the current day technology inhibits this phenomenon. So TL;DR because they were older.

I can't remember who formed the theory but it has been mathematically worked out that after an individual dies they will slowly become more supernatural. That is to say, the stories about that person will get wilder and wilder. However in the current day technology inhibits this phenomenon. So TL;DR because they were older.

explainlikeimfive

t5_2sokd

cge3x5o

I can't remember who formed the theory but it has been mathematically worked out that after an individual dies they will slowly become more supernatural. That is to say, the stories about that person will get wilder and wilder. However in the current day technology inhibits this phenomenon. So

because they were older.

jf286381

> *Individuals, as well as corporate individuals, at least in the United States are guaranteed free speech. I don't see by what basis you could argue that a search engine provider has their right removed.* Let's break this down on a human level... Person A (website) says the word "Voldermort". The word "Voldermort" is illegal. Person B (Google) is a news crier; parrots Person A's statement to all who inquire (consumers). Should Person B go to jail? No. We protect his speech. So, logically, Person B shouldn't give a fuck what Person A has to say. Person A is protected, with certain restrictions. Person A is responsible for Person A; and any Person C's that wish to hear what Person A has to say have every right to do so. If Person A screams "Voldermort", and Person C asks questions, then Person B impedes free speech by limiting the answer to these questions. The word "*Speech*" is nebulous. We speak with our mouth, our eyes, our hands. Everything we do is speech. So honoring the censorship of speech as speech itself confounds me. Yet another ruling that follows the letter of law, while ignoring the spirit it was written in. **TL;DR** Censorship is not free speech. Search engines don't speak; they query and resolve. When did we become China?

> Individuals, as well as corporate individuals, at least in the United States are guaranteed free speech. I don't see by what basis you could argue that a search engine provider has their right removed. Let's break this down on a human level... Person A (website) says the word "Voldermort". The word "Voldermort" is illegal. Person B (Google) is a news crier; parrots Person A's statement to all who inquire (consumers). Should Person B go to jail? No. We protect his speech. So, logically, Person B shouldn't give a fuck what Person A has to say. Person A is protected, with certain restrictions. Person A is responsible for Person A; and any Person C's that wish to hear what Person A has to say have every right to do so. If Person A screams "Voldermort", and Person C asks questions, then Person B impedes free speech by limiting the answer to these questions. The word " Speech " is nebulous. We speak with our mouth, our eyes, our hands. Everything we do is speech. So honoring the censorship of speech as speech itself confounds me. Yet another ruling that follows the letter of law, while ignoring the spirit it was written in. TL;DR Censorship is not free speech. Search engines don't speak; they query and resolve. When did we become China?

news

t5_2qh3l

cgeddid

Individuals, as well as corporate individuals, at least in the United States are guaranteed free speech. I don't see by what basis you could argue that a search engine provider has their right removed. Let's break this down on a human level... Person A (website) says the word "Voldermort". The word "Voldermort" is illegal. Person B (Google) is a news crier; parrots Person A's statement to all who inquire (consumers). Should Person B go to jail? No. We protect his speech. So, logically, Person B shouldn't give a fuck what Person A has to say. Person A is protected, with certain restrictions. Person A is responsible for Person A; and any Person C's that wish to hear what Person A has to say have every right to do so. If Person A screams "Voldermort", and Person C asks questions, then Person B impedes free speech by limiting the answer to these questions. The word " Speech " is nebulous. We speak with our mouth, our eyes, our hands. Everything we do is speech. So honoring the censorship of speech as speech itself confounds me. Yet another ruling that follows the letter of law, while ignoring the spirit it was written in.

Censorship is not free speech. Search engines don't speak; they query and resolve. When did we become China?

redditor1983

Fair point, but the article is making implications that it can't really back up with the facts. First of all, the title implies that rich people are building large houses solely to get money from the government. Which I don't think is the case. Second, from their own graph, these tax incentives aren't really adding that much space. I would estimate the average to be around 500 square feet, which is a little bit more than one large room. Third, one of the first statistics that they cite is the average house square footage (2,500). Even if you add the *highest* value from the graph you get a 3,924 square foot house. I know many middle class people that live in houses that size. That's no where near a mansion. **TL;DR:** The article may have some truth to it, but it attempts to imply that wealthy people are living in mansions in order to reap rewards from the government. But the article doesn't back that implication up with facts.

Fair point, but the article is making implications that it can't really back up with the facts. First of all, the title implies that rich people are building large houses solely to get money from the government. Which I don't think is the case. Second, from their own graph, these tax incentives aren't really adding that much space. I would estimate the average to be around 500 square feet, which is a little bit more than one large room. Third, one of the first statistics that they cite is the average house square footage (2,500). Even if you add the highest value from the graph you get a 3,924 square foot house. I know many middle class people that live in houses that size. That's no where near a mansion. TL;DR: The article may have some truth to it, but it attempts to imply that wealthy people are living in mansions in order to reap rewards from the government. But the article doesn't back that implication up with facts.

politics

t5_2cneq

cge9kv9

Fair point, but the article is making implications that it can't really back up with the facts. First of all, the title implies that rich people are building large houses solely to get money from the government. Which I don't think is the case. Second, from their own graph, these tax incentives aren't really adding that much space. I would estimate the average to be around 500 square feet, which is a little bit more than one large room. Third, one of the first statistics that they cite is the average house square footage (2,500). Even if you add the highest value from the graph you get a 3,924 square foot house. I know many middle class people that live in houses that size. That's no where near a mansion.

The article may have some truth to it, but it attempts to imply that wealthy people are living in mansions in order to reap rewards from the government. But the article doesn't back that implication up with facts.

SuperNinjaBot

Ive gotten caught in the expired insurance before. SO's father let the insurance lapse by 3 days and didnt tell us. I got a few tickets and went on my way. Well I went to court for 2 of them and forgot about the 3rd because her father was going to take care of it being it was his fault. Me being dumb I put it in the back on my mind and went on my way. Turns out couple months later I get pulled over (sos dad fucked up the insurance AGAIN) and I find out my license is expired. I was never notified. So now I have this car that is illegal to drive.. and no license. Im already a couple hundred dollars in the hole for tickets at this point. I still have to drive to work. There is NO way around it I have a family and id be damned if I lose my job over this. I end up getting 3 more tickets and my car impounded over the course of the next week till everything was squared away. Hundreds more dollars. Worst part is in my state if you get that many tickets in a period they give you an assessment fee of 300 dollars. WTF. At this point I cant afford to pay the 300 so I had to continue driving with out a license until I could recover from being shaken down so much. I didnt even do anything wrong. Except maybe knowingly driving with out a license because I need to take care of my kid. Driving should be a RIGHT not a privilege. They almost ruined my life at one point. I need to drive. There is no way around it. I get anxiety every time I get pulled over now because I think my license is going to be suspended for some weird reason I dont know about. TLDR: If you are broke you are a criminal and will be treated as such.

Ive gotten caught in the expired insurance before. SO's father let the insurance lapse by 3 days and didnt tell us. I got a few tickets and went on my way. Well I went to court for 2 of them and forgot about the 3rd because her father was going to take care of it being it was his fault. Me being dumb I put it in the back on my mind and went on my way. Turns out couple months later I get pulled over (sos dad fucked up the insurance AGAIN) and I find out my license is expired. I was never notified. So now I have this car that is illegal to drive.. and no license. Im already a couple hundred dollars in the hole for tickets at this point. I still have to drive to work. There is NO way around it I have a family and id be damned if I lose my job over this. I end up getting 3 more tickets and my car impounded over the course of the next week till everything was squared away. Hundreds more dollars. Worst part is in my state if you get that many tickets in a period they give you an assessment fee of 300 dollars. WTF. At this point I cant afford to pay the 300 so I had to continue driving with out a license until I could recover from being shaken down so much. I didnt even do anything wrong. Except maybe knowingly driving with out a license because I need to take care of my kid. Driving should be a RIGHT not a privilege. They almost ruined my life at one point. I need to drive. There is no way around it. I get anxiety every time I get pulled over now because I think my license is going to be suspended for some weird reason I dont know about. TLDR: If you are broke you are a criminal and will be treated as such.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cgf281j

Ive gotten caught in the expired insurance before. SO's father let the insurance lapse by 3 days and didnt tell us. I got a few tickets and went on my way. Well I went to court for 2 of them and forgot about the 3rd because her father was going to take care of it being it was his fault. Me being dumb I put it in the back on my mind and went on my way. Turns out couple months later I get pulled over (sos dad fucked up the insurance AGAIN) and I find out my license is expired. I was never notified. So now I have this car that is illegal to drive.. and no license. Im already a couple hundred dollars in the hole for tickets at this point. I still have to drive to work. There is NO way around it I have a family and id be damned if I lose my job over this. I end up getting 3 more tickets and my car impounded over the course of the next week till everything was squared away. Hundreds more dollars. Worst part is in my state if you get that many tickets in a period they give you an assessment fee of 300 dollars. WTF. At this point I cant afford to pay the 300 so I had to continue driving with out a license until I could recover from being shaken down so much. I didnt even do anything wrong. Except maybe knowingly driving with out a license because I need to take care of my kid. Driving should be a RIGHT not a privilege. They almost ruined my life at one point. I need to drive. There is no way around it. I get anxiety every time I get pulled over now because I think my license is going to be suspended for some weird reason I dont know about.

If you are broke you are a criminal and will be treated as such.

evNNNs

As much as I would love a windfall of philanthropy, I think another big thing is I'm depressed. I mention it because (although I can't find it at this moment...) there is a TED that mentions a relationship between depression and poverty. The problem sort of stems from the fact that as a society, we don't treat poorness like we would depressed patients. This means that people who are depressed and need psychological help don't get it and just assume "I'm sad because I'm poor." Which may not necessarily be the case. In the talk the guy had a real life example. The speaker has overcame his depression and went out to talk to other people. He ended up getting one person that was financially struggling to see a doctor for depression needs. Not long after the person (not the speaker, for clarity) found the will to get to work and take care of her kids, and pulled herself out of poverty. The beautiful sort of punchline to it was when he pitched his "Depression could be seriously hurting our financially struggling peers," his editor said "I don't know, no one is really talking about this and sounds far fetched," to which the TED speaker replied "And that is EXACTLY why this is news." TL;DR My anxiety is not just financial, it's psychological - but it's a concern for the larger population as well.

As much as I would love a windfall of philanthropy, I think another big thing is I'm depressed. I mention it because (although I can't find it at this moment...) there is a TED that mentions a relationship between depression and poverty. The problem sort of stems from the fact that as a society, we don't treat poorness like we would depressed patients. This means that people who are depressed and need psychological help don't get it and just assume "I'm sad because I'm poor." Which may not necessarily be the case. In the talk the guy had a real life example. The speaker has overcame his depression and went out to talk to other people. He ended up getting one person that was financially struggling to see a doctor for depression needs. Not long after the person (not the speaker, for clarity) found the will to get to work and take care of her kids, and pulled herself out of poverty. The beautiful sort of punchline to it was when he pitched his "Depression could be seriously hurting our financially struggling peers," his editor said "I don't know, no one is really talking about this and sounds far fetched," to which the TED speaker replied "And that is EXACTLY why this is news." TL;DR My anxiety is not just financial, it's psychological - but it's a concern for the larger population as well.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cgfbuh8

As much as I would love a windfall of philanthropy, I think another big thing is I'm depressed. I mention it because (although I can't find it at this moment...) there is a TED that mentions a relationship between depression and poverty. The problem sort of stems from the fact that as a society, we don't treat poorness like we would depressed patients. This means that people who are depressed and need psychological help don't get it and just assume "I'm sad because I'm poor." Which may not necessarily be the case. In the talk the guy had a real life example. The speaker has overcame his depression and went out to talk to other people. He ended up getting one person that was financially struggling to see a doctor for depression needs. Not long after the person (not the speaker, for clarity) found the will to get to work and take care of her kids, and pulled herself out of poverty. The beautiful sort of punchline to it was when he pitched his "Depression could be seriously hurting our financially struggling peers," his editor said "I don't know, no one is really talking about this and sounds far fetched," to which the TED speaker replied "And that is EXACTLY why this is news."

My anxiety is not just financial, it's psychological - but it's a concern for the larger population as well.

DivineAdvice

Grew up severely poor, now still poor but not real real bad off. I don't think people understand when your mother buys fast food and doesnt have enough money for food for the days that follow she bought fast food because she was lazy and didn't feel like cooking. How long can you hold half a pizza in a bedroom sock drawer before it starts growing penicillin on it. I did that she would buy pizza id have food for 4 days if rationed. Instead of having to eat macaronni and tomatoes or salmon patties because there was nothing else. Also for a week I lived on peanut butter crackers, another week ramen. So when they through us out into the field in the army I already was able to survive just because I knew what true hunger was. I also dont leave a scrap on my plate because I know how long it can be before the next meal. TL;DR: Food even in the wealthiest of nations, you still have some kids that go to bed hungry.

Grew up severely poor, now still poor but not real real bad off. I don't think people understand when your mother buys fast food and doesnt have enough money for food for the days that follow she bought fast food because she was lazy and didn't feel like cooking. How long can you hold half a pizza in a bedroom sock drawer before it starts growing penicillin on it. I did that she would buy pizza id have food for 4 days if rationed. Instead of having to eat macaronni and tomatoes or salmon patties because there was nothing else. Also for a week I lived on peanut butter crackers, another week ramen. So when they through us out into the field in the army I already was able to survive just because I knew what true hunger was. I also dont leave a scrap on my plate because I know how long it can be before the next meal. TL;DR: Food even in the wealthiest of nations, you still have some kids that go to bed hungry.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cgej4g5

Grew up severely poor, now still poor but not real real bad off. I don't think people understand when your mother buys fast food and doesnt have enough money for food for the days that follow she bought fast food because she was lazy and didn't feel like cooking. How long can you hold half a pizza in a bedroom sock drawer before it starts growing penicillin on it. I did that she would buy pizza id have food for 4 days if rationed. Instead of having to eat macaronni and tomatoes or salmon patties because there was nothing else. Also for a week I lived on peanut butter crackers, another week ramen. So when they through us out into the field in the army I already was able to survive just because I knew what true hunger was. I also dont leave a scrap on my plate because I know how long it can be before the next meal.

Food even in the wealthiest of nations, you still have some kids that go to bed hungry.

cryptonaut420

hmm, most of my time in the work force I have been paid close to minimum wage, which in my area is about $10 an hour. I was making about $11/hour on average. Pretty hard to find a job that will actually give you 40 hours a week these days, and especially with restaurant type jobs, they love to work you split shifts and random scheduling, making having a second job very tough to do. So lets say im managing to pull in 30 hours a week. Thats 330 a week, or 660 each 2 week pay cheque. After taxes and all that, end up with somewhere between $275 and $300 actual money you get to keep for that week. If I can get at least that amount of hours and also never take any extra days off or vacation or anything, thats only around $15,600 for the entire year. Hell, I wish I was making 32,000 even now. Roughly $1200 a month in earnings. Then subtract rent, utilities and groceries. Just right there, that leaves you with maybe a couple hundred bucks left to spend on non absolute essentials. Throw a car in the mix (insurance, gas, maintenance) and it gets even tighter. Add in some kids or any other expenses and things become really difficult really fast. Thats the way it is for a huge portion of the population and it leads to so many people getting massively in debt. And regions and cities that have higher wages also tend to have higher living expensives, so the end result is usually the same. Not trying to say that the situation in the western world is anything even comparable to how bad it is in third world countries etc., but everything is relative, and people struggle in all walks of life. Sure, if everyone got to see and experience first hand just how fucked up some areas of the world are, they would probably be a lot more humble about their current situations, but in reality most of us never will. tl;dr a lot of people are stuck in a cycle of living pay cheque to pay cheque and it's very hard to break out of. But we also shouldn't pretend we have it as bad or worse than say people in somalia or something

hmm, most of my time in the work force I have been paid close to minimum wage, which in my area is about $10 an hour. I was making about $11/hour on average. Pretty hard to find a job that will actually give you 40 hours a week these days, and especially with restaurant type jobs, they love to work you split shifts and random scheduling, making having a second job very tough to do. So lets say im managing to pull in 30 hours a week. Thats 330 a week, or 660 each 2 week pay cheque. After taxes and all that, end up with somewhere between $275 and $300 actual money you get to keep for that week. If I can get at least that amount of hours and also never take any extra days off or vacation or anything, thats only around $15,600 for the entire year. Hell, I wish I was making 32,000 even now. Roughly $1200 a month in earnings. Then subtract rent, utilities and groceries. Just right there, that leaves you with maybe a couple hundred bucks left to spend on non absolute essentials. Throw a car in the mix (insurance, gas, maintenance) and it gets even tighter. Add in some kids or any other expenses and things become really difficult really fast. Thats the way it is for a huge portion of the population and it leads to so many people getting massively in debt. And regions and cities that have higher wages also tend to have higher living expensives, so the end result is usually the same. Not trying to say that the situation in the western world is anything even comparable to how bad it is in third world countries etc., but everything is relative, and people struggle in all walks of life. Sure, if everyone got to see and experience first hand just how fucked up some areas of the world are, they would probably be a lot more humble about their current situations, but in reality most of us never will. tl;dr a lot of people are stuck in a cycle of living pay cheque to pay cheque and it's very hard to break out of. But we also shouldn't pretend we have it as bad or worse than say people in somalia or something

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cgelfsj

hmm, most of my time in the work force I have been paid close to minimum wage, which in my area is about $10 an hour. I was making about $11/hour on average. Pretty hard to find a job that will actually give you 40 hours a week these days, and especially with restaurant type jobs, they love to work you split shifts and random scheduling, making having a second job very tough to do. So lets say im managing to pull in 30 hours a week. Thats 330 a week, or 660 each 2 week pay cheque. After taxes and all that, end up with somewhere between $275 and $300 actual money you get to keep for that week. If I can get at least that amount of hours and also never take any extra days off or vacation or anything, thats only around $15,600 for the entire year. Hell, I wish I was making 32,000 even now. Roughly $1200 a month in earnings. Then subtract rent, utilities and groceries. Just right there, that leaves you with maybe a couple hundred bucks left to spend on non absolute essentials. Throw a car in the mix (insurance, gas, maintenance) and it gets even tighter. Add in some kids or any other expenses and things become really difficult really fast. Thats the way it is for a huge portion of the population and it leads to so many people getting massively in debt. And regions and cities that have higher wages also tend to have higher living expensives, so the end result is usually the same. Not trying to say that the situation in the western world is anything even comparable to how bad it is in third world countries etc., but everything is relative, and people struggle in all walks of life. Sure, if everyone got to see and experience first hand just how fucked up some areas of the world are, they would probably be a lot more humble about their current situations, but in reality most of us never will.

a lot of people are stuck in a cycle of living pay cheque to pay cheque and it's very hard to break out of. But we also shouldn't pretend we have it as bad or worse than say people in somalia or something

AtlasRoaring

I didn't really know that we were relatively bad-off until I was maybe...fifteen or so? We were all homeschooled from pretty young, and I didn't really have any social activities to speak of. I had no one to compare to as far as 'well-to-do' goes. One memorable occasion was when Mom came home with a trunk full of MREs (Meals Ready to Eat, sort of a military staple), and we all ate like kings for a few months. I remember Ramen being a common food, as well as peanut butter. We didn't really have snacks. Not unless it was peanut butter on apple slices. McDonalds was unheard of, the ridiculously special treat. Possibly like birthday-level special. I know now that I've moved out, I tend to feel guilty about buying 'frivolous' things (i.e., every pair of work pants I own are full of holes that I keep mending) because I get panicky about not having a little extra for that just in case episode. TL;DR: MREs.

I didn't really know that we were relatively bad-off until I was maybe...fifteen or so? We were all homeschooled from pretty young, and I didn't really have any social activities to speak of. I had no one to compare to as far as 'well-to-do' goes. One memorable occasion was when Mom came home with a trunk full of MREs (Meals Ready to Eat, sort of a military staple), and we all ate like kings for a few months. I remember Ramen being a common food, as well as peanut butter. We didn't really have snacks. Not unless it was peanut butter on apple slices. McDonalds was unheard of, the ridiculously special treat. Possibly like birthday-level special. I know now that I've moved out, I tend to feel guilty about buying 'frivolous' things (i.e., every pair of work pants I own are full of holes that I keep mending) because I get panicky about not having a little extra for that just in case episode. TL;DR: MREs.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cgelknp

I didn't really know that we were relatively bad-off until I was maybe...fifteen or so? We were all homeschooled from pretty young, and I didn't really have any social activities to speak of. I had no one to compare to as far as 'well-to-do' goes. One memorable occasion was when Mom came home with a trunk full of MREs (Meals Ready to Eat, sort of a military staple), and we all ate like kings for a few months. I remember Ramen being a common food, as well as peanut butter. We didn't really have snacks. Not unless it was peanut butter on apple slices. McDonalds was unheard of, the ridiculously special treat. Possibly like birthday-level special. I know now that I've moved out, I tend to feel guilty about buying 'frivolous' things (i.e., every pair of work pants I own are full of holes that I keep mending) because I get panicky about not having a little extra for that just in case episode.

MREs.

azntitanik

I was poor and was too rich (compare to old standard), then now get poor again. It was like this : having cheap meal/still very healthy because Vietnamese style, sometimes only 2 meals a day - in the city standard this is poor. Then I come to the States, lived with cousin for a while, watching her took so much food at Souplantation then never finished half of them made me almost burst into tears every time. Now after some bad incidents, I am poor again, and even though I can afford 3 meals a day, but cheap food in America is very unhealthy and doesn't give me much energy as my 2 meals a day in Vietnam does. So I miss that a lot. Tl;DR : American wastes too much food

I was poor and was too rich (compare to old standard), then now get poor again. It was like this : having cheap meal/still very healthy because Vietnamese style, sometimes only 2 meals a day - in the city standard this is poor. Then I come to the States, lived with cousin for a while, watching her took so much food at Souplantation then never finished half of them made me almost burst into tears every time. Now after some bad incidents, I am poor again, and even though I can afford 3 meals a day, but cheap food in America is very unhealthy and doesn't give me much energy as my 2 meals a day in Vietnam does. So I miss that a lot. Tl;DR : American wastes too much food

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cget4m9

I was poor and was too rich (compare to old standard), then now get poor again. It was like this : having cheap meal/still very healthy because Vietnamese style, sometimes only 2 meals a day - in the city standard this is poor. Then I come to the States, lived with cousin for a while, watching her took so much food at Souplantation then never finished half of them made me almost burst into tears every time. Now after some bad incidents, I am poor again, and even though I can afford 3 meals a day, but cheap food in America is very unhealthy and doesn't give me much energy as my 2 meals a day in Vietnam does. So I miss that a lot.

American wastes too much food

MoosMoosMom

I did find a guy! I wasn't looking for a relationship, but as of today I have been with my now husband for four years. We have the egalitarian, feminist, and mutually supportive relationship that I set out to have. I didn't want someone to only support me but someone who could support himself and someone who shared my views on the family construct that I wanted. He is college educated, makes six figures a year, and has been my biggest cheerleader through college. We got together when he was still a poor college student and opposed to my mother who just dated losers who had no future, it was important to be with someone who was investing in their own future like I am. TLDR; I am married to someone regardless of his ability to support me, but we do have financial security.

I did find a guy! I wasn't looking for a relationship, but as of today I have been with my now husband for four years. We have the egalitarian, feminist, and mutually supportive relationship that I set out to have. I didn't want someone to only support me but someone who could support himself and someone who shared my views on the family construct that I wanted. He is college educated, makes six figures a year, and has been my biggest cheerleader through college. We got together when he was still a poor college student and opposed to my mother who just dated losers who had no future, it was important to be with someone who was investing in their own future like I am. TLDR; I am married to someone regardless of his ability to support me, but we do have financial security.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cgexzco

I did find a guy! I wasn't looking for a relationship, but as of today I have been with my now husband for four years. We have the egalitarian, feminist, and mutually supportive relationship that I set out to have. I didn't want someone to only support me but someone who could support himself and someone who shared my views on the family construct that I wanted. He is college educated, makes six figures a year, and has been my biggest cheerleader through college. We got together when he was still a poor college student and opposed to my mother who just dated losers who had no future, it was important to be with someone who was investing in their own future like I am.

I am married to someone regardless of his ability to support me, but we do have financial security.

stiletto_vodka

The funny thing about crazy... what does it mean when you're ACONs? The one I can think of right now that is remotely amusing and not just annoyingly typical is last summer, I lived in a different city from Nparents at the invite of Nfriend/friend with INTENSE FLEAS (not sure what her deal is... definitely has Nmom). Let's call her D. D had hooked me up with an apartment and a job, but I was only there b/c I had nothing better to do for the summer. D and I work at the same place, but she gets fired a few weeks before I'm set to quit at the end of the summer. I work there without her, but she has a friend who works there with me still. Towards the end of my time in this city, I start fucking my boss (nice guy, super interesting, great in bed). I'm over at his place and we sleep in because he was under the impression that there was no work in the morning (I was on shift as well); Coworker lets D know I'm not there because there is, in fact, work. D calls me-- dead phone. Gets the building manager to let her into my apartment-- not there. Calls Nmom-- scares her. I get home and play it off like "Christ calm down, Boss told me I didn't have to work" and D finds out I was fucking him. She flips. No idea, to this day, why. Calls me out my name, screaming in the street, threatens me... I'm like, uh okay. Bans me from the city. I leave and go back to Nparents, who I foolishly told the story to. They keep telling me I was wrong and I should apologize to D. For what, exactly? No. Nmom keeps saying she is going to call D and "fix things", to which I respond basically threatening to never speak to her again (she's a needy N) if she does so. Nparents are trying to stage an intervention... anyway. I moved out of their house and got back on my meds and was fine. A few months after the initial fallout, D randomly texts me and apologizes for her behavior saying she was acting like HER Nmom. All is forgiven-- I was never that pressed about the situation, I just wasn't going to let Nparents make me go crawling back to be friends with someone who flamed me for zero reason. FFWD to today: my aunt (sister of Ndad and very VERY aware of Nparents' pathologies) asks me "what happened to you in DsCity?" "what do you mean?" "your mom told me something had happened and to pray for you but she wouldn't say anything else... I was worried" "UGH. I fucked my boss and everyone in the world went into a strop about it" "that's it?" "yeah. they honestly made it worse by trying to convince me I was to blame for everyone acting so silly" then we laughed for a while. TL;DR: fucked my boss, everyone flips, aunt brings it up because Nmom made it sound like I was on the brink of death over the shit. Aside: Sane family members are a godsend; especially ones who know the crazy shit you're going through. AngelAunt helps me understand what normal is, or looks like, and doesn't let me get too down on myself about ACONs life but lets me vent if I need to. She also respects my contact boundaries even if as the sister to Ndad she wishes they weren't what they were.

The funny thing about crazy... what does it mean when you're ACONs? The one I can think of right now that is remotely amusing and not just annoyingly typical is last summer, I lived in a different city from Nparents at the invite of Nfriend/friend with INTENSE FLEAS (not sure what her deal is... definitely has Nmom). Let's call her D. D had hooked me up with an apartment and a job, but I was only there b/c I had nothing better to do for the summer. D and I work at the same place, but she gets fired a few weeks before I'm set to quit at the end of the summer. I work there without her, but she has a friend who works there with me still. Towards the end of my time in this city, I start fucking my boss (nice guy, super interesting, great in bed). I'm over at his place and we sleep in because he was under the impression that there was no work in the morning (I was on shift as well); Coworker lets D know I'm not there because there is, in fact, work. D calls me-- dead phone. Gets the building manager to let her into my apartment-- not there. Calls Nmom-- scares her. I get home and play it off like "Christ calm down, Boss told me I didn't have to work" and D finds out I was fucking him. She flips. No idea, to this day, why. Calls me out my name, screaming in the street, threatens me... I'm like, uh okay. Bans me from the city. I leave and go back to Nparents, who I foolishly told the story to. They keep telling me I was wrong and I should apologize to D. For what, exactly? No. Nmom keeps saying she is going to call D and "fix things", to which I respond basically threatening to never speak to her again (she's a needy N) if she does so. Nparents are trying to stage an intervention... anyway. I moved out of their house and got back on my meds and was fine. A few months after the initial fallout, D randomly texts me and apologizes for her behavior saying she was acting like HER Nmom. All is forgiven-- I was never that pressed about the situation, I just wasn't going to let Nparents make me go crawling back to be friends with someone who flamed me for zero reason. FFWD to today: my aunt (sister of Ndad and very VERY aware of Nparents' pathologies) asks me "what happened to you in DsCity?" "what do you mean?" "your mom told me something had happened and to pray for you but she wouldn't say anything else... I was worried" "UGH. I fucked my boss and everyone in the world went into a strop about it" "that's it?" "yeah. they honestly made it worse by trying to convince me I was to blame for everyone acting so silly" then we laughed for a while. TL;DR: fucked my boss, everyone flips, aunt brings it up because Nmom made it sound like I was on the brink of death over the shit. Aside: Sane family members are a godsend; especially ones who know the crazy shit you're going through. AngelAunt helps me understand what normal is, or looks like, and doesn't let me get too down on myself about ACONs life but lets me vent if I need to. She also respects my contact boundaries even if as the sister to Ndad she wishes they weren't what they were.

raisedbynarcissists

t5_2we9n

cgesjc7

The funny thing about crazy... what does it mean when you're ACONs? The one I can think of right now that is remotely amusing and not just annoyingly typical is last summer, I lived in a different city from Nparents at the invite of Nfriend/friend with INTENSE FLEAS (not sure what her deal is... definitely has Nmom). Let's call her D. D had hooked me up with an apartment and a job, but I was only there b/c I had nothing better to do for the summer. D and I work at the same place, but she gets fired a few weeks before I'm set to quit at the end of the summer. I work there without her, but she has a friend who works there with me still. Towards the end of my time in this city, I start fucking my boss (nice guy, super interesting, great in bed). I'm over at his place and we sleep in because he was under the impression that there was no work in the morning (I was on shift as well); Coworker lets D know I'm not there because there is, in fact, work. D calls me-- dead phone. Gets the building manager to let her into my apartment-- not there. Calls Nmom-- scares her. I get home and play it off like "Christ calm down, Boss told me I didn't have to work" and D finds out I was fucking him. She flips. No idea, to this day, why. Calls me out my name, screaming in the street, threatens me... I'm like, uh okay. Bans me from the city. I leave and go back to Nparents, who I foolishly told the story to. They keep telling me I was wrong and I should apologize to D. For what, exactly? No. Nmom keeps saying she is going to call D and "fix things", to which I respond basically threatening to never speak to her again (she's a needy N) if she does so. Nparents are trying to stage an intervention... anyway. I moved out of their house and got back on my meds and was fine. A few months after the initial fallout, D randomly texts me and apologizes for her behavior saying she was acting like HER Nmom. All is forgiven-- I was never that pressed about the situation, I just wasn't going to let Nparents make me go crawling back to be friends with someone who flamed me for zero reason. FFWD to today: my aunt (sister of Ndad and very VERY aware of Nparents' pathologies) asks me "what happened to you in DsCity?" "what do you mean?" "your mom told me something had happened and to pray for you but she wouldn't say anything else... I was worried" "UGH. I fucked my boss and everyone in the world went into a strop about it" "that's it?" "yeah. they honestly made it worse by trying to convince me I was to blame for everyone acting so silly" then we laughed for a while.

fucked my boss, everyone flips, aunt brings it up because Nmom made it sound like I was on the brink of death over the shit. Aside: Sane family members are a godsend; especially ones who know the crazy shit you're going through. AngelAunt helps me understand what normal is, or looks like, and doesn't let me get too down on myself about ACONs life but lets me vent if I need to. She also respects my contact boundaries even if as the sister to Ndad she wishes they weren't what they were.

boomstick85

> The difference between blacks and asians is that blacks have had it hammered into their heads since they were kids.. that they're being discriminated against. They can play the race card because they know that they have that race card to play. Yeah...no. 1. This is not hammered in our heads. It is just American history and the persecution of ethnic minorities, women, LGBT, and the poor are intertwined; the legacy of this still reverberates in the social fibers of today's society. Your Asian version of *whiteplaining* the black American experience is a clear indicator that you're indoctrinated within the very system that you so vehemently rage against. 2. What is playing the race card, exactly? Pointing out racial injustice and micro-aggressions? Then dude, *you're* playing the race. 3. You do realize that you can have a discussion about racial issues without dismissing or trivializing the struggles of others, right? I don't really know why I am trying to engage in an intelligent debate with someone who uses 'bro.' **tl;dr** Quit your bullshit.

> The difference between blacks and asians is that blacks have had it hammered into their heads since they were kids.. that they're being discriminated against. They can play the race card because they know that they have that race card to play. Yeah...no. This is not hammered in our heads. It is just American history and the persecution of ethnic minorities, women, LGBT, and the poor are intertwined; the legacy of this still reverberates in the social fibers of today's society. Your Asian version of whiteplaining the black American experience is a clear indicator that you're indoctrinated within the very system that you so vehemently rage against. What is playing the race card, exactly? Pointing out racial injustice and micro-aggressions? Then dude, you're playing the race. You do realize that you can have a discussion about racial issues without dismissing or trivializing the struggles of others, right? I don't really know why I am trying to engage in an intelligent debate with someone who uses 'bro.' tl;dr Quit your bullshit.

asianamerican

t5_2rfyw

cgevi3b

The difference between blacks and asians is that blacks have had it hammered into their heads since they were kids.. that they're being discriminated against. They can play the race card because they know that they have that race card to play. Yeah...no. This is not hammered in our heads. It is just American history and the persecution of ethnic minorities, women, LGBT, and the poor are intertwined; the legacy of this still reverberates in the social fibers of today's society. Your Asian version of whiteplaining the black American experience is a clear indicator that you're indoctrinated within the very system that you so vehemently rage against. What is playing the race card, exactly? Pointing out racial injustice and micro-aggressions? Then dude, you're playing the race. You do realize that you can have a discussion about racial issues without dismissing or trivializing the struggles of others, right? I don't really know why I am trying to engage in an intelligent debate with someone who uses 'bro.'

Quit your bullshit.

Tsiox

The different options for IPSec will change the amount of overhead used for the IPSec header. That much you probably have already figured out. The one thing that threw me when I delved into this issue many moons ago was that some of the options used variable lengths (AH? It's been awhile). EG: If you do a ping size sweep through a IPSec connection, and you have one of the variable size options enabled on the IPSec connection, you should see the IPSec packets step up in size (by 5 if I remember correctly) rather than match the packet size + X. The easiest thing to do is to do a packet capture before and after the encryption device, and look at the before and after packet sizes while doing a sweep of packet sizes through the encryption. Not only does that show exactly how much bandwidth the encryption/encapsulation overhead is being used (you might not be able to see the packets exactly, but if you're the only one using a particular tunnel, you can safely assume input = output), but if you have a good decoder (eg: Wireshark) it will show you the breakdown of the packet header for you. Also, keep in mind that there are administrative portions of the protocol (ISAKMP, IPSec keepalive, GRE keepalives, routing protocols, etc) that use bandwidth as well, and need to be factored in to overall bandwidth usage. tl;dr: Packet capture on a lab setup is your friend.

The different options for IPSec will change the amount of overhead used for the IPSec header. That much you probably have already figured out. The one thing that threw me when I delved into this issue many moons ago was that some of the options used variable lengths (AH? It's been awhile). EG: If you do a ping size sweep through a IPSec connection, and you have one of the variable size options enabled on the IPSec connection, you should see the IPSec packets step up in size (by 5 if I remember correctly) rather than match the packet size + X. The easiest thing to do is to do a packet capture before and after the encryption device, and look at the before and after packet sizes while doing a sweep of packet sizes through the encryption. Not only does that show exactly how much bandwidth the encryption/encapsulation overhead is being used (you might not be able to see the packets exactly, but if you're the only one using a particular tunnel, you can safely assume input = output), but if you have a good decoder (eg: Wireshark) it will show you the breakdown of the packet header for you. Also, keep in mind that there are administrative portions of the protocol (ISAKMP, IPSec keepalive, GRE keepalives, routing protocols, etc) that use bandwidth as well, and need to be factored in to overall bandwidth usage. tl;dr: Packet capture on a lab setup is your friend.

networking

t5_2qkaf

cgfncug

The different options for IPSec will change the amount of overhead used for the IPSec header. That much you probably have already figured out. The one thing that threw me when I delved into this issue many moons ago was that some of the options used variable lengths (AH? It's been awhile). EG: If you do a ping size sweep through a IPSec connection, and you have one of the variable size options enabled on the IPSec connection, you should see the IPSec packets step up in size (by 5 if I remember correctly) rather than match the packet size + X. The easiest thing to do is to do a packet capture before and after the encryption device, and look at the before and after packet sizes while doing a sweep of packet sizes through the encryption. Not only does that show exactly how much bandwidth the encryption/encapsulation overhead is being used (you might not be able to see the packets exactly, but if you're the only one using a particular tunnel, you can safely assume input = output), but if you have a good decoder (eg: Wireshark) it will show you the breakdown of the packet header for you. Also, keep in mind that there are administrative portions of the protocol (ISAKMP, IPSec keepalive, GRE keepalives, routing protocols, etc) that use bandwidth as well, and need to be factored in to overall bandwidth usage.

Packet capture on a lab setup is your friend.

noplzstop

Write an outline. Seriously. Even just sentence fragments. The more you have, the better, so you can just fill in the blanks when you go to write, and so your ideas are organized and not rambling. Should go something like this: * Intro - blah blah blah main thesis statement, brief summary and points you want to cover Then you do the body part, obviously. * Best argument/point or most interesting/relevant information * Second best * So on, and so on until you run out of things to say on your topic or reach your length limit Then, before the conclusion, use at least one paragraph to address concerns about your topic, opposing viewpoints, that crap. Explain them, and explain why your stance is the correct one. Then do a conclusion. * Restate your argument/thesis, explain why you're right, end with some seemingly profound statement or a question for future research or something. Just write out the main points in a bulleted outline, and do subpoints for supporting arguments in each paragraph. Make a thorough-enough outline and you can pretty much just turn them into full sentences and your essay is done. TL:DR - OUTLINE YOUR FUKKIN' PAPER, IT HELPS.

Write an outline. Seriously. Even just sentence fragments. The more you have, the better, so you can just fill in the blanks when you go to write, and so your ideas are organized and not rambling. Should go something like this: Intro - blah blah blah main thesis statement, brief summary and points you want to cover Then you do the body part, obviously. Best argument/point or most interesting/relevant information Second best So on, and so on until you run out of things to say on your topic or reach your length limit Then, before the conclusion, use at least one paragraph to address concerns about your topic, opposing viewpoints, that crap. Explain them, and explain why your stance is the correct one. Then do a conclusion. Restate your argument/thesis, explain why you're right, end with some seemingly profound statement or a question for future research or something. Just write out the main points in a bulleted outline, and do subpoints for supporting arguments in each paragraph. Make a thorough-enough outline and you can pretty much just turn them into full sentences and your essay is done. TL:DR - OUTLINE YOUR FUKKIN' PAPER, IT HELPS.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cgexn6x

Write an outline. Seriously. Even just sentence fragments. The more you have, the better, so you can just fill in the blanks when you go to write, and so your ideas are organized and not rambling. Should go something like this: Intro - blah blah blah main thesis statement, brief summary and points you want to cover Then you do the body part, obviously. Best argument/point or most interesting/relevant information Second best So on, and so on until you run out of things to say on your topic or reach your length limit Then, before the conclusion, use at least one paragraph to address concerns about your topic, opposing viewpoints, that crap. Explain them, and explain why your stance is the correct one. Then do a conclusion. Restate your argument/thesis, explain why you're right, end with some seemingly profound statement or a question for future research or something. Just write out the main points in a bulleted outline, and do subpoints for supporting arguments in each paragraph. Make a thorough-enough outline and you can pretty much just turn them into full sentences and your essay is done.

OUTLINE YOUR FUKKIN' PAPER, IT HELPS.

rockman0

Dude, go somewhere with that bullshit. You came in here with a throwaway account called "ConfusedHonky" and start mocking black women who wear their hair the way they want. Then, you switch to this bullshit concern trolling. Words like "nappy" and "kinky" have always been used to make black women feel uncomfortable about their hair and body. If you really cared about black women's self-esteem, you sure as hell wouldn't be using words like that to try and comfort them. Then, there's the fact that you're clueless as fuck. >There's no need to let society dictate what you should or shouldn't look like. But hey, keep living however you're "told" to. When your ability to get a job and go through school without being bullied depends on choosing natural or relaxed hair, well, it's not exactly easy to be all 'fuck society' and do whatever you want. Even as a white guy, it shouldn't be that hard to understand. I mean, I'm not a black woman, but I can still feel empathy for people that don't exactly fit into the same category as I do. I get it. You're having trouble sleeping at night, and your erectile dysfunction is really making you uncomfortable, but come on, that's no reason to go around shitting on other people. Do what everyone else does and get a hobby or something. TL;DR: "Go fuck yourself" is definitely the most appropriate response to your bullshit.

Dude, go somewhere with that bullshit. You came in here with a throwaway account called "ConfusedHonky" and start mocking black women who wear their hair the way they want. Then, you switch to this bullshit concern trolling. Words like "nappy" and "kinky" have always been used to make black women feel uncomfortable about their hair and body. If you really cared about black women's self-esteem, you sure as hell wouldn't be using words like that to try and comfort them. Then, there's the fact that you're clueless as fuck. >There's no need to let society dictate what you should or shouldn't look like. But hey, keep living however you're "told" to. When your ability to get a job and go through school without being bullied depends on choosing natural or relaxed hair, well, it's not exactly easy to be all 'fuck society' and do whatever you want. Even as a white guy, it shouldn't be that hard to understand. I mean, I'm not a black woman, but I can still feel empathy for people that don't exactly fit into the same category as I do. I get it. You're having trouble sleeping at night, and your erectile dysfunction is really making you uncomfortable, but come on, that's no reason to go around shitting on other people. Do what everyone else does and get a hobby or something. TL;DR: "Go fuck yourself" is definitely the most appropriate response to your bullshit.

AfricanAmerican

t5_2qyod

cgf7e9q

Dude, go somewhere with that bullshit. You came in here with a throwaway account called "ConfusedHonky" and start mocking black women who wear their hair the way they want. Then, you switch to this bullshit concern trolling. Words like "nappy" and "kinky" have always been used to make black women feel uncomfortable about their hair and body. If you really cared about black women's self-esteem, you sure as hell wouldn't be using words like that to try and comfort them. Then, there's the fact that you're clueless as fuck. >There's no need to let society dictate what you should or shouldn't look like. But hey, keep living however you're "told" to. When your ability to get a job and go through school without being bullied depends on choosing natural or relaxed hair, well, it's not exactly easy to be all 'fuck society' and do whatever you want. Even as a white guy, it shouldn't be that hard to understand. I mean, I'm not a black woman, but I can still feel empathy for people that don't exactly fit into the same category as I do. I get it. You're having trouble sleeping at night, and your erectile dysfunction is really making you uncomfortable, but come on, that's no reason to go around shitting on other people. Do what everyone else does and get a hobby or something.

Go fuck yourself" is definitely the most appropriate response to your bullshit.

turtletyrant17

Was stationed on two different aircraft carriers when i was in the navy the enterprise and the nimitz. Aircraft carriers get all the hype because they are quite literally floating cities 5000+ people and over 100 aircraft. They are protected by a strike group which can be 4 or 5 surface ships and a couple of submarines. Now there have been some pretty strange stories of ships actually reaching carriers though. Several years back i had a friend on the Kitty Hawk out of Japan and they had a Chinese sub surface right next to the carrier. While i was on the Nimitz out of San Diego we had some small sail boat come up right next to us and it was almost destroyed due to what happened with the USS Cole. TLDR: Lots of People, Lots of Aircraft, A Floating Fucking City

Was stationed on two different aircraft carriers when i was in the navy the enterprise and the nimitz. Aircraft carriers get all the hype because they are quite literally floating cities 5000+ people and over 100 aircraft. They are protected by a strike group which can be 4 or 5 surface ships and a couple of submarines. Now there have been some pretty strange stories of ships actually reaching carriers though. Several years back i had a friend on the Kitty Hawk out of Japan and they had a Chinese sub surface right next to the carrier. While i was on the Nimitz out of San Diego we had some small sail boat come up right next to us and it was almost destroyed due to what happened with the USS Cole. TLDR: Lots of People, Lots of Aircraft, A Floating Fucking City

explainlikeimfive

t5_2sokd

cgfiqy2

Was stationed on two different aircraft carriers when i was in the navy the enterprise and the nimitz. Aircraft carriers get all the hype because they are quite literally floating cities 5000+ people and over 100 aircraft. They are protected by a strike group which can be 4 or 5 surface ships and a couple of submarines. Now there have been some pretty strange stories of ships actually reaching carriers though. Several years back i had a friend on the Kitty Hawk out of Japan and they had a Chinese sub surface right next to the carrier. While i was on the Nimitz out of San Diego we had some small sail boat come up right next to us and it was almost destroyed due to what happened with the USS Cole.

Lots of People, Lots of Aircraft, A Floating Fucking City

and1296

Aircraft carriers are a very nice thing to have for many reasons. Airpower is a great equalizer when it comes to warfare, and our carrier launched aircraft are some of the most capable aircraft in history. A carrier airwing is capable of deploying SEAD (Supression of Enemy Air Defense) weapons, establishing air superiority, and then blowing up major strategic resources for an enemy. A carrier battle group, to answer your first question, is highly capable at defending itself, you have on the carrier itself few weapons, but it is the other ships in the battle group which do the defensive combat, as well as it's aircraft. Aegis missile cruisers like the Ticonderoga class are designed to down missiles and other inbound threats to the battle group, such as aircraft and others. You also have the Ticonderoga's helicopters for Anti-submarine warfare (ASW) tasks, as well as the carrier's weapons for that task. So, yes, a carrier battle group CAN be overwhelmed, but it takes a whole lot of missiles and other ordinance to do so. However, if you get a carrier in close with a cruiser or destroyer, modern warfare isn't as partial to those enemies. Yes, you can sink a carrier with a 5 inch gun, but your very likely to get hit by a helicopter or other aspect of it's air wing toting anti ship missiles which will sink your destroyer or cruiser, and the carrier also has it's close in weapons systems to down most of the missiles you throw at it. TLDR: Yes they are that hard to kill, they can make a massive difference in a naval battle, and they really are still succeptable, but they will likely sink you before you sink them.

Aircraft carriers are a very nice thing to have for many reasons. Airpower is a great equalizer when it comes to warfare, and our carrier launched aircraft are some of the most capable aircraft in history. A carrier airwing is capable of deploying SEAD (Supression of Enemy Air Defense) weapons, establishing air superiority, and then blowing up major strategic resources for an enemy. A carrier battle group, to answer your first question, is highly capable at defending itself, you have on the carrier itself few weapons, but it is the other ships in the battle group which do the defensive combat, as well as it's aircraft. Aegis missile cruisers like the Ticonderoga class are designed to down missiles and other inbound threats to the battle group, such as aircraft and others. You also have the Ticonderoga's helicopters for Anti-submarine warfare (ASW) tasks, as well as the carrier's weapons for that task. So, yes, a carrier battle group CAN be overwhelmed, but it takes a whole lot of missiles and other ordinance to do so. However, if you get a carrier in close with a cruiser or destroyer, modern warfare isn't as partial to those enemies. Yes, you can sink a carrier with a 5 inch gun, but your very likely to get hit by a helicopter or other aspect of it's air wing toting anti ship missiles which will sink your destroyer or cruiser, and the carrier also has it's close in weapons systems to down most of the missiles you throw at it. TLDR: Yes they are that hard to kill, they can make a massive difference in a naval battle, and they really are still succeptable, but they will likely sink you before you sink them.

explainlikeimfive

t5_2sokd

cgfmxz5

Aircraft carriers are a very nice thing to have for many reasons. Airpower is a great equalizer when it comes to warfare, and our carrier launched aircraft are some of the most capable aircraft in history. A carrier airwing is capable of deploying SEAD (Supression of Enemy Air Defense) weapons, establishing air superiority, and then blowing up major strategic resources for an enemy. A carrier battle group, to answer your first question, is highly capable at defending itself, you have on the carrier itself few weapons, but it is the other ships in the battle group which do the defensive combat, as well as it's aircraft. Aegis missile cruisers like the Ticonderoga class are designed to down missiles and other inbound threats to the battle group, such as aircraft and others. You also have the Ticonderoga's helicopters for Anti-submarine warfare (ASW) tasks, as well as the carrier's weapons for that task. So, yes, a carrier battle group CAN be overwhelmed, but it takes a whole lot of missiles and other ordinance to do so. However, if you get a carrier in close with a cruiser or destroyer, modern warfare isn't as partial to those enemies. Yes, you can sink a carrier with a 5 inch gun, but your very likely to get hit by a helicopter or other aspect of it's air wing toting anti ship missiles which will sink your destroyer or cruiser, and the carrier also has it's close in weapons systems to down most of the missiles you throw at it.

Yes they are that hard to kill, they can make a massive difference in a naval battle, and they really are still succeptable, but they will likely sink you before you sink them.

snackies

The problem is that he hasn't actually learned much about the game. He's been so coddled from the start that he's still really terribly informed about how the game at large functions. Even his logi division for his corp kind of just does their own thing entirely. Which if you've ever been in leadership for a corp or alliance, would be fucking amazing. He get's to just lose allll of his fleets and reimburse stuff and not have to worry at all. That's awesome, and I don't mind him effectively getting a free ride and having fun at all. However when he starts to behave like he's somehow a pro eve player making bets with people about information he's just wrong about. Or like a post he made a while back that literally could be summed up with "Target painters are good against sig tanked fleets." A revelation that most players had several years prior. You can call me jealous or elitist, because I probably am both. Truth is that it's incredibly frusturating to see someone like him going around talking like he's somehow an eve genius. However his arrogance is understandable. Beyond that being a defining trait of his personality as a streamer. He is only exposed to an environment with inexperienced and REALLY bad players. He has very few actual veterans who understand the game, and the advice that they attempt to give get's lost in the white noise that is 500 clueless idiots all giving their own incorrect opinions. As a result destiny ends going to external sources that are simple and non detailed, often times i'd imagine going to sources like e-uni. Which is the equivalent to taking an intro class in anatomy, and claiming you're a surgeon. He has a rough understanding of the ideas, but because of how many dumb people he's around his rough understanding seems (to him) like he's discovered some brilliant strategy, when in reality it's standard. TLDR: He's an alright player who is still learning, but he has been unfortunately surrounded by enough idiots to the point where the standard idea becomes somehow revolutionary in his mind, simply because it is a better idea than literally awful ideas offered by other players.

The problem is that he hasn't actually learned much about the game. He's been so coddled from the start that he's still really terribly informed about how the game at large functions. Even his logi division for his corp kind of just does their own thing entirely. Which if you've ever been in leadership for a corp or alliance, would be fucking amazing. He get's to just lose allll of his fleets and reimburse stuff and not have to worry at all. That's awesome, and I don't mind him effectively getting a free ride and having fun at all. However when he starts to behave like he's somehow a pro eve player making bets with people about information he's just wrong about. Or like a post he made a while back that literally could be summed up with "Target painters are good against sig tanked fleets." A revelation that most players had several years prior. You can call me jealous or elitist, because I probably am both. Truth is that it's incredibly frusturating to see someone like him going around talking like he's somehow an eve genius. However his arrogance is understandable. Beyond that being a defining trait of his personality as a streamer. He is only exposed to an environment with inexperienced and REALLY bad players. He has very few actual veterans who understand the game, and the advice that they attempt to give get's lost in the white noise that is 500 clueless idiots all giving their own incorrect opinions. As a result destiny ends going to external sources that are simple and non detailed, often times i'd imagine going to sources like e-uni. Which is the equivalent to taking an intro class in anatomy, and claiming you're a surgeon. He has a rough understanding of the ideas, but because of how many dumb people he's around his rough understanding seems (to him) like he's discovered some brilliant strategy, when in reality it's standard. TLDR: He's an alright player who is still learning, but he has been unfortunately surrounded by enough idiots to the point where the standard idea becomes somehow revolutionary in his mind, simply because it is a better idea than literally awful ideas offered by other players.

Eve

t5_2qil9

cggbiub

The problem is that he hasn't actually learned much about the game. He's been so coddled from the start that he's still really terribly informed about how the game at large functions. Even his logi division for his corp kind of just does their own thing entirely. Which if you've ever been in leadership for a corp or alliance, would be fucking amazing. He get's to just lose allll of his fleets and reimburse stuff and not have to worry at all. That's awesome, and I don't mind him effectively getting a free ride and having fun at all. However when he starts to behave like he's somehow a pro eve player making bets with people about information he's just wrong about. Or like a post he made a while back that literally could be summed up with "Target painters are good against sig tanked fleets." A revelation that most players had several years prior. You can call me jealous or elitist, because I probably am both. Truth is that it's incredibly frusturating to see someone like him going around talking like he's somehow an eve genius. However his arrogance is understandable. Beyond that being a defining trait of his personality as a streamer. He is only exposed to an environment with inexperienced and REALLY bad players. He has very few actual veterans who understand the game, and the advice that they attempt to give get's lost in the white noise that is 500 clueless idiots all giving their own incorrect opinions. As a result destiny ends going to external sources that are simple and non detailed, often times i'd imagine going to sources like e-uni. Which is the equivalent to taking an intro class in anatomy, and claiming you're a surgeon. He has a rough understanding of the ideas, but because of how many dumb people he's around his rough understanding seems (to him) like he's discovered some brilliant strategy, when in reality it's standard.

He's an alright player who is still learning, but he has been unfortunately surrounded by enough idiots to the point where the standard idea becomes somehow revolutionary in his mind, simply because it is a better idea than literally awful ideas offered by other players.

IcedchickenKing

I think I figured out why you don't get this. Etf's numbers are assuming you are orbiting a stationary dude. To get maximum velocity while doing that with your linked fit you have to orbit at 50km+, so forget applying real dps. Ignoring that, should the guy move at all it will require you to turn to adjust your orbit, reducing your speed. The lower agility on mwd ships means turning takes much longer. The longer the turn takes, the longer you're not at 100% of your velocity / transversal. Remember that an orbit it in big turn so you can get out of losing Some of your max velocity / transversal - even at 50km+. Then you factor in that all someone has to do is use the 'look at' feature to see which way your ship is flying and manually fly their ship in that direction too. This leaves you with 0 transversal and even though your velocity will be much much better you will lose even more trying to tune to return to an orbit OR you will manually fly to in order to try to keep up your transversal and velocity which turns this into a game of who can adjust quicker to their opponents orbit (hint the mwd ship has worse agility so it can't adjust nearly as fast as the other ship). Eft is showing you graphs and numbers that don't take into account the basics of eve - enemy ships moving, agility penalties on maintaining an orbit (of any size) and the fact that a ship is NEVER at max velocity unless burning in a strait line for a long time. And when you burn in a strait like for a long time, any enemy will burn the same direction (giving them 0 transversal to you) which means your larger sig more than makes up for the 60% better speed you have over them during your strait line burn. If you can't understand that, you should go to one of those new player CCP led pvp roams and ask them. You can cry and bitch and repost graphs all you want but I would think this many nerds explaining this to you in really simple to understand words would be enough. Etf is super powerful but it simply can't take all the in game factors into account, there are too many and the developers didn't think the kind of people who used it would look at their scenario graphs and believe they were anything more than hypothetical relationships between several factors. Even if you were right about this (you are not) your own tracking (the ability to hit anyone with your pew pew guns) flying like these graphs indicate (even a dude sitting at 0ms) would he so horrific you couldn't land a shot. Ignoring the fact that you wouldn't be close enough to engage with hardly any weapon system while maintaining any sort of speedy orbit. Tldr: pay up and learn something.

I think I figured out why you don't get this. Etf's numbers are assuming you are orbiting a stationary dude. To get maximum velocity while doing that with your linked fit you have to orbit at 50km+, so forget applying real dps. Ignoring that, should the guy move at all it will require you to turn to adjust your orbit, reducing your speed. The lower agility on mwd ships means turning takes much longer. The longer the turn takes, the longer you're not at 100% of your velocity / transversal. Remember that an orbit it in big turn so you can get out of losing Some of your max velocity / transversal - even at 50km+. Then you factor in that all someone has to do is use the 'look at' feature to see which way your ship is flying and manually fly their ship in that direction too. This leaves you with 0 transversal and even though your velocity will be much much better you will lose even more trying to tune to return to an orbit OR you will manually fly to in order to try to keep up your transversal and velocity which turns this into a game of who can adjust quicker to their opponents orbit (hint the mwd ship has worse agility so it can't adjust nearly as fast as the other ship). Eft is showing you graphs and numbers that don't take into account the basics of eve - enemy ships moving, agility penalties on maintaining an orbit (of any size) and the fact that a ship is NEVER at max velocity unless burning in a strait line for a long time. And when you burn in a strait like for a long time, any enemy will burn the same direction (giving them 0 transversal to you) which means your larger sig more than makes up for the 60% better speed you have over them during your strait line burn. If you can't understand that, you should go to one of those new player CCP led pvp roams and ask them. You can cry and bitch and repost graphs all you want but I would think this many nerds explaining this to you in really simple to understand words would be enough. Etf is super powerful but it simply can't take all the in game factors into account, there are too many and the developers didn't think the kind of people who used it would look at their scenario graphs and believe they were anything more than hypothetical relationships between several factors. Even if you were right about this (you are not) your own tracking (the ability to hit anyone with your pew pew guns) flying like these graphs indicate (even a dude sitting at 0ms) would he so horrific you couldn't land a shot. Ignoring the fact that you wouldn't be close enough to engage with hardly any weapon system while maintaining any sort of speedy orbit. Tldr: pay up and learn something.

Eve

t5_2qil9

cggefgu

I think I figured out why you don't get this. Etf's numbers are assuming you are orbiting a stationary dude. To get maximum velocity while doing that with your linked fit you have to orbit at 50km+, so forget applying real dps. Ignoring that, should the guy move at all it will require you to turn to adjust your orbit, reducing your speed. The lower agility on mwd ships means turning takes much longer. The longer the turn takes, the longer you're not at 100% of your velocity / transversal. Remember that an orbit it in big turn so you can get out of losing Some of your max velocity / transversal - even at 50km+. Then you factor in that all someone has to do is use the 'look at' feature to see which way your ship is flying and manually fly their ship in that direction too. This leaves you with 0 transversal and even though your velocity will be much much better you will lose even more trying to tune to return to an orbit OR you will manually fly to in order to try to keep up your transversal and velocity which turns this into a game of who can adjust quicker to their opponents orbit (hint the mwd ship has worse agility so it can't adjust nearly as fast as the other ship). Eft is showing you graphs and numbers that don't take into account the basics of eve - enemy ships moving, agility penalties on maintaining an orbit (of any size) and the fact that a ship is NEVER at max velocity unless burning in a strait line for a long time. And when you burn in a strait like for a long time, any enemy will burn the same direction (giving them 0 transversal to you) which means your larger sig more than makes up for the 60% better speed you have over them during your strait line burn. If you can't understand that, you should go to one of those new player CCP led pvp roams and ask them. You can cry and bitch and repost graphs all you want but I would think this many nerds explaining this to you in really simple to understand words would be enough. Etf is super powerful but it simply can't take all the in game factors into account, there are too many and the developers didn't think the kind of people who used it would look at their scenario graphs and believe they were anything more than hypothetical relationships between several factors. Even if you were right about this (you are not) your own tracking (the ability to hit anyone with your pew pew guns) flying like these graphs indicate (even a dude sitting at 0ms) would he so horrific you couldn't land a shot. Ignoring the fact that you wouldn't be close enough to engage with hardly any weapon system while maintaining any sort of speedy orbit.

pay up and learn something.

IcedchickenKing

This was my reply to him down below: "I think I figured out why you don't get this. Etf's numbers are assuming you are orbiting a stationary dude. To get maximum velocity while doing that with your linked fit you have to orbit at 50km+, so forget applying real dps. Ignoring that, should the guy move at all it will require you to turn to adjust your orbit, reducing your speed. The lower agility on mwd ships means turning takes much longer. The longer the turn takes, the longer you're not at 100% of your velocity / transversal. Remember that an orbit it in big turn so you can get out of losing Some of your max velocity / transversal - even at 50km+. Then you factor in that all someone has to do is use the 'look at' feature to see which way your ship is flying and manually fly their ship in that direction too. This leaves you with 0 transversal and even though your velocity will be much much better you will lose even more trying to tune to return to an orbit OR you will manually fly to in order to try to keep up your transversal and velocity which turns this into a game of who can adjust quicker to their opponents orbit (hint the mwd ship has worse agility so it can't adjust nearly as fast as the other ship). Eft is showing you graphs and numbers that don't take into account the basics of eve - enemy ships moving, agility penalties on maintaining an orbit (of any size) and the fact that a ship is NEVER at max velocity unless burning in a strait line for a long time. And when you burn in a strait like for a long time, any enemy will burn the same direction (giving them 0 transversal to you) which means your larger sig more than makes up for the 60% better speed you have over them during your strait line burn. If you can't understand that, you should go to one of those new player CCP led pvp roams and ask them. You can cry and bitch and repost graphs all you want but I would think this many nerds explaining this to you in really simple to understand words would be enough. Etf is super powerful but it simply can't take all the in game factors into account, there are too many and the developers didn't think the kind of people who used it would look at their scenario graphs and believe they were anything more than hypothetical relationships between several factors. Even if you were right about this (you are not) your own tracking (the ability to hit anyone with your pew pew guns) flying like these graphs indicate (even a dude sitting at 0ms) would he so horrific you couldn't land a shot. Ignoring the fact that you wouldn't be close enough to engage with hardly any weapon system while maintaining any sort of speedy orbit. Tldr: pay up and learn something. " Dude does not know how to learn from other. Though I am so glad this tread happened as I have learned a shit ton more about tracking. Anyway I hope you get your ISK! Congrats on besting him and winning yourself 43b ISK!

This was my reply to him down below: "I think I figured out why you don't get this. Etf's numbers are assuming you are orbiting a stationary dude. To get maximum velocity while doing that with your linked fit you have to orbit at 50km+, so forget applying real dps. Ignoring that, should the guy move at all it will require you to turn to adjust your orbit, reducing your speed. The lower agility on mwd ships means turning takes much longer. The longer the turn takes, the longer you're not at 100% of your velocity / transversal. Remember that an orbit it in big turn so you can get out of losing Some of your max velocity / transversal - even at 50km+. Then you factor in that all someone has to do is use the 'look at' feature to see which way your ship is flying and manually fly their ship in that direction too. This leaves you with 0 transversal and even though your velocity will be much much better you will lose even more trying to tune to return to an orbit OR you will manually fly to in order to try to keep up your transversal and velocity which turns this into a game of who can adjust quicker to their opponents orbit (hint the mwd ship has worse agility so it can't adjust nearly as fast as the other ship). Eft is showing you graphs and numbers that don't take into account the basics of eve - enemy ships moving, agility penalties on maintaining an orbit (of any size) and the fact that a ship is NEVER at max velocity unless burning in a strait line for a long time. And when you burn in a strait like for a long time, any enemy will burn the same direction (giving them 0 transversal to you) which means your larger sig more than makes up for the 60% better speed you have over them during your strait line burn. If you can't understand that, you should go to one of those new player CCP led pvp roams and ask them. You can cry and bitch and repost graphs all you want but I would think this many nerds explaining this to you in really simple to understand words would be enough. Etf is super powerful but it simply can't take all the in game factors into account, there are too many and the developers didn't think the kind of people who used it would look at their scenario graphs and believe they were anything more than hypothetical relationships between several factors. Even if you were right about this (you are not) your own tracking (the ability to hit anyone with your pew pew guns) flying like these graphs indicate (even a dude sitting at 0ms) would he so horrific you couldn't land a shot. Ignoring the fact that you wouldn't be close enough to engage with hardly any weapon system while maintaining any sort of speedy orbit. Tldr: pay up and learn something. " Dude does not know how to learn from other. Though I am so glad this tread happened as I have learned a shit ton more about tracking. Anyway I hope you get your ISK! Congrats on besting him and winning yourself 43b ISK!

Eve

t5_2qil9

cggeox6

This was my reply to him down below: "I think I figured out why you don't get this. Etf's numbers are assuming you are orbiting a stationary dude. To get maximum velocity while doing that with your linked fit you have to orbit at 50km+, so forget applying real dps. Ignoring that, should the guy move at all it will require you to turn to adjust your orbit, reducing your speed. The lower agility on mwd ships means turning takes much longer. The longer the turn takes, the longer you're not at 100% of your velocity / transversal. Remember that an orbit it in big turn so you can get out of losing Some of your max velocity / transversal - even at 50km+. Then you factor in that all someone has to do is use the 'look at' feature to see which way your ship is flying and manually fly their ship in that direction too. This leaves you with 0 transversal and even though your velocity will be much much better you will lose even more trying to tune to return to an orbit OR you will manually fly to in order to try to keep up your transversal and velocity which turns this into a game of who can adjust quicker to their opponents orbit (hint the mwd ship has worse agility so it can't adjust nearly as fast as the other ship). Eft is showing you graphs and numbers that don't take into account the basics of eve - enemy ships moving, agility penalties on maintaining an orbit (of any size) and the fact that a ship is NEVER at max velocity unless burning in a strait line for a long time. And when you burn in a strait like for a long time, any enemy will burn the same direction (giving them 0 transversal to you) which means your larger sig more than makes up for the 60% better speed you have over them during your strait line burn. If you can't understand that, you should go to one of those new player CCP led pvp roams and ask them. You can cry and bitch and repost graphs all you want but I would think this many nerds explaining this to you in really simple to understand words would be enough. Etf is super powerful but it simply can't take all the in game factors into account, there are too many and the developers didn't think the kind of people who used it would look at their scenario graphs and believe they were anything more than hypothetical relationships between several factors. Even if you were right about this (you are not) your own tracking (the ability to hit anyone with your pew pew guns) flying like these graphs indicate (even a dude sitting at 0ms) would he so horrific you couldn't land a shot. Ignoring the fact that you wouldn't be close enough to engage with hardly any weapon system while maintaining any sort of speedy orbit.

pay up and learn something. " Dude does not know how to learn from other. Though I am so glad this tread happened as I have learned a shit ton more about tracking. Anyway I hope you get your ISK! Congrats on besting him and winning yourself 43b ISK!

Lyrd

It's not even about the plane. I found online much more irrelevant topics that managed to garner the attention of the CNN staff, such as that silly #CancelColbert twitter fad. But on twitter when someone simply asked the CNNWriters account why they haven't reported on the Leland Yee thing, they responded they don't cover "state-level" news and accused the questioner of having an unfounded conspiracy theory. And yet, searching "Leland Yee" on CNN I found over half a dozen cases of them reporting on "state-level" matters including that shark-fin soup prohibition. But nothing, absolutely nothing on the trafficking of millions of dollars of full-auto weapons, launched explosives, and even a hellfire missile to known terrorists. It is undeniable at this point: CNN is actively suppressing this information. They are ultimately a left-leaning broadcast network despite their attempts to appear moderate. This conflicts with their narrative of supporting Yee's gun control policies, it certainly gets in the way of MSNBC's clear bias on the matter (but Rachel Maddow alone has had nearly 100 hours of coverage on bridge-gate so far, to the point where even Bill Mahr thinks it's bullshit) As for Fox news, they barely covered it but they aren't going to cover too much that doesn't involve Obamacare or other distraction issues. All broadcast news in this country represents certain corporate or political bias. They can't be trusted but the problem is people do. Even when people do wise up it's a matter of only seeing one side of the coin. Too many people who call out the "Communist News Network" tune in to The Five or Hannity and think Obamacare is by far the worst offense to civil liberties we've seen in decades. Too many people who call out "Faux News" think Jon Stewart is an honest man or think MicrosoftNBC is for people who 'get it' because the Koch brothers run everything and corporations are evil. tl;dr - news is bullshit and delusions of journalistic ethics still being a think with major outlets is also bullshit.

It's not even about the plane. I found online much more irrelevant topics that managed to garner the attention of the CNN staff, such as that silly #CancelColbert twitter fad. But on twitter when someone simply asked the CNNWriters account why they haven't reported on the Leland Yee thing, they responded they don't cover "state-level" news and accused the questioner of having an unfounded conspiracy theory. And yet, searching "Leland Yee" on CNN I found over half a dozen cases of them reporting on "state-level" matters including that shark-fin soup prohibition. But nothing, absolutely nothing on the trafficking of millions of dollars of full-auto weapons, launched explosives, and even a hellfire missile to known terrorists. It is undeniable at this point: CNN is actively suppressing this information. They are ultimately a left-leaning broadcast network despite their attempts to appear moderate. This conflicts with their narrative of supporting Yee's gun control policies, it certainly gets in the way of MSNBC's clear bias on the matter (but Rachel Maddow alone has had nearly 100 hours of coverage on bridge-gate so far, to the point where even Bill Mahr thinks it's bullshit) As for Fox news, they barely covered it but they aren't going to cover too much that doesn't involve Obamacare or other distraction issues. All broadcast news in this country represents certain corporate or political bias. They can't be trusted but the problem is people do. Even when people do wise up it's a matter of only seeing one side of the coin. Too many people who call out the "Communist News Network" tune in to The Five or Hannity and think Obamacare is by far the worst offense to civil liberties we've seen in decades. Too many people who call out "Faux News" think Jon Stewart is an honest man or think MicrosoftNBC is for people who 'get it' because the Koch brothers run everything and corporations are evil. tl;dr - news is bullshit and delusions of journalistic ethics still being a think with major outlets is also bullshit.

progun

t5_2vtr4

cggsebf

It's not even about the plane. I found online much more irrelevant topics that managed to garner the attention of the CNN staff, such as that silly #CancelColbert twitter fad. But on twitter when someone simply asked the CNNWriters account why they haven't reported on the Leland Yee thing, they responded they don't cover "state-level" news and accused the questioner of having an unfounded conspiracy theory. And yet, searching "Leland Yee" on CNN I found over half a dozen cases of them reporting on "state-level" matters including that shark-fin soup prohibition. But nothing, absolutely nothing on the trafficking of millions of dollars of full-auto weapons, launched explosives, and even a hellfire missile to known terrorists. It is undeniable at this point: CNN is actively suppressing this information. They are ultimately a left-leaning broadcast network despite their attempts to appear moderate. This conflicts with their narrative of supporting Yee's gun control policies, it certainly gets in the way of MSNBC's clear bias on the matter (but Rachel Maddow alone has had nearly 100 hours of coverage on bridge-gate so far, to the point where even Bill Mahr thinks it's bullshit) As for Fox news, they barely covered it but they aren't going to cover too much that doesn't involve Obamacare or other distraction issues. All broadcast news in this country represents certain corporate or political bias. They can't be trusted but the problem is people do. Even when people do wise up it's a matter of only seeing one side of the coin. Too many people who call out the "Communist News Network" tune in to The Five or Hannity and think Obamacare is by far the worst offense to civil liberties we've seen in decades. Too many people who call out "Faux News" think Jon Stewart is an honest man or think MicrosoftNBC is for people who 'get it' because the Koch brothers run everything and corporations are evil.

news is bullshit and delusions of journalistic ethics still being a think with major outlets is also bullshit.

FrankP3893

I didn't read it. TLDR? Just leave her

I didn't read it. TLDR? Just leave her

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cggabjj

I didn't read it.

Just leave her

Smilge

Here's what I've come up with from testing: As soon as the temperature drops below 45 F, one unit of fuel is instantly consumed in every house. From there, a timer starts on each house. Boarding houses and wooden houses will consume another unit of fuel every 60 seconds, and stone houses will consume a unit of fuel every 90 seconds. For reference, a month (for instance, from 'early winter' to 'winter') lasts 5 minutes. Houses will continue to consume fuel at this rate until the temperature rises to 45 F or above. Here are the numbers based on a fairly typical year, where it becomes 44 F partway through autumn and rises to 45 F partway through early spring. | Type | Fuel per month | Fuel per year | |:-----------|:------------:|:------------:| | Wooden | 5 | 26 | Stone | 3.3 | 17 A wooden house costs 16 wood and 8 stone, while a stone house costs 24 wood, 40 stone, and 10 iron. Assuming you have unlimited traders, the cost breakdown looks like this: | Type | Wood (value) | Stone (value) | Iron (value) | Total value |:-----------|:---------------:|:---------------:|:------------:|:------------:| | Wooden | 16 (32) | 8 (56) | 0 (0) | 88 | Stone | 24 (48)| 40 (280) | 10 (50) | 378 So a wooden house burns 9 extra firewood per year, and firewood is worth 4 each. We can say that our break even point is year x, where the value of the stone house's materials is equal to the value of the extra firewood burned plus the value of the wooden house, or 378 = 36x + 88 x = ~8 **TL;DR:** It takes about 8 years for a stone house to break even with a wooden house in terms of trader value of materials.

Here's what I've come up with from testing: As soon as the temperature drops below 45 F, one unit of fuel is instantly consumed in every house. From there, a timer starts on each house. Boarding houses and wooden houses will consume another unit of fuel every 60 seconds, and stone houses will consume a unit of fuel every 90 seconds. For reference, a month (for instance, from 'early winter' to 'winter') lasts 5 minutes. Houses will continue to consume fuel at this rate until the temperature rises to 45 F or above. Here are the numbers based on a fairly typical year, where it becomes 44 F partway through autumn and rises to 45 F partway through early spring. Type Fuel per month Fuel per year Wooden 5 26 Stone 3.3 17 A wooden house costs 16 wood and 8 stone, while a stone house costs 24 wood, 40 stone, and 10 iron. Assuming you have unlimited traders, the cost breakdown looks like this: Type Wood (value) Stone (value) Iron (value) Total value Wooden 16 (32) 8 (56) 0 (0) 88 Stone 24 (48) 40 (280) 10 (50) 378 So a wooden house burns 9 extra firewood per year, and firewood is worth 4 each. We can say that our break even point is year x, where the value of the stone house's materials is equal to the value of the extra firewood burned plus the value of the wooden house, or 378 = 36x + 88 x = ~8 TL;DR: It takes about 8 years for a stone house to break even with a wooden house in terms of trader value of materials.

Banished

t5_2wp64

cggllxv

Here's what I've come up with from testing: As soon as the temperature drops below 45 F, one unit of fuel is instantly consumed in every house. From there, a timer starts on each house. Boarding houses and wooden houses will consume another unit of fuel every 60 seconds, and stone houses will consume a unit of fuel every 90 seconds. For reference, a month (for instance, from 'early winter' to 'winter') lasts 5 minutes. Houses will continue to consume fuel at this rate until the temperature rises to 45 F or above. Here are the numbers based on a fairly typical year, where it becomes 44 F partway through autumn and rises to 45 F partway through early spring. Type Fuel per month Fuel per year Wooden 5 26 Stone 3.3 17 A wooden house costs 16 wood and 8 stone, while a stone house costs 24 wood, 40 stone, and 10 iron. Assuming you have unlimited traders, the cost breakdown looks like this: Type Wood (value) Stone (value) Iron (value) Total value Wooden 16 (32) 8 (56) 0 (0) 88 Stone 24 (48) 40 (280) 10 (50) 378 So a wooden house burns 9 extra firewood per year, and firewood is worth 4 each. We can say that our break even point is year x, where the value of the stone house's materials is equal to the value of the extra firewood burned plus the value of the wooden house, or 378 = 36x + 88 x = ~8

It takes about 8 years for a stone house to break even with a wooden house in terms of trader value of materials.

Grave_Girl

It's hard and painful. I'm only doing it unmedicated again because none of the pain relief methods I tried really helped enough to feel worthwhile to me. The IV narcotics just put me to sleep in between contractions (so I was still in pain but loopy as hell), and the epidural left me still in pain but unable to move. Which is **not** a problem most women have, by the way. So at this point I'll handle the pain because I *know* the pain, but let me tell you, if an epidural was that magical pain-free elixir for me it seems to be for everyone else, I'd have them call the anesthesiologist the second I got checked in. Tl;dr: Do what gets you through happily, and crotch punch anyone who questions you.

It's hard and painful. I'm only doing it unmedicated again because none of the pain relief methods I tried really helped enough to feel worthwhile to me. The IV narcotics just put me to sleep in between contractions (so I was still in pain but loopy as hell), and the epidural left me still in pain but unable to move. Which is not a problem most women have, by the way. So at this point I'll handle the pain because I know the pain, but let me tell you, if an epidural was that magical pain-free elixir for me it seems to be for everyone else, I'd have them call the anesthesiologist the second I got checked in. Tl;dr: Do what gets you through happily, and crotch punch anyone who questions you.

BabyBumps

t5_2s7cl

cggnxux

It's hard and painful. I'm only doing it unmedicated again because none of the pain relief methods I tried really helped enough to feel worthwhile to me. The IV narcotics just put me to sleep in between contractions (so I was still in pain but loopy as hell), and the epidural left me still in pain but unable to move. Which is not a problem most women have, by the way. So at this point I'll handle the pain because I know the pain, but let me tell you, if an epidural was that magical pain-free elixir for me it seems to be for everyone else, I'd have them call the anesthesiologist the second I got checked in.

Do what gets you through happily, and crotch punch anyone who questions you.

Plazmatic

it has to do with Object Oriented programming topics, to get some of this stuff you would have to be semi well versed in the workings of all these languages, though that isn't too uncommon among college undergrads and above. Python: refers to imports of classes and object structures, not worth getting into specifics, I have not done much with python. Java: sufferes from trying to be "Object Oriented" at times, so while a language like C++ only requires main() (because it comes from C) for main, Java actually maid thier main a method, and its complicated, EX >public static void main(String [ ] args) similarly with printing a statement, C and C++ use simple cout or printf functions/methods, but in java? >System.out.println("hello"); C++: this one makes less sense, even from coming from a java/c++ background my self, maybe they are refering to the templates? or having multiple versions of code for the same platform? EDIT: /u/HyperionCantos pointed out that you have to define in C++ if you are going to pass by reference or not, for java this happens for all objects automatically (since it was common practice to do that any way before Java even in C++), but C++ wanted to keep the functionality for objects as well for deep copies and that you *might* need the feature, which is basically been the C++ philosophy on its *over*abundance of features at times. If you don't pass by reference you could be copying over a *lot* of data unnecessarily if you just want to compare or edit a variable in the other class. The reference by the way refers to the spot in memory the object for the class exists at. Unix Shell: sort of self explanatory, but not really amusing unless you use it a lot. Assembly: really low level code, you don't have classes or other libraries you can depend on, just op-codes (predefined methods, often for multiplication and other simple arithmetic and memory management commands) and some variable spaces (depending on what assembly language) and its just one big thing of code, no multiple files or anything, so you end up making everything you need yourself. C: Null Terminated Arrays, these are strings that C knows have ended when they end with the ascii null character, and won't stop reading until it find the null character. Latex: Formatting? I don't know, maybe the author has a hard on for Latex, really obscure reference even for a programmer, why not use FORTRAN or C# instead? or really any other reference. Doesn't look particularly beautiful in my opinion. HTML: The whole point of the image, lots of people who are inexperienced like to think HTML is a programming language (it is not, you cannot create things, it just tells your browser what to render for online stuff, your browser determines how to render it) and it probably refers to the capabilities of HTML. **TLDR Honestly it wasn't very funny, kind of dumb, and not really worth your time.** EDIT: I'm probably wrong on some of these my self, so don't get mad if I mis-interpreted something, very easy thing to do with something like this

it has to do with Object Oriented programming topics, to get some of this stuff you would have to be semi well versed in the workings of all these languages, though that isn't too uncommon among college undergrads and above. Python: refers to imports of classes and object structures, not worth getting into specifics, I have not done much with python. Java: sufferes from trying to be "Object Oriented" at times, so while a language like C++ only requires main() (because it comes from C) for main, Java actually maid thier main a method, and its complicated, EX >public static void main(String [ ] args) similarly with printing a statement, C and C++ use simple cout or printf functions/methods, but in java? >System.out.println("hello"); C++: this one makes less sense, even from coming from a java/c++ background my self, maybe they are refering to the templates? or having multiple versions of code for the same platform? EDIT: /u/HyperionCantos pointed out that you have to define in C++ if you are going to pass by reference or not, for java this happens for all objects automatically (since it was common practice to do that any way before Java even in C++), but C++ wanted to keep the functionality for objects as well for deep copies and that you might need the feature, which is basically been the C++ philosophy on its over abundance of features at times. If you don't pass by reference you could be copying over a lot of data unnecessarily if you just want to compare or edit a variable in the other class. The reference by the way refers to the spot in memory the object for the class exists at. Unix Shell: sort of self explanatory, but not really amusing unless you use it a lot. Assembly: really low level code, you don't have classes or other libraries you can depend on, just op-codes (predefined methods, often for multiplication and other simple arithmetic and memory management commands) and some variable spaces (depending on what assembly language) and its just one big thing of code, no multiple files or anything, so you end up making everything you need yourself. C: Null Terminated Arrays, these are strings that C knows have ended when they end with the ascii null character, and won't stop reading until it find the null character. Latex: Formatting? I don't know, maybe the author has a hard on for Latex, really obscure reference even for a programmer, why not use FORTRAN or C# instead? or really any other reference. Doesn't look particularly beautiful in my opinion. HTML: The whole point of the image, lots of people who are inexperienced like to think HTML is a programming language (it is not, you cannot create things, it just tells your browser what to render for online stuff, your browser determines how to render it) and it probably refers to the capabilities of HTML. TLDR Honestly it wasn't very funny, kind of dumb, and not really worth your time. EDIT: I'm probably wrong on some of these my self, so don't get mad if I mis-interpreted something, very easy thing to do with something like this

todayilearned

t5_2qqjc

cggx5er

it has to do with Object Oriented programming topics, to get some of this stuff you would have to be semi well versed in the workings of all these languages, though that isn't too uncommon among college undergrads and above. Python: refers to imports of classes and object structures, not worth getting into specifics, I have not done much with python. Java: sufferes from trying to be "Object Oriented" at times, so while a language like C++ only requires main() (because it comes from C) for main, Java actually maid thier main a method, and its complicated, EX >public static void main(String [ ] args) similarly with printing a statement, C and C++ use simple cout or printf functions/methods, but in java? >System.out.println("hello"); C++: this one makes less sense, even from coming from a java/c++ background my self, maybe they are refering to the templates? or having multiple versions of code for the same platform? EDIT: /u/HyperionCantos pointed out that you have to define in C++ if you are going to pass by reference or not, for java this happens for all objects automatically (since it was common practice to do that any way before Java even in C++), but C++ wanted to keep the functionality for objects as well for deep copies and that you might need the feature, which is basically been the C++ philosophy on its over abundance of features at times. If you don't pass by reference you could be copying over a lot of data unnecessarily if you just want to compare or edit a variable in the other class. The reference by the way refers to the spot in memory the object for the class exists at. Unix Shell: sort of self explanatory, but not really amusing unless you use it a lot. Assembly: really low level code, you don't have classes or other libraries you can depend on, just op-codes (predefined methods, often for multiplication and other simple arithmetic and memory management commands) and some variable spaces (depending on what assembly language) and its just one big thing of code, no multiple files or anything, so you end up making everything you need yourself. C: Null Terminated Arrays, these are strings that C knows have ended when they end with the ascii null character, and won't stop reading until it find the null character. Latex: Formatting? I don't know, maybe the author has a hard on for Latex, really obscure reference even for a programmer, why not use FORTRAN or C# instead? or really any other reference. Doesn't look particularly beautiful in my opinion. HTML: The whole point of the image, lots of people who are inexperienced like to think HTML is a programming language (it is not, you cannot create things, it just tells your browser what to render for online stuff, your browser determines how to render it) and it probably refers to the capabilities of HTML.

Honestly it wasn't very funny, kind of dumb, and not really worth your time. EDIT: I'm probably wrong on some of these my self, so don't get mad if I mis-interpreted something, very easy thing to do with something like this

superpowerface

This is an unpopular opinion but I think the soldier is one of the most poorly balanced classes. The main issues I have with them are: * **Too much HP.** One-on-one, *no* class can deal enough damage in enough time to kill a soldier before being killed. Even if the soldier is sufficiently weakened, they rocket jump to safety. An overhealed soldier can soak up incredible amounts of damage. * **No range nerf.** Rocket spam at long range (crits from across the map) *and* rocket/shotgun damage at short range. Most classes need to get up close to deal proper damage and this is made virtually impossible since the soldier just shoots their own feet and kills anything around them with little sacrifice. * **Too mobile.** Ok, this one isn't so much of an issue except on more experienced pubs but it's incredibly annoying to walk out of spawn and get instagibbed by a soldier that has rocket-jumped across the map with impunity. But people complaining that the soldier is slow and lacks maneuvrability just haven't learned how to rocket jump yet. * **No counter-class.** Every other class seems to fit in the web of hard- and soft-counters, but the soldier's only real counter is other soldiers. Demos can deal with them *only* in the mid-long ranges. At short range, 1v1, the soldier's higher HP, and the respective splash-ranges of the GL (3ft) and RL (10ft) make it far more likely that the soldier wins (assuming equal skill). Yes, I know the above could be said of demomen, but honestly their range is far more balanced. Sticky jumping exists of course, but the self-damage due to stickies is far worse than a rocket jump, is exacerbated by less HP and isn't as versatile (easily jumping off walls, etc.) due to the detonation delay. Since there's no pointing out issues without providing solutions, I have some. None of this will ever happen of course because people would stop playing TF2 for ever: * Reduce the soldier's HP. * Increase self-damage from rockets. * Reduce overheal. * Reduce rocket damage. Of course, I'm sure there's numerous good counter-arguments to the above, and I'd love to hear them. *tl;dr* fucking soldiers

This is an unpopular opinion but I think the soldier is one of the most poorly balanced classes. The main issues I have with them are: Too much HP. One-on-one, no class can deal enough damage in enough time to kill a soldier before being killed. Even if the soldier is sufficiently weakened, they rocket jump to safety. An overhealed soldier can soak up incredible amounts of damage. No range nerf. Rocket spam at long range (crits from across the map) and rocket/shotgun damage at short range. Most classes need to get up close to deal proper damage and this is made virtually impossible since the soldier just shoots their own feet and kills anything around them with little sacrifice. Too mobile. Ok, this one isn't so much of an issue except on more experienced pubs but it's incredibly annoying to walk out of spawn and get instagibbed by a soldier that has rocket-jumped across the map with impunity. But people complaining that the soldier is slow and lacks maneuvrability just haven't learned how to rocket jump yet. No counter-class. Every other class seems to fit in the web of hard- and soft-counters, but the soldier's only real counter is other soldiers. Demos can deal with them only in the mid-long ranges. At short range, 1v1, the soldier's higher HP, and the respective splash-ranges of the GL (3ft) and RL (10ft) make it far more likely that the soldier wins (assuming equal skill). Yes, I know the above could be said of demomen, but honestly their range is far more balanced. Sticky jumping exists of course, but the self-damage due to stickies is far worse than a rocket jump, is exacerbated by less HP and isn't as versatile (easily jumping off walls, etc.) due to the detonation delay. Since there's no pointing out issues without providing solutions, I have some. None of this will ever happen of course because people would stop playing TF2 for ever: Reduce the soldier's HP. Increase self-damage from rockets. Reduce overheal. Reduce rocket damage. Of course, I'm sure there's numerous good counter-arguments to the above, and I'd love to hear them. tl;dr fucking soldiers

tf2

t5_2qka0

cghbm6j

This is an unpopular opinion but I think the soldier is one of the most poorly balanced classes. The main issues I have with them are: Too much HP. One-on-one, no class can deal enough damage in enough time to kill a soldier before being killed. Even if the soldier is sufficiently weakened, they rocket jump to safety. An overhealed soldier can soak up incredible amounts of damage. No range nerf. Rocket spam at long range (crits from across the map) and rocket/shotgun damage at short range. Most classes need to get up close to deal proper damage and this is made virtually impossible since the soldier just shoots their own feet and kills anything around them with little sacrifice. Too mobile. Ok, this one isn't so much of an issue except on more experienced pubs but it's incredibly annoying to walk out of spawn and get instagibbed by a soldier that has rocket-jumped across the map with impunity. But people complaining that the soldier is slow and lacks maneuvrability just haven't learned how to rocket jump yet. No counter-class. Every other class seems to fit in the web of hard- and soft-counters, but the soldier's only real counter is other soldiers. Demos can deal with them only in the mid-long ranges. At short range, 1v1, the soldier's higher HP, and the respective splash-ranges of the GL (3ft) and RL (10ft) make it far more likely that the soldier wins (assuming equal skill). Yes, I know the above could be said of demomen, but honestly their range is far more balanced. Sticky jumping exists of course, but the self-damage due to stickies is far worse than a rocket jump, is exacerbated by less HP and isn't as versatile (easily jumping off walls, etc.) due to the detonation delay. Since there's no pointing out issues without providing solutions, I have some. None of this will ever happen of course because people would stop playing TF2 for ever: Reduce the soldier's HP. Increase self-damage from rockets. Reduce overheal. Reduce rocket damage. Of course, I'm sure there's numerous good counter-arguments to the above, and I'd love to hear them.

fucking soldiers

ilmat1k

Little background. For my senior thesis at UWM, I wrote a book illustrating the changing landscape and culture of Milwaukee from the past to the present and ultimately, the future. In order to accomplish this project, I bought these photos and negatives from a train expert who I met at the train expo a few years back. I went through and shot a same perspective at these locations (and many more) showing the change (or lack thereof) in a bunch of neighborhoods. Then, I chose 5 buildings or locations that are in dire need of investment and change and worked with several architecture students to design how each of these hard hit areas could change and why we need to invest. tl:dr. I bought these photos and negatives and used them in a book I wrote.

Little background. For my senior thesis at UWM, I wrote a book illustrating the changing landscape and culture of Milwaukee from the past to the present and ultimately, the future. In order to accomplish this project, I bought these photos and negatives from a train expert who I met at the train expo a few years back. I went through and shot a same perspective at these locations (and many more) showing the change (or lack thereof) in a bunch of neighborhoods. Then, I chose 5 buildings or locations that are in dire need of investment and change and worked with several architecture students to design how each of these hard hit areas could change and why we need to invest. tl:dr. I bought these photos and negatives and used them in a book I wrote.

milwaukee

t5_2r7dt

cghhbdw

Little background. For my senior thesis at UWM, I wrote a book illustrating the changing landscape and culture of Milwaukee from the past to the present and ultimately, the future. In order to accomplish this project, I bought these photos and negatives from a train expert who I met at the train expo a few years back. I went through and shot a same perspective at these locations (and many more) showing the change (or lack thereof) in a bunch of neighborhoods. Then, I chose 5 buildings or locations that are in dire need of investment and change and worked with several architecture students to design how each of these hard hit areas could change and why we need to invest.

I bought these photos and negatives and used them in a book I wrote.

JeremyR22

The asteroids in-simulation have no gravity (according to a Scott Manley video at least). I assume that is because with them being measured in metres across rather than hundreds or thousands of miles means that their sphere of influence is so small as makes no sense to waste time computing it considering KSP works on the scale of a whole solar system. TL;DR: You have to push. Gravity is so weak it would be pointless even calculating it.

The asteroids in-simulation have no gravity (according to a Scott Manley video at least). I assume that is because with them being measured in metres across rather than hundreds or thousands of miles means that their sphere of influence is so small as makes no sense to waste time computing it considering KSP works on the scale of a whole solar system. TL;DR: You have to push. Gravity is so weak it would be pointless even calculating it.

Games

t5_2qhwp

cghuqli

The asteroids in-simulation have no gravity (according to a Scott Manley video at least). I assume that is because with them being measured in metres across rather than hundreds or thousands of miles means that their sphere of influence is so small as makes no sense to waste time computing it considering KSP works on the scale of a whole solar system.

You have to push. Gravity is so weak it would be pointless even calculating it.

-Shank-

This is what I've garnered from MrsViolence and Proofy's partner's accounts: Apparently MrsViolence had it in her contract when she joined the show that she could use her Gunnars. In addition, Tsquared had it in his contract that he would wear his Steelseries headset. They basically had preemptive permission from these companies (in their contracts) that the Battlefield competition could show their products without any repercussions. Proofy didn't do the same with his Kontrol Freeks (don't really blame him since he was so young), so the producers were reluctant to use them on the show and didn't want to hold up production just because of it so they told him he couldn't use them. This didn't sit well with him, so he said if he couldn't use his KFs that MrsViolence and Tsquared shouldn't be able to use their stuff either. MrsViolence agreed to take off her Gunnars but Tsquared said he was contractually obligated to wear the headset and refused to not wear it. Apparently that wasn't good enough for Proofy and he refused to play without his Kontrol Freeks. He threw a fit on camera because he didn't get his way and left the competition. TL;DR: He didn't leave because he would have violated his contract with Kontrol Freek if he didn't use them in the competition, he left because he didn't secure permission from Kontrol Freek to use their product in his contract like MrsViolence and Tsquared had done with their sponsorships. He felt slighted and like they had extra advantages over him so he quit.

This is what I've garnered from MrsViolence and Proofy's partner's accounts: Apparently MrsViolence had it in her contract when she joined the show that she could use her Gunnars. In addition, Tsquared had it in his contract that he would wear his Steelseries headset. They basically had preemptive permission from these companies (in their contracts) that the Battlefield competition could show their products without any repercussions. Proofy didn't do the same with his Kontrol Freeks (don't really blame him since he was so young), so the producers were reluctant to use them on the show and didn't want to hold up production just because of it so they told him he couldn't use them. This didn't sit well with him, so he said if he couldn't use his KFs that MrsViolence and Tsquared shouldn't be able to use their stuff either. MrsViolence agreed to take off her Gunnars but Tsquared said he was contractually obligated to wear the headset and refused to not wear it. Apparently that wasn't good enough for Proofy and he refused to play without his Kontrol Freeks. He threw a fit on camera because he didn't get his way and left the competition. TL;DR: He didn't leave because he would have violated his contract with Kontrol Freek if he didn't use them in the competition, he left because he didn't secure permission from Kontrol Freek to use their product in his contract like MrsViolence and Tsquared had done with their sponsorships. He felt slighted and like they had extra advantages over him so he quit.

CoDCompetitive

t5_2tvg8

cgi4d8z

This is what I've garnered from MrsViolence and Proofy's partner's accounts: Apparently MrsViolence had it in her contract when she joined the show that she could use her Gunnars. In addition, Tsquared had it in his contract that he would wear his Steelseries headset. They basically had preemptive permission from these companies (in their contracts) that the Battlefield competition could show their products without any repercussions. Proofy didn't do the same with his Kontrol Freeks (don't really blame him since he was so young), so the producers were reluctant to use them on the show and didn't want to hold up production just because of it so they told him he couldn't use them. This didn't sit well with him, so he said if he couldn't use his KFs that MrsViolence and Tsquared shouldn't be able to use their stuff either. MrsViolence agreed to take off her Gunnars but Tsquared said he was contractually obligated to wear the headset and refused to not wear it. Apparently that wasn't good enough for Proofy and he refused to play without his Kontrol Freeks. He threw a fit on camera because he didn't get his way and left the competition.

He didn't leave because he would have violated his contract with Kontrol Freek if he didn't use them in the competition, he left because he didn't secure permission from Kontrol Freek to use their product in his contract like MrsViolence and Tsquared had done with their sponsorships. He felt slighted and like they had extra advantages over him so he quit.

hugsfordrugs

Honestly I love them all and it depends on what you're going for. Rolls/pills are good for easy transportation and a good amount of them have some amphetamine mixed in, so if you're going clubbing or raving they might be the best choice. I think MDA is definitely more of a club/rave drug as well, since it lacks most of the empathy of MDMA but makes up for it in intensity and psychedelia. I prefer to take MDMA with people I like and love, in a home setting. Legit MDMA is so empathetic for me that I can't imagine ever taking it in a club setting. **TL;DR**: Largely depends on the set/setting.

Honestly I love them all and it depends on what you're going for. Rolls/pills are good for easy transportation and a good amount of them have some amphetamine mixed in, so if you're going clubbing or raving they might be the best choice. I think MDA is definitely more of a club/rave drug as well, since it lacks most of the empathy of MDMA but makes up for it in intensity and psychedelia. I prefer to take MDMA with people I like and love, in a home setting. Legit MDMA is so empathetic for me that I can't imagine ever taking it in a club setting. TL;DR : Largely depends on the set/setting.

DarkNetMarkets

t5_2yt0h

cgiiw08

Honestly I love them all and it depends on what you're going for. Rolls/pills are good for easy transportation and a good amount of them have some amphetamine mixed in, so if you're going clubbing or raving they might be the best choice. I think MDA is definitely more of a club/rave drug as well, since it lacks most of the empathy of MDMA but makes up for it in intensity and psychedelia. I prefer to take MDMA with people I like and love, in a home setting. Legit MDMA is so empathetic for me that I can't imagine ever taking it in a club setting.

Largely depends on the set/setting.

IrresponsiblePenguin

It really depends on when and where he lands. Let's say that at the peak of The Great Crusade, he is transported to Earth a few weeks/months prior to the alien invasion of New York (Avengers) And we agree that he won't be able to draw any kind of power from the warp. Hokay, so... Since the Emperor is a tall ass motherfucker (between 11 and 12 ft, or 3,3 and 3,5 meters), he would have a hard time hiding. He wouldn't be able to use psychic powers to "hide" his appearance, since they're non-existant in this universe. If he manages to go into hiding, he would probably stay there until he come up with a masterplan to get back to his beloved Imperium. If he is discovered, chances are that S.H.I.E.L.D. would probably get a hold of him and try to recruit him. He might be drawn in by the whole killing off invading aliens part. If so, he is most likely to play a huge part in the alien invasion of NY, and the battle would be over much faster and with less destruction. I am not sure if he's going to be able to unite mankind right away, but it is an achievable goal even though he won't have his psychic powers to help him. When he does that, he'll just start over. Get world domination, start the primarch project and because of the missing warp, the four chaos gods won't be able to sabotage his plan. Primarchs are created, Adeptus Astartes created and Earth will embark on a new great crusade. There might be some technological problems due to no Mechanicum on Mars, but there's plenty of Alien technology to be inspired from. A lot of the enemies mankind will encounter is gonna be a bit more of a challenge. First off, because there's no (as far as I know) lost human civilizations to join their cause. Will he succeed in conquering the galaxy? Probably. I'm don't know a lot about Marvel outside the movies, so most of this is based on assumption. Feel free to correct me. *TL;DR: Emperor helps out SHIELD with alien invasion, unites mankind, embarks on Great Crusade 2.0, Big E will encounter very challenging alien civilizations. Not sure what will happen then.*

It really depends on when and where he lands. Let's say that at the peak of The Great Crusade, he is transported to Earth a few weeks/months prior to the alien invasion of New York (Avengers) And we agree that he won't be able to draw any kind of power from the warp. Hokay, so... Since the Emperor is a tall ass motherfucker (between 11 and 12 ft, or 3,3 and 3,5 meters), he would have a hard time hiding. He wouldn't be able to use psychic powers to "hide" his appearance, since they're non-existant in this universe. If he manages to go into hiding, he would probably stay there until he come up with a masterplan to get back to his beloved Imperium. If he is discovered, chances are that S.H.I.E.L.D. would probably get a hold of him and try to recruit him. He might be drawn in by the whole killing off invading aliens part. If so, he is most likely to play a huge part in the alien invasion of NY, and the battle would be over much faster and with less destruction. I am not sure if he's going to be able to unite mankind right away, but it is an achievable goal even though he won't have his psychic powers to help him. When he does that, he'll just start over. Get world domination, start the primarch project and because of the missing warp, the four chaos gods won't be able to sabotage his plan. Primarchs are created, Adeptus Astartes created and Earth will embark on a new great crusade. There might be some technological problems due to no Mechanicum on Mars, but there's plenty of Alien technology to be inspired from. A lot of the enemies mankind will encounter is gonna be a bit more of a challenge. First off, because there's no (as far as I know) lost human civilizations to join their cause. Will he succeed in conquering the galaxy? Probably. I'm don't know a lot about Marvel outside the movies, so most of this is based on assumption. Feel free to correct me. TL;DR: Emperor helps out SHIELD with alien invasion, unites mankind, embarks on Great Crusade 2.0, Big E will encounter very challenging alien civilizations. Not sure what will happen then.

AskScienceFiction

t5_2slu2

cgi0st2

It really depends on when and where he lands. Let's say that at the peak of The Great Crusade, he is transported to Earth a few weeks/months prior to the alien invasion of New York (Avengers) And we agree that he won't be able to draw any kind of power from the warp. Hokay, so... Since the Emperor is a tall ass motherfucker (between 11 and 12 ft, or 3,3 and 3,5 meters), he would have a hard time hiding. He wouldn't be able to use psychic powers to "hide" his appearance, since they're non-existant in this universe. If he manages to go into hiding, he would probably stay there until he come up with a masterplan to get back to his beloved Imperium. If he is discovered, chances are that S.H.I.E.L.D. would probably get a hold of him and try to recruit him. He might be drawn in by the whole killing off invading aliens part. If so, he is most likely to play a huge part in the alien invasion of NY, and the battle would be over much faster and with less destruction. I am not sure if he's going to be able to unite mankind right away, but it is an achievable goal even though he won't have his psychic powers to help him. When he does that, he'll just start over. Get world domination, start the primarch project and because of the missing warp, the four chaos gods won't be able to sabotage his plan. Primarchs are created, Adeptus Astartes created and Earth will embark on a new great crusade. There might be some technological problems due to no Mechanicum on Mars, but there's plenty of Alien technology to be inspired from. A lot of the enemies mankind will encounter is gonna be a bit more of a challenge. First off, because there's no (as far as I know) lost human civilizations to join their cause. Will he succeed in conquering the galaxy? Probably. I'm don't know a lot about Marvel outside the movies, so most of this is based on assumption. Feel free to correct me.

Emperor helps out SHIELD with alien invasion, unites mankind, embarks on Great Crusade 2.0, Big E will encounter very challenging alien civilizations. Not sure what will happen then.

Kalepsis

I hate to be the one to say this, but it's not the customer's job to be polite. It is yours. That's what you were hired to do, whether the customer is nice or an asshole. Seems to me that many of the companies in the US these days have an "I don't give a shit about my customers" attitude, and customers are tired of being screwed over in every shop in which they spend their hard-earned money. I *always* start out polite, but if an employee is snarky and sarcastic, or just generally doesn't give a shit about their job, I turn on superasshole mode. Tl;Dr: Do your job well and you'll get *promoted*.

I hate to be the one to say this, but it's not the customer's job to be polite. It is yours. That's what you were hired to do, whether the customer is nice or an asshole. Seems to me that many of the companies in the US these days have an "I don't give a shit about my customers" attitude, and customers are tired of being screwed over in every shop in which they spend their hard-earned money. I always start out polite, but if an employee is snarky and sarcastic, or just generally doesn't give a shit about their job, I turn on superasshole mode. Tl;Dr: Do your job well and you'll get promoted .

AdviceAnimals

t5_2s7tt

cgii2v7

I hate to be the one to say this, but it's not the customer's job to be polite. It is yours. That's what you were hired to do, whether the customer is nice or an asshole. Seems to me that many of the companies in the US these days have an "I don't give a shit about my customers" attitude, and customers are tired of being screwed over in every shop in which they spend their hard-earned money. I always start out polite, but if an employee is snarky and sarcastic, or just generally doesn't give a shit about their job, I turn on superasshole mode.

Do your job well and you'll get promoted .

strongdoctor

He's still wrong. 10664 Megabytes/s = ~85312 Megabits/s = ~10.5 Gigabytes/s = ~84 Gigabits/s If he'd known his shit he'd have known the difference between bits and bytes. TLDR: Bits aren't bytes and vice versa.

He's still wrong. 10664 Megabytes/s = ~85312 Megabits/s = ~10.5 Gigabytes/s = ~84 Gigabits/s If he'd known his shit he'd have known the difference between bits and bytes. TLDR: Bits aren't bytes and vice versa.

pcmasterrace

t5_2sgp1

cgiclx5

He's still wrong. 10664 Megabytes/s = ~85312 Megabits/s = ~10.5 Gigabytes/s = ~84 Gigabits/s If he'd known his shit he'd have known the difference between bits and bytes.

Bits aren't bytes and vice versa.

TheAsianTroll

Route 1 seems like the option you want. If you buy the TM then you'd end up buying a metal gun kit for it which would end up being expensive. TL;DR route 1 to avoid buying a metal body kit for the M9

Route 1 seems like the option you want. If you buy the TM then you'd end up buying a metal gun kit for it which would end up being expensive. TL;DR route 1 to avoid buying a metal body kit for the M9

airsoft

t5_2qi2x

cgibh2l

Route 1 seems like the option you want. If you buy the TM then you'd end up buying a metal gun kit for it which would end up being expensive.

route 1 to avoid buying a metal body kit for the M9

Renoxo

HEY OP GREAT JOB! To everyone else who may be discourage by the excellent results OP has had, don't be! OP's accomplishments are incredibly impressive, but you can do it too! To lose 50 lbs in 3 months (12 weeks), you would average a loss of 4.1 lbs per week. Since a pound of fat is 3500 calories and OP lost 4 ish per week, this would equate to OP eating 2000 calories less a day...wait a second. Look OP, I'm not saying you didn't work hard, because it is very apparent that you did, but 3 months is a bit much and I'm just afraid that it might discourage people who otherwise don't see results as fast by making them quit their diet/exercise routine. To the people who feel encouraged by this post: keep it up man! Any motivation is great motivation! To the people who actually may feel discouraged from this post, seriously don't be, weight loss is a difficult and long journey; but goddamnit YOU CAN DO IT! TL;DR: OP is either smudging the numbers a bit or seriously has insane will power to eat 2000 less calories a day. Great job either way! I just didn't want these extreme results to discourage anyone :)

HEY OP GREAT JOB! To everyone else who may be discourage by the excellent results OP has had, don't be! OP's accomplishments are incredibly impressive, but you can do it too! To lose 50 lbs in 3 months (12 weeks), you would average a loss of 4.1 lbs per week. Since a pound of fat is 3500 calories and OP lost 4 ish per week, this would equate to OP eating 2000 calories less a day...wait a second. Look OP, I'm not saying you didn't work hard, because it is very apparent that you did, but 3 months is a bit much and I'm just afraid that it might discourage people who otherwise don't see results as fast by making them quit their diet/exercise routine. To the people who feel encouraged by this post: keep it up man! Any motivation is great motivation! To the people who actually may feel discouraged from this post, seriously don't be, weight loss is a difficult and long journey; but goddamnit YOU CAN DO IT! TL;DR: OP is either smudging the numbers a bit or seriously has insane will power to eat 2000 less calories a day. Great job either way! I just didn't want these extreme results to discourage anyone :)

GetMotivated

t5_2rmfx

cgj5g0x

HEY OP GREAT JOB! To everyone else who may be discourage by the excellent results OP has had, don't be! OP's accomplishments are incredibly impressive, but you can do it too! To lose 50 lbs in 3 months (12 weeks), you would average a loss of 4.1 lbs per week. Since a pound of fat is 3500 calories and OP lost 4 ish per week, this would equate to OP eating 2000 calories less a day...wait a second. Look OP, I'm not saying you didn't work hard, because it is very apparent that you did, but 3 months is a bit much and I'm just afraid that it might discourage people who otherwise don't see results as fast by making them quit their diet/exercise routine. To the people who feel encouraged by this post: keep it up man! Any motivation is great motivation! To the people who actually may feel discouraged from this post, seriously don't be, weight loss is a difficult and long journey; but goddamnit YOU CAN DO IT!

OP is either smudging the numbers a bit or seriously has insane will power to eat 2000 less calories a day. Great job either way! I just didn't want these extreme results to discourage anyone :)

jesusmcpenis

Seriously, I see this a lot on this sub and it pisses me off more than it probably should. But goddamnit, these are really well done photos, and OP knows it. Everyone knows it. He might have overdid a few things in post but the shots are still great. Titling it mediocre is just begging for praise instead of putting your art out and letting the opinions form themselves. I used to do it and its a shallow way to cope with the vulnerability of putting art out into the world. tl;dr People with poor confidence undersell their achievements in order to garner the most praise.

Seriously, I see this a lot on this sub and it pisses me off more than it probably should. But goddamnit, these are really well done photos, and OP knows it. Everyone knows it. He might have overdid a few things in post but the shots are still great. Titling it mediocre is just begging for praise instead of putting your art out and letting the opinions form themselves. I used to do it and its a shallow way to cope with the vulnerability of putting art out into the world. tl;dr People with poor confidence undersell their achievements in order to garner the most praise.

travel

t5_2qh41

cgjlk18

Seriously, I see this a lot on this sub and it pisses me off more than it probably should. But goddamnit, these are really well done photos, and OP knows it. Everyone knows it. He might have overdid a few things in post but the shots are still great. Titling it mediocre is just begging for praise instead of putting your art out and letting the opinions form themselves. I used to do it and its a shallow way to cope with the vulnerability of putting art out into the world.

People with poor confidence undersell their achievements in order to garner the most praise.

Carlthefox

I havent read that novel but im familiar with the [Millennium Challenge]( TL;DR: Missiles fuck shit up.

I havent read that novel but im familiar with the [Millennium Challenge]( TL;DR: Missiles fuck shit up.

MilitaryPorn

t5_2sq9y

cgk8xes

I havent read that novel but im familiar with the [Millennium Challenge](

Missiles fuck shit up.

extraperson1988

Dude, there's an hbcu here in Houston too. Most of the students that go there live in a uav, or an "urban academic village." I went on a couple dates with a girl who lived there, and she always claimed that her "friend" lived there, not her. Except...it was the only place I ever picked her up at. Even late at night, it was the only place she ever wanted to be dropped off. I guess she was embarrassed or something. I'm actually not too surprised, the area was really ghetto. I could see kids hotboxing in their cars and everybody was always dressed thugged out. It didn't feel anything like how a standard on-campus living should. The kids there dressed like they would be happier selling weed than working a 9-5. As you can guess the whole dating thing with her ended up going very poorly. You say in your post that weren't ratchet enough for the Howard parties...that might look racist from an outsider's perspective. But after dating someone who goes to an hbcu and seeing what type of environment that is, I can safely say, from my experience at least, that hbcus can be ratchet as hell. The houston hbcu graduation rate is at an INSANE 3%, and I can't say I'm too surprised: **tl;dr Girls in hbcus be crazy ratchet**

Dude, there's an hbcu here in Houston too. Most of the students that go there live in a uav, or an "urban academic village." I went on a couple dates with a girl who lived there, and she always claimed that her "friend" lived there, not her. Except...it was the only place I ever picked her up at. Even late at night, it was the only place she ever wanted to be dropped off. I guess she was embarrassed or something. I'm actually not too surprised, the area was really ghetto. I could see kids hotboxing in their cars and everybody was always dressed thugged out. It didn't feel anything like how a standard on-campus living should. The kids there dressed like they would be happier selling weed than working a 9-5. As you can guess the whole dating thing with her ended up going very poorly. You say in your post that weren't ratchet enough for the Howard parties...that might look racist from an outsider's perspective. But after dating someone who goes to an hbcu and seeing what type of environment that is, I can safely say, from my experience at least, that hbcus can be ratchet as hell. The houston hbcu graduation rate is at an INSANE 3%, and I can't say I'm too surprised: tl;dr Girls in hbcus be crazy ratchet

IAmA

t5_2qzb6

cgjc9r2

Dude, there's an hbcu here in Houston too. Most of the students that go there live in a uav, or an "urban academic village." I went on a couple dates with a girl who lived there, and she always claimed that her "friend" lived there, not her. Except...it was the only place I ever picked her up at. Even late at night, it was the only place she ever wanted to be dropped off. I guess she was embarrassed or something. I'm actually not too surprised, the area was really ghetto. I could see kids hotboxing in their cars and everybody was always dressed thugged out. It didn't feel anything like how a standard on-campus living should. The kids there dressed like they would be happier selling weed than working a 9-5. As you can guess the whole dating thing with her ended up going very poorly. You say in your post that weren't ratchet enough for the Howard parties...that might look racist from an outsider's perspective. But after dating someone who goes to an hbcu and seeing what type of environment that is, I can safely say, from my experience at least, that hbcus can be ratchet as hell. The houston hbcu graduation rate is at an INSANE 3%, and I can't say I'm too surprised:

Girls in hbcus be crazy ratchet

Biffingston

Yah, there was zero way that that could be intreperted as "You're trying to circlejerk." /s And yes, I could easily be more of an ass. I choose not too though. TL:DR Tone is next to impossible to communicate in text only. Don't forget that.

Yah, there was zero way that that could be intreperted as "You're trying to circlejerk." /s And yes, I could easily be more of an ass. I choose not too though. TL:DR Tone is next to impossible to communicate in text only. Don't forget that.

SquaredCircle

t5_2sljg

cgjm8vz

Yah, there was zero way that that could be intreperted as "You're trying to circlejerk." /s And yes, I could easily be more of an ass. I choose not too though.

Tone is next to impossible to communicate in text only. Don't forget that.

rinwashere

I wrote a long thing. Erased it. Wrote another long thing. Erased it again. I don't want to be over presumptuous, but I feel like I should say something. I feel like a lot of this stems from comparing yourself to others. *I* am *failing* because *I* am not like the *others*. *He* expects more, and could have more, because *he* is the *others*. Here is my outlook on life now: in this marathon, there are sprinters and there are pacers. There are people who lag behind. But whatever it is, it's not a race. Nobody wins by being ahead by miles. ***Everyone wins*** when they finish. You personally may not be satisfied with your run, but really, everyone else is just as concerned about their own. It doesn't really matter if they've ran 30 marathons before, and it doesn't matter if they're the world champion of marathons. ***YOU*** have every right to be on the path as everyone else does. I'm not going to feel bad because someone else sprinted ahead because I'm not a sprinter. I'm not going to feel bad because someone moving steady overtook me because I'm not a pacer. I'm going to take my rest when I need to, I'm going to work on the things I need to work on, and I'm going to keep going no matter what and win the race at the end. TL;DR: It's not about other people and how good they are, or how good they could have it, it's about ***YOU***. It's unfair to compare. You're not a failure if you've tried, for 10 years, for 20 years, for however long. You have your struggles, everyone has their own struggles. [Women like these]( are an inspiration.

I wrote a long thing. Erased it. Wrote another long thing. Erased it again. I don't want to be over presumptuous, but I feel like I should say something. I feel like a lot of this stems from comparing yourself to others. I am failing because I am not like the others . He expects more, and could have more, because he is the others . Here is my outlook on life now: in this marathon, there are sprinters and there are pacers. There are people who lag behind. But whatever it is, it's not a race. Nobody wins by being ahead by miles. Everyone wins when they finish. You personally may not be satisfied with your run, but really, everyone else is just as concerned about their own. It doesn't really matter if they've ran 30 marathons before, and it doesn't matter if they're the world champion of marathons. YOU have every right to be on the path as everyone else does. I'm not going to feel bad because someone else sprinted ahead because I'm not a sprinter. I'm not going to feel bad because someone moving steady overtook me because I'm not a pacer. I'm going to take my rest when I need to, I'm going to work on the things I need to work on, and I'm going to keep going no matter what and win the race at the end. TL;DR: It's not about other people and how good they are, or how good they could have it, it's about YOU . It's unfair to compare. You're not a failure if you've tried, for 10 years, for 20 years, for however long. You have your struggles, everyone has their own struggles. [Women like these]( are an inspiration.

ForeverAloneWomen

t5_2tzyn

cgkbk41

I wrote a long thing. Erased it. Wrote another long thing. Erased it again. I don't want to be over presumptuous, but I feel like I should say something. I feel like a lot of this stems from comparing yourself to others. I am failing because I am not like the others . He expects more, and could have more, because he is the others . Here is my outlook on life now: in this marathon, there are sprinters and there are pacers. There are people who lag behind. But whatever it is, it's not a race. Nobody wins by being ahead by miles. Everyone wins when they finish. You personally may not be satisfied with your run, but really, everyone else is just as concerned about their own. It doesn't really matter if they've ran 30 marathons before, and it doesn't matter if they're the world champion of marathons. YOU have every right to be on the path as everyone else does. I'm not going to feel bad because someone else sprinted ahead because I'm not a sprinter. I'm not going to feel bad because someone moving steady overtook me because I'm not a pacer. I'm going to take my rest when I need to, I'm going to work on the things I need to work on, and I'm going to keep going no matter what and win the race at the end.

It's not about other people and how good they are, or how good they could have it, it's about YOU . It's unfair to compare. You're not a failure if you've tried, for 10 years, for 20 years, for however long. You have your struggles, everyone has their own struggles. [Women like these]( are an inspiration.

anna545

a) See a psychologist/counselor, you'd benefit from talking about this with someone. b) I can relate here. I actually think most people can on some level. There's always someone out there who you had a huge crush on and they rejected you and now you feel inferior to them yet continue to be hung up on them. Subsequent interactions just reinforce the feeling, because they don't change their mind about you so you're continually reminded that you're not worthy of them. You feel like if they liked you, your existence would be validated - all these negative things you think about yourself couldn't be true, because they (awesome person) like you. Suffice to say, it's not very healthy for your self-worth to be dependent on someone else's opinion of you. I think most people probably feel something of the above when they're rejected, but if they have decent coping skills they get over it soon enough. I suppose the goal is to get to the point where you can go "meh, their loss" despite being disappointed. Easier said than done, though. Oh, and just saw this: > But nothing at all makes it worse than being surrounded by women--not just "normal" and functioning, but passionate about the things he is--in my life that this man could have found that would have been better matches, if that makes sense. Yeah, that's the worst... In my situation I kept thinking of people who'd suit him better and how I didn't live up to them. They seemed so much cooler, more intelligent, sexier, whatever. I don't like thinking that way. I prefer to think, "Maybe they suit him better, but that doesn't mean I'm inferior to them, and eventually I'll meet someone who appreciates me for my qualities. They might be X, Y and Z, but I have A, B and C, so meh." Also, if you've only met him online he probably doesn't live up to what you're imagining. You're filling in all the unknowns with desirable characteristics. As I saw someone say in another thread once, for all you know he has a crooked penis, bad morning breath and skidmarks. Be careful not to idealize him too much. tl;dr - you need to work on your self-esteem and distance yourself from this guy a bit. sorry for the rambling message, hopefully some of it was useful...

a) See a psychologist/counselor, you'd benefit from talking about this with someone. b) I can relate here. I actually think most people can on some level. There's always someone out there who you had a huge crush on and they rejected you and now you feel inferior to them yet continue to be hung up on them. Subsequent interactions just reinforce the feeling, because they don't change their mind about you so you're continually reminded that you're not worthy of them. You feel like if they liked you, your existence would be validated - all these negative things you think about yourself couldn't be true, because they (awesome person) like you. Suffice to say, it's not very healthy for your self-worth to be dependent on someone else's opinion of you. I think most people probably feel something of the above when they're rejected, but if they have decent coping skills they get over it soon enough. I suppose the goal is to get to the point where you can go "meh, their loss" despite being disappointed. Easier said than done, though. Oh, and just saw this: > But nothing at all makes it worse than being surrounded by women--not just "normal" and functioning, but passionate about the things he is--in my life that this man could have found that would have been better matches, if that makes sense. Yeah, that's the worst... In my situation I kept thinking of people who'd suit him better and how I didn't live up to them. They seemed so much cooler, more intelligent, sexier, whatever. I don't like thinking that way. I prefer to think, "Maybe they suit him better, but that doesn't mean I'm inferior to them, and eventually I'll meet someone who appreciates me for my qualities. They might be X, Y and Z, but I have A, B and C, so meh." Also, if you've only met him online he probably doesn't live up to what you're imagining. You're filling in all the unknowns with desirable characteristics. As I saw someone say in another thread once, for all you know he has a crooked penis, bad morning breath and skidmarks. Be careful not to idealize him too much. tl;dr - you need to work on your self-esteem and distance yourself from this guy a bit. sorry for the rambling message, hopefully some of it was useful...

ForeverAloneWomen

t5_2tzyn

cgkomtr

a) See a psychologist/counselor, you'd benefit from talking about this with someone. b) I can relate here. I actually think most people can on some level. There's always someone out there who you had a huge crush on and they rejected you and now you feel inferior to them yet continue to be hung up on them. Subsequent interactions just reinforce the feeling, because they don't change their mind about you so you're continually reminded that you're not worthy of them. You feel like if they liked you, your existence would be validated - all these negative things you think about yourself couldn't be true, because they (awesome person) like you. Suffice to say, it's not very healthy for your self-worth to be dependent on someone else's opinion of you. I think most people probably feel something of the above when they're rejected, but if they have decent coping skills they get over it soon enough. I suppose the goal is to get to the point where you can go "meh, their loss" despite being disappointed. Easier said than done, though. Oh, and just saw this: > But nothing at all makes it worse than being surrounded by women--not just "normal" and functioning, but passionate about the things he is--in my life that this man could have found that would have been better matches, if that makes sense. Yeah, that's the worst... In my situation I kept thinking of people who'd suit him better and how I didn't live up to them. They seemed so much cooler, more intelligent, sexier, whatever. I don't like thinking that way. I prefer to think, "Maybe they suit him better, but that doesn't mean I'm inferior to them, and eventually I'll meet someone who appreciates me for my qualities. They might be X, Y and Z, but I have A, B and C, so meh." Also, if you've only met him online he probably doesn't live up to what you're imagining. You're filling in all the unknowns with desirable characteristics. As I saw someone say in another thread once, for all you know he has a crooked penis, bad morning breath and skidmarks. Be careful not to idealize him too much.

you need to work on your self-esteem and distance yourself from this guy a bit. sorry for the rambling message, hopefully some of it was useful...

Best4Business

This represents everything wrong with comics today... I've met some really great artists that did some amazing work and when talking to them about the whole Superman/Batman thing, not once did any artist say "Fuck Superman! I Hate That Moronic Character!" In my honest opinion if you think he is simple is because you are a shallow minded simpleton who can not see the complexity of the character in the day to day struggle to find humanity. Superman is a GOD. Batman knows it, Marvel sure as fuck knows it, and artists know it. Yes Superman has a kryptonite weakness. Yes some of the artists over the years have not done him justice by any means. But for fucks sake, it's not like he's crying on literally every other cover. He's not always the boy scout. People like this artist are what give comic book fans a bad rap. He is closed minded and thinks Frank Miller is a GOD Damn genius for his "Dark Knight Returns" work. Which in and of it self is ok at best in my opinion. I love Batman. I love Superman. And when it comes down to complexity of a character, I'm sorry but to me Superman is leaps and bounds over Bats. But that's just me. Tl;Dr - Fuck that guy.

This represents everything wrong with comics today... I've met some really great artists that did some amazing work and when talking to them about the whole Superman/Batman thing, not once did any artist say "Fuck Superman! I Hate That Moronic Character!" In my honest opinion if you think he is simple is because you are a shallow minded simpleton who can not see the complexity of the character in the day to day struggle to find humanity. Superman is a GOD. Batman knows it, Marvel sure as fuck knows it, and artists know it. Yes Superman has a kryptonite weakness. Yes some of the artists over the years have not done him justice by any means. But for fucks sake, it's not like he's crying on literally every other cover. He's not always the boy scout. People like this artist are what give comic book fans a bad rap. He is closed minded and thinks Frank Miller is a GOD Damn genius for his "Dark Knight Returns" work. Which in and of it self is ok at best in my opinion. I love Batman. I love Superman. And when it comes down to complexity of a character, I'm sorry but to me Superman is leaps and bounds over Bats. But that's just me. Tl;Dr - Fuck that guy.

superman

t5_2qrwe

cgtty5b

This represents everything wrong with comics today... I've met some really great artists that did some amazing work and when talking to them about the whole Superman/Batman thing, not once did any artist say "Fuck Superman! I Hate That Moronic Character!" In my honest opinion if you think he is simple is because you are a shallow minded simpleton who can not see the complexity of the character in the day to day struggle to find humanity. Superman is a GOD. Batman knows it, Marvel sure as fuck knows it, and artists know it. Yes Superman has a kryptonite weakness. Yes some of the artists over the years have not done him justice by any means. But for fucks sake, it's not like he's crying on literally every other cover. He's not always the boy scout. People like this artist are what give comic book fans a bad rap. He is closed minded and thinks Frank Miller is a GOD Damn genius for his "Dark Knight Returns" work. Which in and of it self is ok at best in my opinion. I love Batman. I love Superman. And when it comes down to complexity of a character, I'm sorry but to me Superman is leaps and bounds over Bats. But that's just me.

Fuck that guy.

ARC_Prisoner

The issue was not that they should be essential services. This was not some platform discussion going on, it was a knee jerk response to a strike that does not involve wages. The previous strike, the allowed nurses to strike (while unpaid) for a time. Money was saved. The nurses were then given what they wanted, the extra wages. These wages effectively came out of the time while striking. More money was saved than given up in increased wages. Fast forward to now. The management's old equation (let them strike long enough to make a cost-savings afterwards) no longer functions as they are asking for mandated ratios. The only solution becomes disallow a strike. TL;DR The bill is less about essential services definition, and more about denying worker's rights. How to you disallow a group from being able to strike? Make a bill that deems it illegal in the form of essential services. The bill was not already in the works, it was rushed through to ensure they could not strike.

The issue was not that they should be essential services. This was not some platform discussion going on, it was a knee jerk response to a strike that does not involve wages. The previous strike, the allowed nurses to strike (while unpaid) for a time. Money was saved. The nurses were then given what they wanted, the extra wages. These wages effectively came out of the time while striking. More money was saved than given up in increased wages. Fast forward to now. The management's old equation (let them strike long enough to make a cost-savings afterwards) no longer functions as they are asking for mandated ratios. The only solution becomes disallow a strike. TL;DR The bill is less about essential services definition, and more about denying worker's rights. How to you disallow a group from being able to strike? Make a bill that deems it illegal in the form of essential services. The bill was not already in the works, it was rushed through to ensure they could not strike.

halifax

t5_2r77k

cgk4dal

The issue was not that they should be essential services. This was not some platform discussion going on, it was a knee jerk response to a strike that does not involve wages. The previous strike, the allowed nurses to strike (while unpaid) for a time. Money was saved. The nurses were then given what they wanted, the extra wages. These wages effectively came out of the time while striking. More money was saved than given up in increased wages. Fast forward to now. The management's old equation (let them strike long enough to make a cost-savings afterwards) no longer functions as they are asking for mandated ratios. The only solution becomes disallow a strike.

The bill is less about essential services definition, and more about denying worker's rights. How to you disallow a group from being able to strike? Make a bill that deems it illegal in the form of essential services. The bill was not already in the works, it was rushed through to ensure they could not strike.

RikM

Hi, I want to tell you a story. (If you don't want to read all that, then feel free just to skip to **The Point**.) When I was your age I hated my life, I was probably above average at school but I once had a bad head injury when I was about 12 so I am about as socially able as a broom handle (thanks to that injury, I have lost my rhythm and coordination which ruined my ability at my first love; music. Overnight, I got kicked off the school choir and orchestra). And a weak kid with zero social skill gets shit, and I am sure you know what that feels like. I found a way to get "protection". You see the "prison bitch" in films, well lets use that as a metaphor. I attached myself to a group who I felt comfortable around, the sort of people who don't give people shit, a mix of emo rockers (my kind of music) and the quiet, unassuming intellects of the year who somehow had found a way to attain popularity as well. I was not popular and only ever got pity invites but if I was with people, everyone else gave me less shit. Unfortunately, this meant I had to put up with a little too much "banter". This is why I always give banter back. It wasn't a great time but it reduced the bullying although I cannot possibly explain how much shit I went through, but I can assume that you will be able to take a good guess. As a result of this, I did once try to kill myself when I was about your age (14) but I didn't swallow enough pills and did nothing more than oversleep. I cannot possibly begin to explain how glad I am I survived. I survived but I wish I had not tried. As high school became sixth form (16-18) the worst people left and I started to learn how to act around people. I still got the pity invite but more people began to accept me.At 18, I got into university (so much doubt, even from teachers, that I would get there but I did). So, I moved away and distanced myself from the haters. I made friends and felt honestly included for the first time in my life. I met a girl and fell in love. I even got involved in a project in my dream career which has already hit the headlines. So that is something to be proud of. Unfortunately, the story doesn't end there. When I was 20, my heart broke and I didn't know how to cope. I tried to run away and left everyone who cares. And now, 2 weeks from my 22nd birthday I am in a bad place. I am inches from failing my masters degree (I almost failed my bachelors but good shit happened and I saved it at the last minute. I ended up being in the top 10 from my course. So shit may go good again for me). I have considered killing myself. I have stood on the edge of a bridge and held a knife to my wrists but one thought saved my life everytime. And that is the point of me telling you all this. **THE POINT** Kids in school are arseholes. They just want to be liked and the only way they know how is to make others suffer. It is something so many of us have to struggle with but you are not long from leaving these people behind and meeting new, like minded, people. When you are in school you are expected to know exactly what you want to do and be on your way to your dream career but not only is that a scary though but it is rare that A 16 year old knows what they want to do for the next 50 years. The amount of people *anyone* will ever see drop out of uni because they don't actually like what they thought they wanted to do is amazing. So do not worry if you haven't found your path yet. You will soon find something that you enjoy and are good at. (And if you enjoy something but are not yet good at it, then work at it.) **THE FINAL POINT** Most people live 'til they have passed 70 which means you are 20% through your life. Look at everything that has happened to me in the space of 7 years. Things change so quickly if you let them, sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse. But if thins went so well for me once, then it is bound to happen again sooner or later. And if that happens to me, then why can it not happen to anyone else? It will happen but you just need to display patience. I am sure that sooner or later it will all be worth it. I have a crappy job pot washing and people ask why I do it and work masses of overtime to make sure everything is spotless. Well, I put the time in because I need the money to pay for my degree to get me out of here and get me where I want to be. And when I am there, every single dirty plate will have been worth it. They say life is short but so much can happen in even just a single year. and you are just not far enough in to experience it yet. You have only really been concious of life for maybe 5 years. This is too soon to judge what will happen. **Analogy time:** Do you watch Formula 1? Drivers turn up at the first race in the worst car on the grid. Every race, Marussia and Caterham put a car there that cannot possibly keep up with Red Bull or Mercedes... but one day the conditions will be right and they will win. There was a famous race in Canada in 2010 when Jenson Button went from last place and won. At the end of 2008, Button did not have a team or a car. Weeks before the Australian GP of 2009, he was given a drive. They turned up at the first race without having done any testing and he became the 2009 world champion. What if he had given up in 2008? You never know what will happen but you just need to keep your foot down. **And Finally:** So to finish this essay, I can definitely empathise with how you feel and if my life is anything to go by, then it is too soon to give up on yours. If you ever need anyone to talk to, I am just a PM away. I am online most days so you will get a reply pretty quickly (even if it is just to say that I have seen it and will reply properly later that day). Any issue you have, I am happy to listen. Hell, I will even try and help you with your homework if it is something I know about. **TL;DR:** You never know when bad shit can go good and I am always here to listen. Good luck to you.

Hi, I want to tell you a story. (If you don't want to read all that, then feel free just to skip to The Point .) When I was your age I hated my life, I was probably above average at school but I once had a bad head injury when I was about 12 so I am about as socially able as a broom handle (thanks to that injury, I have lost my rhythm and coordination which ruined my ability at my first love; music. Overnight, I got kicked off the school choir and orchestra). And a weak kid with zero social skill gets shit, and I am sure you know what that feels like. I found a way to get "protection". You see the "prison bitch" in films, well lets use that as a metaphor. I attached myself to a group who I felt comfortable around, the sort of people who don't give people shit, a mix of emo rockers (my kind of music) and the quiet, unassuming intellects of the year who somehow had found a way to attain popularity as well. I was not popular and only ever got pity invites but if I was with people, everyone else gave me less shit. Unfortunately, this meant I had to put up with a little too much "banter". This is why I always give banter back. It wasn't a great time but it reduced the bullying although I cannot possibly explain how much shit I went through, but I can assume that you will be able to take a good guess. As a result of this, I did once try to kill myself when I was about your age (14) but I didn't swallow enough pills and did nothing more than oversleep. I cannot possibly begin to explain how glad I am I survived. I survived but I wish I had not tried. As high school became sixth form (16-18) the worst people left and I started to learn how to act around people. I still got the pity invite but more people began to accept me.At 18, I got into university (so much doubt, even from teachers, that I would get there but I did). So, I moved away and distanced myself from the haters. I made friends and felt honestly included for the first time in my life. I met a girl and fell in love. I even got involved in a project in my dream career which has already hit the headlines. So that is something to be proud of. Unfortunately, the story doesn't end there. When I was 20, my heart broke and I didn't know how to cope. I tried to run away and left everyone who cares. And now, 2 weeks from my 22nd birthday I am in a bad place. I am inches from failing my masters degree (I almost failed my bachelors but good shit happened and I saved it at the last minute. I ended up being in the top 10 from my course. So shit may go good again for me). I have considered killing myself. I have stood on the edge of a bridge and held a knife to my wrists but one thought saved my life everytime. And that is the point of me telling you all this. THE POINT Kids in school are arseholes. They just want to be liked and the only way they know how is to make others suffer. It is something so many of us have to struggle with but you are not long from leaving these people behind and meeting new, like minded, people. When you are in school you are expected to know exactly what you want to do and be on your way to your dream career but not only is that a scary though but it is rare that A 16 year old knows what they want to do for the next 50 years. The amount of people anyone will ever see drop out of uni because they don't actually like what they thought they wanted to do is amazing. So do not worry if you haven't found your path yet. You will soon find something that you enjoy and are good at. (And if you enjoy something but are not yet good at it, then work at it.) THE FINAL POINT Most people live 'til they have passed 70 which means you are 20% through your life. Look at everything that has happened to me in the space of 7 years. Things change so quickly if you let them, sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse. But if thins went so well for me once, then it is bound to happen again sooner or later. And if that happens to me, then why can it not happen to anyone else? It will happen but you just need to display patience. I am sure that sooner or later it will all be worth it. I have a crappy job pot washing and people ask why I do it and work masses of overtime to make sure everything is spotless. Well, I put the time in because I need the money to pay for my degree to get me out of here and get me where I want to be. And when I am there, every single dirty plate will have been worth it. They say life is short but so much can happen in even just a single year. and you are just not far enough in to experience it yet. You have only really been concious of life for maybe 5 years. This is too soon to judge what will happen. Analogy time: Do you watch Formula 1? Drivers turn up at the first race in the worst car on the grid. Every race, Marussia and Caterham put a car there that cannot possibly keep up with Red Bull or Mercedes... but one day the conditions will be right and they will win. There was a famous race in Canada in 2010 when Jenson Button went from last place and won. At the end of 2008, Button did not have a team or a car. Weeks before the Australian GP of 2009, he was given a drive. They turned up at the first race without having done any testing and he became the 2009 world champion. What if he had given up in 2008? You never know what will happen but you just need to keep your foot down. And Finally: So to finish this essay, I can definitely empathise with how you feel and if my life is anything to go by, then it is too soon to give up on yours. If you ever need anyone to talk to, I am just a PM away. I am online most days so you will get a reply pretty quickly (even if it is just to say that I have seen it and will reply properly later that day). Any issue you have, I am happy to listen. Hell, I will even try and help you with your homework if it is something I know about. TL;DR: You never know when bad shit can go good and I am always here to listen. Good luck to you.

SuicideWatch

t5_2qpzs

cgkhukd

Hi, I want to tell you a story. (If you don't want to read all that, then feel free just to skip to The Point .) When I was your age I hated my life, I was probably above average at school but I once had a bad head injury when I was about 12 so I am about as socially able as a broom handle (thanks to that injury, I have lost my rhythm and coordination which ruined my ability at my first love; music. Overnight, I got kicked off the school choir and orchestra). And a weak kid with zero social skill gets shit, and I am sure you know what that feels like. I found a way to get "protection". You see the "prison bitch" in films, well lets use that as a metaphor. I attached myself to a group who I felt comfortable around, the sort of people who don't give people shit, a mix of emo rockers (my kind of music) and the quiet, unassuming intellects of the year who somehow had found a way to attain popularity as well. I was not popular and only ever got pity invites but if I was with people, everyone else gave me less shit. Unfortunately, this meant I had to put up with a little too much "banter". This is why I always give banter back. It wasn't a great time but it reduced the bullying although I cannot possibly explain how much shit I went through, but I can assume that you will be able to take a good guess. As a result of this, I did once try to kill myself when I was about your age (14) but I didn't swallow enough pills and did nothing more than oversleep. I cannot possibly begin to explain how glad I am I survived. I survived but I wish I had not tried. As high school became sixth form (16-18) the worst people left and I started to learn how to act around people. I still got the pity invite but more people began to accept me.At 18, I got into university (so much doubt, even from teachers, that I would get there but I did). So, I moved away and distanced myself from the haters. I made friends and felt honestly included for the first time in my life. I met a girl and fell in love. I even got involved in a project in my dream career which has already hit the headlines. So that is something to be proud of. Unfortunately, the story doesn't end there. When I was 20, my heart broke and I didn't know how to cope. I tried to run away and left everyone who cares. And now, 2 weeks from my 22nd birthday I am in a bad place. I am inches from failing my masters degree (I almost failed my bachelors but good shit happened and I saved it at the last minute. I ended up being in the top 10 from my course. So shit may go good again for me). I have considered killing myself. I have stood on the edge of a bridge and held a knife to my wrists but one thought saved my life everytime. And that is the point of me telling you all this. THE POINT Kids in school are arseholes. They just want to be liked and the only way they know how is to make others suffer. It is something so many of us have to struggle with but you are not long from leaving these people behind and meeting new, like minded, people. When you are in school you are expected to know exactly what you want to do and be on your way to your dream career but not only is that a scary though but it is rare that A 16 year old knows what they want to do for the next 50 years. The amount of people anyone will ever see drop out of uni because they don't actually like what they thought they wanted to do is amazing. So do not worry if you haven't found your path yet. You will soon find something that you enjoy and are good at. (And if you enjoy something but are not yet good at it, then work at it.) THE FINAL POINT Most people live 'til they have passed 70 which means you are 20% through your life. Look at everything that has happened to me in the space of 7 years. Things change so quickly if you let them, sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse. But if thins went so well for me once, then it is bound to happen again sooner or later. And if that happens to me, then why can it not happen to anyone else? It will happen but you just need to display patience. I am sure that sooner or later it will all be worth it. I have a crappy job pot washing and people ask why I do it and work masses of overtime to make sure everything is spotless. Well, I put the time in because I need the money to pay for my degree to get me out of here and get me where I want to be. And when I am there, every single dirty plate will have been worth it. They say life is short but so much can happen in even just a single year. and you are just not far enough in to experience it yet. You have only really been concious of life for maybe 5 years. This is too soon to judge what will happen. Analogy time: Do you watch Formula 1? Drivers turn up at the first race in the worst car on the grid. Every race, Marussia and Caterham put a car there that cannot possibly keep up with Red Bull or Mercedes... but one day the conditions will be right and they will win. There was a famous race in Canada in 2010 when Jenson Button went from last place and won. At the end of 2008, Button did not have a team or a car. Weeks before the Australian GP of 2009, he was given a drive. They turned up at the first race without having done any testing and he became the 2009 world champion. What if he had given up in 2008? You never know what will happen but you just need to keep your foot down. And Finally: So to finish this essay, I can definitely empathise with how you feel and if my life is anything to go by, then it is too soon to give up on yours. If you ever need anyone to talk to, I am just a PM away. I am online most days so you will get a reply pretty quickly (even if it is just to say that I have seen it and will reply properly later that day). Any issue you have, I am happy to listen. Hell, I will even try and help you with your homework if it is something I know about.

You never know when bad shit can go good and I am always here to listen. Good luck to you.

ChelseaManning

Another ignorant article criticizing the financial industry written by a person who has no idea what they're talking about. What value could there possibly be in purchasing a company, then running into the ground and fire selling all the assets to return pennies on the dollar to the investor? Think about it. Because I think it would be beneficial, private equity 101: **What is a private equity firm?** A group of guys with business experience (typically former consultants and investment bankers-- here is a legitimate point of contention around how relevant said business experience is, but of course these points aren't addressed in the article) form a general partnership. They then go out and raise money (funds) from outside investors (limited partners) with the promise of using that money to go out and purchase companies, improve them operationally, and sell them after they are more valuable, typically within 5 to 7 years. Usually the fund will put capital to work alongside their limited partners, so they very much are "the ones left holding the bag" when things go south. Unfortunately, not all of these deals work out. Some of them go south, and the companies get liquidated. This may or may not be the PE firm's fault. Outside market conditions, unforeseen circumstances etc. may cause the firms to go bankrupt. When this happens, nobody gets paid. It's literally the worst case scenario. **Who are the limited partners?** Not "the top .01%" as this article writer would have you believe. The limited partners are typically pension funds like Calpers, the Canadian Pension Plan Investment Board, Texas Teachers, etc. They invest in private equity because they need above-market returns to fulfill their pension obligations. **How do GP's get paid?** LP's typically pay the private equity firm 2% of their base capital as a management fee. They also pay 20% of "carry," which is basically the money that is left over after the fund has cleared a certain return hurdle, typically 7%. This means that in order for the GP's to make any real money, the fund has to return a minimum of 7%. **Why do GP's get paid so much money?** Because LP's think its worth it-- the returns are very high. And when you put billions of dollars to work with a relatively small group of people, 2% + 20% of carry is quite a bit of money. **What do LP's get?** LP's get what's left: hopefully their original investment, minus a 2% management fee, 7% base return, and 80% of any excess return on top of that. They pay for the ability to get these returns without having to actually put the capital to work themselves. Not a terrible deal. **tl,dr:** Private equity is not "evil." They are not in the business of killing companies and returning pennies on the dollar to their investors-- a bankruptcy is the last thing a firm wants. What they want is to buy companies that are mismanaged, introduce robust business processes to create value, and sell the companies to capture the value that they created. This value gets split between the firm and the people who invested money for the deal to get done-- the limited partners, who are not the super rich .01%, but rather public workers, teachers, regular people like you and me. There's a TON of misinformation floating around these days around the financial sector, basically trying to stir shit up against the top 1% or whatever, so I urge you: **please educate yourself as to what these institutions are, what they do, and why they are important.** Especially if you want to write a whiny article that's going to be read by thousands of people who are even more ignorant than you are. Criticisms are welcome, just know what the fuck you're talking about. As an aside, I am not employed by the financial industry.

Another ignorant article criticizing the financial industry written by a person who has no idea what they're talking about. What value could there possibly be in purchasing a company, then running into the ground and fire selling all the assets to return pennies on the dollar to the investor? Think about it. Because I think it would be beneficial, private equity 101: What is a private equity firm? A group of guys with business experience (typically former consultants and investment bankers-- here is a legitimate point of contention around how relevant said business experience is, but of course these points aren't addressed in the article) form a general partnership. They then go out and raise money (funds) from outside investors (limited partners) with the promise of using that money to go out and purchase companies, improve them operationally, and sell them after they are more valuable, typically within 5 to 7 years. Usually the fund will put capital to work alongside their limited partners, so they very much are "the ones left holding the bag" when things go south. Unfortunately, not all of these deals work out. Some of them go south, and the companies get liquidated. This may or may not be the PE firm's fault. Outside market conditions, unforeseen circumstances etc. may cause the firms to go bankrupt. When this happens, nobody gets paid. It's literally the worst case scenario. Who are the limited partners? Not "the top .01%" as this article writer would have you believe. The limited partners are typically pension funds like Calpers, the Canadian Pension Plan Investment Board, Texas Teachers, etc. They invest in private equity because they need above-market returns to fulfill their pension obligations. How do GP's get paid? LP's typically pay the private equity firm 2% of their base capital as a management fee. They also pay 20% of "carry," which is basically the money that is left over after the fund has cleared a certain return hurdle, typically 7%. This means that in order for the GP's to make any real money, the fund has to return a minimum of 7%. Why do GP's get paid so much money? Because LP's think its worth it-- the returns are very high. And when you put billions of dollars to work with a relatively small group of people, 2% + 20% of carry is quite a bit of money. What do LP's get? LP's get what's left: hopefully their original investment, minus a 2% management fee, 7% base return, and 80% of any excess return on top of that. They pay for the ability to get these returns without having to actually put the capital to work themselves. Not a terrible deal. tl,dr: Private equity is not "evil." They are not in the business of killing companies and returning pennies on the dollar to their investors-- a bankruptcy is the last thing a firm wants. What they want is to buy companies that are mismanaged, introduce robust business processes to create value, and sell the companies to capture the value that they created. This value gets split between the firm and the people who invested money for the deal to get done-- the limited partners, who are not the super rich .01%, but rather public workers, teachers, regular people like you and me. There's a TON of misinformation floating around these days around the financial sector, basically trying to stir shit up against the top 1% or whatever, so I urge you: please educate yourself as to what these institutions are, what they do, and why they are important. Especially if you want to write a whiny article that's going to be read by thousands of people who are even more ignorant than you are. Criticisms are welcome, just know what the fuck you're talking about. As an aside, I am not employed by the financial industry.

business

t5_2qgzg

cgkoqf8

Another ignorant article criticizing the financial industry written by a person who has no idea what they're talking about. What value could there possibly be in purchasing a company, then running into the ground and fire selling all the assets to return pennies on the dollar to the investor? Think about it. Because I think it would be beneficial, private equity 101: What is a private equity firm? A group of guys with business experience (typically former consultants and investment bankers-- here is a legitimate point of contention around how relevant said business experience is, but of course these points aren't addressed in the article) form a general partnership. They then go out and raise money (funds) from outside investors (limited partners) with the promise of using that money to go out and purchase companies, improve them operationally, and sell them after they are more valuable, typically within 5 to 7 years. Usually the fund will put capital to work alongside their limited partners, so they very much are "the ones left holding the bag" when things go south. Unfortunately, not all of these deals work out. Some of them go south, and the companies get liquidated. This may or may not be the PE firm's fault. Outside market conditions, unforeseen circumstances etc. may cause the firms to go bankrupt. When this happens, nobody gets paid. It's literally the worst case scenario. Who are the limited partners? Not "the top .01%" as this article writer would have you believe. The limited partners are typically pension funds like Calpers, the Canadian Pension Plan Investment Board, Texas Teachers, etc. They invest in private equity because they need above-market returns to fulfill their pension obligations. How do GP's get paid? LP's typically pay the private equity firm 2% of their base capital as a management fee. They also pay 20% of "carry," which is basically the money that is left over after the fund has cleared a certain return hurdle, typically 7%. This means that in order for the GP's to make any real money, the fund has to return a minimum of 7%. Why do GP's get paid so much money? Because LP's think its worth it-- the returns are very high. And when you put billions of dollars to work with a relatively small group of people, 2% + 20% of carry is quite a bit of money. What do LP's get? LP's get what's left: hopefully their original investment, minus a 2% management fee, 7% base return, and 80% of any excess return on top of that. They pay for the ability to get these returns without having to actually put the capital to work themselves. Not a terrible deal.

Private equity is not "evil." They are not in the business of killing companies and returning pennies on the dollar to their investors-- a bankruptcy is the last thing a firm wants. What they want is to buy companies that are mismanaged, introduce robust business processes to create value, and sell the companies to capture the value that they created. This value gets split between the firm and the people who invested money for the deal to get done-- the limited partners, who are not the super rich .01%, but rather public workers, teachers, regular people like you and me. There's a TON of misinformation floating around these days around the financial sector, basically trying to stir shit up against the top 1% or whatever, so I urge you: please educate yourself as to what these institutions are, what they do, and why they are important. Especially if you want to write a whiny article that's going to be read by thousands of people who are even more ignorant than you are. Criticisms are welcome, just know what the fuck you're talking about. As an aside, I am not employed by the financial industry.

Bailzychan

I know that prescription anti-anxiety and anti-depressant medicines can be frightening. I struggled with mine, and attempted suicide. The reason being, I never let it complete in my system, I also started using other chemical substances to help alleviate my depression and had been self medicating before the prescription. I put a war of chemicals in my body and it backfired. My advice would be to handle your anger first. I know not smoking pot is important to that, but part of me really feels that you may do better with quitting if you get serious about balancing your chem balance and taking your prescriptions. Possibly talk to them that way you can be on a different medicine... I never thought I would uphold big pharma over the green goddess, but now that I'm in *almost* this situation again- I realize what I would need to do. Sorry if I'm rambling. TL;DR- Trying letting the 'scripts get into your system, continue seeing your psychiatrist/therapist to make sure you find the right medicine for YOU.

I know that prescription anti-anxiety and anti-depressant medicines can be frightening. I struggled with mine, and attempted suicide. The reason being, I never let it complete in my system, I also started using other chemical substances to help alleviate my depression and had been self medicating before the prescription. I put a war of chemicals in my body and it backfired. My advice would be to handle your anger first. I know not smoking pot is important to that, but part of me really feels that you may do better with quitting if you get serious about balancing your chem balance and taking your prescriptions. Possibly talk to them that way you can be on a different medicine... I never thought I would uphold big pharma over the green goddess, but now that I'm in almost this situation again- I realize what I would need to do. Sorry if I'm rambling. TL;DR- Trying letting the 'scripts get into your system, continue seeing your psychiatrist/therapist to make sure you find the right medicine for YOU.

leaves

t5_2s9i3

cgl0g0x

I know that prescription anti-anxiety and anti-depressant medicines can be frightening. I struggled with mine, and attempted suicide. The reason being, I never let it complete in my system, I also started using other chemical substances to help alleviate my depression and had been self medicating before the prescription. I put a war of chemicals in my body and it backfired. My advice would be to handle your anger first. I know not smoking pot is important to that, but part of me really feels that you may do better with quitting if you get serious about balancing your chem balance and taking your prescriptions. Possibly talk to them that way you can be on a different medicine... I never thought I would uphold big pharma over the green goddess, but now that I'm in almost this situation again- I realize what I would need to do. Sorry if I'm rambling.

Trying letting the 'scripts get into your system, continue seeing your psychiatrist/therapist to make sure you find the right medicine for YOU.

KRM_01

Okay, Even looking at this picture makes me feel uncomfortable. I can't really place what the exact thing that freaks me out is but it's a feeling that sticks to it. This is such a huge nope for me. Now i have to procastrinate and browse random content for 30 minutes to forget about this and shake the feeling. edit: see, i cant read the article that explains why i have this feeling because the pictures fream me out. Can someone either TL:DR it or have a text based version without pictures. Edit 2: tried again, freaks me out... im getting out of here.

Okay, Even looking at this picture makes me feel uncomfortable. I can't really place what the exact thing that freaks me out is but it's a feeling that sticks to it. This is such a huge nope for me. Now i have to procastrinate and browse random content for 30 minutes to forget about this and shake the feeling. edit: see, i cant read the article that explains why i have this feeling because the pictures fream me out. Can someone either TL:DR it or have a text based version without pictures. Edit 2: tried again, freaks me out... im getting out of here.

interesting

t5_2qib0

chjdk5c

Okay, Even looking at this picture makes me feel uncomfortable. I can't really place what the exact thing that freaks me out is but it's a feeling that sticks to it. This is such a huge nope for me. Now i have to procastrinate and browse random content for 30 minutes to forget about this and shake the feeling. edit: see, i cant read the article that explains why i have this feeling because the pictures fream me out. Can someone either

it or have a text based version without pictures. Edit 2: tried again, freaks me out... im getting out of here.

Extropian

Why do you have a CDR gem in your helm? None of your skills aside from TP have a cooldown. Upgrade your emerald in your weapon and your topaz in your chest piece. Use prodigy as your passive and drop audacity, you probably aren't getting the benefit of audacity most of the time if you're orb/electrocute spec. Here's a graphic showing how close 15 yards actually is. Typically that spec does a lot of kiting so I'm not too keen on Unwavering Will with that spec. I'd also drop illusionist and pick up cold blooded. Elemental exposure is a good passive, your lighting/cold damage will give you a bonus 10% during aoe encounters, and your sparkflint grants you another 5% during boss fights. TLDR: Use prodigy, elemental exposure, and cold blooded.

Why do you have a CDR gem in your helm? None of your skills aside from TP have a cooldown. Upgrade your emerald in your weapon and your topaz in your chest piece. Use prodigy as your passive and drop audacity, you probably aren't getting the benefit of audacity most of the time if you're orb/electrocute spec. Here's a graphic showing how close 15 yards actually is. Typically that spec does a lot of kiting so I'm not too keen on Unwavering Will with that spec. I'd also drop illusionist and pick up cold blooded. Elemental exposure is a good passive, your lighting/cold damage will give you a bonus 10% during aoe encounters, and your sparkflint grants you another 5% during boss fights. TLDR: Use prodigy, elemental exposure, and cold blooded.

Diablo3Wizards

t5_2ucml

cgl8pa0

Why do you have a CDR gem in your helm? None of your skills aside from TP have a cooldown. Upgrade your emerald in your weapon and your topaz in your chest piece. Use prodigy as your passive and drop audacity, you probably aren't getting the benefit of audacity most of the time if you're orb/electrocute spec. Here's a graphic showing how close 15 yards actually is. Typically that spec does a lot of kiting so I'm not too keen on Unwavering Will with that spec. I'd also drop illusionist and pick up cold blooded. Elemental exposure is a good passive, your lighting/cold damage will give you a bonus 10% during aoe encounters, and your sparkflint grants you another 5% during boss fights.

Use prodigy, elemental exposure, and cold blooded.

ristea

> Why not just encourage people to read books that they find interesting rather than going out of our way to encourage "reading books about a woman" or "reading books by a woman"? Because then you get "best of" lists that feature >80% male authors. Don't you think that's weird considering our population is split roughly 50/50 between men and women? This is a slant that can't be proscribed to quality alone. I don't believe that women write so poorly that they deserve to be underrepresented. Sexism is still a force in our society, and we can't just keep doing what we've been doing, and hope it'll go away. It takes a movement to change how we think. It's the same situation with the disproportionately low number of female CEOs or elected officials (not to mention the wage gap). Following your logic, if we were to just hire people based on what we felt like, or pay people based on what we felt they deserved, you can bet that women would fare worse than the men. **TL;DR — In a patriarchal society, you have to think about these kinds of things, or women will be underrepresented.**

> Why not just encourage people to read books that they find interesting rather than going out of our way to encourage "reading books about a woman" or "reading books by a woman"? Because then you get "best of" lists that feature >80% male authors. Don't you think that's weird considering our population is split roughly 50/50 between men and women? This is a slant that can't be proscribed to quality alone. I don't believe that women write so poorly that they deserve to be underrepresented. Sexism is still a force in our society, and we can't just keep doing what we've been doing, and hope it'll go away. It takes a movement to change how we think. It's the same situation with the disproportionately low number of female CEOs or elected officials (not to mention the wage gap). Following your logic, if we were to just hire people based on what we felt like, or pay people based on what we felt they deserved, you can bet that women would fare worse than the men. TL;DR — In a patriarchal society, you have to think about these kinds of things, or women will be underrepresented.

Fantasy

t5_2qknd

cgl5taf

Why not just encourage people to read books that they find interesting rather than going out of our way to encourage "reading books about a woman" or "reading books by a woman"? Because then you get "best of" lists that feature >80% male authors. Don't you think that's weird considering our population is split roughly 50/50 between men and women? This is a slant that can't be proscribed to quality alone. I don't believe that women write so poorly that they deserve to be underrepresented. Sexism is still a force in our society, and we can't just keep doing what we've been doing, and hope it'll go away. It takes a movement to change how we think. It's the same situation with the disproportionately low number of female CEOs or elected officials (not to mention the wage gap). Following your logic, if we were to just hire people based on what we felt like, or pay people based on what we felt they deserved, you can bet that women would fare worse than the men.

In a patriarchal society, you have to think about these kinds of things, or women will be underrepresented.

Willasaurus

Personally, as many others have said, I don't care who wrote the book. Congratulations, you're a woman, congrats, you're a man. The only times I care are 1) if a being of neither gender wrote a book, like if a lemur wrote a book, holy shit, I'm impressed, or 2) if the author is writing very sexist over tones into their work (on either side if the argument, overly feminist or chauvinistic). I love Jordan, Sanderson, Tolkien, LeGuin, Rowling, Pierce, McCaffrey and Rothfuss. It doesn't matter who wrote it, but or some reason everyone gets all up in arms because "you read a book by a man," you must be a sexist pig. TL;DR If you want to get angry at me for imagined sexist slights then you can fuck off. Let me read my book. I like it better than you anyway.

Personally, as many others have said, I don't care who wrote the book. Congratulations, you're a woman, congrats, you're a man. The only times I care are 1) if a being of neither gender wrote a book, like if a lemur wrote a book, holy shit, I'm impressed, or 2) if the author is writing very sexist over tones into their work (on either side if the argument, overly feminist or chauvinistic). I love Jordan, Sanderson, Tolkien, LeGuin, Rowling, Pierce, McCaffrey and Rothfuss. It doesn't matter who wrote it, but or some reason everyone gets all up in arms because "you read a book by a man," you must be a sexist pig. TL;DR If you want to get angry at me for imagined sexist slights then you can fuck off. Let me read my book. I like it better than you anyway.

Fantasy

t5_2qknd

cgllapi

Personally, as many others have said, I don't care who wrote the book. Congratulations, you're a woman, congrats, you're a man. The only times I care are 1) if a being of neither gender wrote a book, like if a lemur wrote a book, holy shit, I'm impressed, or 2) if the author is writing very sexist over tones into their work (on either side if the argument, overly feminist or chauvinistic). I love Jordan, Sanderson, Tolkien, LeGuin, Rowling, Pierce, McCaffrey and Rothfuss. It doesn't matter who wrote it, but or some reason everyone gets all up in arms because "you read a book by a man," you must be a sexist pig.

If you want to get angry at me for imagined sexist slights then you can fuck off. Let me read my book. I like it better than you anyway.

Willasaurus

I have heard the sentiment expressed before. I'm saying if you read, read. But if you want to preach (not you) about how someone should read more female authors just because they're female, then I'm going to ignore you and continue reading. Because I like books. Now if you tell me to read more female authors because they're good authors an I would enjoy them, then hell yea, I'll read them, when I finish my current book. Diversity in books and authors is great, and we should respect them, but trying to say we need more of A over B, because A and B need to be more equal and not because A and B produce the same amount of awesomeness is ridiculous. It's like saying (example 1) "you should read more Stephanie Meyer because you don't read enough female authors," example 2 is like saying, "hey, I see you like reading Patrick Rothfuss, maybe you should try Ursula K. LeGuinn." I don't care about gender, I care about ability. TL;DR I don't are about gender, I care about ability. Don't try to get me to expand my horizons because *you* (hypothetical you, not you [the reader]) feel like I should, 'cause I won't. I *will* expand my horizons because there are cool, awesome and fantastical things beyond the horizon.

I have heard the sentiment expressed before. I'm saying if you read, read. But if you want to preach (not you) about how someone should read more female authors just because they're female, then I'm going to ignore you and continue reading. Because I like books. Now if you tell me to read more female authors because they're good authors an I would enjoy them, then hell yea, I'll read them, when I finish my current book. Diversity in books and authors is great, and we should respect them, but trying to say we need more of A over B, because A and B need to be more equal and not because A and B produce the same amount of awesomeness is ridiculous. It's like saying (example 1) "you should read more Stephanie Meyer because you don't read enough female authors," example 2 is like saying, "hey, I see you like reading Patrick Rothfuss, maybe you should try Ursula K. LeGuinn." I don't care about gender, I care about ability. TL;DR I don't are about gender, I care about ability. Don't try to get me to expand my horizons because you (hypothetical you, not you [the reader]) feel like I should, 'cause I won't. I will expand my horizons because there are cool, awesome and fantastical things beyond the horizon.

Fantasy

t5_2qknd

cgltb8b

I have heard the sentiment expressed before. I'm saying if you read, read. But if you want to preach (not you) about how someone should read more female authors just because they're female, then I'm going to ignore you and continue reading. Because I like books. Now if you tell me to read more female authors because they're good authors an I would enjoy them, then hell yea, I'll read them, when I finish my current book. Diversity in books and authors is great, and we should respect them, but trying to say we need more of A over B, because A and B need to be more equal and not because A and B produce the same amount of awesomeness is ridiculous. It's like saying (example 1) "you should read more Stephanie Meyer because you don't read enough female authors," example 2 is like saying, "hey, I see you like reading Patrick Rothfuss, maybe you should try Ursula K. LeGuinn." I don't care about gender, I care about ability.

I don't are about gender, I care about ability. Don't try to get me to expand my horizons because you (hypothetical you, not you [the reader]) feel like I should, 'cause I won't. I will expand my horizons because there are cool, awesome and fantastical things beyond the horizon.

blzy79

This is a long story. I committed insurance fraud, wasted police time, filed a false police report (I assume that's a thing). When I was 13 (this is the 90s) I accidentally broke my moms state of the art laptop that I was banned from touching. Laptops were pretty new technology back then and it had cost her £4000 and I smashed the screen on it pretty badly, and then it wouldn't start up. I paniced. I was incredibly stupid. She called up telling me she was on the way home from work, and I thought it would be better to lie on the phone than look her in the eye so I just said we were robbed. To her massive credit, her immediate question was Are you okay. I said I was fine, she asked when it happened, I said, just now. Of course, I was home. She knew I was home. So she assumed I had been home when we were robbed. Instead of being smart and saying I went to the shops and left the door open or something like that, I again paniced, and said yes I was home. She said she'd be home in a few minutes, to stay put, and not panic. Of course, I was panicing - and sounding like I was panicing, but because I had lied and I thought I was going to be grounded for a year. 2 minutes later - 3 police cars pull up full sirens blazing, followed by an ambulance that she had called. Holy shit. Okay now I am freaking out, it never entered my mind that the police would be involved, I just wanted some anonymous stranger to be blamed instead of me. So I start having a panic attack, followed by an asthma attack, because at this point I know I've royally fucked up and I'm scared of the retribution that is coming my way. I was also a very shy child and having a squadron of police charging at me was enough to have me in tears. So I'm there crying, unable to breathe, having an asthma attack and a panic attack. I'd hidden the broken laptop - but only under the sink in a cupboard, no where super smart. I can't talk I'm freaking out so much, they take me to the hospital, check me out, I'm fine of course. The whole time everyone is so nice to me, the police just trying to find out how I was robbed whilst I was in the house, if I could identify who did it, if they hurt me. I was stuck in this lie now, so I followed it through. I said it was a man, in a balaclava (not unusual in the winters here anyway) and gloves, who knocked on the door, pushed me down and took our laptop. The police believed me. The hospital believed me. My mom believed me. The police fingerprinted surfaces and doors but didn't look under the sink! They canvassed the entire area whilst I was being checked out in the hospital. I couldn't believe everyone believed me and I felt terrible but I just kept freaking out when I thought about telling the truth and the longer I left it, the worst it seemed to be - because then my family knew, my friends knew, my school knew... The police never found anything (of course). I throw the laptop away next time she was at work. She files an insurance report, £4000 is paid out and she buys a new one. I committed fraud, wasted massive amounts of police time as well as hospital resources and lied to everyone. It is now 17 years later and she still doesn't know and I still feel terrible about it and have no idea how it got so serious from what I intended to stupidly be a small lie to avoid being grounded. It really made me think about the consequences of my actions for the future though! TL:DR Lied to my mom after breaking her laptop, things got out of hand, she assumed I'd been personally robbed, ended up with a squad of police, ambulance, hospital trip after I had a panic attack from seeing the police. She filed an insurance report and got a new laptop, I threw the old one out. No one ever found out.

This is a long story. I committed insurance fraud, wasted police time, filed a false police report (I assume that's a thing). When I was 13 (this is the 90s) I accidentally broke my moms state of the art laptop that I was banned from touching. Laptops were pretty new technology back then and it had cost her £4000 and I smashed the screen on it pretty badly, and then it wouldn't start up. I paniced. I was incredibly stupid. She called up telling me she was on the way home from work, and I thought it would be better to lie on the phone than look her in the eye so I just said we were robbed. To her massive credit, her immediate question was Are you okay. I said I was fine, she asked when it happened, I said, just now. Of course, I was home. She knew I was home. So she assumed I had been home when we were robbed. Instead of being smart and saying I went to the shops and left the door open or something like that, I again paniced, and said yes I was home. She said she'd be home in a few minutes, to stay put, and not panic. Of course, I was panicing - and sounding like I was panicing, but because I had lied and I thought I was going to be grounded for a year. 2 minutes later - 3 police cars pull up full sirens blazing, followed by an ambulance that she had called. Holy shit. Okay now I am freaking out, it never entered my mind that the police would be involved, I just wanted some anonymous stranger to be blamed instead of me. So I start having a panic attack, followed by an asthma attack, because at this point I know I've royally fucked up and I'm scared of the retribution that is coming my way. I was also a very shy child and having a squadron of police charging at me was enough to have me in tears. So I'm there crying, unable to breathe, having an asthma attack and a panic attack. I'd hidden the broken laptop - but only under the sink in a cupboard, no where super smart. I can't talk I'm freaking out so much, they take me to the hospital, check me out, I'm fine of course. The whole time everyone is so nice to me, the police just trying to find out how I was robbed whilst I was in the house, if I could identify who did it, if they hurt me. I was stuck in this lie now, so I followed it through. I said it was a man, in a balaclava (not unusual in the winters here anyway) and gloves, who knocked on the door, pushed me down and took our laptop. The police believed me. The hospital believed me. My mom believed me. The police fingerprinted surfaces and doors but didn't look under the sink! They canvassed the entire area whilst I was being checked out in the hospital. I couldn't believe everyone believed me and I felt terrible but I just kept freaking out when I thought about telling the truth and the longer I left it, the worst it seemed to be - because then my family knew, my friends knew, my school knew... The police never found anything (of course). I throw the laptop away next time she was at work. She files an insurance report, £4000 is paid out and she buys a new one. I committed fraud, wasted massive amounts of police time as well as hospital resources and lied to everyone. It is now 17 years later and she still doesn't know and I still feel terrible about it and have no idea how it got so serious from what I intended to stupidly be a small lie to avoid being grounded. It really made me think about the consequences of my actions for the future though! TL:DR Lied to my mom after breaking her laptop, things got out of hand, she assumed I'd been personally robbed, ended up with a squad of police, ambulance, hospital trip after I had a panic attack from seeing the police. She filed an insurance report and got a new laptop, I threw the old one out. No one ever found out.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cgl9b4j

This is a long story. I committed insurance fraud, wasted police time, filed a false police report (I assume that's a thing). When I was 13 (this is the 90s) I accidentally broke my moms state of the art laptop that I was banned from touching. Laptops were pretty new technology back then and it had cost her £4000 and I smashed the screen on it pretty badly, and then it wouldn't start up. I paniced. I was incredibly stupid. She called up telling me she was on the way home from work, and I thought it would be better to lie on the phone than look her in the eye so I just said we were robbed. To her massive credit, her immediate question was Are you okay. I said I was fine, she asked when it happened, I said, just now. Of course, I was home. She knew I was home. So she assumed I had been home when we were robbed. Instead of being smart and saying I went to the shops and left the door open or something like that, I again paniced, and said yes I was home. She said she'd be home in a few minutes, to stay put, and not panic. Of course, I was panicing - and sounding like I was panicing, but because I had lied and I thought I was going to be grounded for a year. 2 minutes later - 3 police cars pull up full sirens blazing, followed by an ambulance that she had called. Holy shit. Okay now I am freaking out, it never entered my mind that the police would be involved, I just wanted some anonymous stranger to be blamed instead of me. So I start having a panic attack, followed by an asthma attack, because at this point I know I've royally fucked up and I'm scared of the retribution that is coming my way. I was also a very shy child and having a squadron of police charging at me was enough to have me in tears. So I'm there crying, unable to breathe, having an asthma attack and a panic attack. I'd hidden the broken laptop - but only under the sink in a cupboard, no where super smart. I can't talk I'm freaking out so much, they take me to the hospital, check me out, I'm fine of course. The whole time everyone is so nice to me, the police just trying to find out how I was robbed whilst I was in the house, if I could identify who did it, if they hurt me. I was stuck in this lie now, so I followed it through. I said it was a man, in a balaclava (not unusual in the winters here anyway) and gloves, who knocked on the door, pushed me down and took our laptop. The police believed me. The hospital believed me. My mom believed me. The police fingerprinted surfaces and doors but didn't look under the sink! They canvassed the entire area whilst I was being checked out in the hospital. I couldn't believe everyone believed me and I felt terrible but I just kept freaking out when I thought about telling the truth and the longer I left it, the worst it seemed to be - because then my family knew, my friends knew, my school knew... The police never found anything (of course). I throw the laptop away next time she was at work. She files an insurance report, £4000 is paid out and she buys a new one. I committed fraud, wasted massive amounts of police time as well as hospital resources and lied to everyone. It is now 17 years later and she still doesn't know and I still feel terrible about it and have no idea how it got so serious from what I intended to stupidly be a small lie to avoid being grounded. It really made me think about the consequences of my actions for the future though!

Lied to my mom after breaking her laptop, things got out of hand, she assumed I'd been personally robbed, ended up with a squad of police, ambulance, hospital trip after I had a panic attack from seeing the police. She filed an insurance report and got a new laptop, I threw the old one out. No one ever found out.

BonzotheFifth

A Strawman fallacy accusation is also an easy out for people to throw around to dismiss a subject and pretend like it doesn't exist. OP is making a statement about one specific behavior, and doesn't seem to be implying that this is systemic, universal, or the Only Problem With the Community (TM). So I don't see a problem with talking about it. Besides, this is an Internet forum with a nigh infinite capacity to handling various subjects one at a time. Why is a post discussing a specific issue incomplete unless it also takes into account everything else? That's what other threads are for, to discuss other specific issues, individually. TL;DR, Strawman accusations are, at best, dismissive, at worst, silencing and opinion policing.

A Strawman fallacy accusation is also an easy out for people to throw around to dismiss a subject and pretend like it doesn't exist. OP is making a statement about one specific behavior, and doesn't seem to be implying that this is systemic, universal, or the Only Problem With the Community (TM). So I don't see a problem with talking about it. Besides, this is an Internet forum with a nigh infinite capacity to handling various subjects one at a time. Why is a post discussing a specific issue incomplete unless it also takes into account everything else? That's what other threads are for, to discuss other specific issues, individually. TL;DR, Strawman accusations are, at best, dismissive, at worst, silencing and opinion policing.

polyamory

t5_2qu5n

cglbphv

A Strawman fallacy accusation is also an easy out for people to throw around to dismiss a subject and pretend like it doesn't exist. OP is making a statement about one specific behavior, and doesn't seem to be implying that this is systemic, universal, or the Only Problem With the Community (TM). So I don't see a problem with talking about it. Besides, this is an Internet forum with a nigh infinite capacity to handling various subjects one at a time. Why is a post discussing a specific issue incomplete unless it also takes into account everything else? That's what other threads are for, to discuss other specific issues, individually.

Strawman accusations are, at best, dismissive, at worst, silencing and opinion policing.

this_guy_in_your_but

Psychopaths feel and act according to their emotions, impulses, and a very reactive. This does not necessarily they are sadists or violent people. Sometimes they are just self-centered, big balls of emotion. This means that due to their lack of empathy, they are more likely to not care 'in the heat of the moment' type stuff. They are likely to act out violently, but not always. However, they still can follow rules. These are the types of people who have a 'quick reaction to bullshit'. A sociopath is someone with a lack of empathy driven more so by logic. They are less likely to act out in a bad situation, but they are more likely to carefully plan out a murder. These guys might as well be impossible to read because they will imitate emotions well to fit the scenario. You want to avoid and get a psychopath help ASAP. In certain cases, they can be a time bomb waiting to go off. How can you tell one? 1. They won't think about others' feelings. 2. They can have emotional outbursts. 3. They can be hotheaded, and prone to anger. 4. They have their own movie/show. As for sociopaths, they are harder to find and are less of a threat. Just make sure to not get on their bad side. The scary thing about sociopaths, is that they are far more common than a psychopath. A sociopath is basically anyone who can plan ahead, and throw away emotion, sentiment, morals, and empathy. Getting an I.D. on one is difficult.they only have a few consistent traits.These may include: 1. lack of morals. 2. capacity to plan very well. 3. they are self-centered. 4. they have a successful movie/show. **TL;DR, psychopaths act on emotions and don't care about other people as much, they aren't too hard to spot, and no they aren't always dangerous, but don't take the chance.**

Psychopaths feel and act according to their emotions, impulses, and a very reactive. This does not necessarily they are sadists or violent people. Sometimes they are just self-centered, big balls of emotion. This means that due to their lack of empathy, they are more likely to not care 'in the heat of the moment' type stuff. They are likely to act out violently, but not always. However, they still can follow rules. These are the types of people who have a 'quick reaction to bullshit'. A sociopath is someone with a lack of empathy driven more so by logic. They are less likely to act out in a bad situation, but they are more likely to carefully plan out a murder. These guys might as well be impossible to read because they will imitate emotions well to fit the scenario. You want to avoid and get a psychopath help ASAP. In certain cases, they can be a time bomb waiting to go off. How can you tell one? 1. They won't think about others' feelings. 2. They can have emotional outbursts. 3. They can be hotheaded, and prone to anger. 4. They have their own movie/show. As for sociopaths, they are harder to find and are less of a threat. Just make sure to not get on their bad side. The scary thing about sociopaths, is that they are far more common than a psychopath. A sociopath is basically anyone who can plan ahead, and throw away emotion, sentiment, morals, and empathy. Getting an I.D. on one is difficult.they only have a few consistent traits.These may include: 1. lack of morals. 2. capacity to plan very well. 3. they are self-centered. 4. they have a successful movie/show. TL;DR, psychopaths act on emotions and don't care about other people as much, they aren't too hard to spot, and no they aren't always dangerous, but don't take the chance.

explainlikeimfive

t5_2sokd

cgl9uto

Psychopaths feel and act according to their emotions, impulses, and a very reactive. This does not necessarily they are sadists or violent people. Sometimes they are just self-centered, big balls of emotion. This means that due to their lack of empathy, they are more likely to not care 'in the heat of the moment' type stuff. They are likely to act out violently, but not always. However, they still can follow rules. These are the types of people who have a 'quick reaction to bullshit'. A sociopath is someone with a lack of empathy driven more so by logic. They are less likely to act out in a bad situation, but they are more likely to carefully plan out a murder. These guys might as well be impossible to read because they will imitate emotions well to fit the scenario. You want to avoid and get a psychopath help ASAP. In certain cases, they can be a time bomb waiting to go off. How can you tell one? 1. They won't think about others' feelings. 2. They can have emotional outbursts. 3. They can be hotheaded, and prone to anger. 4. They have their own movie/show. As for sociopaths, they are harder to find and are less of a threat. Just make sure to not get on their bad side. The scary thing about sociopaths, is that they are far more common than a psychopath. A sociopath is basically anyone who can plan ahead, and throw away emotion, sentiment, morals, and empathy. Getting an I.D. on one is difficult.they only have a few consistent traits.These may include: 1. lack of morals. 2. capacity to plan very well. 3. they are self-centered. 4. they have a successful movie/show.

psychopaths act on emotions and don't care about other people as much, they aren't too hard to spot, and no they aren't always dangerous, but don't take the chance.

Ogbobbyj

I don't know if some people will say this was in proportion, but I don't think it was. One day my friend passed me a note, asking who I wanted to win, Obama or Romney. I said Romney to purposely piss him off, so he sent me another note saying "Fuck you." Than I said I was kidding, and he passed me a note saying "Good, here's the code to disarm the bomb under your sink, 787927463." A couple days later a teacher found it, I was pulled from art class. There were 9 police officers waiting for us in the office. After it was all worked out, we were suspended for a week. Tl:dr - Friend sent note with fake bomb threat, lots of cops and a week suspension.

I don't know if some people will say this was in proportion, but I don't think it was. One day my friend passed me a note, asking who I wanted to win, Obama or Romney. I said Romney to purposely piss him off, so he sent me another note saying "Fuck you." Than I said I was kidding, and he passed me a note saying "Good, here's the code to disarm the bomb under your sink, 787927463." A couple days later a teacher found it, I was pulled from art class. There were 9 police officers waiting for us in the office. After it was all worked out, we were suspended for a week. Tl:dr - Friend sent note with fake bomb threat, lots of cops and a week suspension.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cgl8jyi

I don't know if some people will say this was in proportion, but I don't think it was. One day my friend passed me a note, asking who I wanted to win, Obama or Romney. I said Romney to purposely piss him off, so he sent me another note saying "Fuck you." Than I said I was kidding, and he passed me a note saying "Good, here's the code to disarm the bomb under your sink, 787927463." A couple days later a teacher found it, I was pulled from art class. There were 9 police officers waiting for us in the office. After it was all worked out, we were suspended for a week.

Friend sent note with fake bomb threat, lots of cops and a week suspension.

Big_Blue_Box40

I took an air soft gun to school for about a week when i was in grade school, I put it in there a weekend before cause I was playing and it was raining and whatnot (don't want it to rust or whatever). That Friday my mom was saying something about putting something in my backpack and i was like no i am late and she took off my backpack and opened it to find the 'gun' and called in my father. He asked me why it was in my bag and i told him as above. He didn't like that answer and began spanking me asking/yelling over and over "why were you bringing it to school?!", every once in a while throwing in "were you trying to show one of your friends? tell ME?!" and i gave him the same answer over and over the same thing. After an hour or two and my bumb numb I just gave in and said I was going to show one of my friends, he continued. Eventually stopped and made me go to school. TL:DR I had to lie to get out of trouble when I was young. More to the story if anyone wants it.

I took an air soft gun to school for about a week when i was in grade school, I put it in there a weekend before cause I was playing and it was raining and whatnot (don't want it to rust or whatever). That Friday my mom was saying something about putting something in my backpack and i was like no i am late and she took off my backpack and opened it to find the 'gun' and called in my father. He asked me why it was in my bag and i told him as above. He didn't like that answer and began spanking me asking/yelling over and over "why were you bringing it to school?!", every once in a while throwing in "were you trying to show one of your friends? tell ME?!" and i gave him the same answer over and over the same thing. After an hour or two and my bumb numb I just gave in and said I was going to show one of my friends, he continued. Eventually stopped and made me go to school. TL:DR I had to lie to get out of trouble when I was young. More to the story if anyone wants it.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cgla6ox

I took an air soft gun to school for about a week when i was in grade school, I put it in there a weekend before cause I was playing and it was raining and whatnot (don't want it to rust or whatever). That Friday my mom was saying something about putting something in my backpack and i was like no i am late and she took off my backpack and opened it to find the 'gun' and called in my father. He asked me why it was in my bag and i told him as above. He didn't like that answer and began spanking me asking/yelling over and over "why were you bringing it to school?!", every once in a while throwing in "were you trying to show one of your friends? tell ME?!" and i gave him the same answer over and over the same thing. After an hour or two and my bumb numb I just gave in and said I was going to show one of my friends, he continued. Eventually stopped and made me go to school.

I had to lie to get out of trouble when I was young. More to the story if anyone wants it.

justduck01

Well judging by the show and what my friends who live in Portland tell me, most of the jokes apply aptly to Austin, as well. And judging by my friends who have never been to Austin nor Portland, we are apparently alone with Portlanders in "getting" the jokes. So ***TL/DR: Yes, for good reason.***

Well judging by the show and what my friends who live in Portland tell me, most of the jokes apply aptly to Austin, as well. And judging by my friends who have never been to Austin nor Portland, we are apparently alone with Portlanders in "getting" the jokes. So TL/DR: Yes, for good reason.

Austin

t5_2qhn5

cglneml

Well judging by the show and what my friends who live in Portland tell me, most of the jokes apply aptly to Austin, as well. And judging by my friends who have never been to Austin nor Portland, we are apparently alone with Portlanders in "getting" the jokes. So

Yes, for good reason.

liquld

>Duels are at their fairest when neither party heals - it's an honor thing. The only time I feel that healing is dishonorable is during a Red Sign Soapstone duel since only 1 party is capable of healing. The idea of no-heal duels is flawed in this game for a couple of reasons. First, there's no way to know that you're engaged in an actual no-heal duel or just one in which nobody has healed **yet** in most cases. Second, there are 3 different in-game that are disregarded in a no-heal duel which I believe upsets the thoughtful balance of the game: 1. Durability - I feel no shame when drinking Estus in duels, but I do try to limit how long the battle lasts because my Third Dragon Ring will eventually break and put me at a severe disadvantage if I'm not careful. Certain other items also experience this issue such as the hated Sun Ring (it's bizarre to me that people would complain about this ring AND complain about a tactic that works around it). 2. Item use speed is part of AGI, eliminating healing items from duels eliminates part of the use of AGI. 3. Some people are equipped with Estus counters such as the Avelyn or other bows. These counters take up precious equip load so it is a disadvantage to the user when they don't get the chance to use them. Those that make the decision to not heal so they can continue to pressure me receive the benefit of my slightly worse roll and worse stamina recovery as a reward for not healing mid-fight as I won't get the opportunity to use the Avelyn. 4. The Meta-game and mind-games are lost in a world where there is no healing in duels. Point three is already an example of this - where I wouldn't equip my Avelyn if I didn't feel the need to use it as a counter to Estus. Another example: one of my favorite tactics is to trade blows to get my opponent down, then squeeze a quick heal off to see if they'll try to do the same, and then punish them before they get their's off. Doesn't work on everyone, but it's satisfying to see the plan work. I know my brother likes to double chug Estus to get people to over-exert on a combo and then tries to punish them while they're stamina is too low to block attacks. TLDR: How can you call a no-heal duel the fairest type of duel when that type of duel disregards several balancing factors in the game?

>Duels are at their fairest when neither party heals - it's an honor thing. The only time I feel that healing is dishonorable is during a Red Sign Soapstone duel since only 1 party is capable of healing. The idea of no-heal duels is flawed in this game for a couple of reasons. First, there's no way to know that you're engaged in an actual no-heal duel or just one in which nobody has healed yet in most cases. Second, there are 3 different in-game that are disregarded in a no-heal duel which I believe upsets the thoughtful balance of the game: Durability - I feel no shame when drinking Estus in duels, but I do try to limit how long the battle lasts because my Third Dragon Ring will eventually break and put me at a severe disadvantage if I'm not careful. Certain other items also experience this issue such as the hated Sun Ring (it's bizarre to me that people would complain about this ring AND complain about a tactic that works around it). Item use speed is part of AGI, eliminating healing items from duels eliminates part of the use of AGI. Some people are equipped with Estus counters such as the Avelyn or other bows. These counters take up precious equip load so it is a disadvantage to the user when they don't get the chance to use them. Those that make the decision to not heal so they can continue to pressure me receive the benefit of my slightly worse roll and worse stamina recovery as a reward for not healing mid-fight as I won't get the opportunity to use the Avelyn. The Meta-game and mind-games are lost in a world where there is no healing in duels. Point three is already an example of this - where I wouldn't equip my Avelyn if I didn't feel the need to use it as a counter to Estus. Another example: one of my favorite tactics is to trade blows to get my opponent down, then squeeze a quick heal off to see if they'll try to do the same, and then punish them before they get their's off. Doesn't work on everyone, but it's satisfying to see the plan work. I know my brother likes to double chug Estus to get people to over-exert on a combo and then tries to punish them while they're stamina is too low to block attacks. TLDR: How can you call a no-heal duel the fairest type of duel when that type of duel disregards several balancing factors in the game?

DarkSouls2

t5_2vqni

cgma3i2

Duels are at their fairest when neither party heals - it's an honor thing. The only time I feel that healing is dishonorable is during a Red Sign Soapstone duel since only 1 party is capable of healing. The idea of no-heal duels is flawed in this game for a couple of reasons. First, there's no way to know that you're engaged in an actual no-heal duel or just one in which nobody has healed yet in most cases. Second, there are 3 different in-game that are disregarded in a no-heal duel which I believe upsets the thoughtful balance of the game: Durability - I feel no shame when drinking Estus in duels, but I do try to limit how long the battle lasts because my Third Dragon Ring will eventually break and put me at a severe disadvantage if I'm not careful. Certain other items also experience this issue such as the hated Sun Ring (it's bizarre to me that people would complain about this ring AND complain about a tactic that works around it). Item use speed is part of AGI, eliminating healing items from duels eliminates part of the use of AGI. Some people are equipped with Estus counters such as the Avelyn or other bows. These counters take up precious equip load so it is a disadvantage to the user when they don't get the chance to use them. Those that make the decision to not heal so they can continue to pressure me receive the benefit of my slightly worse roll and worse stamina recovery as a reward for not healing mid-fight as I won't get the opportunity to use the Avelyn. The Meta-game and mind-games are lost in a world where there is no healing in duels. Point three is already an example of this - where I wouldn't equip my Avelyn if I didn't feel the need to use it as a counter to Estus. Another example: one of my favorite tactics is to trade blows to get my opponent down, then squeeze a quick heal off to see if they'll try to do the same, and then punish them before they get their's off. Doesn't work on everyone, but it's satisfying to see the plan work. I know my brother likes to double chug Estus to get people to over-exert on a combo and then tries to punish them while they're stamina is too low to block attacks.

How can you call a no-heal duel the fairest type of duel when that type of duel disregards several balancing factors in the game?

fenrir119

Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO). Scary stuff. Prolonged exposure to its solid form can cause severe tissue damage, whereas accidental inhalation of its liquid form can sometimes result in death, even where small quantities of the compound are concerned. Additionally, its gaseous form has been known to cause severe burns. It is also a main component of many toxic substances, as well as acid rain. While we're talking about the environment, DHMO is responsible for large amounts of soil erosion. Also, if ingested in its purest form, it can reportedly poison you by leeching the nutrients from your very body. Like I said, super scary stuff. If you need to read more: TL;DR: DHMO: not even once.

Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO). Scary stuff. Prolonged exposure to its solid form can cause severe tissue damage, whereas accidental inhalation of its liquid form can sometimes result in death, even where small quantities of the compound are concerned. Additionally, its gaseous form has been known to cause severe burns. It is also a main component of many toxic substances, as well as acid rain. While we're talking about the environment, DHMO is responsible for large amounts of soil erosion. Also, if ingested in its purest form, it can reportedly poison you by leeching the nutrients from your very body. Like I said, super scary stuff. If you need to read more: TL;DR: DHMO: not even once.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cglt2b2

Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO). Scary stuff. Prolonged exposure to its solid form can cause severe tissue damage, whereas accidental inhalation of its liquid form can sometimes result in death, even where small quantities of the compound are concerned. Additionally, its gaseous form has been known to cause severe burns. It is also a main component of many toxic substances, as well as acid rain. While we're talking about the environment, DHMO is responsible for large amounts of soil erosion. Also, if ingested in its purest form, it can reportedly poison you by leeching the nutrients from your very body. Like I said, super scary stuff. If you need to read more:

DHMO: not even once.

Dinokiller12345

Cho carried me to silver 4 in ranked. Heres what i do. Get a dorans shield and Health pot. Have full tank runes and masteries, like 0/30/0. Max your E first for your lane clear. Eventually you will be clearing very fast with no mana cost. And your passive is where everytime you last hit a minion you're healed. When you hit lvl 6, Start ulting minions. Get your 6 stacks up early. If you get in a fistfight with someone, use your Q right at your feet to Stop them from attacking for a sec, then W them as they come down for the silence. If anyone is ballsy enough to towerdive you, Q your feet to knock em up (At this point the tower is laying into them), Ult them then if theyre low enough, ignite. For builds. A rod of the ages is a good 1st item. Then just stack any health and defense items you can find, like Sunfire cape or Spirit visage. If you're winning lane and are getting early kills, a Nashors Tooth can be a good idea to ensure you keep winning fights with your opponent. TL;DR - Play kinda passively, Max your E first, Build tanky and health, Ult minions for stacks

Cho carried me to silver 4 in ranked. Heres what i do. Get a dorans shield and Health pot. Have full tank runes and masteries, like 0/30/0. Max your E first for your lane clear. Eventually you will be clearing very fast with no mana cost. And your passive is where everytime you last hit a minion you're healed. When you hit lvl 6, Start ulting minions. Get your 6 stacks up early. If you get in a fistfight with someone, use your Q right at your feet to Stop them from attacking for a sec, then W them as they come down for the silence. If anyone is ballsy enough to towerdive you, Q your feet to knock em up (At this point the tower is laying into them), Ult them then if theyre low enough, ignite. For builds. A rod of the ages is a good 1st item. Then just stack any health and defense items you can find, like Sunfire cape or Spirit visage. If you're winning lane and are getting early kills, a Nashors Tooth can be a good idea to ensure you keep winning fights with your opponent. TL;DR - Play kinda passively, Max your E first, Build tanky and health, Ult minions for stacks

summonerschool

t5_2t9x3

cgm06kg

Cho carried me to silver 4 in ranked. Heres what i do. Get a dorans shield and Health pot. Have full tank runes and masteries, like 0/30/0. Max your E first for your lane clear. Eventually you will be clearing very fast with no mana cost. And your passive is where everytime you last hit a minion you're healed. When you hit lvl 6, Start ulting minions. Get your 6 stacks up early. If you get in a fistfight with someone, use your Q right at your feet to Stop them from attacking for a sec, then W them as they come down for the silence. If anyone is ballsy enough to towerdive you, Q your feet to knock em up (At this point the tower is laying into them), Ult them then if theyre low enough, ignite. For builds. A rod of the ages is a good 1st item. Then just stack any health and defense items you can find, like Sunfire cape or Spirit visage. If you're winning lane and are getting early kills, a Nashors Tooth can be a good idea to ensure you keep winning fights with your opponent.

Play kinda passively, Max your E first, Build tanky and health, Ult minions for stacks

constituent

I find them to be adorable. I refer to them as the ninjas of the insect world since they run up walls, across ceilings, and pounce on their prey. Plus they tickle when you pick them up (presuming if you can successfully catch one). They have the potential to bite but their mandibles aren't effective at grasping onto humans. They live a good 3 - 6 years and molt several times. I never kill them, since they are very beneficial to have around. If there's one in the tub, I'll just get them wet since they're awful clumsy at that point and toss it out the window (in well above-freezing temperatures only). Several of my friends swear these things are hell spawn and will throw anything and everything at them. Thankfully I've educated a few of them to let them be or trap them in an inverted bowl or glass. **TL;DR** I was that weird child that picked up everything that moved.

I find them to be adorable. I refer to them as the ninjas of the insect world since they run up walls, across ceilings, and pounce on their prey. Plus they tickle when you pick them up (presuming if you can successfully catch one). They have the potential to bite but their mandibles aren't effective at grasping onto humans. They live a good 3 - 6 years and molt several times. I never kill them, since they are very beneficial to have around. If there's one in the tub, I'll just get them wet since they're awful clumsy at that point and toss it out the window (in well above-freezing temperatures only). Several of my friends swear these things are hell spawn and will throw anything and everything at them. Thankfully I've educated a few of them to let them be or trap them in an inverted bowl or glass. TL;DR I was that weird child that picked up everything that moved.

chicago

t5_2qh2t

cgmo9co

I find them to be adorable. I refer to them as the ninjas of the insect world since they run up walls, across ceilings, and pounce on their prey. Plus they tickle when you pick them up (presuming if you can successfully catch one). They have the potential to bite but their mandibles aren't effective at grasping onto humans. They live a good 3 - 6 years and molt several times. I never kill them, since they are very beneficial to have around. If there's one in the tub, I'll just get them wet since they're awful clumsy at that point and toss it out the window (in well above-freezing temperatures only). Several of my friends swear these things are hell spawn and will throw anything and everything at them. Thankfully I've educated a few of them to let them be or trap them in an inverted bowl or glass.

I was that weird child that picked up everything that moved.

Midnightepiphany6555

Upvote for putting the TL; DR at the top.

Upvote for putting the TL; DR at the top.

funny

t5_2qh33

cgmz8h3

Upvote for putting the

at the top.