Datasets:

webis

/

tldr-17

like 39

Wren-FROST

I had a laptop come to me because the owner had filled up his C:/ drive and there was no space causing the computer to run slow. I looked and this computer had a 32GB SSD Flash Micro PCI Express card. I have heard this called a *Cache* drive. But in this case, the operating system was installed directly to it. The user had a 500gb HDD as drive D:/ but didn't know to use it. TL;DR: Do you just use these as small drives or is there a better way?

I had a laptop come to me because the owner had filled up his C:/ drive and there was no space causing the computer to run slow. I looked and this computer had a 32GB SSD Flash Micro PCI Express card. I have heard this called a Cache drive. But in this case, the operating system was installed directly to it. The user had a 500gb HDD as drive D:/ but didn't know to use it. TL;DR: Do you just use these as small drives or is there a better way?

buildapc

t5_2rnve

c8h9fh5

I had a laptop come to me because the owner had filled up his C:/ drive and there was no space causing the computer to run slow. I looked and this computer had a 32GB SSD Flash Micro PCI Express card. I have heard this called a Cache drive. But in this case, the operating system was installed directly to it. The user had a 500gb HDD as drive D:/ but didn't know to use it.

Do you just use these as small drives or is there a better way?

DnaK

A semi without his trailer was in the right lane on a two lane highway, while i came up on the left to pass him. Before i passed him, about 50 ft before i was parallel with him, he swerved into my lane without his blinker. I thought nothing of it other then he is an asshole until i realized he was not stopping and ended up swerving into the concrete median, bouncing off, and blocking a lane of traffic on a totally dark highway. I stopped to make sure he was ok, and he was apparently sleeping as far as i could tell, he seemed very lethargic. TL;DR, semi smashed into median, had i been 50 ft further up he woulda pancaked my poor pickup truck.

A semi without his trailer was in the right lane on a two lane highway, while i came up on the left to pass him. Before i passed him, about 50 ft before i was parallel with him, he swerved into my lane without his blinker. I thought nothing of it other then he is an asshole until i realized he was not stopping and ended up swerving into the concrete median, bouncing off, and blocking a lane of traffic on a totally dark highway. I stopped to make sure he was ok, and he was apparently sleeping as far as i could tell, he seemed very lethargic. TL;DR, semi smashed into median, had i been 50 ft further up he woulda pancaked my poor pickup truck.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8hbcuf

A semi without his trailer was in the right lane on a two lane highway, while i came up on the left to pass him. Before i passed him, about 50 ft before i was parallel with him, he swerved into my lane without his blinker. I thought nothing of it other then he is an asshole until i realized he was not stopping and ended up swerving into the concrete median, bouncing off, and blocking a lane of traffic on a totally dark highway. I stopped to make sure he was ok, and he was apparently sleeping as far as i could tell, he seemed very lethargic.

semi smashed into median, had i been 50 ft further up he woulda pancaked my poor pickup truck.

jjnich

Coming around curve at about 55 (maybe faster I was 16 I don't remember it that well) hit a little loose gravel and my tail spun around so I was facing backwards. I overcorrected and spun 360 so I was facing backwards again. Spun the wheel around and my car spins back the other way 180 so I'm facing forward, half in a ditch when I finally come to a stop. I just about crapped my pants. I realized that if there had been even a single car in the oncoming lane I probably wouldn't have walked away, but as it was I drove away without a single scratch on the car. TL;DR Loose gravel on a curve caused my car to spin around a couple times. Lucky no other cars were there or I would have had a much bigger problem.

Coming around curve at about 55 (maybe faster I was 16 I don't remember it that well) hit a little loose gravel and my tail spun around so I was facing backwards. I overcorrected and spun 360 so I was facing backwards again. Spun the wheel around and my car spins back the other way 180 so I'm facing forward, half in a ditch when I finally come to a stop. I just about crapped my pants. I realized that if there had been even a single car in the oncoming lane I probably wouldn't have walked away, but as it was I drove away without a single scratch on the car. TL;DR Loose gravel on a curve caused my car to spin around a couple times. Lucky no other cars were there or I would have had a much bigger problem.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8hbhuo

Coming around curve at about 55 (maybe faster I was 16 I don't remember it that well) hit a little loose gravel and my tail spun around so I was facing backwards. I overcorrected and spun 360 so I was facing backwards again. Spun the wheel around and my car spins back the other way 180 so I'm facing forward, half in a ditch when I finally come to a stop. I just about crapped my pants. I realized that if there had been even a single car in the oncoming lane I probably wouldn't have walked away, but as it was I drove away without a single scratch on the car.

Loose gravel on a curve caused my car to spin around a couple times. Lucky no other cars were there or I would have had a much bigger problem.

cali_dave

I've got two. Most recent: Was driving my work van (at the time, a Ford E-150 cargo van) home late at night after a long day. I was sitting at a red light on a freeway, nobody else in sight. My attention wandered for a minute while waiting for the light to turn green. I was sitting in the right-hand lane. Suddenly, an 18-wheeler BLEW by me doing at least 60.. <i>on the right</i>. It completely ran the red light, then pulled over after blowing through the intersection. Scared the shit out of me, almost literally. The trucker must have noticed just in time, because if I had been sitting in the passenger seat I could have reached out the window and touched the truck as it went by. If that trucker hadn't noticed just in time.. well, I wouldn't be typing this. Second story: About ten years ago, I was driving home (on the same freeway, as it happens) in a little silver sports car I owned at the time. I was doing about 70 and the car in front of me (I was following at a safe-ish distance) ran over something long, metal, and curved.. kind of like the bumper to an old Volkswagen Beetle. I didn't realize what it was at first, but when I did I swerved a little too hard to avoid it. The ass end got squirrelly on me, and I overcorrected. Ended up fishtailing down the freeway for a few very long seconds before losing it completely and spinning off into the (thankfully dirt) median. Kicked up a LOT of dirt, cars started pulling over. I came to a stop, unharmed.. got out of the car, waved traffic on to show them I was fine, and examined the car. No damage. It had stalled when I stopped (stickshift, must have left the clutch out), and it was a pain in the ass to start again.. but I got it started and home safe. Aside from wobbly legs, white knuckles, and an elevated heart rate, I was fine. tl;dr: trucker almost killed me, and i spun out a small sports car at 70mph on the freeway

I've got two. Most recent: Was driving my work van (at the time, a Ford E-150 cargo van) home late at night after a long day. I was sitting at a red light on a freeway, nobody else in sight. My attention wandered for a minute while waiting for the light to turn green. I was sitting in the right-hand lane. Suddenly, an 18-wheeler BLEW by me doing at least 60.. <i>on the right</i>. It completely ran the red light, then pulled over after blowing through the intersection. Scared the shit out of me, almost literally. The trucker must have noticed just in time, because if I had been sitting in the passenger seat I could have reached out the window and touched the truck as it went by. If that trucker hadn't noticed just in time.. well, I wouldn't be typing this. Second story: About ten years ago, I was driving home (on the same freeway, as it happens) in a little silver sports car I owned at the time. I was doing about 70 and the car in front of me (I was following at a safe-ish distance) ran over something long, metal, and curved.. kind of like the bumper to an old Volkswagen Beetle. I didn't realize what it was at first, but when I did I swerved a little too hard to avoid it. The ass end got squirrelly on me, and I overcorrected. Ended up fishtailing down the freeway for a few very long seconds before losing it completely and spinning off into the (thankfully dirt) median. Kicked up a LOT of dirt, cars started pulling over. I came to a stop, unharmed.. got out of the car, waved traffic on to show them I was fine, and examined the car. No damage. It had stalled when I stopped (stickshift, must have left the clutch out), and it was a pain in the ass to start again.. but I got it started and home safe. Aside from wobbly legs, white knuckles, and an elevated heart rate, I was fine. tl;dr: trucker almost killed me, and i spun out a small sports car at 70mph on the freeway

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8hgh78

I've got two. Most recent: Was driving my work van (at the time, a Ford E-150 cargo van) home late at night after a long day. I was sitting at a red light on a freeway, nobody else in sight. My attention wandered for a minute while waiting for the light to turn green. I was sitting in the right-hand lane. Suddenly, an 18-wheeler BLEW by me doing at least 60.. <i>on the right</i>. It completely ran the red light, then pulled over after blowing through the intersection. Scared the shit out of me, almost literally. The trucker must have noticed just in time, because if I had been sitting in the passenger seat I could have reached out the window and touched the truck as it went by. If that trucker hadn't noticed just in time.. well, I wouldn't be typing this. Second story: About ten years ago, I was driving home (on the same freeway, as it happens) in a little silver sports car I owned at the time. I was doing about 70 and the car in front of me (I was following at a safe-ish distance) ran over something long, metal, and curved.. kind of like the bumper to an old Volkswagen Beetle. I didn't realize what it was at first, but when I did I swerved a little too hard to avoid it. The ass end got squirrelly on me, and I overcorrected. Ended up fishtailing down the freeway for a few very long seconds before losing it completely and spinning off into the (thankfully dirt) median. Kicked up a LOT of dirt, cars started pulling over. I came to a stop, unharmed.. got out of the car, waved traffic on to show them I was fine, and examined the car. No damage. It had stalled when I stopped (stickshift, must have left the clutch out), and it was a pain in the ass to start again.. but I got it started and home safe. Aside from wobbly legs, white knuckles, and an elevated heart rate, I was fine.

trucker almost killed me, and i spun out a small sports car at 70mph on the freeway

Fishing4PeaceOfMind

Two hours into a very long drive I notice the red pick-up towing a skiff in front of me is swerving. He looked drunk, so I slowed down and gave him space. Flash-forward a few miles and the boat flies off the trailer and rolls down the highway at my car. Since I had slowed down I had enough time to swerve around the boat and luckily there was no oncoming traffic. I thought I'd be free of the asshole, but he didn't even notice he lost the boat. Ten miles or so down the road he pulls over, completely blocking the lane, and stands there looking around with his door wide open. Had to swerve again, but this time there was oncoming traffic. Luckily, they saw what was going on and had their SUV halfway in the ditch to let me pass. I was about three inches from taking the idiot's door off. Unsurprisingly, I started smoking again as soon as I got to the next town. Took more than half a pack to get me calmed down enough to drive again. Have since quit smoking. Again. TL;DR, Moron doesn't secure boat, almost creams my car then causes me to almost cream another car when he finally sees his boat is missing.

Two hours into a very long drive I notice the red pick-up towing a skiff in front of me is swerving. He looked drunk, so I slowed down and gave him space. Flash-forward a few miles and the boat flies off the trailer and rolls down the highway at my car. Since I had slowed down I had enough time to swerve around the boat and luckily there was no oncoming traffic. I thought I'd be free of the asshole, but he didn't even notice he lost the boat. Ten miles or so down the road he pulls over, completely blocking the lane, and stands there looking around with his door wide open. Had to swerve again, but this time there was oncoming traffic. Luckily, they saw what was going on and had their SUV halfway in the ditch to let me pass. I was about three inches from taking the idiot's door off. Unsurprisingly, I started smoking again as soon as I got to the next town. Took more than half a pack to get me calmed down enough to drive again. Have since quit smoking. Again. TL;DR, Moron doesn't secure boat, almost creams my car then causes me to almost cream another car when he finally sees his boat is missing.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8hhefj

Two hours into a very long drive I notice the red pick-up towing a skiff in front of me is swerving. He looked drunk, so I slowed down and gave him space. Flash-forward a few miles and the boat flies off the trailer and rolls down the highway at my car. Since I had slowed down I had enough time to swerve around the boat and luckily there was no oncoming traffic. I thought I'd be free of the asshole, but he didn't even notice he lost the boat. Ten miles or so down the road he pulls over, completely blocking the lane, and stands there looking around with his door wide open. Had to swerve again, but this time there was oncoming traffic. Luckily, they saw what was going on and had their SUV halfway in the ditch to let me pass. I was about three inches from taking the idiot's door off. Unsurprisingly, I started smoking again as soon as I got to the next town. Took more than half a pack to get me calmed down enough to drive again. Have since quit smoking. Again.

Moron doesn't secure boat, almost creams my car then causes me to almost cream another car when he finally sees his boat is missing.

t00_legit_t0_quit

I was driving me and my friend home from a day of shopping and just having fun. I usually do 75-80 on the highway if there isn't any traffic and immediately slow down once there is. However for some reason I chose to do this speed behind a group of 5 cars (including me). When all of a sudden someone swerved into our lane (passing lane) and caused the car 4 cars in front of me to hit them. I somehow went from 80/85 to 10 in about 5 seconds. How I managed to not only safely slow down but also to make it into the other lane (checking all my mirrors first of course) is beyond me. All I know is I avoided a 10+ pile up without a scratch. TL;DR- and that's why "accident cushions" are so important kids!

I was driving me and my friend home from a day of shopping and just having fun. I usually do 75-80 on the highway if there isn't any traffic and immediately slow down once there is. However for some reason I chose to do this speed behind a group of 5 cars (including me). When all of a sudden someone swerved into our lane (passing lane) and caused the car 4 cars in front of me to hit them. I somehow went from 80/85 to 10 in about 5 seconds. How I managed to not only safely slow down but also to make it into the other lane (checking all my mirrors first of course) is beyond me. All I know is I avoided a 10+ pile up without a scratch. TL;DR- and that's why "accident cushions" are so important kids!

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8hmg5b

I was driving me and my friend home from a day of shopping and just having fun. I usually do 75-80 on the highway if there isn't any traffic and immediately slow down once there is. However for some reason I chose to do this speed behind a group of 5 cars (including me). When all of a sudden someone swerved into our lane (passing lane) and caused the car 4 cars in front of me to hit them. I somehow went from 80/85 to 10 in about 5 seconds. How I managed to not only safely slow down but also to make it into the other lane (checking all my mirrors first of course) is beyond me. All I know is I avoided a 10+ pile up without a scratch.

and that's why "accident cushions" are so important kids!

Prop_Representation

You walk into a room and sit down. Perhaps a clock rings noon, a certain song is playing on the radio, a television program hits a certain scene, you read a specific passage in a book - whatever happens, one thing is for sure, you've lived this EXACT moment before. You know what's going to happen next, it's on the tip of your tongue and then suddenly you're in that next moment. These moments stagger from one to the next, mini triggers in the unraveling of what must surely your life in an alternate universe. Just as suddenly as it began, it's over. TLDR: Long term/short term memory gets confused.

You walk into a room and sit down. Perhaps a clock rings noon, a certain song is playing on the radio, a television program hits a certain scene, you read a specific passage in a book - whatever happens, one thing is for sure, you've lived this EXACT moment before. You know what's going to happen next, it's on the tip of your tongue and then suddenly you're in that next moment. These moments stagger from one to the next, mini triggers in the unraveling of what must surely your life in an alternate universe. Just as suddenly as it began, it's over. TLDR: Long term/short term memory gets confused.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8hcd3p

You walk into a room and sit down. Perhaps a clock rings noon, a certain song is playing on the radio, a television program hits a certain scene, you read a specific passage in a book - whatever happens, one thing is for sure, you've lived this EXACT moment before. You know what's going to happen next, it's on the tip of your tongue and then suddenly you're in that next moment. These moments stagger from one to the next, mini triggers in the unraveling of what must surely your life in an alternate universe. Just as suddenly as it began, it's over.

Long term/short term memory gets confused.

SRCarrn

Before I get too deep into this, I want to make sure you understand these points: * Jungling is very dependent on your team, just as your team depends on you * You will get blamed a lot for them losing lane &gt; Because of this, you need to make sure your communication is constant, friendly, and clear **Some things that will help with communication** * At the very start of the game, preferably in lobby, tell your team your initial route. Include planned ganks, so they can set it up This will help them help you, and let them know what to expect from your play at first * Call out everything, in advance If you're at red and notice that the enemy top lane is getting low on health, tell your top lane to not push because you will do wolves then gank his lane. This will give him some time to prepare, save his abilities, and let you know of any wards * Ask about enemy wards, or buy an oracle if you're ahead Same as above, do it before you gank * Think about the enemy jungler If one of your lanes is winning and pushing, you can probably assume that the enemy jungler will gank him. Knowing this, you can go to that lane and ward, and be ready for their jungler to show up and surprise him TL;DR Always talk to your team, and always pat attention to the map. Add me in game on Carrn (NA) if you would like to chat/play Edited for spelling

Before I get too deep into this, I want to make sure you understand these points: Jungling is very dependent on your team, just as your team depends on you You will get blamed a lot for them losing lane > Because of this, you need to make sure your communication is constant, friendly, and clear Some things that will help with communication At the very start of the game, preferably in lobby, tell your team your initial route. Include planned ganks, so they can set it up This will help them help you, and let them know what to expect from your play at first Call out everything, in advance If you're at red and notice that the enemy top lane is getting low on health, tell your top lane to not push because you will do wolves then gank his lane. This will give him some time to prepare, save his abilities, and let you know of any wards Ask about enemy wards, or buy an oracle if you're ahead Same as above, do it before you gank Think about the enemy jungler If one of your lanes is winning and pushing, you can probably assume that the enemy jungler will gank him. Knowing this, you can go to that lane and ward, and be ready for their jungler to show up and surprise him TL;DR Always talk to your team, and always pat attention to the map. Add me in game on Carrn (NA) if you would like to chat/play Edited for spelling

summonerschool

t5_2t9x3

c8hd7t1

Before I get too deep into this, I want to make sure you understand these points: Jungling is very dependent on your team, just as your team depends on you You will get blamed a lot for them losing lane > Because of this, you need to make sure your communication is constant, friendly, and clear Some things that will help with communication At the very start of the game, preferably in lobby, tell your team your initial route. Include planned ganks, so they can set it up This will help them help you, and let them know what to expect from your play at first Call out everything, in advance If you're at red and notice that the enemy top lane is getting low on health, tell your top lane to not push because you will do wolves then gank his lane. This will give him some time to prepare, save his abilities, and let you know of any wards Ask about enemy wards, or buy an oracle if you're ahead Same as above, do it before you gank Think about the enemy jungler If one of your lanes is winning and pushing, you can probably assume that the enemy jungler will gank him. Knowing this, you can go to that lane and ward, and be ready for their jungler to show up and surprise him

Always talk to your team, and always pat attention to the map. Add me in game on Carrn (NA) if you would like to chat/play Edited for spelling

goatlink

yeah, sadly it only works for gba, and only on the gba (dose not work on game boy player, I tested). The problem is that the gameboy game boots before the memory stick can, then sense the gba is in "game boy mode" the SMS (super memory stick) can't load. I have tried a bunch of ways to get the SMS to load with a gameboy game, but with no luck. tl;dr: no

yeah, sadly it only works for gba, and only on the gba (dose not work on game boy player, I tested). The problem is that the gameboy game boots before the memory stick can, then sense the gba is in "game boy mode" the SMS (super memory stick) can't load. I have tried a bunch of ways to get the SMS to load with a gameboy game, but with no luck. tl;dr: no

Gameboy

t5_2s0qt

c8ixgj0

yeah, sadly it only works for gba, and only on the gba (dose not work on game boy player, I tested). The problem is that the gameboy game boots before the memory stick can, then sense the gba is in "game boy mode" the SMS (super memory stick) can't load. I have tried a bunch of ways to get the SMS to load with a gameboy game, but with no luck.

no

shadowsoldier591

The game is (for the most part) seamless, with no loading screens. The immersion is very good in some of the more dark and scary areas. You can play the game through multiple times and still discover interesting details. TL;DR Good immersion, and a lot of things to find.

The game is (for the most part) seamless, with no loading screens. The immersion is very good in some of the more dark and scary areas. You can play the game through multiple times and still discover interesting details. TL;DR Good immersion, and a lot of things to find.

darksouls

t5_2sazo

c8hs8y8

The game is (for the most part) seamless, with no loading screens. The immersion is very good in some of the more dark and scary areas. You can play the game through multiple times and still discover interesting details.

Good immersion, and a lot of things to find.

frayjoker

To me Mass Effect 1 was far too padded out with cookie cutter environments and inane collect quests. The RPG elements were a little too arbitrary and generic for what was ostensibly trying just as hard to be a third person shooter, which it did fairly miserably. The plot and world building were fantastic though. Mass Effect 2 was a better Third Person Shooter. But as a third person shooter it still suffered from them still pretending it was an RPG. Not a very good RPG either, they pretty much stripped out all elements of customisation and progress. Now unlike most, I felt that developing an armoury gave each weapon much more contextual strength and made choices between guns a lot more than just picking the largest of two numbers. I also felt that more linear missions allowed for more dynamic objectives and interesting exploration (in the context of lore, not so much in gameplay). Plot and Lore writing was up to the same scratch as the first game, but better characterisation and personal impact on others elevated it to the best writing of the series. Mass Effect 3 however, by far, had the best gameplay. They realised the series had always been trying to be a third person shooter for three games now, and seemed to build the RPG elements around a solid action basis. Characters had a full range of movement and powers felt geared towards controlling the battlefield instead of being "magic missile" type spells. Again I liked the feeling of each gun having contextual strength and weakness, the mod system meant you could tailor a weapon to your specific strengths. Anyway, I feel like ME1 was a hideously dumbed down 3rd person shooter. Yes the RPG elements were dumbed down in ME2, but I don't think the gameplay got good until they developed the game as a 3rd person shooter first, and an RPG second. People seem to think that the Multiplayer had no place in ME3 because it's a single player franchise. I argue that neither 1 or 2 had gameplay good enough to support a multiplayer mode. TL;DR I don't think Mass Effect got dumbed down. I think they realised the RPG elements were to the detriment of a better 3rd person shooter. I think Mass Effect 1 played like a prototype, that Mass Effect 2 had the best writing of the series, and Mass Effect 3 the best gameplay. So much so I wish that they'd remake ME1 and tweak ME2 to bring it in line with ME3.

To me Mass Effect 1 was far too padded out with cookie cutter environments and inane collect quests. The RPG elements were a little too arbitrary and generic for what was ostensibly trying just as hard to be a third person shooter, which it did fairly miserably. The plot and world building were fantastic though. Mass Effect 2 was a better Third Person Shooter. But as a third person shooter it still suffered from them still pretending it was an RPG. Not a very good RPG either, they pretty much stripped out all elements of customisation and progress. Now unlike most, I felt that developing an armoury gave each weapon much more contextual strength and made choices between guns a lot more than just picking the largest of two numbers. I also felt that more linear missions allowed for more dynamic objectives and interesting exploration (in the context of lore, not so much in gameplay). Plot and Lore writing was up to the same scratch as the first game, but better characterisation and personal impact on others elevated it to the best writing of the series. Mass Effect 3 however, by far, had the best gameplay. They realised the series had always been trying to be a third person shooter for three games now, and seemed to build the RPG elements around a solid action basis. Characters had a full range of movement and powers felt geared towards controlling the battlefield instead of being "magic missile" type spells. Again I liked the feeling of each gun having contextual strength and weakness, the mod system meant you could tailor a weapon to your specific strengths. Anyway, I feel like ME1 was a hideously dumbed down 3rd person shooter. Yes the RPG elements were dumbed down in ME2, but I don't think the gameplay got good until they developed the game as a 3rd person shooter first, and an RPG second. People seem to think that the Multiplayer had no place in ME3 because it's a single player franchise. I argue that neither 1 or 2 had gameplay good enough to support a multiplayer mode. TL;DR I don't think Mass Effect got dumbed down. I think they realised the RPG elements were to the detriment of a better 3rd person shooter. I think Mass Effect 1 played like a prototype, that Mass Effect 2 had the best writing of the series, and Mass Effect 3 the best gameplay. So much so I wish that they'd remake ME1 and tweak ME2 to bring it in line with ME3.

truegaming

t5_2sgq6

c8hojl0

To me Mass Effect 1 was far too padded out with cookie cutter environments and inane collect quests. The RPG elements were a little too arbitrary and generic for what was ostensibly trying just as hard to be a third person shooter, which it did fairly miserably. The plot and world building were fantastic though. Mass Effect 2 was a better Third Person Shooter. But as a third person shooter it still suffered from them still pretending it was an RPG. Not a very good RPG either, they pretty much stripped out all elements of customisation and progress. Now unlike most, I felt that developing an armoury gave each weapon much more contextual strength and made choices between guns a lot more than just picking the largest of two numbers. I also felt that more linear missions allowed for more dynamic objectives and interesting exploration (in the context of lore, not so much in gameplay). Plot and Lore writing was up to the same scratch as the first game, but better characterisation and personal impact on others elevated it to the best writing of the series. Mass Effect 3 however, by far, had the best gameplay. They realised the series had always been trying to be a third person shooter for three games now, and seemed to build the RPG elements around a solid action basis. Characters had a full range of movement and powers felt geared towards controlling the battlefield instead of being "magic missile" type spells. Again I liked the feeling of each gun having contextual strength and weakness, the mod system meant you could tailor a weapon to your specific strengths. Anyway, I feel like ME1 was a hideously dumbed down 3rd person shooter. Yes the RPG elements were dumbed down in ME2, but I don't think the gameplay got good until they developed the game as a 3rd person shooter first, and an RPG second. People seem to think that the Multiplayer had no place in ME3 because it's a single player franchise. I argue that neither 1 or 2 had gameplay good enough to support a multiplayer mode.

I don't think Mass Effect got dumbed down. I think they realised the RPG elements were to the detriment of a better 3rd person shooter. I think Mass Effect 1 played like a prototype, that Mass Effect 2 had the best writing of the series, and Mass Effect 3 the best gameplay. So much so I wish that they'd remake ME1 and tweak ME2 to bring it in line with ME3.

potsmoking_princess

***This.*** I am currently with my second sexual partner, and with him I have never faked an orgasm, nor will I ever. When I lost my virginity with my first partner, I faked it because I thought that it would make him happier and having an orgasm was just what you were supposed to do. I decided not to do that with my current boyfriend, and let me tell you, the difference is earth-shattering. If I didn't orgasm, I would tell him after sex, but I would always assure him that I still thoroughly enjoyed it (I always did!) I would constantly be showing and telling him what I liked and the sex got continually better and better. Now, four years later and he can make me cum like the drop of a hat. TL;DR: Just be honest about what works for you and what doesn't, it'll help you both in the long run.

This. I am currently with my second sexual partner, and with him I have never faked an orgasm, nor will I ever. When I lost my virginity with my first partner, I faked it because I thought that it would make him happier and having an orgasm was just what you were supposed to do. I decided not to do that with my current boyfriend, and let me tell you, the difference is earth-shattering. If I didn't orgasm, I would tell him after sex, but I would always assure him that I still thoroughly enjoyed it (I always did!) I would constantly be showing and telling him what I liked and the sex got continually better and better. Now, four years later and he can make me cum like the drop of a hat. TL;DR: Just be honest about what works for you and what doesn't, it'll help you both in the long run.

sex

t5_2qh3p

c8hpdql

This. I am currently with my second sexual partner, and with him I have never faked an orgasm, nor will I ever. When I lost my virginity with my first partner, I faked it because I thought that it would make him happier and having an orgasm was just what you were supposed to do. I decided not to do that with my current boyfriend, and let me tell you, the difference is earth-shattering. If I didn't orgasm, I would tell him after sex, but I would always assure him that I still thoroughly enjoyed it (I always did!) I would constantly be showing and telling him what I liked and the sex got continually better and better. Now, four years later and he can make me cum like the drop of a hat.

Just be honest about what works for you and what doesn't, it'll help you both in the long run.

Coupleadoctors

&gt;Whatever issues they have left, though? Those are probably going to be that much stronger. &gt;If they've conquered their demons, it can be amazing. If they haven't, watch out. I couldn't agree with this more. As someone who has been with two older women (1 ex, 1 current), I can tell you that this is exactly what you'll be looking at. The Ex had a ton of issues that I tried very hard to work on, but it was too much for our relationship to handle, and inevitably ended up causing our issues. While on the other hand, my current SO has conquered way more, though still some lingering things we have issues with. The good part is, our bond is way stronger than any relationship I've had before, and I'm fairly confident we will continue to make it work. But now I'm just bragging. **TL;DR Totally agree with this guy, had one fail relationship with an older SO, current SO is absolutely amazing, give it a shot, age only matters if you think so!**

>Whatever issues they have left, though? Those are probably going to be that much stronger. >If they've conquered their demons, it can be amazing. If they haven't, watch out. I couldn't agree with this more. As someone who has been with two older women (1 ex, 1 current), I can tell you that this is exactly what you'll be looking at. The Ex had a ton of issues that I tried very hard to work on, but it was too much for our relationship to handle, and inevitably ended up causing our issues. While on the other hand, my current SO has conquered way more, though still some lingering things we have issues with. The good part is, our bond is way stronger than any relationship I've had before, and I'm fairly confident we will continue to make it work. But now I'm just bragging. TL;DR Totally agree with this guy, had one fail relationship with an older SO, current SO is absolutely amazing, give it a shot, age only matters if you think so!

AskMen

t5_2s30g

c8hmnou

Whatever issues they have left, though? Those are probably going to be that much stronger. >If they've conquered their demons, it can be amazing. If they haven't, watch out. I couldn't agree with this more. As someone who has been with two older women (1 ex, 1 current), I can tell you that this is exactly what you'll be looking at. The Ex had a ton of issues that I tried very hard to work on, but it was too much for our relationship to handle, and inevitably ended up causing our issues. While on the other hand, my current SO has conquered way more, though still some lingering things we have issues with. The good part is, our bond is way stronger than any relationship I've had before, and I'm fairly confident we will continue to make it work. But now I'm just bragging.

Totally agree with this guy, had one fail relationship with an older SO, current SO is absolutely amazing, give it a shot, age only matters if you think so!

Lechubbybunny

This one time in elementary school, there was an older bully named Scott. He was this 13 yeard old ginger from hell. Anyway, he scammed me into buying his pubes for 10 bucks, because I thought that was how you "get your first pubes". Anyway, I find out how you actually get pubes, so I go to him for a refund, but he ended up scamming me for another $6.12 and after an extreme effort to get all my money back, he humiliates me about my weight on camera and burns my cash in front of my face. So I plot to get revenge on this bastard. I trick my friends into thinking I was training a horse belong to this crazy old farmer to bite Scott's penis off at an upcoming Chili Festival, knowing they would reveal this "master plan" to Scott. I knew he would then try and get rid of the horse before the carnival, but would be too pussy to get rid of the horse himself in risk of getting castrated. So he would send his parents. He would make some kind of dumb story to have them get rid of the horse for him. I ALSO knew the crazy old farmer, Mr. Denkins, shot trespassers to his farm on sight. I was right. When I went to the farm the night I anticipated Scott's parents would go and get the horse, I saw their dead bodies lying at a fresh crime scene. I snuck their body bags into my basement and had fun with the hacksaw that night, mixing their parts into a bowl of yummy chili. I found out that Scott would get back at me for my fake revenge plot and mix pubes into chili to feed to me at the carnival, so I made sure to avoid eating that. So, at the carnival, after I exchange bowls of chili with Scott, he prepapred to reveal to me I was eating pube chili. I cut him off and reveal my knowledge of his pathetic scheme as he is eating my "special" chili. I tell him everything, and reveal MY secret ingredient to my chili. He sees his moms finger in the bowl and hysterically cried and vomitted. As if on cue, Scott's favorite band, Radiohead, appears and sees him cry. I had them come to the festival because I told him one of his fans had "anal cancer" and should visit him to "make him feel better." Radiohead sees Scott crying, mocks his pussiness and walls away. Not only did he just find out he ate his dead parents, but now his idols think he is a pussy. The revenge was ever so sweet, just like the tears of Scott's sorrow. TL;DR: I got revenge in a bully by killing his parents and feeding their body parts to him in chili form.

This one time in elementary school, there was an older bully named Scott. He was this 13 yeard old ginger from hell. Anyway, he scammed me into buying his pubes for 10 bucks, because I thought that was how you "get your first pubes". Anyway, I find out how you actually get pubes, so I go to him for a refund, but he ended up scamming me for another $6.12 and after an extreme effort to get all my money back, he humiliates me about my weight on camera and burns my cash in front of my face. So I plot to get revenge on this bastard. I trick my friends into thinking I was training a horse belong to this crazy old farmer to bite Scott's penis off at an upcoming Chili Festival, knowing they would reveal this "master plan" to Scott. I knew he would then try and get rid of the horse before the carnival, but would be too pussy to get rid of the horse himself in risk of getting castrated. So he would send his parents. He would make some kind of dumb story to have them get rid of the horse for him. I ALSO knew the crazy old farmer, Mr. Denkins, shot trespassers to his farm on sight. I was right. When I went to the farm the night I anticipated Scott's parents would go and get the horse, I saw their dead bodies lying at a fresh crime scene. I snuck their body bags into my basement and had fun with the hacksaw that night, mixing their parts into a bowl of yummy chili. I found out that Scott would get back at me for my fake revenge plot and mix pubes into chili to feed to me at the carnival, so I made sure to avoid eating that. So, at the carnival, after I exchange bowls of chili with Scott, he prepapred to reveal to me I was eating pube chili. I cut him off and reveal my knowledge of his pathetic scheme as he is eating my "special" chili. I tell him everything, and reveal MY secret ingredient to my chili. He sees his moms finger in the bowl and hysterically cried and vomitted. As if on cue, Scott's favorite band, Radiohead, appears and sees him cry. I had them come to the festival because I told him one of his fans had "anal cancer" and should visit him to "make him feel better." Radiohead sees Scott crying, mocks his pussiness and walls away. Not only did he just find out he ate his dead parents, but now his idols think he is a pussy. The revenge was ever so sweet, just like the tears of Scott's sorrow. TL;DR: I got revenge in a bully by killing his parents and feeding their body parts to him in chili form.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8hmx3o

This one time in elementary school, there was an older bully named Scott. He was this 13 yeard old ginger from hell. Anyway, he scammed me into buying his pubes for 10 bucks, because I thought that was how you "get your first pubes". Anyway, I find out how you actually get pubes, so I go to him for a refund, but he ended up scamming me for another $6.12 and after an extreme effort to get all my money back, he humiliates me about my weight on camera and burns my cash in front of my face. So I plot to get revenge on this bastard. I trick my friends into thinking I was training a horse belong to this crazy old farmer to bite Scott's penis off at an upcoming Chili Festival, knowing they would reveal this "master plan" to Scott. I knew he would then try and get rid of the horse before the carnival, but would be too pussy to get rid of the horse himself in risk of getting castrated. So he would send his parents. He would make some kind of dumb story to have them get rid of the horse for him. I ALSO knew the crazy old farmer, Mr. Denkins, shot trespassers to his farm on sight. I was right. When I went to the farm the night I anticipated Scott's parents would go and get the horse, I saw their dead bodies lying at a fresh crime scene. I snuck their body bags into my basement and had fun with the hacksaw that night, mixing their parts into a bowl of yummy chili. I found out that Scott would get back at me for my fake revenge plot and mix pubes into chili to feed to me at the carnival, so I made sure to avoid eating that. So, at the carnival, after I exchange bowls of chili with Scott, he prepapred to reveal to me I was eating pube chili. I cut him off and reveal my knowledge of his pathetic scheme as he is eating my "special" chili. I tell him everything, and reveal MY secret ingredient to my chili. He sees his moms finger in the bowl and hysterically cried and vomitted. As if on cue, Scott's favorite band, Radiohead, appears and sees him cry. I had them come to the festival because I told him one of his fans had "anal cancer" and should visit him to "make him feel better." Radiohead sees Scott crying, mocks his pussiness and walls away. Not only did he just find out he ate his dead parents, but now his idols think he is a pussy. The revenge was ever so sweet, just like the tears of Scott's sorrow.

I got revenge in a bully by killing his parents and feeding their body parts to him in chili form.

ruraldream

What does your family eat NOW? What is your normal meal plan for an average month? Use your current menu plan / eating habits as the base for your food storage, and just expand on what you would normally buy. For instance, if you normally eat spaghetti and tomato sauce once a week, get the ingredients for four extra meals of spaghetti and tomato sauce (ie. dry pasta, canned tomato sauce, spices). If you eat chili often, get extra beans and tomato sauce and such. Even if parts of the 'normal' meal aren't storage-friendly (say, ground beef, or fresh bell peppers), you could make substitutions (a can of salsa in a pot of chili does wonders in making up for a lack of fresh peppers and onions), and at least you have some base ingredients on hand. If your current menu is not very storage-friendly, maybe try introducing a new meal every couple of weeks to see what your family actually likes, before going out and buying a lot of food. Or, try adjusting one of your usual recipes to use only pantry items (like the chili example above). The bonus to this is that you will always have a quick meal on hand (I find anything that is based on canned food is usually super-fast to throw together, and you never have to run to the store). Personally, I think the LDS recommendations are not very useful to most people, as there are very few families that would be able to cook something tasty from wheat, sugar, peanut butter, and cooking oil; however, a much larger group would be able to make a tasty meal with canned beans, tomato sauce, and spices, or with applesauce, oatmeal, and sugar. TL; DR: Your best bet is to get extra of the ingredients you already use. If you don't ever use canned or dried foods right now, start introducing the occasional 'storage foods' meal to make sure your family likes a given meal before you buy a lot of ingredients for it.

What does your family eat NOW? What is your normal meal plan for an average month? Use your current menu plan / eating habits as the base for your food storage, and just expand on what you would normally buy. For instance, if you normally eat spaghetti and tomato sauce once a week, get the ingredients for four extra meals of spaghetti and tomato sauce (ie. dry pasta, canned tomato sauce, spices). If you eat chili often, get extra beans and tomato sauce and such. Even if parts of the 'normal' meal aren't storage-friendly (say, ground beef, or fresh bell peppers), you could make substitutions (a can of salsa in a pot of chili does wonders in making up for a lack of fresh peppers and onions), and at least you have some base ingredients on hand. If your current menu is not very storage-friendly, maybe try introducing a new meal every couple of weeks to see what your family actually likes, before going out and buying a lot of food. Or, try adjusting one of your usual recipes to use only pantry items (like the chili example above). The bonus to this is that you will always have a quick meal on hand (I find anything that is based on canned food is usually super-fast to throw together, and you never have to run to the store). Personally, I think the LDS recommendations are not very useful to most people, as there are very few families that would be able to cook something tasty from wheat, sugar, peanut butter, and cooking oil; however, a much larger group would be able to make a tasty meal with canned beans, tomato sauce, and spices, or with applesauce, oatmeal, and sugar. TL; DR: Your best bet is to get extra of the ingredients you already use. If you don't ever use canned or dried foods right now, start introducing the occasional 'storage foods' meal to make sure your family likes a given meal before you buy a lot of ingredients for it.

preppers

t5_2riow

c8hvhgl

What does your family eat NOW? What is your normal meal plan for an average month? Use your current menu plan / eating habits as the base for your food storage, and just expand on what you would normally buy. For instance, if you normally eat spaghetti and tomato sauce once a week, get the ingredients for four extra meals of spaghetti and tomato sauce (ie. dry pasta, canned tomato sauce, spices). If you eat chili often, get extra beans and tomato sauce and such. Even if parts of the 'normal' meal aren't storage-friendly (say, ground beef, or fresh bell peppers), you could make substitutions (a can of salsa in a pot of chili does wonders in making up for a lack of fresh peppers and onions), and at least you have some base ingredients on hand. If your current menu is not very storage-friendly, maybe try introducing a new meal every couple of weeks to see what your family actually likes, before going out and buying a lot of food. Or, try adjusting one of your usual recipes to use only pantry items (like the chili example above). The bonus to this is that you will always have a quick meal on hand (I find anything that is based on canned food is usually super-fast to throw together, and you never have to run to the store). Personally, I think the LDS recommendations are not very useful to most people, as there are very few families that would be able to cook something tasty from wheat, sugar, peanut butter, and cooking oil; however, a much larger group would be able to make a tasty meal with canned beans, tomato sauce, and spices, or with applesauce, oatmeal, and sugar.

Your best bet is to get extra of the ingredients you already use. If you don't ever use canned or dried foods right now, start introducing the occasional 'storage foods' meal to make sure your family likes a given meal before you buy a lot of ingredients for it.

aksoileau

I guess everywhere has their own stories. I "discovered" PBR during my broke days in college in 2005. Our favorite watering hole had PBR for 50 cent draft or $1 a can. Of course we flocked to it because it was cheap as hell and tasted better than most of the cheap swill like busch, old mil, and high life. This was the only bar in town that I know of that had PBR at the time. It wasn't till a few years ago that PBR tallboys, cans, and bottles were available in every store here. TLDR; Its cheap and pretty drinkable.

I guess everywhere has their own stories. I "discovered" PBR during my broke days in college in 2005. Our favorite watering hole had PBR for 50 cent draft or $1 a can. Of course we flocked to it because it was cheap as hell and tasted better than most of the cheap swill like busch, old mil, and high life. This was the only bar in town that I know of that had PBR at the time. It wasn't till a few years ago that PBR tallboys, cans, and bottles were available in every store here. TLDR; Its cheap and pretty drinkable.

beer

t5_2qhg1

c8i1f3o

I guess everywhere has their own stories. I "discovered" PBR during my broke days in college in 2005. Our favorite watering hole had PBR for 50 cent draft or $1 a can. Of course we flocked to it because it was cheap as hell and tasted better than most of the cheap swill like busch, old mil, and high life. This was the only bar in town that I know of that had PBR at the time. It wasn't till a few years ago that PBR tallboys, cans, and bottles were available in every store here.

Its cheap and pretty drinkable.

wilkenm

You have no debt, and are starting a career/life/etc. Why on earth would you want to add $25k in debt to an otherwise great start? &gt; I was thinking I'd invest $10k immediately to start off a Roth IRA (someone told me that the first year you open an account you can deposit for both the current and previous year as well - is this true?) How about you just open an IRA and contribute to it? Let's skip all the borrowing money at 3% in order to fund your retirement. Best case, you're giving away 3% of your returns, and worst case is the market crashes and you're paying 3% on something that's worth 25% of what you paid for it. Leveraged investing is not for the average person. &gt; My max price for the car is $15k-20k (probably buying recently used - 2009-2012ish), so I would be taking out a loan for the difference, I suppose. Should I just put it all down on the car/is 2.99 a better APR than most used car loans? Don't spend half your salary on a car. Find something in the $5k-$10k range, and get a loan from Penfed.org for 1.49% (assuming you have good credit). &gt; Kelly BB on old car is around 2-3k (though some places give you like 5k on the spot for trade-ins I think?) No one will give you more than the car is worth wholesale. If one place will give you $2k extra, that means they are charging you $2k extra on the car you're buying. Your best bet is to sell the car directly on Craigslist, and avoid trading it into a dealer. &gt; I was thinking about investing in a CD, but I was advised with interest, current rates, and inflation I wouldn't really be coming out ahead much. You're going to borrow money at 3%, and invest it in something that you know will pay ~1.25%? What? tl;dr - you don't need the loan for any of the reasons you listed. Do not take a loan and use the money to invest.

You have no debt, and are starting a career/life/etc. Why on earth would you want to add $25k in debt to an otherwise great start? > I was thinking I'd invest $10k immediately to start off a Roth IRA (someone told me that the first year you open an account you can deposit for both the current and previous year as well - is this true?) How about you just open an IRA and contribute to it? Let's skip all the borrowing money at 3% in order to fund your retirement. Best case, you're giving away 3% of your returns, and worst case is the market crashes and you're paying 3% on something that's worth 25% of what you paid for it. Leveraged investing is not for the average person. > My max price for the car is $15k-20k (probably buying recently used - 2009-2012ish), so I would be taking out a loan for the difference, I suppose. Should I just put it all down on the car/is 2.99 a better APR than most used car loans? Don't spend half your salary on a car. Find something in the $5k-$10k range, and get a loan from Penfed.org for 1.49% (assuming you have good credit). > Kelly BB on old car is around 2-3k (though some places give you like 5k on the spot for trade-ins I think?) No one will give you more than the car is worth wholesale. If one place will give you $2k extra, that means they are charging you $2k extra on the car you're buying. Your best bet is to sell the car directly on Craigslist, and avoid trading it into a dealer. > I was thinking about investing in a CD, but I was advised with interest, current rates, and inflation I wouldn't really be coming out ahead much. You're going to borrow money at 3%, and invest it in something that you know will pay ~1.25%? What? tl;dr - you don't need the loan for any of the reasons you listed. Do not take a loan and use the money to invest.

personalfinance

t5_2qstm

c8i449z

You have no debt, and are starting a career/life/etc. Why on earth would you want to add $25k in debt to an otherwise great start? > I was thinking I'd invest $10k immediately to start off a Roth IRA (someone told me that the first year you open an account you can deposit for both the current and previous year as well - is this true?) How about you just open an IRA and contribute to it? Let's skip all the borrowing money at 3% in order to fund your retirement. Best case, you're giving away 3% of your returns, and worst case is the market crashes and you're paying 3% on something that's worth 25% of what you paid for it. Leveraged investing is not for the average person. > My max price for the car is $15k-20k (probably buying recently used - 2009-2012ish), so I would be taking out a loan for the difference, I suppose. Should I just put it all down on the car/is 2.99 a better APR than most used car loans? Don't spend half your salary on a car. Find something in the $5k-$10k range, and get a loan from Penfed.org for 1.49% (assuming you have good credit). > Kelly BB on old car is around 2-3k (though some places give you like 5k on the spot for trade-ins I think?) No one will give you more than the car is worth wholesale. If one place will give you $2k extra, that means they are charging you $2k extra on the car you're buying. Your best bet is to sell the car directly on Craigslist, and avoid trading it into a dealer. > I was thinking about investing in a CD, but I was advised with interest, current rates, and inflation I wouldn't really be coming out ahead much. You're going to borrow money at 3%, and invest it in something that you know will pay ~1.25%? What?

you don't need the loan for any of the reasons you listed. Do not take a loan and use the money to invest.

CrotchMissile

Great story, but there was something that should be mentioned. One of the terminator's greatest strengths lies in its ability to be upgraded in order to more efficiently counter a new threat. Like aliens, most terminators are simply drones that can be thrown away, but with the added benefit of collecting combat data. In a first encounter situation against xenomorphs I would give the aliens an edge over terminators since they are calibrated to fight against human enemies: * We don't actually know that their sensors can adequately detect xenomorph life signs. It is entirely possible that an alien would remain more difficult to find and track than a human. * I would give acidic blood more weight in a first encounter, as it is extremely corrosive and would likely do more to at least damage a terminator's structural integrity enough to give an alien an edge in close combat. * the queen xenomorph is much more intelligent and powerful than the average drone, who is in turn much more powerful than an average human. Again, terminators are calibrated to countering human threats and may be caught off guard by something like this. This being said, terminators are expendable and as they fight and die, they provide combat data to skynet. Skynet, in turn, uses that data to program new behaviors and create new weapons, armor, and terminator designs. What I think would happen is that a terminator would encounter a nest for the first time and be completely unprepared for the encounter. It would lose and give time for the nest to continue growing. However, skynet would use the data provided by the the encounter to create a prototype terminator with a sturdier body and acid resistant armor. It would continue to improve on this design as turn out robots that are increasingly more effective at countering the aliens until a model is released that outmatches xenomorphs on every possible level. Xenomorphs can only really "counter" a biological opponent by assimilating their strengths when they reproduce through facehuggers. Terminators aren't a biological enemy and would leave the aliens unable to match their mechanical foe. **TLDR:** in a first encounter scenario, i'd give xenomorphs an edge over terminators. In a second encounter or more situation, i'd give terminators an increasingly large edge over xenomorphs. I'd do this partly for entertainment value because whatever terminator that skynet created to counter a xenomorph would, undoubtedly, be really badass.

Great story, but there was something that should be mentioned. One of the terminator's greatest strengths lies in its ability to be upgraded in order to more efficiently counter a new threat. Like aliens, most terminators are simply drones that can be thrown away, but with the added benefit of collecting combat data. In a first encounter situation against xenomorphs I would give the aliens an edge over terminators since they are calibrated to fight against human enemies: We don't actually know that their sensors can adequately detect xenomorph life signs. It is entirely possible that an alien would remain more difficult to find and track than a human. I would give acidic blood more weight in a first encounter, as it is extremely corrosive and would likely do more to at least damage a terminator's structural integrity enough to give an alien an edge in close combat. the queen xenomorph is much more intelligent and powerful than the average drone, who is in turn much more powerful than an average human. Again, terminators are calibrated to countering human threats and may be caught off guard by something like this. This being said, terminators are expendable and as they fight and die, they provide combat data to skynet. Skynet, in turn, uses that data to program new behaviors and create new weapons, armor, and terminator designs. What I think would happen is that a terminator would encounter a nest for the first time and be completely unprepared for the encounter. It would lose and give time for the nest to continue growing. However, skynet would use the data provided by the the encounter to create a prototype terminator with a sturdier body and acid resistant armor. It would continue to improve on this design as turn out robots that are increasingly more effective at countering the aliens until a model is released that outmatches xenomorphs on every possible level. Xenomorphs can only really "counter" a biological opponent by assimilating their strengths when they reproduce through facehuggers. Terminators aren't a biological enemy and would leave the aliens unable to match their mechanical foe. TLDR: in a first encounter scenario, i'd give xenomorphs an edge over terminators. In a second encounter or more situation, i'd give terminators an increasingly large edge over xenomorphs. I'd do this partly for entertainment value because whatever terminator that skynet created to counter a xenomorph would, undoubtedly, be really badass.

whowouldwin

t5_2s599

c9sdmcw

Great story, but there was something that should be mentioned. One of the terminator's greatest strengths lies in its ability to be upgraded in order to more efficiently counter a new threat. Like aliens, most terminators are simply drones that can be thrown away, but with the added benefit of collecting combat data. In a first encounter situation against xenomorphs I would give the aliens an edge over terminators since they are calibrated to fight against human enemies: We don't actually know that their sensors can adequately detect xenomorph life signs. It is entirely possible that an alien would remain more difficult to find and track than a human. I would give acidic blood more weight in a first encounter, as it is extremely corrosive and would likely do more to at least damage a terminator's structural integrity enough to give an alien an edge in close combat. the queen xenomorph is much more intelligent and powerful than the average drone, who is in turn much more powerful than an average human. Again, terminators are calibrated to countering human threats and may be caught off guard by something like this. This being said, terminators are expendable and as they fight and die, they provide combat data to skynet. Skynet, in turn, uses that data to program new behaviors and create new weapons, armor, and terminator designs. What I think would happen is that a terminator would encounter a nest for the first time and be completely unprepared for the encounter. It would lose and give time for the nest to continue growing. However, skynet would use the data provided by the the encounter to create a prototype terminator with a sturdier body and acid resistant armor. It would continue to improve on this design as turn out robots that are increasingly more effective at countering the aliens until a model is released that outmatches xenomorphs on every possible level. Xenomorphs can only really "counter" a biological opponent by assimilating their strengths when they reproduce through facehuggers. Terminators aren't a biological enemy and would leave the aliens unable to match their mechanical foe.

in a first encounter scenario, i'd give xenomorphs an edge over terminators. In a second encounter or more situation, i'd give terminators an increasingly large edge over xenomorphs. I'd do this partly for entertainment value because whatever terminator that skynet created to counter a xenomorph would, undoubtedly, be really badass.

redtastic

I belong to the Philly Sports Club (PSC) network. The Society Hill gym has an outdoor pool, that is perfect for the summer - only three blocks from the Market Line. The cost of summer pool memberships in Philly come out what the a yearly membership at PSC is. So essentially, you have a pool for the summer and a "free" gym for the rest of the year. The Society Hill gym also has phenomenal spinning classes (sign up early because they get booked). (Coach/Steve is the best,it's like AP spinning, but he goes to Florida Dec-Apr). The Rodin gym has great classes. It has some parking, but usually fills up and people sneak into the Whole Foods parking lot - but if you buy something then it is fine. I can't speak for the Center City one, but it is near the Market Line. TL; DR - PSC gyms give you access to a pool in the summer to get some sun and have great classes year round.

I belong to the Philly Sports Club (PSC) network. The Society Hill gym has an outdoor pool, that is perfect for the summer - only three blocks from the Market Line. The cost of summer pool memberships in Philly come out what the a yearly membership at PSC is. So essentially, you have a pool for the summer and a "free" gym for the rest of the year. The Society Hill gym also has phenomenal spinning classes (sign up early because they get booked). (Coach/Steve is the best,it's like AP spinning, but he goes to Florida Dec-Apr). The Rodin gym has great classes. It has some parking, but usually fills up and people sneak into the Whole Foods parking lot - but if you buy something then it is fine. I can't speak for the Center City one, but it is near the Market Line. TL; DR - PSC gyms give you access to a pool in the summer to get some sun and have great classes year round.

philadelphia

t5_2qh24

c8immfy

I belong to the Philly Sports Club (PSC) network. The Society Hill gym has an outdoor pool, that is perfect for the summer - only three blocks from the Market Line. The cost of summer pool memberships in Philly come out what the a yearly membership at PSC is. So essentially, you have a pool for the summer and a "free" gym for the rest of the year. The Society Hill gym also has phenomenal spinning classes (sign up early because they get booked). (Coach/Steve is the best,it's like AP spinning, but he goes to Florida Dec-Apr). The Rodin gym has great classes. It has some parking, but usually fills up and people sneak into the Whole Foods parking lot - but if you buy something then it is fine. I can't speak for the Center City one, but it is near the Market Line.

PSC gyms give you access to a pool in the summer to get some sun and have great classes year round.

tj1226

Right? Whedon always makes me feel like a lady and a person. I wanted to include Dollhouse but I feel like that might be a little grown up plus so far I've really met girls who enjoyed it and most guys said it wasn't well planned enough or they found the plot superficial. Also have you seen Princess Cookie? I must have rematched it 40 times by now an I still usually cry. That episode just has such an amazing message and The way they mirror Jakes simple dream with cookies complicated one is just.... Llllaaaaagh you know? TL:DR I geeked out...

Right? Whedon always makes me feel like a lady and a person. I wanted to include Dollhouse but I feel like that might be a little grown up plus so far I've really met girls who enjoyed it and most guys said it wasn't well planned enough or they found the plot superficial. Also have you seen Princess Cookie? I must have rematched it 40 times by now an I still usually cry. That episode just has such an amazing message and The way they mirror Jakes simple dream with cookies complicated one is just.... Llllaaaaagh you know? TL:DR I geeked out...

TwoXChromosomes

t5_2r2jt

c8ip9aj

Right? Whedon always makes me feel like a lady and a person. I wanted to include Dollhouse but I feel like that might be a little grown up plus so far I've really met girls who enjoyed it and most guys said it wasn't well planned enough or they found the plot superficial. Also have you seen Princess Cookie? I must have rematched it 40 times by now an I still usually cry. That episode just has such an amazing message and The way they mirror Jakes simple dream with cookies complicated one is just.... Llllaaaaagh you know?

I geeked out...

jrock954

Native Floridian here. I know this'll be buried, but I just have to say this. I've lived in Broward county my whole life (area code 954) and since the Tea Party took control here I have watched this place turn into an absolute disgrace. I worked in private security here and volunteered in soup kitchens. I have seen in person the absolute horror of the Tea Party's agenda. We have damaged roads, train tracks that need repair, a school system that is a goddamn joke at both the public and private levels, and an unbelievable crime problem. We have homeless begging in almost every late night drive thru, and most are either addicts dropped onto the street when they can't pay for their halfway home care or veterans that have been abandoned by the VA. When they're not begging at Taco Bell they're begging on the side of the road and in our malls in the hundreds. Guess what that does to tourism? What that article doesn't touch on is that the areas most affected by this (Ft. Lauderdale, Miami, West Palm Beach, Orlando, and Tampa) don't vote strongly red anyway. The rural areas around us vote OVERWHELMINGLY Republican. We HATE Scott, but as long as the Tea Party holds sway with Republicans on a national level our wonderful citizens will vote he and his ilk in time and again. Why would an orange farmer give a shit about a railway to ease traffic he's never in? Why would the sugar farmers want the Everglades protected, when the Glades are in the way of expansion? Why would anyone in a small town care that there are hundred of people dying in the streets of cities they never visit? Add to that an aging population that spends over half the year living in other states away from this garbage and you start to get an idea of what we're dealing with. We're the laughing stock of the nation every election because it looks like we can't get our shit together, mainly because we're so disconnected. There's two Floridas; one red, one blue. Move the capital down here to Ft. Lauderdale down the road from the literal homeless communities under the overpasses and you'll see some changes. Sorry for any typos, this was done on my phone at work. TL;DR: Half of Florida keeps fucking the other half.

Native Floridian here. I know this'll be buried, but I just have to say this. I've lived in Broward county my whole life (area code 954) and since the Tea Party took control here I have watched this place turn into an absolute disgrace. I worked in private security here and volunteered in soup kitchens. I have seen in person the absolute horror of the Tea Party's agenda. We have damaged roads, train tracks that need repair, a school system that is a goddamn joke at both the public and private levels, and an unbelievable crime problem. We have homeless begging in almost every late night drive thru, and most are either addicts dropped onto the street when they can't pay for their halfway home care or veterans that have been abandoned by the VA. When they're not begging at Taco Bell they're begging on the side of the road and in our malls in the hundreds. Guess what that does to tourism? What that article doesn't touch on is that the areas most affected by this (Ft. Lauderdale, Miami, West Palm Beach, Orlando, and Tampa) don't vote strongly red anyway. The rural areas around us vote OVERWHELMINGLY Republican. We HATE Scott, but as long as the Tea Party holds sway with Republicans on a national level our wonderful citizens will vote he and his ilk in time and again. Why would an orange farmer give a shit about a railway to ease traffic he's never in? Why would the sugar farmers want the Everglades protected, when the Glades are in the way of expansion? Why would anyone in a small town care that there are hundred of people dying in the streets of cities they never visit? Add to that an aging population that spends over half the year living in other states away from this garbage and you start to get an idea of what we're dealing with. We're the laughing stock of the nation every election because it looks like we can't get our shit together, mainly because we're so disconnected. There's two Floridas; one red, one blue. Move the capital down here to Ft. Lauderdale down the road from the literal homeless communities under the overpasses and you'll see some changes. Sorry for any typos, this was done on my phone at work. TL;DR: Half of Florida keeps fucking the other half.

politics

t5_2cneq

c8il3v8

Native Floridian here. I know this'll be buried, but I just have to say this. I've lived in Broward county my whole life (area code 954) and since the Tea Party took control here I have watched this place turn into an absolute disgrace. I worked in private security here and volunteered in soup kitchens. I have seen in person the absolute horror of the Tea Party's agenda. We have damaged roads, train tracks that need repair, a school system that is a goddamn joke at both the public and private levels, and an unbelievable crime problem. We have homeless begging in almost every late night drive thru, and most are either addicts dropped onto the street when they can't pay for their halfway home care or veterans that have been abandoned by the VA. When they're not begging at Taco Bell they're begging on the side of the road and in our malls in the hundreds. Guess what that does to tourism? What that article doesn't touch on is that the areas most affected by this (Ft. Lauderdale, Miami, West Palm Beach, Orlando, and Tampa) don't vote strongly red anyway. The rural areas around us vote OVERWHELMINGLY Republican. We HATE Scott, but as long as the Tea Party holds sway with Republicans on a national level our wonderful citizens will vote he and his ilk in time and again. Why would an orange farmer give a shit about a railway to ease traffic he's never in? Why would the sugar farmers want the Everglades protected, when the Glades are in the way of expansion? Why would anyone in a small town care that there are hundred of people dying in the streets of cities they never visit? Add to that an aging population that spends over half the year living in other states away from this garbage and you start to get an idea of what we're dealing with. We're the laughing stock of the nation every election because it looks like we can't get our shit together, mainly because we're so disconnected. There's two Floridas; one red, one blue. Move the capital down here to Ft. Lauderdale down the road from the literal homeless communities under the overpasses and you'll see some changes. Sorry for any typos, this was done on my phone at work.

Half of Florida keeps fucking the other half.

The_Original_Gronkie

Crist got my attention back when he was attorney general under Jeb Bush. When the hurricanes of 2004 and 2005 devastated the state, the insurance companies started crying about how damaged they were and all wanted to raise the rates. Now remember, the hurricanes basically hit a couple of states, did bad damage, yes, but they collected property insurance for 48 other states that had zero damage. In addition, only about a quarter of Florida were affected by the hurricanes, so they collected on the other three quarters with no payouts as well. So Charlie invites them to a big meeting where they can make their case, and tells them to bring all the documentation to prove they need a rate hike. They show up for the meeting, Charlie asks for the documentation, and none of the insurance companies had it. They all figured they'd close the door, pretend they had a meeting, Republican Charlie Crist would rubber stamp their request, and they'd all go out for scotch and cigars. Instead Charlie reminded them that he required the documentation and adjourned the meeting until they could provide it. The meeting lasted about 10 minutes. The next time they met, they brought the documentation. TL;DR: Charlie Crist is the kind of independently thinking politician that we need in this country.

Crist got my attention back when he was attorney general under Jeb Bush. When the hurricanes of 2004 and 2005 devastated the state, the insurance companies started crying about how damaged they were and all wanted to raise the rates. Now remember, the hurricanes basically hit a couple of states, did bad damage, yes, but they collected property insurance for 48 other states that had zero damage. In addition, only about a quarter of Florida were affected by the hurricanes, so they collected on the other three quarters with no payouts as well. So Charlie invites them to a big meeting where they can make their case, and tells them to bring all the documentation to prove they need a rate hike. They show up for the meeting, Charlie asks for the documentation, and none of the insurance companies had it. They all figured they'd close the door, pretend they had a meeting, Republican Charlie Crist would rubber stamp their request, and they'd all go out for scotch and cigars. Instead Charlie reminded them that he required the documentation and adjourned the meeting until they could provide it. The meeting lasted about 10 minutes. The next time they met, they brought the documentation. TL;DR: Charlie Crist is the kind of independently thinking politician that we need in this country.

politics

t5_2cneq

c8irjfg

Crist got my attention back when he was attorney general under Jeb Bush. When the hurricanes of 2004 and 2005 devastated the state, the insurance companies started crying about how damaged they were and all wanted to raise the rates. Now remember, the hurricanes basically hit a couple of states, did bad damage, yes, but they collected property insurance for 48 other states that had zero damage. In addition, only about a quarter of Florida were affected by the hurricanes, so they collected on the other three quarters with no payouts as well. So Charlie invites them to a big meeting where they can make their case, and tells them to bring all the documentation to prove they need a rate hike. They show up for the meeting, Charlie asks for the documentation, and none of the insurance companies had it. They all figured they'd close the door, pretend they had a meeting, Republican Charlie Crist would rubber stamp their request, and they'd all go out for scotch and cigars. Instead Charlie reminded them that he required the documentation and adjourned the meeting until they could provide it. The meeting lasted about 10 minutes. The next time they met, they brought the documentation.

Charlie Crist is the kind of independently thinking politician that we need in this country.

The_Original_Gronkie

Sorry, I'm going to hijack the top comment because there is a major issue with Rick Scott that wasn't addressed in the article or any of the comments that I read, and it needs to be heard. It is one of the most blatant conflicts of interest I have ever witnessed. One of Rick Scott's first moves (after killing the popular high-speed rail program that cost the state tens of thousands of jobs, and billions in revenues for many years to come), was to mandate drug-testing for those receiving welfare, despite all studies showing that it would cost the state far more than it would save. If the person failed, they'd be responsible for paying the fee, if the person passed, the state would pay the fee. Either way, the clinic doing the testing would collect a fee. What wasn't mentioned was that Rick Scott owns a large chain of medical clinics that performs drug testing, and he implemented this program knowing that some of those people would wander into his clinics for their drug testing. Whether they passed or not, he was going to get paid. When someone finally noticed this, he sold his chain of drug testing medical clinics. Who did he sell it to so he could avoid the conflict of interest? Wait for it... Wait for it... His WIFE. In order to avoid the conflict of interest, he sold the chain of drug testing medical clinics to HIS WIFE! TL; DR: Rick Scott is fucking crook who belongs in prison. And he looks like a penis with ears.

Sorry, I'm going to hijack the top comment because there is a major issue with Rick Scott that wasn't addressed in the article or any of the comments that I read, and it needs to be heard. It is one of the most blatant conflicts of interest I have ever witnessed. One of Rick Scott's first moves (after killing the popular high-speed rail program that cost the state tens of thousands of jobs, and billions in revenues for many years to come), was to mandate drug-testing for those receiving welfare, despite all studies showing that it would cost the state far more than it would save. If the person failed, they'd be responsible for paying the fee, if the person passed, the state would pay the fee. Either way, the clinic doing the testing would collect a fee. What wasn't mentioned was that Rick Scott owns a large chain of medical clinics that performs drug testing, and he implemented this program knowing that some of those people would wander into his clinics for their drug testing. Whether they passed or not, he was going to get paid. When someone finally noticed this, he sold his chain of drug testing medical clinics. Who did he sell it to so he could avoid the conflict of interest? Wait for it... Wait for it... His WIFE. In order to avoid the conflict of interest, he sold the chain of drug testing medical clinics to HIS WIFE! TL; DR: Rick Scott is fucking crook who belongs in prison. And he looks like a penis with ears.

politics

t5_2cneq

c8iszz6

Sorry, I'm going to hijack the top comment because there is a major issue with Rick Scott that wasn't addressed in the article or any of the comments that I read, and it needs to be heard. It is one of the most blatant conflicts of interest I have ever witnessed. One of Rick Scott's first moves (after killing the popular high-speed rail program that cost the state tens of thousands of jobs, and billions in revenues for many years to come), was to mandate drug-testing for those receiving welfare, despite all studies showing that it would cost the state far more than it would save. If the person failed, they'd be responsible for paying the fee, if the person passed, the state would pay the fee. Either way, the clinic doing the testing would collect a fee. What wasn't mentioned was that Rick Scott owns a large chain of medical clinics that performs drug testing, and he implemented this program knowing that some of those people would wander into his clinics for their drug testing. Whether they passed or not, he was going to get paid. When someone finally noticed this, he sold his chain of drug testing medical clinics. Who did he sell it to so he could avoid the conflict of interest? Wait for it... Wait for it... His WIFE. In order to avoid the conflict of interest, he sold the chain of drug testing medical clinics to HIS WIFE!

Rick Scott is fucking crook who belongs in prison. And he looks like a penis with ears.

IrishTek

My school had a college adviser come only once during my senior year when I happened to be out from mono. When I asked when I could talk to one, my school counselor told me to just go to the school I wanted to go to and ask. The first semester and a half, I didn't know how to get student loans, assuming they were all private loans. I also had stopped talking to my Dad, and so I was doing this all on my own. So instead, I drained my savings the first semester, and worked 50 hours a week while attending 12 hours a week of classes to pay for it myself. I got so burnt out that I eventually dropped out and haven't seriously gone back, instead just working into a decent, entry level IT job. I'm 28, and just now going back to school for Cyber Security. This was back in 2003. Having a ton of information out there doesn't mean it's good information, or that I could have understood it without assistance. I just assumed people either had scholarships (which I didn't get), or had their parents paying for it (which wasn't an option). The system when funded is already massively faulty. I'm from a rural area, where very few people even leave the county, or get a job other than the local factory. TL;DR: Yes, we need college advisers.

My school had a college adviser come only once during my senior year when I happened to be out from mono. When I asked when I could talk to one, my school counselor told me to just go to the school I wanted to go to and ask. The first semester and a half, I didn't know how to get student loans, assuming they were all private loans. I also had stopped talking to my Dad, and so I was doing this all on my own. So instead, I drained my savings the first semester, and worked 50 hours a week while attending 12 hours a week of classes to pay for it myself. I got so burnt out that I eventually dropped out and haven't seriously gone back, instead just working into a decent, entry level IT job. I'm 28, and just now going back to school for Cyber Security. This was back in 2003. Having a ton of information out there doesn't mean it's good information, or that I could have understood it without assistance. I just assumed people either had scholarships (which I didn't get), or had their parents paying for it (which wasn't an option). The system when funded is already massively faulty. I'm from a rural area, where very few people even leave the county, or get a job other than the local factory. TL;DR: Yes, we need college advisers.

politics

t5_2cneq

c8ito9m

My school had a college adviser come only once during my senior year when I happened to be out from mono. When I asked when I could talk to one, my school counselor told me to just go to the school I wanted to go to and ask. The first semester and a half, I didn't know how to get student loans, assuming they were all private loans. I also had stopped talking to my Dad, and so I was doing this all on my own. So instead, I drained my savings the first semester, and worked 50 hours a week while attending 12 hours a week of classes to pay for it myself. I got so burnt out that I eventually dropped out and haven't seriously gone back, instead just working into a decent, entry level IT job. I'm 28, and just now going back to school for Cyber Security. This was back in 2003. Having a ton of information out there doesn't mean it's good information, or that I could have understood it without assistance. I just assumed people either had scholarships (which I didn't get), or had their parents paying for it (which wasn't an option). The system when funded is already massively faulty. I'm from a rural area, where very few people even leave the county, or get a job other than the local factory.

Yes, we need college advisers.

Furin

Story time: An artist uploaded his own videos. They were later blocked by his record label, apparently. He then contacted his label... and was told that they didn't block his videos, GEMA did because they were in conflict with YouTube. The artist then contacted GEMA and he was told that they in fact were in conflict with YouTube right now, but didn't actually block his videos. The kicker: YouTube blocked the videos on their own, so that if they lose they don't have to pay retroactively. But they also don't say that GEMA blocked the videos because that would mean that they were wrong if they lost, so they just said the record label did. But of course, YouTube stopped paying the label for the neighboring rights as well... TL;DR: YouTube and GEMA are both stupid.

Story time: An artist uploaded his own videos. They were later blocked by his record label, apparently. He then contacted his label... and was told that they didn't block his videos, GEMA did because they were in conflict with YouTube. The artist then contacted GEMA and he was told that they in fact were in conflict with YouTube right now, but didn't actually block his videos. The kicker: YouTube blocked the videos on their own, so that if they lose they don't have to pay retroactively. But they also don't say that GEMA blocked the videos because that would mean that they were wrong if they lost, so they just said the record label did. But of course, YouTube stopped paying the label for the neighboring rights as well... TL;DR: YouTube and GEMA are both stupid.

technology

t5_2qh16

c8iq97m

Story time: An artist uploaded his own videos. They were later blocked by his record label, apparently. He then contacted his label... and was told that they didn't block his videos, GEMA did because they were in conflict with YouTube. The artist then contacted GEMA and he was told that they in fact were in conflict with YouTube right now, but didn't actually block his videos. The kicker: YouTube blocked the videos on their own, so that if they lose they don't have to pay retroactively. But they also don't say that GEMA blocked the videos because that would mean that they were wrong if they lost, so they just said the record label did. But of course, YouTube stopped paying the label for the neighboring rights as well...

YouTube and GEMA are both stupid.

Ka1ser

The younger ones and those who actually spend a lot of time on the internet know the direness of this situation pretty well. The older ones in contrary, those who don't use the internet so often, mostly don't know about this. This also leads to the situation that, when the topic is discussed, the "older generation" mostly supports the arguments of the GEMA. The only see the side "well, of course people should pay for the music, the artists have to earn some money", but they usually don't know the other side - like those meteorite pictures. Don't get me wrong, it's not so much their fault, on the surface the topic looks different then it really is. tl;dr: the younger ones yes, the older ones not neccesarily

The younger ones and those who actually spend a lot of time on the internet know the direness of this situation pretty well. The older ones in contrary, those who don't use the internet so often, mostly don't know about this. This also leads to the situation that, when the topic is discussed, the "older generation" mostly supports the arguments of the GEMA. The only see the side "well, of course people should pay for the music, the artists have to earn some money", but they usually don't know the other side - like those meteorite pictures. Don't get me wrong, it's not so much their fault, on the surface the topic looks different then it really is. tl;dr: the younger ones yes, the older ones not neccesarily

technology

t5_2qh16

c8iqv6s

The younger ones and those who actually spend a lot of time on the internet know the direness of this situation pretty well. The older ones in contrary, those who don't use the internet so often, mostly don't know about this. This also leads to the situation that, when the topic is discussed, the "older generation" mostly supports the arguments of the GEMA. The only see the side "well, of course people should pay for the music, the artists have to earn some money", but they usually don't know the other side - like those meteorite pictures. Don't get me wrong, it's not so much their fault, on the surface the topic looks different then it really is.

the younger ones yes, the older ones not neccesarily

LDL2

Here is the issue, imo. It is naive to assume that governmental position will remain static. If one takes your basic nolan chart and examines governmental position throughout history it can move but thos movements happen linearly. However to assume it functions on a 2d chart like the nolan chart also isn't supported by history. Really imo you need to wrap that into either a sphere or a cylinder and remain on the surface. In a sphere each tip touches one another while in a cylinder history at least points to anarchy touching totalitarianism. This makes sense if you look at actual social contract theory. In the social contract theory there isn't stability by the natural rules of how one functions. This results in seeking out the strongest in society for protection which devolves into government which may or may not be totalitarian in nature. This is historically on display in Somolia (as annoying as that reference may be to libertarians) or potentially the Russian revolution. Most libertarian ideologies are bickering about how to prevent this movement one way or another. Simply adopting no standard almost ensures this transformation as the moral position is naught. This is why the Somolia example is not seen in some other examples of statelessness whether it is Pennsylvania or Spain. The adoption of a moral standard was set, or simply variation of property rights are formed and people were able to identify them. We are on a dangerous position by the inequities brought about from crony capitalism, thus some level of standard need apply. otherwise the power elites will use this to undermine the moral positions we have formed in much of western culture. As an aside the formation of those standards leads me to believe anarchy can only exist post-state, which is not a real problem throughout the world. Thus, I don't think inaction is an option. Now the issue I find is can we find some inclusive system that fits a moral standard where people can agree to maintain a moral position towards one another. I think the NAP presents a reasonable starting place. I also think the more leftist ideology of the golden rule is very applicable. We've all heard the NAP flagpole claims, but if you overlay that with the golden rule it becomes a non-issue and I think many people already believe that. If you were a strict NAP follower who made someone let go of your flag pole, I personally would treat you the same way I would most criminals. Exclusion from society. So what is a reasonable action based on these moral positions is the event of collapse and that brings me to voluntaryism. You want some agency watching you fine, leave me out of it. If need be charge me to use your toys or exclude me entirely. This has been considered problematic by some on the left because they believe in use rights and rights to travel. Somewhat these are amenable when applying the golden rule. I personally think georgism bridges the first although simply people (hopefully applying the golden rule) would have to make the second work. Now I can't quite tell if you are asking the minarchists to give ancap a chance, but that still doesn't really help the leftists. tl;dr- No action isn't quite possible, these arguments are about preventing the direction from shifting. I would hope we can come to some agreement to stop that while maintaining the general morals each of us finds.

Here is the issue, imo. It is naive to assume that governmental position will remain static. If one takes your basic nolan chart and examines governmental position throughout history it can move but thos movements happen linearly. However to assume it functions on a 2d chart like the nolan chart also isn't supported by history. Really imo you need to wrap that into either a sphere or a cylinder and remain on the surface. In a sphere each tip touches one another while in a cylinder history at least points to anarchy touching totalitarianism. This makes sense if you look at actual social contract theory. In the social contract theory there isn't stability by the natural rules of how one functions. This results in seeking out the strongest in society for protection which devolves into government which may or may not be totalitarian in nature. This is historically on display in Somolia (as annoying as that reference may be to libertarians) or potentially the Russian revolution. Most libertarian ideologies are bickering about how to prevent this movement one way or another. Simply adopting no standard almost ensures this transformation as the moral position is naught. This is why the Somolia example is not seen in some other examples of statelessness whether it is Pennsylvania or Spain. The adoption of a moral standard was set, or simply variation of property rights are formed and people were able to identify them. We are on a dangerous position by the inequities brought about from crony capitalism, thus some level of standard need apply. otherwise the power elites will use this to undermine the moral positions we have formed in much of western culture. As an aside the formation of those standards leads me to believe anarchy can only exist post-state, which is not a real problem throughout the world. Thus, I don't think inaction is an option. Now the issue I find is can we find some inclusive system that fits a moral standard where people can agree to maintain a moral position towards one another. I think the NAP presents a reasonable starting place. I also think the more leftist ideology of the golden rule is very applicable. We've all heard the NAP flagpole claims, but if you overlay that with the golden rule it becomes a non-issue and I think many people already believe that. If you were a strict NAP follower who made someone let go of your flag pole, I personally would treat you the same way I would most criminals. Exclusion from society. So what is a reasonable action based on these moral positions is the event of collapse and that brings me to voluntaryism. You want some agency watching you fine, leave me out of it. If need be charge me to use your toys or exclude me entirely. This has been considered problematic by some on the left because they believe in use rights and rights to travel. Somewhat these are amenable when applying the golden rule. I personally think georgism bridges the first although simply people (hopefully applying the golden rule) would have to make the second work. Now I can't quite tell if you are asking the minarchists to give ancap a chance, but that still doesn't really help the leftists. tl;dr- No action isn't quite possible, these arguments are about preventing the direction from shifting. I would hope we can come to some agreement to stop that while maintaining the general morals each of us finds.

Libertarian

t5_2qh63

c8inshe

Here is the issue, imo. It is naive to assume that governmental position will remain static. If one takes your basic nolan chart and examines governmental position throughout history it can move but thos movements happen linearly. However to assume it functions on a 2d chart like the nolan chart also isn't supported by history. Really imo you need to wrap that into either a sphere or a cylinder and remain on the surface. In a sphere each tip touches one another while in a cylinder history at least points to anarchy touching totalitarianism. This makes sense if you look at actual social contract theory. In the social contract theory there isn't stability by the natural rules of how one functions. This results in seeking out the strongest in society for protection which devolves into government which may or may not be totalitarian in nature. This is historically on display in Somolia (as annoying as that reference may be to libertarians) or potentially the Russian revolution. Most libertarian ideologies are bickering about how to prevent this movement one way or another. Simply adopting no standard almost ensures this transformation as the moral position is naught. This is why the Somolia example is not seen in some other examples of statelessness whether it is Pennsylvania or Spain. The adoption of a moral standard was set, or simply variation of property rights are formed and people were able to identify them. We are on a dangerous position by the inequities brought about from crony capitalism, thus some level of standard need apply. otherwise the power elites will use this to undermine the moral positions we have formed in much of western culture. As an aside the formation of those standards leads me to believe anarchy can only exist post-state, which is not a real problem throughout the world. Thus, I don't think inaction is an option. Now the issue I find is can we find some inclusive system that fits a moral standard where people can agree to maintain a moral position towards one another. I think the NAP presents a reasonable starting place. I also think the more leftist ideology of the golden rule is very applicable. We've all heard the NAP flagpole claims, but if you overlay that with the golden rule it becomes a non-issue and I think many people already believe that. If you were a strict NAP follower who made someone let go of your flag pole, I personally would treat you the same way I would most criminals. Exclusion from society. So what is a reasonable action based on these moral positions is the event of collapse and that brings me to voluntaryism. You want some agency watching you fine, leave me out of it. If need be charge me to use your toys or exclude me entirely. This has been considered problematic by some on the left because they believe in use rights and rights to travel. Somewhat these are amenable when applying the golden rule. I personally think georgism bridges the first although simply people (hopefully applying the golden rule) would have to make the second work. Now I can't quite tell if you are asking the minarchists to give ancap a chance, but that still doesn't really help the leftists.

No action isn't quite possible, these arguments are about preventing the direction from shifting. I would hope we can come to some agreement to stop that while maintaining the general morals each of us finds.

UnicornToF3

Unless you have a computer with an extremely large amount of RAM (think 8-12 gigs), or you have a hard disk with an extremely large hard disk (think terrabytes), then you computer will use a significant portion of your hard drive as RAM if needed. This process (when on OSX) is called virtual memory and is integral to the functionality of the system. TLDR; you have filled up your hard drive to less than 1gigabyte. You need at least 3/4ths of it free for your computer to operate properly.

Unless you have a computer with an extremely large amount of RAM (think 8-12 gigs), or you have a hard disk with an extremely large hard disk (think terrabytes), then you computer will use a significant portion of your hard drive as RAM if needed. This process (when on OSX) is called virtual memory and is integral to the functionality of the system. TLDR; you have filled up your hard drive to less than 1gigabyte. You need at least 3/4ths of it free for your computer to operate properly.

applehelp

t5_2rfbh

c8inpqh

Unless you have a computer with an extremely large amount of RAM (think 8-12 gigs), or you have a hard disk with an extremely large hard disk (think terrabytes), then you computer will use a significant portion of your hard drive as RAM if needed. This process (when on OSX) is called virtual memory and is integral to the functionality of the system.

you have filled up your hard drive to less than 1gigabyte. You need at least 3/4ths of it free for your computer to operate properly.

frustrationman

I'm bi, I find women attractive but they drive me crazy sometimes, like really mad... I like talking to them as individuals, but as a group, they tend to act differently, like the girls that shout "woo" at parties or randomly blurt their thoughts like "I NEED TO GO TO THE BATHROOM" or "UGH I'M SOOOOO HUNGRY RIGHT NOW!!!". I hate that. Men don't blurt out their thoughts like that. I like men. **TL;DR: Shit girls say.**

I'm bi, I find women attractive but they drive me crazy sometimes, like really mad... I like talking to them as individuals, but as a group, they tend to act differently, like the girls that shout "woo" at parties or randomly blurt their thoughts like "I NEED TO GO TO THE BATHROOM" or "UGH I'M SOOOOO HUNGRY RIGHT NOW!!!". I hate that. Men don't blurt out their thoughts like that. I like men. TL;DR: Shit girls say.

gaybros

t5_2tdzg

c8j3o8f

I'm bi, I find women attractive but they drive me crazy sometimes, like really mad... I like talking to them as individuals, but as a group, they tend to act differently, like the girls that shout "woo" at parties or randomly blurt their thoughts like "I NEED TO GO TO THE BATHROOM" or "UGH I'M SOOOOO HUNGRY RIGHT NOW!!!". I hate that. Men don't blurt out their thoughts like that. I like men.

Shit girls say.

kinsey3

My friends are predominately male, but the females in the group can not only keep up, but kind of hold it all together. If I need to know what's going on, they're the ones I ask. Also, they are usually responsible for the best pranks. Helps I guess that I'm bi, too, and they're all really attractive. **TL;DR:** My female friends are sexy, hard-drinking flappers.

My friends are predominately male, but the females in the group can not only keep up, but kind of hold it all together. If I need to know what's going on, they're the ones I ask. Also, they are usually responsible for the best pranks. Helps I guess that I'm bi, too, and they're all really attractive. TL;DR: My female friends are sexy, hard-drinking flappers.

gaybros

t5_2tdzg

c8jc34l

My friends are predominately male, but the females in the group can not only keep up, but kind of hold it all together. If I need to know what's going on, they're the ones I ask. Also, they are usually responsible for the best pranks. Helps I guess that I'm bi, too, and they're all really attractive.

My female friends are sexy, hard-drinking flappers.

mariam67

I really enjoyed that book. Until a relative accidentally donated it to Goodwill while we were moving. Of course my mom goes "oh don't worry about replacing it, it wasn't your fault" and now it's more than a year later and I still haven't found a used copy and I haven't bought a new one because I'll be damned if I'm going to pay full price for it twice. Wow, I didn't realize I was still so mad about it until I started posting and ended up ranting. TL;DR: don't mess with my literature.

I really enjoyed that book. Until a relative accidentally donated it to Goodwill while we were moving. Of course my mom goes "oh don't worry about replacing it, it wasn't your fault" and now it's more than a year later and I still haven't found a used copy and I haven't bought a new one because I'll be damned if I'm going to pay full price for it twice. Wow, I didn't realize I was still so mad about it until I started posting and ended up ranting. TL;DR: don't mess with my literature.

pics

t5_2qh0u

c8jmlwc

I really enjoyed that book. Until a relative accidentally donated it to Goodwill while we were moving. Of course my mom goes "oh don't worry about replacing it, it wasn't your fault" and now it's more than a year later and I still haven't found a used copy and I haven't bought a new one because I'll be damned if I'm going to pay full price for it twice. Wow, I didn't realize I was still so mad about it until I started posting and ended up ranting.

don't mess with my literature.

jpmoney

If *anything* gets swapped out to disk it will lead to that. More memory makes that swap much less likely to happen. Not that it should, but Windows and Linux both tend to swap things out to make themsleves happy. Its been documented fairly well that you can turn off your swap file in Windows and it can still be unstable. Telling Linux to have its vm.swapiness at 0 still results in some swapped out space. tl;dr- Even though it doesn't need to happen, OSes are addicted to swapping.

If anything gets swapped out to disk it will lead to that. More memory makes that swap much less likely to happen. Not that it should, but Windows and Linux both tend to swap things out to make themsleves happy. Its been documented fairly well that you can turn off your swap file in Windows and it can still be unstable. Telling Linux to have its vm.swapiness at 0 still results in some swapped out space. tl;dr- Even though it doesn't need to happen, OSes are addicted to swapping.

buildapc

t5_2rnve

c8j9gym

If anything gets swapped out to disk it will lead to that. More memory makes that swap much less likely to happen. Not that it should, but Windows and Linux both tend to swap things out to make themsleves happy. Its been documented fairly well that you can turn off your swap file in Windows and it can still be unstable. Telling Linux to have its vm.swapiness at 0 still results in some swapped out space.

Even though it doesn't need to happen, OSes are addicted to swapping.

aramid

&gt;I think that's the main ~~problem with~~ **reason for** this approach. My primary computer right now is an overclocked Core2 Duo E4600. Despite being five years old and running on DDR2, I can still game on it. It performs like a new entry-level computer but it still gets the job done, because I've upgraded the easy stuff - RAM and GPU - since I built it. Because I'm not a hardcore gamer who demands 60FPS with all the settings up, I can save a tremendous amount of money by holding off on the full upgrade for as long as possible. I still want 60 FPS, but as long as I can run at native resolution and see shadows, I'm happy. My new computer, currently sitting on my workbench, has an i5-3570k and 16GB of RAM. My Core2 was low-midrange when new, whereas this thing is a beast. So it's almost guaranteed that I'll still be happy with its performance in five years if I just upgrade the GPU every couple generations. Five years from now, everyone else will be using DDR4 and I'll still be getting what I need from DDR3. But while DDR3 will still be sufficient, 8GB will not. So I'm planning ahead and getting what I *will* need, while it's cheap. I fully understand that this approach to upgrades doesn't suit everybody. Then again, there are probably a lot of people who could get by just fine on this approach, if they looked at it objectively and didn't jump at every new shiny thing. **TL;DR:** If you know you're going to upgrade in 2 years, buy 8GB. If you plan to keep the computer longer than that, spend a few bucks extra up front to double it.

>I think that's the main problem with reason for this approach. My primary computer right now is an overclocked Core2 Duo E4600. Despite being five years old and running on DDR2, I can still game on it. It performs like a new entry-level computer but it still gets the job done, because I've upgraded the easy stuff - RAM and GPU - since I built it. Because I'm not a hardcore gamer who demands 60FPS with all the settings up, I can save a tremendous amount of money by holding off on the full upgrade for as long as possible. I still want 60 FPS, but as long as I can run at native resolution and see shadows, I'm happy. My new computer, currently sitting on my workbench, has an i5-3570k and 16GB of RAM. My Core2 was low-midrange when new, whereas this thing is a beast. So it's almost guaranteed that I'll still be happy with its performance in five years if I just upgrade the GPU every couple generations. Five years from now, everyone else will be using DDR4 and I'll still be getting what I need from DDR3. But while DDR3 will still be sufficient, 8GB will not. So I'm planning ahead and getting what I will need, while it's cheap. I fully understand that this approach to upgrades doesn't suit everybody. Then again, there are probably a lot of people who could get by just fine on this approach, if they looked at it objectively and didn't jump at every new shiny thing. TL;DR: If you know you're going to upgrade in 2 years, buy 8GB. If you plan to keep the computer longer than that, spend a few bucks extra up front to double it.

buildapc

t5_2rnve

c8j9n7p

I think that's the main problem with reason for this approach. My primary computer right now is an overclocked Core2 Duo E4600. Despite being five years old and running on DDR2, I can still game on it. It performs like a new entry-level computer but it still gets the job done, because I've upgraded the easy stuff - RAM and GPU - since I built it. Because I'm not a hardcore gamer who demands 60FPS with all the settings up, I can save a tremendous amount of money by holding off on the full upgrade for as long as possible. I still want 60 FPS, but as long as I can run at native resolution and see shadows, I'm happy. My new computer, currently sitting on my workbench, has an i5-3570k and 16GB of RAM. My Core2 was low-midrange when new, whereas this thing is a beast. So it's almost guaranteed that I'll still be happy with its performance in five years if I just upgrade the GPU every couple generations. Five years from now, everyone else will be using DDR4 and I'll still be getting what I need from DDR3. But while DDR3 will still be sufficient, 8GB will not. So I'm planning ahead and getting what I will need, while it's cheap. I fully understand that this approach to upgrades doesn't suit everybody. Then again, there are probably a lot of people who could get by just fine on this approach, if they looked at it objectively and didn't jump at every new shiny thing.

If you know you're going to upgrade in 2 years, buy 8GB. If you plan to keep the computer longer than that, spend a few bucks extra up front to double it.

AsianZensation

If you want an Americanized approximation of how to say "Nguyen," the closest it gets is just "*WIN*." Vietnamese is a monosyllabic language, so "New-win," "Nu-yen," and other two/three syllable pronunciations are incorrect. The velar nasal consonant sound of "ng" isn't used at the beginning of words in English. This makes it really difficult for English speakers to pronounce this name accurately. So for simplicity's sake, and for the sanity of teachers everywhere, a single syllable will suffice. It's not "*WHEN*" or "*WING*" - just "*WIN*." That's the easiest way to explain it. **TL;DR - Nguyen = Win**

If you want an Americanized approximation of how to say "Nguyen," the closest it gets is just " WIN ." Vietnamese is a monosyllabic language, so "New-win," "Nu-yen," and other two/three syllable pronunciations are incorrect. The velar nasal consonant sound of "ng" isn't used at the beginning of words in English. This makes it really difficult for English speakers to pronounce this name accurately. So for simplicity's sake, and for the sanity of teachers everywhere, a single syllable will suffice. It's not " WHEN " or " WING " - just " WIN ." That's the easiest way to explain it. TL;DR - Nguyen = Win

pics

t5_2qh0u

c8jx8l0

If you want an Americanized approximation of how to say "Nguyen," the closest it gets is just " WIN ." Vietnamese is a monosyllabic language, so "New-win," "Nu-yen," and other two/three syllable pronunciations are incorrect. The velar nasal consonant sound of "ng" isn't used at the beginning of words in English. This makes it really difficult for English speakers to pronounce this name accurately. So for simplicity's sake, and for the sanity of teachers everywhere, a single syllable will suffice. It's not " WHEN " or " WING " - just " WIN ." That's the easiest way to explain it.

Nguyen = Win

catalyst_opal

Well, Satre and Nietzsche are existentialists...Camus is not. I would say the biggest difference between Nihilism and Absurdism is this: Nihilism is like the Emo kid...Absurdism is the Goth/punk kid. If you want the deal breaker between Satre and Camus, it was Communism. Camus came to see what Communism was and distanced himself from it. Satre never did. For me, I never understood the status Satre has over Camus. Nor the appeal of Nihilism over Absurdism. tl;dr The deal breaker's are Camus is not an existentialist / And Communism.

Well, Satre and Nietzsche are existentialists...Camus is not. I would say the biggest difference between Nihilism and Absurdism is this: Nihilism is like the Emo kid...Absurdism is the Goth/punk kid. If you want the deal breaker between Satre and Camus, it was Communism. Camus came to see what Communism was and distanced himself from it. Satre never did. For me, I never understood the status Satre has over Camus. Nor the appeal of Nihilism over Absurdism. tl;dr The deal breaker's are Camus is not an existentialist / And Communism.

philosophy

t5_2qh5b

c8k2fgn

Well, Satre and Nietzsche are existentialists...Camus is not. I would say the biggest difference between Nihilism and Absurdism is this: Nihilism is like the Emo kid...Absurdism is the Goth/punk kid. If you want the deal breaker between Satre and Camus, it was Communism. Camus came to see what Communism was and distanced himself from it. Satre never did. For me, I never understood the status Satre has over Camus. Nor the appeal of Nihilism over Absurdism.

The deal breaker's are Camus is not an existentialist / And Communism.

well_deserved_karma

I'm no expert--yet. The expert source I'm learning from is a (very short) textbook called Self-Directed Behavior, and it's the best book I've ever read (only partially, so far). Only *you* truly know what is personally rewarding.... e.g. Reddit. That's what *I'm* using. That and playing this videogame (Jedi Knight II) I really enjoy. In the future, I would like to transition to having more "pro-growth" reinforcers, like learning another language via duolingo.com, but the honest truth is that that's not what I turn to when I'm in a low self-control, 'meh' attitude. I eat brownies, or browse Cracked, or do any number of ignominious things that are *truly* rewarding - and thus my true reinforcers (right now). And I own up to that. P.S. One realization I've had is that you shouldn't eliminate all your 'vices', because they can serve as *excellent* reinforcers. In a nutshell, a reinforcer has to be something you *actually look forward to*, and not just in an intellectual way, but in a visceral way (hence the "Mmm" test). Granted, if you're addicted--can't stop yourself--from doing something, that's a bad reinforcer because you have to be able to prevent yourself from doing it until you perform the desired behavior. The general, top-level message I'm learning is (a) that we're not as agent-y as we'd like, but actually fairly predetermined (by reinforcement schedules and, more accurately, feedback loops as described in cybernetics) with the *illusion* that we're in control, and (b) consequently, it doesn't make much sense to be preoccupied with personal failure and guilt and 'should's, but instead you should just work on changing your reinforcers. I honestly believe that I can change myself to be more or less what I aspire to be, but it will involve less motivational 'I can do it!' messages (which work for someone with a history of *already* "just doing it"), and more careful analysis of how humans actually work, even if it's not as flattering as the typical 'you can just decide and then *POW!*... you're changed' message. *TL;DR Do self-mastery through replicable, honest science. There actually is some scientific self-help.*

I'm no expert--yet. The expert source I'm learning from is a (very short) textbook called Self-Directed Behavior, and it's the best book I've ever read (only partially, so far). Only you truly know what is personally rewarding.... e.g. Reddit. That's what I'm using. That and playing this videogame (Jedi Knight II) I really enjoy. In the future, I would like to transition to having more "pro-growth" reinforcers, like learning another language via duolingo.com, but the honest truth is that that's not what I turn to when I'm in a low self-control, 'meh' attitude. I eat brownies, or browse Cracked, or do any number of ignominious things that are truly rewarding - and thus my true reinforcers (right now). And I own up to that. P.S. One realization I've had is that you shouldn't eliminate all your 'vices', because they can serve as excellent reinforcers. In a nutshell, a reinforcer has to be something you actually look forward to , and not just in an intellectual way, but in a visceral way (hence the "Mmm" test). Granted, if you're addicted--can't stop yourself--from doing something, that's a bad reinforcer because you have to be able to prevent yourself from doing it until you perform the desired behavior. The general, top-level message I'm learning is (a) that we're not as agent-y as we'd like, but actually fairly predetermined (by reinforcement schedules and, more accurately, feedback loops as described in cybernetics) with the illusion that we're in control, and (b) consequently, it doesn't make much sense to be preoccupied with personal failure and guilt and 'should's, but instead you should just work on changing your reinforcers. I honestly believe that I can change myself to be more or less what I aspire to be, but it will involve less motivational 'I can do it!' messages (which work for someone with a history of already "just doing it"), and more careful analysis of how humans actually work, even if it's not as flattering as the typical 'you can just decide and then POW! ... you're changed' message. TL;DR Do self-mastery through replicable, honest science. There actually is some scientific self-help.

getdisciplined

t5_2uzju

c8ljtfr

I'm no expert--yet. The expert source I'm learning from is a (very short) textbook called Self-Directed Behavior, and it's the best book I've ever read (only partially, so far). Only you truly know what is personally rewarding.... e.g. Reddit. That's what I'm using. That and playing this videogame (Jedi Knight II) I really enjoy. In the future, I would like to transition to having more "pro-growth" reinforcers, like learning another language via duolingo.com, but the honest truth is that that's not what I turn to when I'm in a low self-control, 'meh' attitude. I eat brownies, or browse Cracked, or do any number of ignominious things that are truly rewarding - and thus my true reinforcers (right now). And I own up to that. P.S. One realization I've had is that you shouldn't eliminate all your 'vices', because they can serve as excellent reinforcers. In a nutshell, a reinforcer has to be something you actually look forward to , and not just in an intellectual way, but in a visceral way (hence the "Mmm" test). Granted, if you're addicted--can't stop yourself--from doing something, that's a bad reinforcer because you have to be able to prevent yourself from doing it until you perform the desired behavior. The general, top-level message I'm learning is (a) that we're not as agent-y as we'd like, but actually fairly predetermined (by reinforcement schedules and, more accurately, feedback loops as described in cybernetics) with the illusion that we're in control, and (b) consequently, it doesn't make much sense to be preoccupied with personal failure and guilt and 'should's, but instead you should just work on changing your reinforcers. I honestly believe that I can change myself to be more or less what I aspire to be, but it will involve less motivational 'I can do it!' messages (which work for someone with a history of already "just doing it"), and more careful analysis of how humans actually work, even if it's not as flattering as the typical 'you can just decide and then POW! ... you're changed' message.

Do self-mastery through replicable, honest science. There actually is some scientific self-help.

confusicus

Well, to have won the war, he would have to have not declared war on America - but assuming that, the Nazi party would be a legitimate force in Germany. The EU would not have come to be. The neutral contries, and indeed others, would have trade and treaty agreements with Germany. The EU would not exist, and Germany would be pretty much a superpower, having eventual completed a ground invasion of the UK. With the protection of a Nazi Germany in this position, Japan would be a much more dangerous force in the world and currently, I believe, Japan and China would be involved in military conflict. In terms of economics, the Euro would not exist, but I do think a looser alliance of European countries would exist but only after Hitler died. The German Frank would be the most dominant currency. In terms of our day to day living standards for Europe now, I don't believe there would be much of a change. Germany would still be the financial powerhouse. In terms of war crimes, I think if Hitler had have won the war and we fast forward to today, the concentration camps would take a different form. Possibly lower class labour, and for certain ghettos. Tl:dr - The EU wouldn't exist, Germany would have a bigger landmass, but would shift from a military power to an economic power.

Well, to have won the war, he would have to have not declared war on America - but assuming that, the Nazi party would be a legitimate force in Germany. The EU would not have come to be. The neutral contries, and indeed others, would have trade and treaty agreements with Germany. The EU would not exist, and Germany would be pretty much a superpower, having eventual completed a ground invasion of the UK. With the protection of a Nazi Germany in this position, Japan would be a much more dangerous force in the world and currently, I believe, Japan and China would be involved in military conflict. In terms of economics, the Euro would not exist, but I do think a looser alliance of European countries would exist but only after Hitler died. The German Frank would be the most dominant currency. In terms of our day to day living standards for Europe now, I don't believe there would be much of a change. Germany would still be the financial powerhouse. In terms of war crimes, I think if Hitler had have won the war and we fast forward to today, the concentration camps would take a different form. Possibly lower class labour, and for certain ghettos. Tl:dr - The EU wouldn't exist, Germany would have a bigger landmass, but would shift from a military power to an economic power.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8k0dhi

Well, to have won the war, he would have to have not declared war on America - but assuming that, the Nazi party would be a legitimate force in Germany. The EU would not have come to be. The neutral contries, and indeed others, would have trade and treaty agreements with Germany. The EU would not exist, and Germany would be pretty much a superpower, having eventual completed a ground invasion of the UK. With the protection of a Nazi Germany in this position, Japan would be a much more dangerous force in the world and currently, I believe, Japan and China would be involved in military conflict. In terms of economics, the Euro would not exist, but I do think a looser alliance of European countries would exist but only after Hitler died. The German Frank would be the most dominant currency. In terms of our day to day living standards for Europe now, I don't believe there would be much of a change. Germany would still be the financial powerhouse. In terms of war crimes, I think if Hitler had have won the war and we fast forward to today, the concentration camps would take a different form. Possibly lower class labour, and for certain ghettos.

The EU wouldn't exist, Germany would have a bigger landmass, but would shift from a military power to an economic power.

undercome

I'm not misconstruing her message (I think) but its really the arm waving and the tone she presents the conclusion in. I'm the first guy in the room to posture the metaphysical has its roots in underlying rules of being (read: Scooby Doo Velma monologue) but it comes off more touchy-feely than I'm used to science being. That might be why it's so impactful though; she makes the science she's describing so endearing/tangible that the emotion at the end draws a heartstring usually reserved for other processes. TL;DR I'm drunk and you just quoted Sagan to me. Deploying Cosmos episode with the Whale Dialogue.

I'm not misconstruing her message (I think) but its really the arm waving and the tone she presents the conclusion in. I'm the first guy in the room to posture the metaphysical has its roots in underlying rules of being (read: Scooby Doo Velma monologue) but it comes off more touchy-feely than I'm used to science being. That might be why it's so impactful though; she makes the science she's describing so endearing/tangible that the emotion at the end draws a heartstring usually reserved for other processes. TL;DR I'm drunk and you just quoted Sagan to me. Deploying Cosmos episode with the Whale Dialogue.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8k6v0a

I'm not misconstruing her message (I think) but its really the arm waving and the tone she presents the conclusion in. I'm the first guy in the room to posture the metaphysical has its roots in underlying rules of being (read: Scooby Doo Velma monologue) but it comes off more touchy-feely than I'm used to science being. That might be why it's so impactful though; she makes the science she's describing so endearing/tangible that the emotion at the end draws a heartstring usually reserved for other processes.

I'm drunk and you just quoted Sagan to me. Deploying Cosmos episode with the Whale Dialogue.

30usernamesLater

We could do a lot of good with only small changes, yes it would be nice to revamp the whole system but look at how far the Finnish have come since the mid 70's when they restructured their education system. Google for the high points, but it consisted of a few major differences: - Teachers are from the top 10% of their class - They get paid equivalent to what they would make in the private sector - Children start school later and spent less time in class - "Teacher" is a social rank equal to "Lawyer", "Judge", or "Doctor" There are a few articles on the subject, it is a worthy read. TL:DR on their success though, they score first place when compared to pretty much any other country.

We could do a lot of good with only small changes, yes it would be nice to revamp the whole system but look at how far the Finnish have come since the mid 70's when they restructured their education system. Google for the high points, but it consisted of a few major differences: Teachers are from the top 10% of their class They get paid equivalent to what they would make in the private sector Children start school later and spent less time in class "Teacher" is a social rank equal to "Lawyer", "Judge", or "Doctor" There are a few articles on the subject, it is a worthy read. TL:DR on their success though, they score first place when compared to pretty much any other country.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8k73cx

We could do a lot of good with only small changes, yes it would be nice to revamp the whole system but look at how far the Finnish have come since the mid 70's when they restructured their education system. Google for the high points, but it consisted of a few major differences: Teachers are from the top 10% of their class They get paid equivalent to what they would make in the private sector Children start school later and spent less time in class "Teacher" is a social rank equal to "Lawyer", "Judge", or "Doctor" There are a few articles on the subject, it is a worthy read.

on their success though, they score first place when compared to pretty much any other country.

B-80

Yeah, his language is a little fantastical, but what I took away from his talk is this: We as a people can and should define what we want out of our society and then use science to help us achieve that society. For instance, science can't tell us it's "good" to not be obese. It can tell us that obese people die sooner than people in the recommended weight range. We as a society have already decided that dying is a bad thing, so we don't have any problem saying that being obese is bad. Science can certainly tell us which behaviors and conditions lead to obesity, and we can use those answers to help keep people in shape. I think Harris' argument is that if we were to define what it is to be moral, or if we can envision a Utopian society as a people (or even define some Utopian traits, e.g. the lack of conscious suffering), then we can use science to get society to where we want it to be. tl;dr - science can't tell us what's right, but it's stupid to disregard the fact that the majority of people have very similar ideas about some conditions which are necessary for a perfect society, and science can help us make our world match our vision of a perfect world.

Yeah, his language is a little fantastical, but what I took away from his talk is this: We as a people can and should define what we want out of our society and then use science to help us achieve that society. For instance, science can't tell us it's "good" to not be obese. It can tell us that obese people die sooner than people in the recommended weight range. We as a society have already decided that dying is a bad thing, so we don't have any problem saying that being obese is bad. Science can certainly tell us which behaviors and conditions lead to obesity, and we can use those answers to help keep people in shape. I think Harris' argument is that if we were to define what it is to be moral, or if we can envision a Utopian society as a people (or even define some Utopian traits, e.g. the lack of conscious suffering), then we can use science to get society to where we want it to be. tl;dr - science can't tell us what's right, but it's stupid to disregard the fact that the majority of people have very similar ideas about some conditions which are necessary for a perfect society, and science can help us make our world match our vision of a perfect world.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8k9blw

Yeah, his language is a little fantastical, but what I took away from his talk is this: We as a people can and should define what we want out of our society and then use science to help us achieve that society. For instance, science can't tell us it's "good" to not be obese. It can tell us that obese people die sooner than people in the recommended weight range. We as a society have already decided that dying is a bad thing, so we don't have any problem saying that being obese is bad. Science can certainly tell us which behaviors and conditions lead to obesity, and we can use those answers to help keep people in shape. I think Harris' argument is that if we were to define what it is to be moral, or if we can envision a Utopian society as a people (or even define some Utopian traits, e.g. the lack of conscious suffering), then we can use science to get society to where we want it to be.

science can't tell us what's right, but it's stupid to disregard the fact that the majority of people have very similar ideas about some conditions which are necessary for a perfect society, and science can help us make our world match our vision of a perfect world.

JKJ420

From TED.com: TED is a nonprofit devoted to Ideas Worth Spreading. It started out (in 1984) as a conference bringing together people from three worlds: Technology, Entertainment, Design. Since then its scope has become ever broader. TL,DR: TED talks are fascinating short presentations on a large variety of subjects. Check out some from this thread. You will not be disappointed. Unless you are a complete moron. Maybe then you will be disappointed.

From TED.com: TED is a nonprofit devoted to Ideas Worth Spreading. It started out (in 1984) as a conference bringing together people from three worlds: Technology, Entertainment, Design. Since then its scope has become ever broader. TL,DR: TED talks are fascinating short presentations on a large variety of subjects. Check out some from this thread. You will not be disappointed. Unless you are a complete moron. Maybe then you will be disappointed.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8k9jke

From TED.com: TED is a nonprofit devoted to Ideas Worth Spreading. It started out (in 1984) as a conference bringing together people from three worlds: Technology, Entertainment, Design. Since then its scope has become ever broader.

TED talks are fascinating short presentations on a large variety of subjects. Check out some from this thread. You will not be disappointed. Unless you are a complete moron. Maybe then you will be disappointed.

cahamarca

It's sad that you think that because an argument has convinced you, anyone who disagrees "clearly" must not understand it. I hate to break it to you, but almost no one agrees with Harris on this, even his friends in New Athiest circles like Dawkins. If you read the reviews from people who study this you'll get a good sense of what's wrong with Harris's dilettantish argument. "Dilettantish" pretty much sums up most of Harris's work since the End of Faith, actually. He parachutes into a topic - taxation, gun control, terrorism, and starts arguing with people who have vastly greater experience and knowledge. His recent debate with a security expert on whether or not profiling Muslims at airports works to prevent terrorist attacks is another good example. Harris presents X, Y and Z reasons why profiling *should* work, and the security guy just points out that they don't work as a matter of practice. Harris's objections to such evidence center around the fact they violate his intuitions on the subject and they lead to perverse, counter intuitive outcomes, to which the security guy says: &gt; I agree that the result is perverse. I agree that, on the face of it, it makes no sense to screen someone who looks and acts like Betty White, or those four wheelchair-using World War II veterans at San Jose Airport. But it results in better security. **tl;dr Harris doesn't spend enough time learning from others before he starts arguing from his intuitions, and he's too good a debater to realize when he's wrong.**

It's sad that you think that because an argument has convinced you, anyone who disagrees "clearly" must not understand it. I hate to break it to you, but almost no one agrees with Harris on this, even his friends in New Athiest circles like Dawkins. If you read the reviews from people who study this you'll get a good sense of what's wrong with Harris's dilettantish argument. "Dilettantish" pretty much sums up most of Harris's work since the End of Faith, actually. He parachutes into a topic - taxation, gun control, terrorism, and starts arguing with people who have vastly greater experience and knowledge. His recent debate with a security expert on whether or not profiling Muslims at airports works to prevent terrorist attacks is another good example. Harris presents X, Y and Z reasons why profiling should work, and the security guy just points out that they don't work as a matter of practice. Harris's objections to such evidence center around the fact they violate his intuitions on the subject and they lead to perverse, counter intuitive outcomes, to which the security guy says: > I agree that the result is perverse. I agree that, on the face of it, it makes no sense to screen someone who looks and acts like Betty White, or those four wheelchair-using World War II veterans at San Jose Airport. But it results in better security. tl;dr Harris doesn't spend enough time learning from others before he starts arguing from his intuitions, and he's too good a debater to realize when he's wrong.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8kb1lb

It's sad that you think that because an argument has convinced you, anyone who disagrees "clearly" must not understand it. I hate to break it to you, but almost no one agrees with Harris on this, even his friends in New Athiest circles like Dawkins. If you read the reviews from people who study this you'll get a good sense of what's wrong with Harris's dilettantish argument. "Dilettantish" pretty much sums up most of Harris's work since the End of Faith, actually. He parachutes into a topic - taxation, gun control, terrorism, and starts arguing with people who have vastly greater experience and knowledge. His recent debate with a security expert on whether or not profiling Muslims at airports works to prevent terrorist attacks is another good example. Harris presents X, Y and Z reasons why profiling should work, and the security guy just points out that they don't work as a matter of practice. Harris's objections to such evidence center around the fact they violate his intuitions on the subject and they lead to perverse, counter intuitive outcomes, to which the security guy says: > I agree that the result is perverse. I agree that, on the face of it, it makes no sense to screen someone who looks and acts like Betty White, or those four wheelchair-using World War II veterans at San Jose Airport. But it results in better security.

Harris doesn't spend enough time learning from others before he starts arguing from his intuitions, and he's too good a debater to realize when he's wrong.

shall1313

I have a pretty close group of friends that could be casually compared to this show and these intro pics are the exact reason why I've been taking a LOT more photos of us hanging out. Basically 2007-2010 don't exist because we have great memories and maybe 6 pictures. TL;DR: ~~Bring~~ USE a camera with your friends.

I have a pretty close group of friends that could be casually compared to this show and these intro pics are the exact reason why I've been taking a LOT more photos of us hanging out. Basically 2007-2010 don't exist because we have great memories and maybe 6 pictures. TL;DR: Bring USE a camera with your friends.

HIMYM

t5_2rcqy

c8ly72u

I have a pretty close group of friends that could be casually compared to this show and these intro pics are the exact reason why I've been taking a LOT more photos of us hanging out. Basically 2007-2010 don't exist because we have great memories and maybe 6 pictures.

Bring USE a camera with your friends.

Indestructavincible

Unfortunately now that the 2013 rosters are 99% complete, I think there will be some blue balls in the house :) I think on their best days in the best conditions, Kobyashi is the marginally quicker driver, and has balls twice the size of his talent. Perez's balls however are exactly as big as his talent and he is the most positively consistent of the two. I love Kobyashi and he is deserving of this final rant: He is one of the most human and humble guys that has been on the grid, never a fake smile or anything less than honesty when things didn't go great. Hearing a driver say "I dropped a wheel in the last corner and spun the car" is honest and sounds so much better than "The car spun". This is par for the course with Japanese as their society is customarily polite to the extreme by default, yet he comes across humble in his translated words as well. I think he has a place in F1, but I look at Maldonado and Perez who were both "pay drivers" but have performed for the most part better in the long term and I can't see him as a number one a team would thrown their collective weight behind. What I wish continued was his trend to make ballsy passes. If he was still in your inside mirror at the braking zone, best not cut to the apex as he will still be there. I wish every driver assumed every driver who took a peek was about to pass. This whole "I turned into my apex and hit him but I had the corner so it's his fault" BS gets old, and Koby called many on it. Hamilton used to do it, and now he is gun shy since 2011. We no longer have anyone who passes by default, follows next. He reminded many that passes can still be made by forcing your nose in and worrying about the rest later. An amazing and well deserved gift was his podium in Japan. Regardless of how the rest of his racing career goes, that is an awesome accomplishment and one that he can feel comfortable hanging his hat on in case he doesn't make it back to F1. tl,dr: We need more Kobyashis.

Unfortunately now that the 2013 rosters are 99% complete, I think there will be some blue balls in the house :) I think on their best days in the best conditions, Kobyashi is the marginally quicker driver, and has balls twice the size of his talent. Perez's balls however are exactly as big as his talent and he is the most positively consistent of the two. I love Kobyashi and he is deserving of this final rant: He is one of the most human and humble guys that has been on the grid, never a fake smile or anything less than honesty when things didn't go great. Hearing a driver say "I dropped a wheel in the last corner and spun the car" is honest and sounds so much better than "The car spun". This is par for the course with Japanese as their society is customarily polite to the extreme by default, yet he comes across humble in his translated words as well. I think he has a place in F1, but I look at Maldonado and Perez who were both "pay drivers" but have performed for the most part better in the long term and I can't see him as a number one a team would thrown their collective weight behind. What I wish continued was his trend to make ballsy passes. If he was still in your inside mirror at the braking zone, best not cut to the apex as he will still be there. I wish every driver assumed every driver who took a peek was about to pass. This whole "I turned into my apex and hit him but I had the corner so it's his fault" BS gets old, and Koby called many on it. Hamilton used to do it, and now he is gun shy since 2011. We no longer have anyone who passes by default, follows next. He reminded many that passes can still be made by forcing your nose in and worrying about the rest later. An amazing and well deserved gift was his podium in Japan. Regardless of how the rest of his racing career goes, that is an awesome accomplishment and one that he can feel comfortable hanging his hat on in case he doesn't make it back to F1. tl,dr: We need more Kobyashis.

formula1

t5_2qimj

c8kjisu

Unfortunately now that the 2013 rosters are 99% complete, I think there will be some blue balls in the house :) I think on their best days in the best conditions, Kobyashi is the marginally quicker driver, and has balls twice the size of his talent. Perez's balls however are exactly as big as his talent and he is the most positively consistent of the two. I love Kobyashi and he is deserving of this final rant: He is one of the most human and humble guys that has been on the grid, never a fake smile or anything less than honesty when things didn't go great. Hearing a driver say "I dropped a wheel in the last corner and spun the car" is honest and sounds so much better than "The car spun". This is par for the course with Japanese as their society is customarily polite to the extreme by default, yet he comes across humble in his translated words as well. I think he has a place in F1, but I look at Maldonado and Perez who were both "pay drivers" but have performed for the most part better in the long term and I can't see him as a number one a team would thrown their collective weight behind. What I wish continued was his trend to make ballsy passes. If he was still in your inside mirror at the braking zone, best not cut to the apex as he will still be there. I wish every driver assumed every driver who took a peek was about to pass. This whole "I turned into my apex and hit him but I had the corner so it's his fault" BS gets old, and Koby called many on it. Hamilton used to do it, and now he is gun shy since 2011. We no longer have anyone who passes by default, follows next. He reminded many that passes can still be made by forcing your nose in and worrying about the rest later. An amazing and well deserved gift was his podium in Japan. Regardless of how the rest of his racing career goes, that is an awesome accomplishment and one that he can feel comfortable hanging his hat on in case he doesn't make it back to F1.

We need more Kobyashis.

BattleHall

&gt; One thing we haven’t done is change our prices because of this surge in demand. Prices do change from time to time as they always have, but we’d never change prices because of something like this. Our pricing strategy is one of the reasons we’ve put quantity limits on certain products. We’ve all seen certain products selling two or three times higher than normal, and MidwayUSA doesn’t want to enable that type of activity. tl;dr - "Eat a bag of dicks CTD"

> One thing we haven’t done is change our prices because of this surge in demand. Prices do change from time to time as they always have, but we’d never change prices because of something like this. Our pricing strategy is one of the reasons we’ve put quantity limits on certain products. We’ve all seen certain products selling two or three times higher than normal, and MidwayUSA doesn’t want to enable that type of activity. tl;dr - "Eat a bag of dicks CTD"

guns

t5_2qhc8

c8kcoj9

One thing we haven’t done is change our prices because of this surge in demand. Prices do change from time to time as they always have, but we’d never change prices because of something like this. Our pricing strategy is one of the reasons we’ve put quantity limits on certain products. We’ve all seen certain products selling two or three times higher than normal, and MidwayUSA doesn’t want to enable that type of activity.

Eat a bag of dicks CTD"

XCorneliusX

According to the latest info on our US census, the ratio may be correct as people who identify as black account for ~13% of our nation, while white, incl hispanic white is ~78%. [Source]( So, while the show does have people of color, living and undead, there is a lesser number. That ratio will change based on where one is of course, but the rural south has a lot of white people. &gt;tl;dr There are more white zombies because there are more white people.

According to the latest info on our US census, the ratio may be correct as people who identify as black account for ~13% of our nation, while white, incl hispanic white is ~78%. [Source]( So, while the show does have people of color, living and undead, there is a lesser number. That ratio will change based on where one is of course, but the rural south has a lot of white people. >tl;dr There are more white zombies because there are more white people.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8kfivx

According to the latest info on our US census, the ratio may be correct as people who identify as black account for ~13% of our nation, while white, incl hispanic white is ~78%. [Source]( So, while the show does have people of color, living and undead, there is a lesser number. That ratio will change based on where one is of course, but the rural south has a lot of white people. >

There are more white zombies because there are more white people.

Kervonus2

I will try to describe my experience with the swampcore I've played (which was the last temp map for the flatcore server) Skipping the grief and failed attempts of the time before the grief-protection system was reestablished, I had a nice base camp with DigitalDee. One big thing that I believe really helped him and I is the wall that we had surrounding the base. With that, and a lot of torches, we remained mostly safe. As far as I can remember, we had; * A building with a farm in it. * A chicken coop on top of the farm. (constant breeding makes plenty of food) * A stone gen. * An animal pen. For a good portion of the time when I started on that map, I relied on bowls of soup for food because of how common the different kinds of mushrooms were. (I recommend you do the same) Also, make some cakes. dem cakez are mighty tasteh TL;DR: Build a wall, create plenty of light, eat food (dur), have fun, make cake.

I will try to describe my experience with the swampcore I've played (which was the last temp map for the flatcore server) Skipping the grief and failed attempts of the time before the grief-protection system was reestablished, I had a nice base camp with DigitalDee. One big thing that I believe really helped him and I is the wall that we had surrounding the base. With that, and a lot of torches, we remained mostly safe. As far as I can remember, we had; A building with a farm in it. A chicken coop on top of the farm. (constant breeding makes plenty of food) A stone gen. An animal pen. For a good portion of the time when I started on that map, I relied on bowls of soup for food because of how common the different kinds of mushrooms were. (I recommend you do the same) Also, make some cakes. dem cakez are mighty tasteh TL;DR: Build a wall, create plenty of light, eat food (dur), have fun, make cake.

flatcore

t5_2u7tu

c8kgyaf

I will try to describe my experience with the swampcore I've played (which was the last temp map for the flatcore server) Skipping the grief and failed attempts of the time before the grief-protection system was reestablished, I had a nice base camp with DigitalDee. One big thing that I believe really helped him and I is the wall that we had surrounding the base. With that, and a lot of torches, we remained mostly safe. As far as I can remember, we had; A building with a farm in it. A chicken coop on top of the farm. (constant breeding makes plenty of food) A stone gen. An animal pen. For a good portion of the time when I started on that map, I relied on bowls of soup for food because of how common the different kinds of mushrooms were. (I recommend you do the same) Also, make some cakes. dem cakez are mighty tasteh

Build a wall, create plenty of light, eat food (dur), have fun, make cake.

lavell_was_here

I'm not a historian, but I had the same question. I was directed to a book called: **The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel**. It's about a journalist's personal investigation for evidence of Jesus and who He was. I think there are references for sources to the info provided. I'm not sure, its been a while. TL,DR: Literature suggesting evidence of Jesus and who He was.

I'm not a historian, but I had the same question. I was directed to a book called: The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel . It's about a journalist's personal investigation for evidence of Jesus and who He was. I think there are references for sources to the info provided. I'm not sure, its been a while. TL,DR: Literature suggesting evidence of Jesus and who He was.

AskHistorians

t5_2ssp3

cb3up3s

I'm not a historian, but I had the same question. I was directed to a book called: The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel . It's about a journalist's personal investigation for evidence of Jesus and who He was. I think there are references for sources to the info provided. I'm not sure, its been a while.

Literature suggesting evidence of Jesus and who He was.

silentbobsc

It's been my experience that many breeders will be very blunt and to the point, but keep in mind that they probably also deal with a higher volume of similar questions and such, and probably just have a canned response. I recently was corresponding with [Phoenix Gate Rattery]( out of Georgia, inquiring about getting some male Persians and possibly a blue. It came up that I had two girls already in a CN-like 2-story cage and she told me quite bluntly that she would not sell me intact males knowing that there were females in close proximity. While I understood her position, I had considered a single litter and was a little put out but her directness was actually a kindness. I've also discussed a 'planned litter' on RatForum.com and was told point-blank they don't allow that discussion. Simply, much like dogs and cats, there is no shortage of orphans so why add to the problem - and with using pet-store rats in the lineage one can also breed babies who will suffer with Megacolon, Myco, etc. even if the parents are fantastic (wanted to try and keep a line from my oldest, Beatrix, going). TL;DR - many who have been in and around rats for a while will probably deliver some blunt, but true information. Unless they're right out rude, they're probably trying to help by being clear.

It's been my experience that many breeders will be very blunt and to the point, but keep in mind that they probably also deal with a higher volume of similar questions and such, and probably just have a canned response. I recently was corresponding with [Phoenix Gate Rattery]( out of Georgia, inquiring about getting some male Persians and possibly a blue. It came up that I had two girls already in a CN-like 2-story cage and she told me quite bluntly that she would not sell me intact males knowing that there were females in close proximity. While I understood her position, I had considered a single litter and was a little put out but her directness was actually a kindness. I've also discussed a 'planned litter' on RatForum.com and was told point-blank they don't allow that discussion. Simply, much like dogs and cats, there is no shortage of orphans so why add to the problem - and with using pet-store rats in the lineage one can also breed babies who will suffer with Megacolon, Myco, etc. even if the parents are fantastic (wanted to try and keep a line from my oldest, Beatrix, going). TL;DR - many who have been in and around rats for a while will probably deliver some blunt, but true information. Unless they're right out rude, they're probably trying to help by being clear.

RATS

t5_2qnh3

c8lty4p

It's been my experience that many breeders will be very blunt and to the point, but keep in mind that they probably also deal with a higher volume of similar questions and such, and probably just have a canned response. I recently was corresponding with [Phoenix Gate Rattery]( out of Georgia, inquiring about getting some male Persians and possibly a blue. It came up that I had two girls already in a CN-like 2-story cage and she told me quite bluntly that she would not sell me intact males knowing that there were females in close proximity. While I understood her position, I had considered a single litter and was a little put out but her directness was actually a kindness. I've also discussed a 'planned litter' on RatForum.com and was told point-blank they don't allow that discussion. Simply, much like dogs and cats, there is no shortage of orphans so why add to the problem - and with using pet-store rats in the lineage one can also breed babies who will suffer with Megacolon, Myco, etc. even if the parents are fantastic (wanted to try and keep a line from my oldest, Beatrix, going).

many who have been in and around rats for a while will probably deliver some blunt, but true information. Unless they're right out rude, they're probably trying to help by being clear.

mardi_gras

When I was young, maybe around 7 or 8, I entered a department store with my mother there was, what I thought to be a mannequin at the front. It was wearing a NIKE windbreaker but some of the letters over the breast were creased over and I couldnt read it. Curious, I reached up to flatten the lettering out. Turns out it was a woman. She wasn't pleased. TL;DR. when I was young I mistook a woman for a mannequin and tried to grab its breast.

When I was young, maybe around 7 or 8, I entered a department store with my mother there was, what I thought to be a mannequin at the front. It was wearing a NIKE windbreaker but some of the letters over the breast were creased over and I couldnt read it. Curious, I reached up to flatten the lettering out. Turns out it was a woman. She wasn't pleased. TL;DR. when I was young I mistook a woman for a mannequin and tried to grab its breast.

AdviceAnimals

t5_2s7tt

c8ky1q9

When I was young, maybe around 7 or 8, I entered a department store with my mother there was, what I thought to be a mannequin at the front. It was wearing a NIKE windbreaker but some of the letters over the breast were creased over and I couldnt read it. Curious, I reached up to flatten the lettering out. Turns out it was a woman. She wasn't pleased.

when I was young I mistook a woman for a mannequin and tried to grab its breast.

almightytom

A friend just got a .308 Remington 700. He grabbed some of the only 7.62x51 he could find, and had nothing but problems. Almost every casing would get stuck to where the bolt was almost impossible to pull back. Turns out the ammo was loaded hot and was expanding in strange ways, wedging the bolt in place. Got some actual .308 ammo and it fired beautifully with zero problems. TL;DR: just because your gun CAN shoot 7.62x51, doesn't mean you are gonna have a good time.

A friend just got a .308 Remington 700. He grabbed some of the only 7.62x51 he could find, and had nothing but problems. Almost every casing would get stuck to where the bolt was almost impossible to pull back. Turns out the ammo was loaded hot and was expanding in strange ways, wedging the bolt in place. Got some actual .308 ammo and it fired beautifully with zero problems. TL;DR: just because your gun CAN shoot 7.62x51, doesn't mean you are gonna have a good time.

guns

t5_2qhc8

c8l9sfh

A friend just got a .308 Remington 700. He grabbed some of the only 7.62x51 he could find, and had nothing but problems. Almost every casing would get stuck to where the bolt was almost impossible to pull back. Turns out the ammo was loaded hot and was expanding in strange ways, wedging the bolt in place. Got some actual .308 ammo and it fired beautifully with zero problems.

just because your gun CAN shoot 7.62x51, doesn't mean you are gonna have a good time.

Sacrix

It's the lesser of two evils. 1: Piracy. You obtain a copy for yourself. No physical harm done. Potential sales decline? Well, that's what the keyword 'potential' is for. You can not assume income from something that has not been sold. 2: Buying the DVD. You obtain a copy for yourself - oh wait, not really, you're still licensing it if you read the small letters. You don't own it. The content industry does. Where did your money go? That's right, to the middle party, extracting money from consumer AND artists since.. well, since [founding year] of [insert any copyright organisation]. If there's a way to pay the artist directly and not be overwhelmed with what's displayed in the flowchart, then I'd buy the movie/music/whatever. If it's only 'legally' (controversial term) possible to purchase through a 3rd party such as record labels associated with copyright organisations (MPAA, RIAA, etc), then I'll kindly flip a finger and pirate it if possible. You're not getting any cent from me. **Note: I don't justify piracy for the sakes of piracy. I justify piracy for the sake of saying no to a conservative model that's bad for everyone except the ones enacting that model.** Tl;dr: Rather piracy than supporting a corrupted model. *Edit: If you're interested in what models would work: I'm merely a pirate &amp; Kopimist with a vision, but I do know the donation model has worked wonders for many INDEPENDENT artists already. Give the consumer the choice what to pay. Be transparent on what price you'd normally give, and at what price you'd actually think the consumer is super awesome, and note that it's free to the consumer to pay whatever he thinks is right. The consumer may of course come back later and donate after listening to the music first, for example. This has actually resulted in major profits for the artist. Why I mention this: To prevent "if u know better, then why dont u make a new model" circlejerk.*

It's the lesser of two evils. 1: Piracy. You obtain a copy for yourself. No physical harm done. Potential sales decline? Well, that's what the keyword 'potential' is for. You can not assume income from something that has not been sold. 2: Buying the DVD. You obtain a copy for yourself - oh wait, not really, you're still licensing it if you read the small letters. You don't own it. The content industry does. Where did your money go? That's right, to the middle party, extracting money from consumer AND artists since.. well, since [founding year] of [insert any copyright organisation]. If there's a way to pay the artist directly and not be overwhelmed with what's displayed in the flowchart, then I'd buy the movie/music/whatever. If it's only 'legally' (controversial term) possible to purchase through a 3rd party such as record labels associated with copyright organisations (MPAA, RIAA, etc), then I'll kindly flip a finger and pirate it if possible. You're not getting any cent from me. Note: I don't justify piracy for the sakes of piracy. I justify piracy for the sake of saying no to a conservative model that's bad for everyone except the ones enacting that model. Tl;dr: Rather piracy than supporting a corrupted model. Edit: If you're interested in what models would work: I'm merely a pirate & Kopimist with a vision, but I do know the donation model has worked wonders for many INDEPENDENT artists already. Give the consumer the choice what to pay. Be transparent on what price you'd normally give, and at what price you'd actually think the consumer is super awesome, and note that it's free to the consumer to pay whatever he thinks is right. The consumer may of course come back later and donate after listening to the music first, for example. This has actually resulted in major profits for the artist. Why I mention this: To prevent "if u know better, then why dont u make a new model" circlejerk.

LifeProTips

t5_2s5oq

c8lb7tp

It's the lesser of two evils. 1: Piracy. You obtain a copy for yourself. No physical harm done. Potential sales decline? Well, that's what the keyword 'potential' is for. You can not assume income from something that has not been sold. 2: Buying the DVD. You obtain a copy for yourself - oh wait, not really, you're still licensing it if you read the small letters. You don't own it. The content industry does. Where did your money go? That's right, to the middle party, extracting money from consumer AND artists since.. well, since [founding year] of [insert any copyright organisation]. If there's a way to pay the artist directly and not be overwhelmed with what's displayed in the flowchart, then I'd buy the movie/music/whatever. If it's only 'legally' (controversial term) possible to purchase through a 3rd party such as record labels associated with copyright organisations (MPAA, RIAA, etc), then I'll kindly flip a finger and pirate it if possible. You're not getting any cent from me. Note: I don't justify piracy for the sakes of piracy. I justify piracy for the sake of saying no to a conservative model that's bad for everyone except the ones enacting that model.

Rather piracy than supporting a corrupted model. Edit: If you're interested in what models would work: I'm merely a pirate & Kopimist with a vision, but I do know the donation model has worked wonders for many INDEPENDENT artists already. Give the consumer the choice what to pay. Be transparent on what price you'd normally give, and at what price you'd actually think the consumer is super awesome, and note that it's free to the consumer to pay whatever he thinks is right. The consumer may of course come back later and donate after listening to the music first, for example. This has actually resulted in major profits for the artist. Why I mention this: To prevent "if u know better, then why dont u make a new model" circlejerk.

mizmemelemelicious

Ok. Why does everyone expect broke college students to buy movies? Or is it that you have an issue with them having morals they don't actually fully support yet? I don't own much in the way of movies... I don't go see very many in theaters either... but I don't pirate (anymore, and never movies). Why? Because the distribution system allows me to see them at a price point that I find reasonable at this point in my life. (late 20s, scraping by but with a pension at the end, fuck-ton of student loans dragging me down a bit) Redbox and Netflix don't let me see the special features, but they are good enough for me. And back in the day, Blockbuster was a godsend to broke college me. 2 for $1 old movie Wednesday? sure! However, in the past, pre-spotify and pandora and hulu and Amazon prime, I used to pirate the shit out of tv and music. I never would have been as socially 'with it' if I hadn't, and I imagine that it's even worse for the more media saturated youth that came after me. And I know there were times that I couldn't have afforded the meager price point of a hulu subscription, let alone Amazon prime. My point? We're entering a world where the experience is what gets the money, not the item itself... Collectors are going to pay a lot more for fancy versions of items, especially ones that come with an experience (signed record at the show? Heck yeah!). There is a reason that I have paid a significant amount of money over the years to go see my favorite bands play, even though I have lost track of the few cds I bought over those same years. Although, yes, you should pay for the items you view, the Redbox dollars add up to some amount of a royalty check I'm sure...but what good is it to condescend to folks who either are going to view the media or not - payment was never an option? Those people grow up to be real adults with disposable income. And then they want the fancy versions of the things they loved the most, as is witnessed by all of the 'le look at le fancy thing I found in pristine condition at le thrift store (aka Amazon).' Isn't that why having VFX become known would be a boon to the workers? I paid more money in one fell swoop on 3D Avengers tickets than I did on a years worth of Redbox because I LOVE JOSS WHEDON!!! even though I used to have burned CDs of Buffy episodes and used WinMX to get the audio files from Buffy the Musical and had a thrift store Spike figure and some lame home screened t-shirt with his name written out in Buffy-esque script. That fangirl grew up, and now she'll pay good money to support a Whedon project. ...and I'm sure if I actually knew the name of any VFX artists, I might feel the same way about their work. Fuck your tl;dr...I just spent way too long typing out this sometimes rambling reply. You should just read this shit and marvel.

Ok. Why does everyone expect broke college students to buy movies? Or is it that you have an issue with them having morals they don't actually fully support yet? I don't own much in the way of movies... I don't go see very many in theaters either... but I don't pirate (anymore, and never movies). Why? Because the distribution system allows me to see them at a price point that I find reasonable at this point in my life. (late 20s, scraping by but with a pension at the end, fuck-ton of student loans dragging me down a bit) Redbox and Netflix don't let me see the special features, but they are good enough for me. And back in the day, Blockbuster was a godsend to broke college me. 2 for $1 old movie Wednesday? sure! However, in the past, pre-spotify and pandora and hulu and Amazon prime, I used to pirate the shit out of tv and music. I never would have been as socially 'with it' if I hadn't, and I imagine that it's even worse for the more media saturated youth that came after me. And I know there were times that I couldn't have afforded the meager price point of a hulu subscription, let alone Amazon prime. My point? We're entering a world where the experience is what gets the money, not the item itself... Collectors are going to pay a lot more for fancy versions of items, especially ones that come with an experience (signed record at the show? Heck yeah!). There is a reason that I have paid a significant amount of money over the years to go see my favorite bands play, even though I have lost track of the few cds I bought over those same years. Although, yes, you should pay for the items you view, the Redbox dollars add up to some amount of a royalty check I'm sure...but what good is it to condescend to folks who either are going to view the media or not - payment was never an option? Those people grow up to be real adults with disposable income. And then they want the fancy versions of the things they loved the most, as is witnessed by all of the 'le look at le fancy thing I found in pristine condition at le thrift store (aka Amazon).' Isn't that why having VFX become known would be a boon to the workers? I paid more money in one fell swoop on 3D Avengers tickets than I did on a years worth of Redbox because I LOVE JOSS WHEDON!!! even though I used to have burned CDs of Buffy episodes and used WinMX to get the audio files from Buffy the Musical and had a thrift store Spike figure and some lame home screened t-shirt with his name written out in Buffy-esque script. That fangirl grew up, and now she'll pay good money to support a Whedon project. ...and I'm sure if I actually knew the name of any VFX artists, I might feel the same way about their work. Fuck your tl;dr...I just spent way too long typing out this sometimes rambling reply. You should just read this shit and marvel.

news

t5_2qh3l

c8ltozf

Ok. Why does everyone expect broke college students to buy movies? Or is it that you have an issue with them having morals they don't actually fully support yet? I don't own much in the way of movies... I don't go see very many in theaters either... but I don't pirate (anymore, and never movies). Why? Because the distribution system allows me to see them at a price point that I find reasonable at this point in my life. (late 20s, scraping by but with a pension at the end, fuck-ton of student loans dragging me down a bit) Redbox and Netflix don't let me see the special features, but they are good enough for me. And back in the day, Blockbuster was a godsend to broke college me. 2 for $1 old movie Wednesday? sure! However, in the past, pre-spotify and pandora and hulu and Amazon prime, I used to pirate the shit out of tv and music. I never would have been as socially 'with it' if I hadn't, and I imagine that it's even worse for the more media saturated youth that came after me. And I know there were times that I couldn't have afforded the meager price point of a hulu subscription, let alone Amazon prime. My point? We're entering a world where the experience is what gets the money, not the item itself... Collectors are going to pay a lot more for fancy versions of items, especially ones that come with an experience (signed record at the show? Heck yeah!). There is a reason that I have paid a significant amount of money over the years to go see my favorite bands play, even though I have lost track of the few cds I bought over those same years. Although, yes, you should pay for the items you view, the Redbox dollars add up to some amount of a royalty check I'm sure...but what good is it to condescend to folks who either are going to view the media or not - payment was never an option? Those people grow up to be real adults with disposable income. And then they want the fancy versions of the things they loved the most, as is witnessed by all of the 'le look at le fancy thing I found in pristine condition at le thrift store (aka Amazon).' Isn't that why having VFX become known would be a boon to the workers? I paid more money in one fell swoop on 3D Avengers tickets than I did on a years worth of Redbox because I LOVE JOSS WHEDON!!! even though I used to have burned CDs of Buffy episodes and used WinMX to get the audio files from Buffy the Musical and had a thrift store Spike figure and some lame home screened t-shirt with his name written out in Buffy-esque script. That fangirl grew up, and now she'll pay good money to support a Whedon project. ...and I'm sure if I actually knew the name of any VFX artists, I might feel the same way about their work. Fuck your

I just spent way too long typing out this sometimes rambling reply. You should just read this shit and marvel.

nicol3xc

Oh god. This instantly reminded me of my afternoon poop at work a few days ago. I went in the empty bathroom, three stalls. Within a minute of starting the bathroom door opens. I just figured I'd wait it out like I normally do. Well, it happens to be a mother and her daughter. The daughter gets into the stall and is obviously pooping. The mother, standing outside the stalls is giving the daughter words of encouragement. "Go Sofie! You can do it Sofie! How you doing girl?" "Still pooping mom! Plenty to go!" meanwhile, I've finished and am horrified in the next stall over. 15 minutes later...they left. I went back to work with a look of fear. tl;dr: at work in the ladies room, mother daughter comes and mom walks daughter through her poop.

Oh god. This instantly reminded me of my afternoon poop at work a few days ago. I went in the empty bathroom, three stalls. Within a minute of starting the bathroom door opens. I just figured I'd wait it out like I normally do. Well, it happens to be a mother and her daughter. The daughter gets into the stall and is obviously pooping. The mother, standing outside the stalls is giving the daughter words of encouragement. "Go Sofie! You can do it Sofie! How you doing girl?" "Still pooping mom! Plenty to go!" meanwhile, I've finished and am horrified in the next stall over. 15 minutes later...they left. I went back to work with a look of fear. tl;dr: at work in the ladies room, mother daughter comes and mom walks daughter through her poop.

AdviceAnimals

t5_2s7tt

c8l5ud5

Oh god. This instantly reminded me of my afternoon poop at work a few days ago. I went in the empty bathroom, three stalls. Within a minute of starting the bathroom door opens. I just figured I'd wait it out like I normally do. Well, it happens to be a mother and her daughter. The daughter gets into the stall and is obviously pooping. The mother, standing outside the stalls is giving the daughter words of encouragement. "Go Sofie! You can do it Sofie! How you doing girl?" "Still pooping mom! Plenty to go!" meanwhile, I've finished and am horrified in the next stall over. 15 minutes later...they left. I went back to work with a look of fear.

at work in the ladies room, mother daughter comes and mom walks daughter through her poop.

Jimmypop23

Yeah i did word that bad but basically the one who shouts B1450 is buying a full inv of silk from people stealing it in ardy for 1450gp. People usually buy it for less than 1450 so when a silk stealer sees he will make more money off the person who is buying the full inv of silk for 1450gp when people buy it for less he rushes to sell it to that guy before others do. TL;DR : B1450 is a more kind person than others.

Yeah i did word that bad but basically the one who shouts B1450 is buying a full inv of silk from people stealing it in ardy for 1450gp. People usually buy it for less than 1450 so when a silk stealer sees he will make more money off the person who is buying the full inv of silk for 1450gp when people buy it for less he rushes to sell it to that guy before others do. TL;DR : B1450 is a more kind person than others.

runescape

t5_2qwxl

c8l7r54

Yeah i did word that bad but basically the one who shouts B1450 is buying a full inv of silk from people stealing it in ardy for 1450gp. People usually buy it for less than 1450 so when a silk stealer sees he will make more money off the person who is buying the full inv of silk for 1450gp when people buy it for less he rushes to sell it to that guy before others do.

B1450 is a more kind person than others.

septicdeath

Whoa i feel like ive met my doppelganger! In high school we had a fire puroresu club. Just 10 of my friends we would watch puroresu tapes and play fire pro wrestling D on dreamcast! We played that game for a decade. We later moved onto fire pro returns on ps2 because it was 8-player. The club still exists, i finished high school 9 years ago (im old) and we still met at least once a month for fire pro club. It was a way for all my high school friends to keep in touch (you know everyone goes their seperate ways after high school, different universities, different jobs, circles of friends etc) till i left australia. I live in Tokyo now, so fire puroresu club is over.. But i have a lot of friends here who are pro wrestlers, im a tattoo artist you see.. So whenever i get some autogrphed shirts or funny merch from my mates i send a package back for my friend. Tl;dr- GO 2 SLEEPuuuuuu!!!!!

Whoa i feel like ive met my doppelganger! In high school we had a fire puroresu club. Just 10 of my friends we would watch puroresu tapes and play fire pro wrestling D on dreamcast! We played that game for a decade. We later moved onto fire pro returns on ps2 because it was 8-player. The club still exists, i finished high school 9 years ago (im old) and we still met at least once a month for fire pro club. It was a way for all my high school friends to keep in touch (you know everyone goes their seperate ways after high school, different universities, different jobs, circles of friends etc) till i left australia. I live in Tokyo now, so fire puroresu club is over.. But i have a lot of friends here who are pro wrestlers, im a tattoo artist you see.. So whenever i get some autogrphed shirts or funny merch from my mates i send a package back for my friend. Tl;dr- GO 2 SLEEPuuuuuu!!!!!

prowrestling

t5_2qhk0

c8mwkba

Whoa i feel like ive met my doppelganger! In high school we had a fire puroresu club. Just 10 of my friends we would watch puroresu tapes and play fire pro wrestling D on dreamcast! We played that game for a decade. We later moved onto fire pro returns on ps2 because it was 8-player. The club still exists, i finished high school 9 years ago (im old) and we still met at least once a month for fire pro club. It was a way for all my high school friends to keep in touch (you know everyone goes their seperate ways after high school, different universities, different jobs, circles of friends etc) till i left australia. I live in Tokyo now, so fire puroresu club is over.. But i have a lot of friends here who are pro wrestlers, im a tattoo artist you see.. So whenever i get some autogrphed shirts or funny merch from my mates i send a package back for my friend.

GO 2 SLEEPuuuuuu!!!!!

AnotherDrunkCanadian

First off, note that my information is specific to Ontario, Canada. Your mileage may vary depending on your location, but the following generally holds true: Insurance companies have specific appetites for risk. One company may be comfortable insuring homes that are 200 years old, and another won't insure anything older than 50 years. A common insurance question would be: How old is the roof, electrical, plumbing and heating. An insurance company tends to be a lot more accepting of an older home when the four items mentioned above are up to date and professionally installed. Something else to consider with older homes: Chances are the home you saw had "custom" materials (such as extra wide wooden beams as part of the foundation) and was made using out-of-date building techniques. Ask yourself whether, in the event of a loss, are you willing to have the house rebuilt in modern fashion (less expensive - look for the Functional Replacement Cost endorsement) or rebuilt as is (more expensive). Insurance companies are also a little finicky with solid fuels such as the wood oven and fireplace you mention, as well as oil furnaces, as they tend to lead to an increase in risk. Insurance companies generally want to see a lot of pictures (or have someone come in an look at it), have proof that it was professionally installed, and that it is being maintained in proper fashion. It is common for an insurance company to surcharge when a home uses solid fuels or oil furnace, or both. A good insurance broker will have access to multiple companies and will search on your behalf to find the right company to insure your home. With this particular case, it may take some time, and it may cost quite a bit due to age, wood oven, wood fireplace and oil furnace. TL;DR All insurance companies have different appetites for risk, it is common to surcharge for solid fuels and oil furnaces, but there is probably a company out there that would be the right fit for you. Any more questions, ask away!

First off, note that my information is specific to Ontario, Canada. Your mileage may vary depending on your location, but the following generally holds true: Insurance companies have specific appetites for risk. One company may be comfortable insuring homes that are 200 years old, and another won't insure anything older than 50 years. A common insurance question would be: How old is the roof, electrical, plumbing and heating. An insurance company tends to be a lot more accepting of an older home when the four items mentioned above are up to date and professionally installed. Something else to consider with older homes: Chances are the home you saw had "custom" materials (such as extra wide wooden beams as part of the foundation) and was made using out-of-date building techniques. Ask yourself whether, in the event of a loss, are you willing to have the house rebuilt in modern fashion (less expensive - look for the Functional Replacement Cost endorsement) or rebuilt as is (more expensive). Insurance companies are also a little finicky with solid fuels such as the wood oven and fireplace you mention, as well as oil furnaces, as they tend to lead to an increase in risk. Insurance companies generally want to see a lot of pictures (or have someone come in an look at it), have proof that it was professionally installed, and that it is being maintained in proper fashion. It is common for an insurance company to surcharge when a home uses solid fuels or oil furnace, or both. A good insurance broker will have access to multiple companies and will search on your behalf to find the right company to insure your home. With this particular case, it may take some time, and it may cost quite a bit due to age, wood oven, wood fireplace and oil furnace. TL;DR All insurance companies have different appetites for risk, it is common to surcharge for solid fuels and oil furnaces, but there is probably a company out there that would be the right fit for you. Any more questions, ask away!

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8lfa4q

First off, note that my information is specific to Ontario, Canada. Your mileage may vary depending on your location, but the following generally holds true: Insurance companies have specific appetites for risk. One company may be comfortable insuring homes that are 200 years old, and another won't insure anything older than 50 years. A common insurance question would be: How old is the roof, electrical, plumbing and heating. An insurance company tends to be a lot more accepting of an older home when the four items mentioned above are up to date and professionally installed. Something else to consider with older homes: Chances are the home you saw had "custom" materials (such as extra wide wooden beams as part of the foundation) and was made using out-of-date building techniques. Ask yourself whether, in the event of a loss, are you willing to have the house rebuilt in modern fashion (less expensive - look for the Functional Replacement Cost endorsement) or rebuilt as is (more expensive). Insurance companies are also a little finicky with solid fuels such as the wood oven and fireplace you mention, as well as oil furnaces, as they tend to lead to an increase in risk. Insurance companies generally want to see a lot of pictures (or have someone come in an look at it), have proof that it was professionally installed, and that it is being maintained in proper fashion. It is common for an insurance company to surcharge when a home uses solid fuels or oil furnace, or both. A good insurance broker will have access to multiple companies and will search on your behalf to find the right company to insure your home. With this particular case, it may take some time, and it may cost quite a bit due to age, wood oven, wood fireplace and oil furnace.

All insurance companies have different appetites for risk, it is common to surcharge for solid fuels and oil furnaces, but there is probably a company out there that would be the right fit for you. Any more questions, ask away!

redditor_since

That's really how you do it: set a realistic goal and *stick to it*. The idea is not to over-estimate how much you could save, and end up either running yourself into the red because you're trying to save everything, or end up not being able to save anything because your goals weren't practical. I started thinking about it last July, and implemented my savings plan last August. I made three monthly estimates, each a couple hundred dollars apart, and thumped it all out in an Excel spreadsheet. They were my "what I could save if best case", "how much I'll likely save", and "this is my established minimum of what I'll save, no exceptions". That worst-case value was definitely doable for me, so I knew it was my bottom rung. Then, month by month, I laid out how it would look. My apartment lease is up at the end of June, so I calculated until May. "At the end of May, I'll have ___." Next, you need to set an achievable expectation for a home value. It's good to talk to a lender to get "pre-qualified" (yes, it'll niggle your credit), because they'll be able to tell you the maximum loan amount your current financial profile could afford. It takes into account debt-to-income ratio, credit history, job standing, etc., so it's good to keep your debt as low as you can and don't default on payments. The pre-qualification is merely an indication of your standing; you're not approved for anything yet. Let's say you're pre-qualified for a loan roughly equivalent to mine: $200,000. We can't use my example any more than this, because my lease is up in June, and that's four months away. Let's make up a new scenario. Say *your* lease was up at the end of February 2014, and you were calculating savings up until January '14. Divide it out. How much do you need to save to accumulate your down payment on a $200k loan? If you're saving 5%, that's ten grand you need for a down payment. *Don't forget closing costs!* Look at mine; they're a couple thousand dollars. So your down payment isn't the only money you'll have to save. Over-estimate a little. If you're trying to save 5% down payment? Try for 8%, just to make sure you cover your bases (more accurate information from a lender). So, 8% of $200k is sixteen thousand dollars. There are eleven months between now and January '14. That means you'd have to save $1,450 every month to accumulate $16,000 to cover your costs. That's basically your minimum. If you were to calculate a "best case" scenario, you'd aim for probably 10% of the loan value: twenty thousand bucks. Between now and January, you'd have to save $1,800 to make that goal. That's really it, and really all I did. I started far back enough, and thankfully my apartment lease accommodated my needs by being a long ass-lease, and stuck to it. I faltered here and there, because I got married in the middle of it, but I kept adjusting the calculations and making sure I was still good. **TL/DR:** Realistic expectations, careful calculation -- seriously, project it all the way until your intended date of purchase, and try to over-save. Planning it is the easy part. *Doing* it takes balls. And if you can save a few hundred dollars every month, you've got balls. Because those few hundred dollars can be easily frittered away into recreation. Your friends will be doing it, or they'll be buying computers, gaming consoles, sweet motorcycles, etc., and you have to be the responsible one, saving your shit. I've been there. *Keep saving.* Sorry if it was a little long. :) **Edit:** That was before I discovered [Mint.com]( which I could have used to formulate a budget, goals, and look at all my finances and balances in one spot. It's a pretty awesome utility!

That's really how you do it: set a realistic goal and stick to it . The idea is not to over-estimate how much you could save, and end up either running yourself into the red because you're trying to save everything, or end up not being able to save anything because your goals weren't practical. I started thinking about it last July, and implemented my savings plan last August. I made three monthly estimates, each a couple hundred dollars apart, and thumped it all out in an Excel spreadsheet. They were my "what I could save if best case", "how much I'll likely save", and "this is my established minimum of what I'll save, no exceptions". That worst-case value was definitely doable for me, so I knew it was my bottom rung. Then, month by month, I laid out how it would look. My apartment lease is up at the end of June, so I calculated until May. "At the end of May, I'll have ___." Next, you need to set an achievable expectation for a home value. It's good to talk to a lender to get "pre-qualified" (yes, it'll niggle your credit), because they'll be able to tell you the maximum loan amount your current financial profile could afford. It takes into account debt-to-income ratio, credit history, job standing, etc., so it's good to keep your debt as low as you can and don't default on payments. The pre-qualification is merely an indication of your standing; you're not approved for anything yet. Let's say you're pre-qualified for a loan roughly equivalent to mine: $200,000. We can't use my example any more than this, because my lease is up in June, and that's four months away. Let's make up a new scenario. Say your lease was up at the end of February 2014, and you were calculating savings up until January '14. Divide it out. How much do you need to save to accumulate your down payment on a $200k loan? If you're saving 5%, that's ten grand you need for a down payment. Don't forget closing costs! Look at mine; they're a couple thousand dollars. So your down payment isn't the only money you'll have to save. Over-estimate a little. If you're trying to save 5% down payment? Try for 8%, just to make sure you cover your bases (more accurate information from a lender). So, 8% of $200k is sixteen thousand dollars. There are eleven months between now and January '14. That means you'd have to save $1,450 every month to accumulate $16,000 to cover your costs. That's basically your minimum. If you were to calculate a "best case" scenario, you'd aim for probably 10% of the loan value: twenty thousand bucks. Between now and January, you'd have to save $1,800 to make that goal. That's really it, and really all I did. I started far back enough, and thankfully my apartment lease accommodated my needs by being a long ass-lease, and stuck to it. I faltered here and there, because I got married in the middle of it, but I kept adjusting the calculations and making sure I was still good. TL/DR: Realistic expectations, careful calculation -- seriously, project it all the way until your intended date of purchase, and try to over-save. Planning it is the easy part. Doing it takes balls. And if you can save a few hundred dollars every month, you've got balls. Because those few hundred dollars can be easily frittered away into recreation. Your friends will be doing it, or they'll be buying computers, gaming consoles, sweet motorcycles, etc., and you have to be the responsible one, saving your shit. I've been there. Keep saving. Sorry if it was a little long. :) Edit: That was before I discovered [Mint.com]( which I could have used to formulate a budget, goals, and look at all my finances and balances in one spot. It's a pretty awesome utility!

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8lfer4

That's really how you do it: set a realistic goal and stick to it . The idea is not to over-estimate how much you could save, and end up either running yourself into the red because you're trying to save everything, or end up not being able to save anything because your goals weren't practical. I started thinking about it last July, and implemented my savings plan last August. I made three monthly estimates, each a couple hundred dollars apart, and thumped it all out in an Excel spreadsheet. They were my "what I could save if best case", "how much I'll likely save", and "this is my established minimum of what I'll save, no exceptions". That worst-case value was definitely doable for me, so I knew it was my bottom rung. Then, month by month, I laid out how it would look. My apartment lease is up at the end of June, so I calculated until May. "At the end of May, I'll have ___." Next, you need to set an achievable expectation for a home value. It's good to talk to a lender to get "pre-qualified" (yes, it'll niggle your credit), because they'll be able to tell you the maximum loan amount your current financial profile could afford. It takes into account debt-to-income ratio, credit history, job standing, etc., so it's good to keep your debt as low as you can and don't default on payments. The pre-qualification is merely an indication of your standing; you're not approved for anything yet. Let's say you're pre-qualified for a loan roughly equivalent to mine: $200,000. We can't use my example any more than this, because my lease is up in June, and that's four months away. Let's make up a new scenario. Say your lease was up at the end of February 2014, and you were calculating savings up until January '14. Divide it out. How much do you need to save to accumulate your down payment on a $200k loan? If you're saving 5%, that's ten grand you need for a down payment. Don't forget closing costs! Look at mine; they're a couple thousand dollars. So your down payment isn't the only money you'll have to save. Over-estimate a little. If you're trying to save 5% down payment? Try for 8%, just to make sure you cover your bases (more accurate information from a lender). So, 8% of $200k is sixteen thousand dollars. There are eleven months between now and January '14. That means you'd have to save $1,450 every month to accumulate $16,000 to cover your costs. That's basically your minimum. If you were to calculate a "best case" scenario, you'd aim for probably 10% of the loan value: twenty thousand bucks. Between now and January, you'd have to save $1,800 to make that goal. That's really it, and really all I did. I started far back enough, and thankfully my apartment lease accommodated my needs by being a long ass-lease, and stuck to it. I faltered here and there, because I got married in the middle of it, but I kept adjusting the calculations and making sure I was still good.

Realistic expectations, careful calculation -- seriously, project it all the way until your intended date of purchase, and try to over-save. Planning it is the easy part. Doing it takes balls. And if you can save a few hundred dollars every month, you've got balls. Because those few hundred dollars can be easily frittered away into recreation. Your friends will be doing it, or they'll be buying computers, gaming consoles, sweet motorcycles, etc., and you have to be the responsible one, saving your shit. I've been there. Keep saving. Sorry if it was a little long. :) Edit: That was before I discovered [Mint.com]( which I could have used to formulate a budget, goals, and look at all my finances and balances in one spot. It's a pretty awesome utility!

makeshiftskeleton

I can confirm from personal experience. Our first house was a corner lot, not a super great neighborhood either which may have contributed. Had someone crash through our fence and hit our well pump on the other side ( we weren't home at the time or they would've totaled my car since they cut across the driveway ). They took off before any one got there. Had a couple other near misses, one time knocking a large fence post from our front yard into a neighbors gate. But, yeah, tons of foot traffic... Even cutting across our lawn (one time it was a chick pushing a baby stroller with her gaggle of kids following) and it definitely felt less private. Tl;dr: Don't buy a corner lot :/

I can confirm from personal experience. Our first house was a corner lot, not a super great neighborhood either which may have contributed. Had someone crash through our fence and hit our well pump on the other side ( we weren't home at the time or they would've totaled my car since they cut across the driveway ). They took off before any one got there. Had a couple other near misses, one time knocking a large fence post from our front yard into a neighbors gate. But, yeah, tons of foot traffic... Even cutting across our lawn (one time it was a chick pushing a baby stroller with her gaggle of kids following) and it definitely felt less private. Tl;dr: Don't buy a corner lot :/

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8lgt97

I can confirm from personal experience. Our first house was a corner lot, not a super great neighborhood either which may have contributed. Had someone crash through our fence and hit our well pump on the other side ( we weren't home at the time or they would've totaled my car since they cut across the driveway ). They took off before any one got there. Had a couple other near misses, one time knocking a large fence post from our front yard into a neighbors gate. But, yeah, tons of foot traffic... Even cutting across our lawn (one time it was a chick pushing a baby stroller with her gaggle of kids following) and it definitely felt less private.

Don't buy a corner lot :/

Cyrustd

Muramana is a great item on Ryze, anyone can tell you. Iceborn gauntlet is not an item I like building early on. Ryze like any other mage will also land auto attacks in teamfights if he isn't pressured so the slow can be useful, but the damage on the iceborn gauntlet proc is barely noticible. The two items (muramana and iceborn gauntlet) don't actually synergize since the iceborn gauntlet adds 1.25x your base ad, so not the bonus ad gained from muramana. Compared to frozen heart it gives slightly more mana and it gives ap in exchange for less armour and no active and less cdr. So it's worth upgrading your glacial shroud to gauntlet up if you're already CDR capped and you don't need the attack speed slow, but I wouldn't get it until you've got all your other items, since it's so damn expensive (it's like a 2k upgrade cost from glacial shroud). tl;dr those items don't synergize that much, they just add on. Muramana is great. Iceborn gauntlet is okay but usually not worth the cost.

Muramana is a great item on Ryze, anyone can tell you. Iceborn gauntlet is not an item I like building early on. Ryze like any other mage will also land auto attacks in teamfights if he isn't pressured so the slow can be useful, but the damage on the iceborn gauntlet proc is barely noticible. The two items (muramana and iceborn gauntlet) don't actually synergize since the iceborn gauntlet adds 1.25x your base ad, so not the bonus ad gained from muramana. Compared to frozen heart it gives slightly more mana and it gives ap in exchange for less armour and no active and less cdr. So it's worth upgrading your glacial shroud to gauntlet up if you're already CDR capped and you don't need the attack speed slow, but I wouldn't get it until you've got all your other items, since it's so damn expensive (it's like a 2k upgrade cost from glacial shroud). tl;dr those items don't synergize that much, they just add on. Muramana is great. Iceborn gauntlet is okay but usually not worth the cost.

leagueoflegends

t5_2rfxx

c8ll9c7

Muramana is a great item on Ryze, anyone can tell you. Iceborn gauntlet is not an item I like building early on. Ryze like any other mage will also land auto attacks in teamfights if he isn't pressured so the slow can be useful, but the damage on the iceborn gauntlet proc is barely noticible. The two items (muramana and iceborn gauntlet) don't actually synergize since the iceborn gauntlet adds 1.25x your base ad, so not the bonus ad gained from muramana. Compared to frozen heart it gives slightly more mana and it gives ap in exchange for less armour and no active and less cdr. So it's worth upgrading your glacial shroud to gauntlet up if you're already CDR capped and you don't need the attack speed slow, but I wouldn't get it until you've got all your other items, since it's so damn expensive (it's like a 2k upgrade cost from glacial shroud).

those items don't synergize that much, they just add on. Muramana is great. Iceborn gauntlet is okay but usually not worth the cost.

sociable-sociopath

I think it will definitely hold its value—Sony would be pretty stupid to make it any other way. This is the way I imagine it will work, although I could obviously be totally wrong: - online play will be free—because that is one of the biggest reasons to migrate from the Xbox. - cross game chat will be free—again, another reason to switch consoles. - the use of the share button (excluding live streaming) will be free—because it would be foolish of them to put a button on the controller that is rendered completely unusable without a subscription, although it makes sense to make livestreaming premium. - the easy download methods/smart buying will be free—it promotes the spending of money and Sony likes money. Everything else will be behind a pay wall. Then, with the apparent ease of putting content on the store, there should be a higher number of games than we anticipate to hand out for free to PS+ customers. The potential for indie developers to use it for advertising is fantastic, meaning that they can then rely on their next game selling assuming the first is well received. Then once we get further into the life cycle, at least 6 months but probably closer to 12 or 18 months, we might see retail games given out for free. Finally, if they do manage to get their rumoured Netflix of games up and running, the value will go through the roof (although that might require a higher priced subscription, which I'm sure most would be willing to accept). **TL;DR: No, the value of PS+ will still be as good as it is at present and will possibly get better if they decided to make additions to it.**

I think it will definitely hold its value—Sony would be pretty stupid to make it any other way. This is the way I imagine it will work, although I could obviously be totally wrong: online play will be free—because that is one of the biggest reasons to migrate from the Xbox. cross game chat will be free—again, another reason to switch consoles. the use of the share button (excluding live streaming) will be free—because it would be foolish of them to put a button on the controller that is rendered completely unusable without a subscription, although it makes sense to make livestreaming premium. the easy download methods/smart buying will be free—it promotes the spending of money and Sony likes money. Everything else will be behind a pay wall. Then, with the apparent ease of putting content on the store, there should be a higher number of games than we anticipate to hand out for free to PS+ customers. The potential for indie developers to use it for advertising is fantastic, meaning that they can then rely on their next game selling assuming the first is well received. Then once we get further into the life cycle, at least 6 months but probably closer to 12 or 18 months, we might see retail games given out for free. Finally, if they do manage to get their rumoured Netflix of games up and running, the value will go through the roof (although that might require a higher priced subscription, which I'm sure most would be willing to accept). TL;DR: No, the value of PS+ will still be as good as it is at present and will possibly get better if they decided to make additions to it.

PS4

t5_2rrlp

c8legqj

I think it will definitely hold its value—Sony would be pretty stupid to make it any other way. This is the way I imagine it will work, although I could obviously be totally wrong: online play will be free—because that is one of the biggest reasons to migrate from the Xbox. cross game chat will be free—again, another reason to switch consoles. the use of the share button (excluding live streaming) will be free—because it would be foolish of them to put a button on the controller that is rendered completely unusable without a subscription, although it makes sense to make livestreaming premium. the easy download methods/smart buying will be free—it promotes the spending of money and Sony likes money. Everything else will be behind a pay wall. Then, with the apparent ease of putting content on the store, there should be a higher number of games than we anticipate to hand out for free to PS+ customers. The potential for indie developers to use it for advertising is fantastic, meaning that they can then rely on their next game selling assuming the first is well received. Then once we get further into the life cycle, at least 6 months but probably closer to 12 or 18 months, we might see retail games given out for free. Finally, if they do manage to get their rumoured Netflix of games up and running, the value will go through the roof (although that might require a higher priced subscription, which I'm sure most would be willing to accept).

No, the value of PS+ will still be as good as it is at present and will possibly get better if they decided to make additions to it.

fitmedeadly

My bras had been drying overnight in the safety of my washroom on their [bra-rack]( In the morning, I moved them to my bed, still laid out nicely on the rack, so I could shower. After said shower, I notice my bedroom door was askew. Alarms started going off in my head. My bed was a WRECK--blankets were all over the place, hiding my bras. I move everything back and find my bras **shredded**. Brand new. Freshly washed. **TL;DR** My damn cat knows how to open doors. He opened the door to my room and went in a shredded my new bras (3) while I showered. Little bastard.

My bras had been drying overnight in the safety of my washroom on their [bra-rack]( In the morning, I moved them to my bed, still laid out nicely on the rack, so I could shower. After said shower, I notice my bedroom door was askew. Alarms started going off in my head. My bed was a WRECK--blankets were all over the place, hiding my bras. I move everything back and find my bras shredded . Brand new. Freshly washed. TL;DR My damn cat knows how to open doors. He opened the door to my room and went in a shredded my new bras (3) while I showered. Little bastard.

bigboobproblems

t5_2ubfr

c8ljmbi

My bras had been drying overnight in the safety of my washroom on their [bra-rack]( In the morning, I moved them to my bed, still laid out nicely on the rack, so I could shower. After said shower, I notice my bedroom door was askew. Alarms started going off in my head. My bed was a WRECK--blankets were all over the place, hiding my bras. I move everything back and find my bras shredded . Brand new. Freshly washed.

My damn cat knows how to open doors. He opened the door to my room and went in a shredded my new bras (3) while I showered. Little bastard.

Large_banana_hammock

Dude, I did the exact same thing! Funny thing is, I know my wife uses reddit and now she might find out... She will be pissed. TLDR: add a NSFGF

Dude, I did the exact same thing! Funny thing is, I know my wife uses reddit and now she might find out... She will be pissed. TLDR: add a NSFGF

AdviceAnimals

t5_2s7tt

c8lkxwf

Dude, I did the exact same thing! Funny thing is, I know my wife uses reddit and now she might find out... She will be pissed.

add a NSFGF

mdmasux

Throwaway. Here's my PSA if you're thinking about trying E or MDMA or any of that stuff. I avoided all the chemical drugs like the plague for from when I was young until I was grown. While all my friends were experimenting with this and that, I stayed away and said no. Finally at 26 I decide I'll just try it. Imagine climbing mount everest with a group of your friends and how good it would feel to be at the very top of the mountain just looking down on the world. That feeling of accomplishment, joy, and euphoria. Times that by 100 and add a soundtrack of the best music you've ever heard in your entire life that sounds better to your ears then anything you've ever experienced. oh and your body is feeling so good that even the feeling of your sock inside of your shoe rubbing against your foot is enough to almost make you orgasm harder than you ever have in your life. The touch from another human being is like being touched by God himself. All of a sudden everyone seems happy and friendly. The world now seems like a heaven of possibility where everything is bright, glowing, radiant, and nothing could go wrong. Rolling. All you want to do is talk, everything you say and hear is both warm, profound, and life changing. The people you know you feel like you've known them forever and you feel more connected to them and humanity as a whole life you've never experienced before. For the first time in your life, you're the fuckin cool guy and you can feel it with every ounce of your being. All the approval, validation, admiration, and the rest is now all pumping through every part of you. For the first time in my life I felt a deep release from everything that ever held me down. Everything was going to be ok. This too shall pass. Slowly descending down from heaven back to earth. And for the next week while I was after glowing, I felt pretty fuckin good. I'm a very smart guy. I write code too. Before I tried any of that stuff I researched the shit out of it. I spent time on Erowid, Bluelight, and a few other sites learning as much as I could before I tried. The half a pill I had that night was so powerful that in a split second I was complete transformed as a person. It shook the foundations to everything I've ever known. A pandora's box had been opened up that could never be closed. Now I'm not going to sit here and tell you not to do drugs. For most people their minds are already made up. The experience I had along with the people I was hanging out with, the situation I was in, my life at the time, and my selfishness was enough to turn me to a drug addict from the very first pill I took. Its fucked up. Going from hating drugs and never touching them, to doing them once, and becoming an addict. Within my first few months I had overdosed (bad pills), another overdose (pills where methamphetamine not E), and lost my job. By the start of the next year I had another overdose, tried to kil myself, and got serotonin syndrome* like you wouldn't believe. Its like Russian roulette with your life. I'm not going to sit here and say that by taking an E you're going to become an addict or even fuck your life over. Chances are you'll have a good experience with your people, grow closer, and feel like a better person for doing so. What I am saying is that the experience I had was so majestical, profound, and life altering that it planted the idea in my head the doing Es and Ms is a good idea. This is what makes me an addict, that given everything thats happened with all the pain and bullshit, that taking more pills is a good idea. I don't do drugs anymore. The entire experience during my year and some of taking pills was quite enlightening. The cost was pretty high but while I was in rehab I heard a story from one of the consolers which changed my fucking life. The story was about a shaman training his apprentice. It comes time for the master to train the protégé in psychedelic plants and that kinda stuff. So the shaman gives the kid a sack full of psychedelic shit and he does them for a year. At the end of the year the shaman tells the apprentice, thats it, no more, now you know. **Serotonin syndrome for me aside from the fact that everything was fucked was when it came time to getting to sleep. As soon as I started to get tired I would get intermittent and painful brain shocks that would start from what felt like the bottom of my brain stem all throughout my head. Right as I was starting to goto sleep, my eyes would stay open and I would start having nightmares where I'd be conscious enough to experience them but sleeping enough to not be able to move at all. Right before I would come awake my eyes would open again and for the next few minutes I'd have another bout of sleep paralysis and horrible nightmares about monsters I can't describe. This shit went on for months. I haven't touch drugs in awhile but still have horrible nightmares all the time.* **TL;dr hated drugs all my life, at 26 said what the fuck and tried E, experience was life changing and profound, THEN SHIT GOT FUCKED!**

Throwaway. Here's my PSA if you're thinking about trying E or MDMA or any of that stuff. I avoided all the chemical drugs like the plague for from when I was young until I was grown. While all my friends were experimenting with this and that, I stayed away and said no. Finally at 26 I decide I'll just try it. Imagine climbing mount everest with a group of your friends and how good it would feel to be at the very top of the mountain just looking down on the world. That feeling of accomplishment, joy, and euphoria. Times that by 100 and add a soundtrack of the best music you've ever heard in your entire life that sounds better to your ears then anything you've ever experienced. oh and your body is feeling so good that even the feeling of your sock inside of your shoe rubbing against your foot is enough to almost make you orgasm harder than you ever have in your life. The touch from another human being is like being touched by God himself. All of a sudden everyone seems happy and friendly. The world now seems like a heaven of possibility where everything is bright, glowing, radiant, and nothing could go wrong. Rolling. All you want to do is talk, everything you say and hear is both warm, profound, and life changing. The people you know you feel like you've known them forever and you feel more connected to them and humanity as a whole life you've never experienced before. For the first time in your life, you're the fuckin cool guy and you can feel it with every ounce of your being. All the approval, validation, admiration, and the rest is now all pumping through every part of you. For the first time in my life I felt a deep release from everything that ever held me down. Everything was going to be ok. This too shall pass. Slowly descending down from heaven back to earth. And for the next week while I was after glowing, I felt pretty fuckin good. I'm a very smart guy. I write code too. Before I tried any of that stuff I researched the shit out of it. I spent time on Erowid, Bluelight, and a few other sites learning as much as I could before I tried. The half a pill I had that night was so powerful that in a split second I was complete transformed as a person. It shook the foundations to everything I've ever known. A pandora's box had been opened up that could never be closed. Now I'm not going to sit here and tell you not to do drugs. For most people their minds are already made up. The experience I had along with the people I was hanging out with, the situation I was in, my life at the time, and my selfishness was enough to turn me to a drug addict from the very first pill I took. Its fucked up. Going from hating drugs and never touching them, to doing them once, and becoming an addict. Within my first few months I had overdosed (bad pills), another overdose (pills where methamphetamine not E), and lost my job. By the start of the next year I had another overdose, tried to kil myself, and got serotonin syndrome* like you wouldn't believe. Its like Russian roulette with your life. I'm not going to sit here and say that by taking an E you're going to become an addict or even fuck your life over. Chances are you'll have a good experience with your people, grow closer, and feel like a better person for doing so. What I am saying is that the experience I had was so majestical, profound, and life altering that it planted the idea in my head the doing Es and Ms is a good idea. This is what makes me an addict, that given everything thats happened with all the pain and bullshit, that taking more pills is a good idea. I don't do drugs anymore. The entire experience during my year and some of taking pills was quite enlightening. The cost was pretty high but while I was in rehab I heard a story from one of the consolers which changed my fucking life. The story was about a shaman training his apprentice. It comes time for the master to train the protégé in psychedelic plants and that kinda stuff. So the shaman gives the kid a sack full of psychedelic shit and he does them for a year. At the end of the year the shaman tells the apprentice, thats it, no more, now you know. * Serotonin syndrome for me aside from the fact that everything was fucked was when it came time to getting to sleep. As soon as I started to get tired I would get intermittent and painful brain shocks that would start from what felt like the bottom of my brain stem all throughout my head. Right as I was starting to goto sleep, my eyes would stay open and I would start having nightmares where I'd be conscious enough to experience them but sleeping enough to not be able to move at all. Right before I would come awake my eyes would open again and for the next few minutes I'd have another bout of sleep paralysis and horrible nightmares about monsters I can't describe. This shit went on for months. I haven't touch drugs in awhile but still have horrible nightmares all the time. TL;dr hated drugs all my life, at 26 said what the fuck and tried E, experience was life changing and profound, THEN SHIT GOT FUCKED!

howtonotgiveafuck

t5_2tna8

c8m3id0

Throwaway. Here's my PSA if you're thinking about trying E or MDMA or any of that stuff. I avoided all the chemical drugs like the plague for from when I was young until I was grown. While all my friends were experimenting with this and that, I stayed away and said no. Finally at 26 I decide I'll just try it. Imagine climbing mount everest with a group of your friends and how good it would feel to be at the very top of the mountain just looking down on the world. That feeling of accomplishment, joy, and euphoria. Times that by 100 and add a soundtrack of the best music you've ever heard in your entire life that sounds better to your ears then anything you've ever experienced. oh and your body is feeling so good that even the feeling of your sock inside of your shoe rubbing against your foot is enough to almost make you orgasm harder than you ever have in your life. The touch from another human being is like being touched by God himself. All of a sudden everyone seems happy and friendly. The world now seems like a heaven of possibility where everything is bright, glowing, radiant, and nothing could go wrong. Rolling. All you want to do is talk, everything you say and hear is both warm, profound, and life changing. The people you know you feel like you've known them forever and you feel more connected to them and humanity as a whole life you've never experienced before. For the first time in your life, you're the fuckin cool guy and you can feel it with every ounce of your being. All the approval, validation, admiration, and the rest is now all pumping through every part of you. For the first time in my life I felt a deep release from everything that ever held me down. Everything was going to be ok. This too shall pass. Slowly descending down from heaven back to earth. And for the next week while I was after glowing, I felt pretty fuckin good. I'm a very smart guy. I write code too. Before I tried any of that stuff I researched the shit out of it. I spent time on Erowid, Bluelight, and a few other sites learning as much as I could before I tried. The half a pill I had that night was so powerful that in a split second I was complete transformed as a person. It shook the foundations to everything I've ever known. A pandora's box had been opened up that could never be closed. Now I'm not going to sit here and tell you not to do drugs. For most people their minds are already made up. The experience I had along with the people I was hanging out with, the situation I was in, my life at the time, and my selfishness was enough to turn me to a drug addict from the very first pill I took. Its fucked up. Going from hating drugs and never touching them, to doing them once, and becoming an addict. Within my first few months I had overdosed (bad pills), another overdose (pills where methamphetamine not E), and lost my job. By the start of the next year I had another overdose, tried to kil myself, and got serotonin syndrome* like you wouldn't believe. Its like Russian roulette with your life. I'm not going to sit here and say that by taking an E you're going to become an addict or even fuck your life over. Chances are you'll have a good experience with your people, grow closer, and feel like a better person for doing so. What I am saying is that the experience I had was so majestical, profound, and life altering that it planted the idea in my head the doing Es and Ms is a good idea. This is what makes me an addict, that given everything thats happened with all the pain and bullshit, that taking more pills is a good idea. I don't do drugs anymore. The entire experience during my year and some of taking pills was quite enlightening. The cost was pretty high but while I was in rehab I heard a story from one of the consolers which changed my fucking life. The story was about a shaman training his apprentice. It comes time for the master to train the protégé in psychedelic plants and that kinda stuff. So the shaman gives the kid a sack full of psychedelic shit and he does them for a year. At the end of the year the shaman tells the apprentice, thats it, no more, now you know. * Serotonin syndrome for me aside from the fact that everything was fucked was when it came time to getting to sleep. As soon as I started to get tired I would get intermittent and painful brain shocks that would start from what felt like the bottom of my brain stem all throughout my head. Right as I was starting to goto sleep, my eyes would stay open and I would start having nightmares where I'd be conscious enough to experience them but sleeping enough to not be able to move at all. Right before I would come awake my eyes would open again and for the next few minutes I'd have another bout of sleep paralysis and horrible nightmares about monsters I can't describe. This shit went on for months. I haven't touch drugs in awhile but still have horrible nightmares all the time.

hated drugs all my life, at 26 said what the fuck and tried E, experience was life changing and profound, THEN SHIT GOT FUCKED!

ProtoDong

You don't sound like someone who knows security (especially for someone who supposedly attended BlackHat. Bad runtime environment vulnerabilities have existed ever since the beginning. These generally can be easily mitigated by disabling browser plugins. So no they are hardly regarded as "major" vulnerabilities despite their large overall attack surface. &gt;When I walked into the BlackHat hacker conference and the contact lists of everyone entering the room were being displayed on a big screen TV because of some zero-day remote vulnerabilities... Bullshit. Never happened. &gt;When the 'flaw' requires that the hacker has physical access to my phone/computer though... well that's my fault for leaving it unattended. Any security conscious person should have the reasonable expectation that if they leave their devices unattended - providing other people with direct physical access to their device for a prolonged period of time - that anyone can do anything they want with it. Nonsense. This is the purpose of encryption. When implemented correctly, like it is in my machines, I could leave my boxes with the NSA forever and not worry about being compromised. Mobile devices are slightly more challenging but in this case Apple's implementation of their lock screen is pathetic. It might as well be a screen saver. It is more than possible to to encrypt all the info on a disk and decrypt it as needed in RAM. Locking the screen should flush the ram and implement basic functions in hardware only resuming the OS when the pin is re-entered. Keys should be stored in a TPM or Debugging registers where they can't be dumped. tl,dr - I do this for a living and you have a lot to learn.

You don't sound like someone who knows security (especially for someone who supposedly attended BlackHat. Bad runtime environment vulnerabilities have existed ever since the beginning. These generally can be easily mitigated by disabling browser plugins. So no they are hardly regarded as "major" vulnerabilities despite their large overall attack surface. >When I walked into the BlackHat hacker conference and the contact lists of everyone entering the room were being displayed on a big screen TV because of some zero-day remote vulnerabilities... Bullshit. Never happened. >When the 'flaw' requires that the hacker has physical access to my phone/computer though... well that's my fault for leaving it unattended. Any security conscious person should have the reasonable expectation that if they leave their devices unattended - providing other people with direct physical access to their device for a prolonged period of time - that anyone can do anything they want with it. Nonsense. This is the purpose of encryption. When implemented correctly, like it is in my machines, I could leave my boxes with the NSA forever and not worry about being compromised. Mobile devices are slightly more challenging but in this case Apple's implementation of their lock screen is pathetic. It might as well be a screen saver. It is more than possible to to encrypt all the info on a disk and decrypt it as needed in RAM. Locking the screen should flush the ram and implement basic functions in hardware only resuming the OS when the pin is re-entered. Keys should be stored in a TPM or Debugging registers where they can't be dumped. tl,dr - I do this for a living and you have a lot to learn.

technology

t5_2qh16

c8ls5n4

You don't sound like someone who knows security (especially for someone who supposedly attended BlackHat. Bad runtime environment vulnerabilities have existed ever since the beginning. These generally can be easily mitigated by disabling browser plugins. So no they are hardly regarded as "major" vulnerabilities despite their large overall attack surface. >When I walked into the BlackHat hacker conference and the contact lists of everyone entering the room were being displayed on a big screen TV because of some zero-day remote vulnerabilities... Bullshit. Never happened. >When the 'flaw' requires that the hacker has physical access to my phone/computer though... well that's my fault for leaving it unattended. Any security conscious person should have the reasonable expectation that if they leave their devices unattended - providing other people with direct physical access to their device for a prolonged period of time - that anyone can do anything they want with it. Nonsense. This is the purpose of encryption. When implemented correctly, like it is in my machines, I could leave my boxes with the NSA forever and not worry about being compromised. Mobile devices are slightly more challenging but in this case Apple's implementation of their lock screen is pathetic. It might as well be a screen saver. It is more than possible to to encrypt all the info on a disk and decrypt it as needed in RAM. Locking the screen should flush the ram and implement basic functions in hardware only resuming the OS when the pin is re-entered. Keys should be stored in a TPM or Debugging registers where they can't be dumped.

I do this for a living and you have a lot to learn.

TheAnimus

&gt;It is doubtful you can hang up in the time it takes to make the connection. As a Brit, ages ago at uni, when playing with an imate-SP5 (a smartphone pre-iphone, that had 'apps') I'd been writing such an app in the free-for-all that was WM. Slight bug in it stopped the lock screen from working, get distracted slam phone in pocket. Pocket Dials 112. Emergency operator was listening to my pocket, my converstation with friends in kitchen before I heard them make a loud dial tone sound. One profuse appology the operator simply told me to be more careful and wished me a plesant evening. **tldr:** Emergency services get lots of miss dials and won't care if you get through, "I'm so sorry operator, my headset is broken", and no one will care. Yes its logged, but not in your name.

>It is doubtful you can hang up in the time it takes to make the connection. As a Brit, ages ago at uni, when playing with an imate-SP5 (a smartphone pre-iphone, that had 'apps') I'd been writing such an app in the free-for-all that was WM. Slight bug in it stopped the lock screen from working, get distracted slam phone in pocket. Pocket Dials 112. Emergency operator was listening to my pocket, my converstation with friends in kitchen before I heard them make a loud dial tone sound. One profuse appology the operator simply told me to be more careful and wished me a plesant evening. tldr: Emergency services get lots of miss dials and won't care if you get through, "I'm so sorry operator, my headset is broken", and no one will care. Yes its logged, but not in your name.

technology

t5_2qh16

c8lwcct

It is doubtful you can hang up in the time it takes to make the connection. As a Brit, ages ago at uni, when playing with an imate-SP5 (a smartphone pre-iphone, that had 'apps') I'd been writing such an app in the free-for-all that was WM. Slight bug in it stopped the lock screen from working, get distracted slam phone in pocket. Pocket Dials 112. Emergency operator was listening to my pocket, my converstation with friends in kitchen before I heard them make a loud dial tone sound. One profuse appology the operator simply told me to be more careful and wished me a plesant evening.

Emergency services get lots of miss dials and won't care if you get through, "I'm so sorry operator, my headset is broken", and no one will care. Yes its logged, but not in your name.

Stompedyourhousewith

the argument you made, about the apple not being new and innovative, has been said time and again, starting with the Iphone 3, and when the first galaxy came on the market. **NOTHING HAS CHANGED** in regards to that. as for numbers about the galaxy s3, heres a nice article saying otherwise: . now look at this [graph]( do you notice how it has only been going in one direction for at least 5 years? 4-5 years ago, this stock was only 100. compared this to its high of 700 in sept, and current price of 450. this is significant because: anyone who invested in aapl before january 2012 would have seen modest to tremendous **profit** depending on how far ago they bought. Compare this to the majority of other stocks. depending on when you bought another stock, you may or may not have seen a profit. compare that with the number of people who saw a profit in dec 2012 . What significant event happened december 2012 that affected/effected all stocks? **The fiscal cliff.** This was an event that determined the PROFITABILITY of stocks. it was guaranteed that the taxes on profits would go up in 2013 and beyond. so there was pressure to sell stocks that had seen a profit. and what stock has seen better run up than apple (refer to chart above). Like i said, everyone who bought apple stock before a certain time frame was looking at a profit, and wanted to lock in their gains before the bigger tax rate, so there was a tremendous sell off of aapl stock, and we know what happens when that happens. . Stating the obvious: a person whose stocks aren't in the profit zone has 0 pressure to sell to lock in their profits due to the fiscal cliff, compared to all the people who owned aaple and the vast majority of them have a profit to protect. And thats why there was a huge aapl sell off. Also hedge funds were in the same boat Here is an article to support my claim: These hedge funds have HUGE amounts of aapl stock, which they have probably obtained throughout the years, ammassing them huge amounts of profit. But also, they were facing HUGE tax consequences as well, and even more so if they held onto the stock into 2013. So they did the smart and probably only thing they could do. they unloaded it all. and took their profits. and paid a lesser tax on it. and now that the price has depreciated, guess what they can do? BUY ON THE CHEAP This is my take on the aapl situation. Their numbers are strong, but due to the fiscal cliff situation, it caused a huge sell off. **TLDR:** Fiscal Cliff, Huge Hedge Fund sell off, aapl is way oversold

the argument you made, about the apple not being new and innovative, has been said time and again, starting with the Iphone 3, and when the first galaxy came on the market. NOTHING HAS CHANGED in regards to that. as for numbers about the galaxy s3, heres a nice article saying otherwise: . now look at this graph . Like i said, everyone who bought apple stock before a certain time frame was looking at a profit, and wanted to lock in their gains before the bigger tax rate, so there was a tremendous sell off of aapl stock, and we know what happens when that happens. . Stating the obvious: a person whose stocks aren't in the profit zone has 0 pressure to sell to lock in their profits due to the fiscal cliff, compared to all the people who owned aaple and the vast majority of them have a profit to protect. And thats why there was a huge aapl sell off. Also hedge funds were in the same boat Here is an article to support my claim: These hedge funds have HUGE amounts of aapl stock, which they have probably obtained throughout the years, ammassing them huge amounts of profit. But also, they were facing HUGE tax consequences as well, and even more so if they held onto the stock into 2013. So they did the smart and probably only thing they could do. they unloaded it all. and took their profits. and paid a lesser tax on it. and now that the price has depreciated, guess what they can do? BUY ON THE CHEAP This is my take on the aapl situation. Their numbers are strong, but due to the fiscal cliff situation, it caused a huge sell off. TLDR: Fiscal Cliff, Huge Hedge Fund sell off, aapl is way oversold

investing

t5_2qhhq

c8lsmcz

the argument you made, about the apple not being new and innovative, has been said time and again, starting with the Iphone 3, and when the first galaxy came on the market. NOTHING HAS CHANGED in regards to that. as for numbers about the galaxy s3, heres a nice article saying otherwise: . now look at this graph . Like i said, everyone who bought apple stock before a certain time frame was looking at a profit, and wanted to lock in their gains before the bigger tax rate, so there was a tremendous sell off of aapl stock, and we know what happens when that happens. . Stating the obvious: a person whose stocks aren't in the profit zone has 0 pressure to sell to lock in their profits due to the fiscal cliff, compared to all the people who owned aaple and the vast majority of them have a profit to protect. And thats why there was a huge aapl sell off. Also hedge funds were in the same boat Here is an article to support my claim: These hedge funds have HUGE amounts of aapl stock, which they have probably obtained throughout the years, ammassing them huge amounts of profit. But also, they were facing HUGE tax consequences as well, and even more so if they held onto the stock into 2013. So they did the smart and probably only thing they could do. they unloaded it all. and took their profits. and paid a lesser tax on it. and now that the price has depreciated, guess what they can do? BUY ON THE CHEAP This is my take on the aapl situation. Their numbers are strong, but due to the fiscal cliff situation, it caused a huge sell off.

Fiscal Cliff, Huge Hedge Fund sell off, aapl is way oversold

GodsPenisHasGravity

Hopefully you read this, but anyway when I was a kid around junior high all my friends were christians including the girl I liked and my best friend from when I was 2 years old. They all went to church Wednesday and Sunday, Wednesday being a little bit more about fun and socializing, and Sunday more geared toward lessons. At first I considered myself a Christian, but even from the very beginning I had issue with some of their teachings because they directly conflicted with what I had learned in class (i.e. evolution). The thing is that the type of church they had for teens with the socializing and the games I think is more dangerous than normal mass because it was actually fun and I wanted to go. In the long run I remember going home more times thinking of new reasons I didn't agree than I did thinking I felt enlightened. I always talked about the teachings with my mom and explained why I had a problem with them and normally she agreed or was very willing to talk about it. In other words ask your child what they learned and what they think about it at the end (and they may be reluctant). The other experience was with my sister. Her best friend was christian and took her to church, but this was at an even younger age then when I went. At first my sister was very eager, and of course I told her church was crap because I was a uncensored teen "speaking my mind", but she didn't listen and she wanted to go for herself. I think that lasted a good 2 weeks because A, the church was just normal youth class and it bored her to death and B, she is very smart and also took issue with the teachings. Even though she went to church at a much younger age (somewhere from 8-11) she ended up becoming atheist at a much younger age than me. TL;DR: Both me and my sister both went to church as children, in 2 separate types of Christian church environments and if anything it had the opposite effect of indoctrination.

Hopefully you read this, but anyway when I was a kid around junior high all my friends were christians including the girl I liked and my best friend from when I was 2 years old. They all went to church Wednesday and Sunday, Wednesday being a little bit more about fun and socializing, and Sunday more geared toward lessons. At first I considered myself a Christian, but even from the very beginning I had issue with some of their teachings because they directly conflicted with what I had learned in class (i.e. evolution). The thing is that the type of church they had for teens with the socializing and the games I think is more dangerous than normal mass because it was actually fun and I wanted to go. In the long run I remember going home more times thinking of new reasons I didn't agree than I did thinking I felt enlightened. I always talked about the teachings with my mom and explained why I had a problem with them and normally she agreed or was very willing to talk about it. In other words ask your child what they learned and what they think about it at the end (and they may be reluctant). The other experience was with my sister. Her best friend was christian and took her to church, but this was at an even younger age then when I went. At first my sister was very eager, and of course I told her church was crap because I was a uncensored teen "speaking my mind", but she didn't listen and she wanted to go for herself. I think that lasted a good 2 weeks because A, the church was just normal youth class and it bored her to death and B, she is very smart and also took issue with the teachings. Even though she went to church at a much younger age (somewhere from 8-11) she ended up becoming atheist at a much younger age than me. TL;DR: Both me and my sister both went to church as children, in 2 separate types of Christian church environments and if anything it had the opposite effect of indoctrination.

TrueAtheism

t5_2soy6

c8lzh4w

Hopefully you read this, but anyway when I was a kid around junior high all my friends were christians including the girl I liked and my best friend from when I was 2 years old. They all went to church Wednesday and Sunday, Wednesday being a little bit more about fun and socializing, and Sunday more geared toward lessons. At first I considered myself a Christian, but even from the very beginning I had issue with some of their teachings because they directly conflicted with what I had learned in class (i.e. evolution). The thing is that the type of church they had for teens with the socializing and the games I think is more dangerous than normal mass because it was actually fun and I wanted to go. In the long run I remember going home more times thinking of new reasons I didn't agree than I did thinking I felt enlightened. I always talked about the teachings with my mom and explained why I had a problem with them and normally she agreed or was very willing to talk about it. In other words ask your child what they learned and what they think about it at the end (and they may be reluctant). The other experience was with my sister. Her best friend was christian and took her to church, but this was at an even younger age then when I went. At first my sister was very eager, and of course I told her church was crap because I was a uncensored teen "speaking my mind", but she didn't listen and she wanted to go for herself. I think that lasted a good 2 weeks because A, the church was just normal youth class and it bored her to death and B, she is very smart and also took issue with the teachings. Even though she went to church at a much younger age (somewhere from 8-11) she ended up becoming atheist at a much younger age than me.

Both me and my sister both went to church as children, in 2 separate types of Christian church environments and if anything it had the opposite effect of indoctrination.

strayclown

I'm going to have to join the few dissenters at the bottom of the page. When I quickly changed from a shortish person to a tallish person, I found myself quite clumsy. As such, I started hearing quite acutely how loud my feet fell, and quickly associated it with my own substantial clumsiness. As such, I concluded that loud footstep were a thing to be shameful of, and slowly taught myself how to walk with less impact. These ends are such that, even with me becoming slightly overweight, for my general proportions one would think that I would stride a bit heavier. I walk with more silence than the slightest person I have encountered, and have heard comments as such. Nowadays, whenever I can hear people walking at a distance, I assume that they are either clumsy or too full of themselves for my liking, a theory which often is proven correct. Tl:Dr- Walk softly, carrying a big stick is optional.

I'm going to have to join the few dissenters at the bottom of the page. When I quickly changed from a shortish person to a tallish person, I found myself quite clumsy. As such, I started hearing quite acutely how loud my feet fell, and quickly associated it with my own substantial clumsiness. As such, I concluded that loud footstep were a thing to be shameful of, and slowly taught myself how to walk with less impact. These ends are such that, even with me becoming slightly overweight, for my general proportions one would think that I would stride a bit heavier. I walk with more silence than the slightest person I have encountered, and have heard comments as such. Nowadays, whenever I can hear people walking at a distance, I assume that they are either clumsy or too full of themselves for my liking, a theory which often is proven correct. Tl:Dr- Walk softly, carrying a big stick is optional.

DoesAnybodyElse

t5_2r5vt

c8lundz

I'm going to have to join the few dissenters at the bottom of the page. When I quickly changed from a shortish person to a tallish person, I found myself quite clumsy. As such, I started hearing quite acutely how loud my feet fell, and quickly associated it with my own substantial clumsiness. As such, I concluded that loud footstep were a thing to be shameful of, and slowly taught myself how to walk with less impact. These ends are such that, even with me becoming slightly overweight, for my general proportions one would think that I would stride a bit heavier. I walk with more silence than the slightest person I have encountered, and have heard comments as such. Nowadays, whenever I can hear people walking at a distance, I assume that they are either clumsy or too full of themselves for my liking, a theory which often is proven correct.

Walk softly, carrying a big stick is optional.

TDual

Before you go on these huge tirades you should learn some things. The effective money supply is created by demand on the free market for liquidity. Not not by the fed 'printing' money. The fed recently created a ton of 'dollars' on account with them through a large asset buyback expanding their balance sheets. This created huge lending capacity. But inflation hasn't kicked in in large part because the demand for loans (loan creation is how we really increase the money supply) is so low that there is now slack in the system on the supply side. This drives down interest rates. All of this is what you are seeing play out right now. Tl;Dr. The fed does not control the money supply directly. The free market does

Before you go on these huge tirades you should learn some things. The effective money supply is created by demand on the free market for liquidity. Not not by the fed 'printing' money. The fed recently created a ton of 'dollars' on account with them through a large asset buyback expanding their balance sheets. This created huge lending capacity. But inflation hasn't kicked in in large part because the demand for loans (loan creation is how we really increase the money supply) is so low that there is now slack in the system on the supply side. This drives down interest rates. All of this is what you are seeing play out right now. Tl;Dr. The fed does not control the money supply directly. The free market does

conspiracy

t5_2qh4r

c8mevrg

Before you go on these huge tirades you should learn some things. The effective money supply is created by demand on the free market for liquidity. Not not by the fed 'printing' money. The fed recently created a ton of 'dollars' on account with them through a large asset buyback expanding their balance sheets. This created huge lending capacity. But inflation hasn't kicked in in large part because the demand for loans (loan creation is how we really increase the money supply) is so low that there is now slack in the system on the supply side. This drives down interest rates. All of this is what you are seeing play out right now.

The fed does not control the money supply directly. The free market does

Pseudowalker

I will now within the laws of Tigerstaden seek to prosecute you for defamation. You have continued to harass me with unfounded accusations at the expense of my temper and time. Tl;dr Please grow up and stop insisting that I am someone I am not.

I will now within the laws of Tigerstaden seek to prosecute you for defamation. You have continued to harass me with unfounded accusations at the expense of my temper and time. Tl;dr Please grow up and stop insisting that I am someone I am not.

Civcraft

t5_2tm1t

c8lsgn3

I will now within the laws of Tigerstaden seek to prosecute you for defamation. You have continued to harass me with unfounded accusations at the expense of my temper and time.

Please grow up and stop insisting that I am someone I am not.

MSUn4nn3r5

Tried giving a tip once, will probably not attempt again. We're about to win the game, and their 2-13 Heimer started complaining about all the slow my Rumble had. I simply suggested "Heimer, next time if you want try to build for a rylai's, it'll give you some nice slow" His Response: "stfu I know how to play my champ blahblahblahblah" My Retort: "ok" TL;DR: &gt;Dumb people gonna be dumb

Tried giving a tip once, will probably not attempt again. We're about to win the game, and their 2-13 Heimer started complaining about all the slow my Rumble had. I simply suggested "Heimer, next time if you want try to build for a rylai's, it'll give you some nice slow" His Response: "stfu I know how to play my champ blahblahblahblah" My Retort: "ok" TL;DR: >Dumb people gonna be dumb

leagueoflegends

t5_2rfxx

c8lx7aj

Tried giving a tip once, will probably not attempt again. We're about to win the game, and their 2-13 Heimer started complaining about all the slow my Rumble had. I simply suggested "Heimer, next time if you want try to build for a rylai's, it'll give you some nice slow" His Response: "stfu I know how to play my champ blahblahblahblah" My Retort: "ok"

Dumb people gonna be dumb

Manometer

The beauty of science is you can learn a lot without even going to an institute. As an example, most of the content at MIT undergrad is publicly available (helped me through my math courses for Chemical Engineering when your profs aren't all invested in the students). Do you actually want to do this as an occupation or do you just want to know about it? If its the latter just start taking courses (coursera.org is a good location to start for free ones) and you can build your knowledge that way. However, if you want to do engineering as an occupation you'll need to go to a university of some sort. Maybe consider doing it in another country so you can get your travelling thirst quenched at the same time (and maybe save a bit of money depending on where you would otherwise go to school). TL;DR; Check out online free courses: (Many different topics) (Chemical Engineering) (MIT Differential equations)

The beauty of science is you can learn a lot without even going to an institute. As an example, most of the content at MIT undergrad is publicly available (helped me through my math courses for Chemical Engineering when your profs aren't all invested in the students). Do you actually want to do this as an occupation or do you just want to know about it? If its the latter just start taking courses (coursera.org is a good location to start for free ones) and you can build your knowledge that way. However, if you want to do engineering as an occupation you'll need to go to a university of some sort. Maybe consider doing it in another country so you can get your travelling thirst quenched at the same time (and maybe save a bit of money depending on where you would otherwise go to school). TL;DR; Check out online free courses: (Many different topics) (Chemical Engineering) (MIT Differential equations)

engineering

t5_2qhpi

c8m09so

The beauty of science is you can learn a lot without even going to an institute. As an example, most of the content at MIT undergrad is publicly available (helped me through my math courses for Chemical Engineering when your profs aren't all invested in the students). Do you actually want to do this as an occupation or do you just want to know about it? If its the latter just start taking courses (coursera.org is a good location to start for free ones) and you can build your knowledge that way. However, if you want to do engineering as an occupation you'll need to go to a university of some sort. Maybe consider doing it in another country so you can get your travelling thirst quenched at the same time (and maybe save a bit of money depending on where you would otherwise go to school).

Check out online free courses: (Many different topics) (Chemical Engineering) (MIT Differential equations)

badgergasm

This argument against emergentism largely misses the mark. With such a physical set up, we should expect physical arrangement of the sheets to contain more water--the shape entails a volume, and the ability to hold more water is a necessary consequence of this arrangement--you could not create such a box that had the exact same characteristics and did *not* hold water. With consciousness, not so. There is nothing about the physical brain that seems to necessitate consciousness, yet we have phenomenal experience. If one knew everything there was to know about the physical processes and patterns of brain activity, one would still have no reason to expect phenomenal content to be produced by the physical arrangement. Phenomenal experience is not a physically necessary consequence of the brain's structure, yet it phenomenal states certainly appear to consistently supervene on brain states. This is the phenomenon that emergentists (and, to a certain similar degree, epiphenomenalists) are discussing. tl;dr: A physical structure holding water and a physical structure having conscious experience are not emergent in the same way. Your argument misses this distinction and fails because of it.

This argument against emergentism largely misses the mark. With such a physical set up, we should expect physical arrangement of the sheets to contain more water--the shape entails a volume, and the ability to hold more water is a necessary consequence of this arrangement--you could not create such a box that had the exact same characteristics and did not hold water. With consciousness, not so. There is nothing about the physical brain that seems to necessitate consciousness, yet we have phenomenal experience. If one knew everything there was to know about the physical processes and patterns of brain activity, one would still have no reason to expect phenomenal content to be produced by the physical arrangement. Phenomenal experience is not a physically necessary consequence of the brain's structure, yet it phenomenal states certainly appear to consistently supervene on brain states. This is the phenomenon that emergentists (and, to a certain similar degree, epiphenomenalists) are discussing. tl;dr: A physical structure holding water and a physical structure having conscious experience are not emergent in the same way. Your argument misses this distinction and fails because of it.

PhilosophyofScience

t5_2r7mh

c8r7iy3

This argument against emergentism largely misses the mark. With such a physical set up, we should expect physical arrangement of the sheets to contain more water--the shape entails a volume, and the ability to hold more water is a necessary consequence of this arrangement--you could not create such a box that had the exact same characteristics and did not hold water. With consciousness, not so. There is nothing about the physical brain that seems to necessitate consciousness, yet we have phenomenal experience. If one knew everything there was to know about the physical processes and patterns of brain activity, one would still have no reason to expect phenomenal content to be produced by the physical arrangement. Phenomenal experience is not a physically necessary consequence of the brain's structure, yet it phenomenal states certainly appear to consistently supervene on brain states. This is the phenomenon that emergentists (and, to a certain similar degree, epiphenomenalists) are discussing.

A physical structure holding water and a physical structure having conscious experience are not emergent in the same way. Your argument misses this distinction and fails because of it.

ForScale

My argument is for emergentism, not against it. With the physical set up of the sheets (keep in mind, the brain is also a physical object), we would expect the amount of water they are able to hold together to be the sum of the amounts of water they can hold individually. But this is not the case, the property emerges and generates a water holding value that is greater than the sum of the water holding value of the parts. "There is nothing about the physical brain that seems to necessitate consciousness" You don't know everything about the brain so you cannot validly make such a claim. You also do not know everything about consciousness so you cannot make the claim. "If one knew everything there was to know about the physical processes and patterns of brain activity, one would still have no reason to expect phenomenal content to be produced by the physical arrangement." Again, you don't know all the processes and the patterns, so how can you claim that, with that knowledge, someone wouldn't expect to find phenomenal content? What is the distinction between a physical structure holding water and a physical brain displaying the phenomenon of consciousness (seriously, I'm curious to hear your answer)? They are the same in that neurons themselves aren't conscious, but when you get a bunch of them talking to each other, consciousness emerges from the physical neurons. The neurons and the sheets are the same in that they both display emergent properties when appropriately configured. tl;dr: Your arguments do not stand up to tests of reasoning and they fail because of that.

My argument is for emergentism, not against it. With the physical set up of the sheets (keep in mind, the brain is also a physical object), we would expect the amount of water they are able to hold together to be the sum of the amounts of water they can hold individually. But this is not the case, the property emerges and generates a water holding value that is greater than the sum of the water holding value of the parts. "There is nothing about the physical brain that seems to necessitate consciousness" You don't know everything about the brain so you cannot validly make such a claim. You also do not know everything about consciousness so you cannot make the claim. "If one knew everything there was to know about the physical processes and patterns of brain activity, one would still have no reason to expect phenomenal content to be produced by the physical arrangement." Again, you don't know all the processes and the patterns, so how can you claim that, with that knowledge, someone wouldn't expect to find phenomenal content? What is the distinction between a physical structure holding water and a physical brain displaying the phenomenon of consciousness (seriously, I'm curious to hear your answer)? They are the same in that neurons themselves aren't conscious, but when you get a bunch of them talking to each other, consciousness emerges from the physical neurons. The neurons and the sheets are the same in that they both display emergent properties when appropriately configured. tl;dr: Your arguments do not stand up to tests of reasoning and they fail because of that.

PhilosophyofScience

t5_2r7mh

c8r8695

My argument is for emergentism, not against it. With the physical set up of the sheets (keep in mind, the brain is also a physical object), we would expect the amount of water they are able to hold together to be the sum of the amounts of water they can hold individually. But this is not the case, the property emerges and generates a water holding value that is greater than the sum of the water holding value of the parts. "There is nothing about the physical brain that seems to necessitate consciousness" You don't know everything about the brain so you cannot validly make such a claim. You also do not know everything about consciousness so you cannot make the claim. "If one knew everything there was to know about the physical processes and patterns of brain activity, one would still have no reason to expect phenomenal content to be produced by the physical arrangement." Again, you don't know all the processes and the patterns, so how can you claim that, with that knowledge, someone wouldn't expect to find phenomenal content? What is the distinction between a physical structure holding water and a physical brain displaying the phenomenon of consciousness (seriously, I'm curious to hear your answer)? They are the same in that neurons themselves aren't conscious, but when you get a bunch of them talking to each other, consciousness emerges from the physical neurons. The neurons and the sheets are the same in that they both display emergent properties when appropriately configured.

Your arguments do not stand up to tests of reasoning and they fail because of that.

PoketheCAREbear

The problem with the truskill system is that it isn't exactly a great system to pair people by. It isn't a 100% reliable system, but at the same time I don't think that will really ever be achieved unless you're matched up based on K/D, which would be terrible because more people would complain about going negative. I see a lot of people complain (I am included in this to some degree) about the fact that people get paired against people who are ungodly good all of a sudden after playing and being "the best on the team for several matches." Granted, I don't see your post as whining, yours actually is a legit question and I'm glad it's not one of those "why am I suddenly not the top?" I guarantee that people aren't going to be top on their team 24/7. The second they start going top and start doing worse, all I see is them complain about it. It's rather depressing, there is always someone better than you somewhere. It's hard for people to accept. I don't think adding a "skill" system will help either. Sure you might be paired with people of that skill level, but what is that skill level based on? Wins? Kills? K/D? Wins aren't always solely based on a single teammate, maybe there's a teammate that's terrible on the team and they get carried through the games consistently, so going by wins isn't always the best, but at the same time it could have benefits. Going by kills is another problem because some people in the lower tiers get a ton of kills per game to start and suddenly skyrocket through the tiers, so Kills isn't a great way either. K/D isn't necessarily a great way to go either, because again in the lower tiers there are those people that boost it. Sure your K/D should level out after a time and set around where your "true skill" lies, but at the beginning it might not be. This will only truly happen after I'd say about 4-6 months of playing. We're getting to that point, but a lot of people like to smurf accounts when their K/D just "isn't good enough." The obsession with K/D online makes no sense honestly, everyone wants to have that 2.0... but frankly, if you aren't a 2.0 player, you won't get that 2.0 in the long run unless you increase your level of skill through practice. K/D is just a number that shows up on your service record and doesn't necessarily mean anything especially if you're a great objective player. Anyway, I'm done ranting for now! Downvotes are coming my way probably! TL;DR A lot of people complain about being paired against better people, when they shouldn't. This post doesn't complain and offers a relevant question that I find interesting... RANT RANT RANT Truskill system is crap. /endrant

The problem with the truskill system is that it isn't exactly a great system to pair people by. It isn't a 100% reliable system, but at the same time I don't think that will really ever be achieved unless you're matched up based on K/D, which would be terrible because more people would complain about going negative. I see a lot of people complain (I am included in this to some degree) about the fact that people get paired against people who are ungodly good all of a sudden after playing and being "the best on the team for several matches." Granted, I don't see your post as whining, yours actually is a legit question and I'm glad it's not one of those "why am I suddenly not the top?" I guarantee that people aren't going to be top on their team 24/7. The second they start going top and start doing worse, all I see is them complain about it. It's rather depressing, there is always someone better than you somewhere. It's hard for people to accept. I don't think adding a "skill" system will help either. Sure you might be paired with people of that skill level, but what is that skill level based on? Wins? Kills? K/D? Wins aren't always solely based on a single teammate, maybe there's a teammate that's terrible on the team and they get carried through the games consistently, so going by wins isn't always the best, but at the same time it could have benefits. Going by kills is another problem because some people in the lower tiers get a ton of kills per game to start and suddenly skyrocket through the tiers, so Kills isn't a great way either. K/D isn't necessarily a great way to go either, because again in the lower tiers there are those people that boost it. Sure your K/D should level out after a time and set around where your "true skill" lies, but at the beginning it might not be. This will only truly happen after I'd say about 4-6 months of playing. We're getting to that point, but a lot of people like to smurf accounts when their K/D just "isn't good enough." The obsession with K/D online makes no sense honestly, everyone wants to have that 2.0... but frankly, if you aren't a 2.0 player, you won't get that 2.0 in the long run unless you increase your level of skill through practice. K/D is just a number that shows up on your service record and doesn't necessarily mean anything especially if you're a great objective player. Anyway, I'm done ranting for now! Downvotes are coming my way probably! TL;DR A lot of people complain about being paired against better people, when they shouldn't. This post doesn't complain and offers a relevant question that I find interesting... RANT RANT RANT Truskill system is crap. /endrant

halo

t5_2qixk

c8mn6wr

The problem with the truskill system is that it isn't exactly a great system to pair people by. It isn't a 100% reliable system, but at the same time I don't think that will really ever be achieved unless you're matched up based on K/D, which would be terrible because more people would complain about going negative. I see a lot of people complain (I am included in this to some degree) about the fact that people get paired against people who are ungodly good all of a sudden after playing and being "the best on the team for several matches." Granted, I don't see your post as whining, yours actually is a legit question and I'm glad it's not one of those "why am I suddenly not the top?" I guarantee that people aren't going to be top on their team 24/7. The second they start going top and start doing worse, all I see is them complain about it. It's rather depressing, there is always someone better than you somewhere. It's hard for people to accept. I don't think adding a "skill" system will help either. Sure you might be paired with people of that skill level, but what is that skill level based on? Wins? Kills? K/D? Wins aren't always solely based on a single teammate, maybe there's a teammate that's terrible on the team and they get carried through the games consistently, so going by wins isn't always the best, but at the same time it could have benefits. Going by kills is another problem because some people in the lower tiers get a ton of kills per game to start and suddenly skyrocket through the tiers, so Kills isn't a great way either. K/D isn't necessarily a great way to go either, because again in the lower tiers there are those people that boost it. Sure your K/D should level out after a time and set around where your "true skill" lies, but at the beginning it might not be. This will only truly happen after I'd say about 4-6 months of playing. We're getting to that point, but a lot of people like to smurf accounts when their K/D just "isn't good enough." The obsession with K/D online makes no sense honestly, everyone wants to have that 2.0... but frankly, if you aren't a 2.0 player, you won't get that 2.0 in the long run unless you increase your level of skill through practice. K/D is just a number that shows up on your service record and doesn't necessarily mean anything especially if you're a great objective player. Anyway, I'm done ranting for now! Downvotes are coming my way probably!

A lot of people complain about being paired against better people, when they shouldn't. This post doesn't complain and offers a relevant question that I find interesting... RANT RANT RANT Truskill system is crap. /endrant

Micahsm

I never had a healer complain about healing leveling up as a brewmaster, I guess I was just lucky to do my research? I honestly fell In love with brewmasters :) but healers and everyone needs to know, we gave very few "normal" tank cool downs. Typically I have to use 2 in one for it to be an effective single one (Zen Meditation and Avert Harm) and then I can't actually use it for myself, it's just a raid CD. Our tiger is only a CD in dungeons, atleast the defensive part. We get either 10% health per brew consumed on a 15s cd, or a magic/physical cd (1:30 or 2:00 I believe) that honestly aren't that strong. Our real true cool down is fortifying Brew. Once per 3 minutes, 20% more health and less damage taken. That's all we get. So tl;dr Healers and others are awesome to help out brewmasters with outside CDs.

I never had a healer complain about healing leveling up as a brewmaster, I guess I was just lucky to do my research? I honestly fell In love with brewmasters :) but healers and everyone needs to know, we gave very few "normal" tank cool downs. Typically I have to use 2 in one for it to be an effective single one (Zen Meditation and Avert Harm) and then I can't actually use it for myself, it's just a raid CD. Our tiger is only a CD in dungeons, atleast the defensive part. We get either 10% health per brew consumed on a 15s cd, or a magic/physical cd (1:30 or 2:00 I believe) that honestly aren't that strong. Our real true cool down is fortifying Brew. Once per 3 minutes, 20% more health and less damage taken. That's all we get. So tl;dr Healers and others are awesome to help out brewmasters with outside CDs.

wow

t5_2qio8

c8mx2bf

I never had a healer complain about healing leveling up as a brewmaster, I guess I was just lucky to do my research? I honestly fell In love with brewmasters :) but healers and everyone needs to know, we gave very few "normal" tank cool downs. Typically I have to use 2 in one for it to be an effective single one (Zen Meditation and Avert Harm) and then I can't actually use it for myself, it's just a raid CD. Our tiger is only a CD in dungeons, atleast the defensive part. We get either 10% health per brew consumed on a 15s cd, or a magic/physical cd (1:30 or 2:00 I believe) that honestly aren't that strong. Our real true cool down is fortifying Brew. Once per 3 minutes, 20% more health and less damage taken. That's all we get. So

Healers and others are awesome to help out brewmasters with outside CDs.

TangibleTurian

First of all, you can't say "full strength" Itachi, because that would be basing your argument off something we've never seen and only assumed. That's like saying Hiruzen would steam roll everyone in his prime because he was the "God of Shinobi". There is a good chance he would, but without any evidence to base an argument on, it would be pointless. &gt; I don't think Sauske has evolved that much since their fight. I don't say this often, but are you retarded? He has a much better version of Amaterasu, being able to mold it into it's perfect form, the same Susanoo as Itachi, EMS which would allow him to use said abilities much more often than Itachi, and improved eyesight. Itachi "showed his prowess" against Kabuto, but because he had an immortal body and unlimited chakra. He got cut in half multiple times. His one saving grace is his Izanami, but since that costs him an eye, I doubt he'd use it. **TL;DR** You are being a blind fanboy, and need to see the facts.

First of all, you can't say "full strength" Itachi, because that would be basing your argument off something we've never seen and only assumed. That's like saying Hiruzen would steam roll everyone in his prime because he was the "God of Shinobi". There is a good chance he would, but without any evidence to base an argument on, it would be pointless. > I don't think Sauske has evolved that much since their fight. I don't say this often, but are you retarded? He has a much better version of Amaterasu, being able to mold it into it's perfect form, the same Susanoo as Itachi, EMS which would allow him to use said abilities much more often than Itachi, and improved eyesight. Itachi "showed his prowess" against Kabuto, but because he had an immortal body and unlimited chakra. He got cut in half multiple times. His one saving grace is his Izanami, but since that costs him an eye, I doubt he'd use it. TL;DR You are being a blind fanboy, and need to see the facts.

Naruto

t5_2quts

c8nbyls

First of all, you can't say "full strength" Itachi, because that would be basing your argument off something we've never seen and only assumed. That's like saying Hiruzen would steam roll everyone in his prime because he was the "God of Shinobi". There is a good chance he would, but without any evidence to base an argument on, it would be pointless. > I don't think Sauske has evolved that much since their fight. I don't say this often, but are you retarded? He has a much better version of Amaterasu, being able to mold it into it's perfect form, the same Susanoo as Itachi, EMS which would allow him to use said abilities much more often than Itachi, and improved eyesight. Itachi "showed his prowess" against Kabuto, but because he had an immortal body and unlimited chakra. He got cut in half multiple times. His one saving grace is his Izanami, but since that costs him an eye, I doubt he'd use it.

You are being a blind fanboy, and need to see the facts.

OpenGLaDOS

As a fellow RES user, this is what I see when I read between the lines of usual posts from /r/Enhancement. But in appreciable hand-drawn rage comic form. *** Oh. TL;DR: Update your browser, update RES, done.

As a fellow RES user, this is what I see when I read between the lines of usual posts from /r/Enhancement. But in appreciable hand-drawn rage comic form. Oh. TL;DR: Update your browser, update RES, done.

classicrage

t5_2sa7i

c8njyto

As a fellow RES user, this is what I see when I read between the lines of usual posts from /r/Enhancement. But in appreciable hand-drawn rage comic form. Oh.

Update your browser, update RES, done.

mtlnobody

we experienced something very similar. when we first started, the environment was a complete disaster. i had the unfortunate timing of joining the network admin team as the thing was about to be deployed. i ended up being handed the entire project simply because no one else wanted it. the beginning was absolute hell, nothing worked. i ended up having the consultant company come back in and rebuild the entire infrastructure with me involved from step one. we ended up rebuilding all the servers, re-thinking the entire environment and even re-ordering different thin clients (Linux based instead of Windows Embedded). it's taken about two years but now the Citrix computers operate faster, with less inconsistency and less problems than their "normal pc" counterparts. it took me over a year to stand behind the product but i have to admit that i can see the benefits now. i don't understand the decision to downgrade to xp though. when we switched our staff out it was to give them windows 7 on Citrix. we're looking at the next version of Citrix now and one of the things i'm going to be trying is to offer a windows 8 desktop for staff members who are interested. anyway, all that to say, it's going to be a long, rough path but hang in there! TL;DR i understand your pain, but there's hope

we experienced something very similar. when we first started, the environment was a complete disaster. i had the unfortunate timing of joining the network admin team as the thing was about to be deployed. i ended up being handed the entire project simply because no one else wanted it. the beginning was absolute hell, nothing worked. i ended up having the consultant company come back in and rebuild the entire infrastructure with me involved from step one. we ended up rebuilding all the servers, re-thinking the entire environment and even re-ordering different thin clients (Linux based instead of Windows Embedded). it's taken about two years but now the Citrix computers operate faster, with less inconsistency and less problems than their "normal pc" counterparts. it took me over a year to stand behind the product but i have to admit that i can see the benefits now. i don't understand the decision to downgrade to xp though. when we switched our staff out it was to give them windows 7 on Citrix. we're looking at the next version of Citrix now and one of the things i'm going to be trying is to offer a windows 8 desktop for staff members who are interested. anyway, all that to say, it's going to be a long, rough path but hang in there! TL;DR i understand your pain, but there's hope

talesfromtechsupport

t5_2sfg5

c8ole1n

we experienced something very similar. when we first started, the environment was a complete disaster. i had the unfortunate timing of joining the network admin team as the thing was about to be deployed. i ended up being handed the entire project simply because no one else wanted it. the beginning was absolute hell, nothing worked. i ended up having the consultant company come back in and rebuild the entire infrastructure with me involved from step one. we ended up rebuilding all the servers, re-thinking the entire environment and even re-ordering different thin clients (Linux based instead of Windows Embedded). it's taken about two years but now the Citrix computers operate faster, with less inconsistency and less problems than their "normal pc" counterparts. it took me over a year to stand behind the product but i have to admit that i can see the benefits now. i don't understand the decision to downgrade to xp though. when we switched our staff out it was to give them windows 7 on Citrix. we're looking at the next version of Citrix now and one of the things i'm going to be trying is to offer a windows 8 desktop for staff members who are interested. anyway, all that to say, it's going to be a long, rough path but hang in there!

i understand your pain, but there's hope

Astromike23

So this idea has been explored somewhat extensively. [This PDF]( gives a decent insight into some preliminary mission planning for an aerobot that could be used on Jupiter. Technically speaking, a "blimp" itself would never work on Jupiter. Blimps work on the principle that you maintain buoyancy by containing a gas that is lighter than the surrounding atmosphere. The problem is that on Jupiter, the atmosphere is mostly hydrogen...and there's no gas lighter than hydrogen! With that said, though, a Montgolfiere-style hot air balloon - the kind where you heat up the contained gases to maintain buoyancy - would actually work, and folks have been starting to propose such a missions. Now, maintaining an internal flame to heat the balloon contents (as we do for hot air balloons here on Earth) would be very difficult. Flame requires free oxygen, which doesn't exist in Jupiter's atmosphere, so you'd have to bring your own oxygen for combustion...and that would likely add a lot of weight. However, you can design a balloon filled with some of Jupiter's own atmosphere, has a top surface that absorbs sunlight (but doesn't emit infrared energy back out to space) as well as a bottom surface that absorbs infrared energy escaping from the deep interior of the planet. As the Sun appeared each day to warm the balloon, it would rise in the atmosphere for 5 hours, then descend at night for another 5 hours. If properly designed, such a balloon could last months. **TL;DR**: A blimp wouldn't work. Blimps use lighter-than-air gases to float, but Jupiter's "air" is made of mostly hydrogen, and there's no lighter gas. A hot air balloon could work, though.

So this idea has been explored somewhat extensively. [This PDF]( gives a decent insight into some preliminary mission planning for an aerobot that could be used on Jupiter. Technically speaking, a "blimp" itself would never work on Jupiter. Blimps work on the principle that you maintain buoyancy by containing a gas that is lighter than the surrounding atmosphere. The problem is that on Jupiter, the atmosphere is mostly hydrogen...and there's no gas lighter than hydrogen! With that said, though, a Montgolfiere-style hot air balloon - the kind where you heat up the contained gases to maintain buoyancy - would actually work, and folks have been starting to propose such a missions. Now, maintaining an internal flame to heat the balloon contents (as we do for hot air balloons here on Earth) would be very difficult. Flame requires free oxygen, which doesn't exist in Jupiter's atmosphere, so you'd have to bring your own oxygen for combustion...and that would likely add a lot of weight. However, you can design a balloon filled with some of Jupiter's own atmosphere, has a top surface that absorbs sunlight (but doesn't emit infrared energy back out to space) as well as a bottom surface that absorbs infrared energy escaping from the deep interior of the planet. As the Sun appeared each day to warm the balloon, it would rise in the atmosphere for 5 hours, then descend at night for another 5 hours. If properly designed, such a balloon could last months. TL;DR : A blimp wouldn't work. Blimps use lighter-than-air gases to float, but Jupiter's "air" is made of mostly hydrogen, and there's no lighter gas. A hot air balloon could work, though.

askscience

t5_2qm4e

c8np6gs

So this idea has been explored somewhat extensively. [This PDF]( gives a decent insight into some preliminary mission planning for an aerobot that could be used on Jupiter. Technically speaking, a "blimp" itself would never work on Jupiter. Blimps work on the principle that you maintain buoyancy by containing a gas that is lighter than the surrounding atmosphere. The problem is that on Jupiter, the atmosphere is mostly hydrogen...and there's no gas lighter than hydrogen! With that said, though, a Montgolfiere-style hot air balloon - the kind where you heat up the contained gases to maintain buoyancy - would actually work, and folks have been starting to propose such a missions. Now, maintaining an internal flame to heat the balloon contents (as we do for hot air balloons here on Earth) would be very difficult. Flame requires free oxygen, which doesn't exist in Jupiter's atmosphere, so you'd have to bring your own oxygen for combustion...and that would likely add a lot of weight. However, you can design a balloon filled with some of Jupiter's own atmosphere, has a top surface that absorbs sunlight (but doesn't emit infrared energy back out to space) as well as a bottom surface that absorbs infrared energy escaping from the deep interior of the planet. As the Sun appeared each day to warm the balloon, it would rise in the atmosphere for 5 hours, then descend at night for another 5 hours. If properly designed, such a balloon could last months.

A blimp wouldn't work. Blimps use lighter-than-air gases to float, but Jupiter's "air" is made of mostly hydrogen, and there's no lighter gas. A hot air balloon could work, though.

Mr_Zarika

**Stop this.** &gt;Having a girlfriend is something I have been wanting for 6 years. &gt;I feel like the world is against me, that I am not allowed to have a girlfriend. I know we all can get discouraged and get down, but ever verbalise it. Don't put your fears to words, they're not even real so why acknowledge them? When you hear yourself say something, subconsciously it becomes more real. Second, when she says, "who is this?" you always joke around. Don't let your desperation make you too serious. "OHHH WHY DOESN'T SHE REMEMBER ME!? SHE MUST HATE MEEEE!!" Would you want to hang around that kinda attitude? Gross. &gt;We just kissed and now I’m sitting here with a boner ;) That's funny dude. I actually spat out my orange juice. LOL You sound like you're getting some pretty solid successes here dude. Don't get down on yourself. Just relax though, your mentality of I NEED A HOT GIRLFRIEND is making me sick. You're putting too much value in having a girlfriend. Just enjoy fooling around and have a good time. You're 18, I can almost guarantee that whatever girl you find now will not be around in a few years. TL;DR? RELAX...you're too intense about NEEDing a girlfriend.

Stop this. >Having a girlfriend is something I have been wanting for 6 years. >I feel like the world is against me, that I am not allowed to have a girlfriend. I know we all can get discouraged and get down, but ever verbalise it. Don't put your fears to words, they're not even real so why acknowledge them? When you hear yourself say something, subconsciously it becomes more real. Second, when she says, "who is this?" you always joke around. Don't let your desperation make you too serious. "OHHH WHY DOESN'T SHE REMEMBER ME!? SHE MUST HATE MEEEE!!" Would you want to hang around that kinda attitude? Gross. >We just kissed and now I’m sitting here with a boner ;) That's funny dude. I actually spat out my orange juice. LOL You sound like you're getting some pretty solid successes here dude. Don't get down on yourself. Just relax though, your mentality of I NEED A HOT GIRLFRIEND is making me sick. You're putting too much value in having a girlfriend. Just enjoy fooling around and have a good time. You're 18, I can almost guarantee that whatever girl you find now will not be around in a few years. TL;DR? RELAX...you're too intense about NEEDing a girlfriend.

seduction

t5_2qhrv

c8nji0h

Stop this. >Having a girlfriend is something I have been wanting for 6 years. >I feel like the world is against me, that I am not allowed to have a girlfriend. I know we all can get discouraged and get down, but ever verbalise it. Don't put your fears to words, they're not even real so why acknowledge them? When you hear yourself say something, subconsciously it becomes more real. Second, when she says, "who is this?" you always joke around. Don't let your desperation make you too serious. "OHHH WHY DOESN'T SHE REMEMBER ME!? SHE MUST HATE MEEEE!!" Would you want to hang around that kinda attitude? Gross. >We just kissed and now I’m sitting here with a boner ;) That's funny dude. I actually spat out my orange juice. LOL You sound like you're getting some pretty solid successes here dude. Don't get down on yourself. Just relax though, your mentality of I NEED A HOT GIRLFRIEND is making me sick. You're putting too much value in having a girlfriend. Just enjoy fooling around and have a good time. You're 18, I can almost guarantee that whatever girl you find now will not be around in a few years.

RELAX...you're too intense about NEEDing a girlfriend.

biggreenfan

I wrote Jack McDevitt and Julie Czerneda on separate occasions. Both wrote back personally. I have corresponded with Julie a few times now. Extremely nice people, both of them. Julie offered advice on breaking into writing per my request. Part of that was suggesting that I attend conventions and meet my favorites like Niven and McDevitt. She indicated that many such authors (the two mentioned specifically) are very approachable. It's that easy to sit down and have a conversation with your favorite authors, so she said. I have every reason to believe her, though I haven't had opportunity to test it. Also, I have written to several well-known authors in my field (education) and on two occasions, I have had (different) authors actually send me pre-release manuscripts to read! So, in my experience, authors are generally pretty awesome to their fans. I suppose there are the other kind, but I have yet to encounter them. TL/DR Yes. Most of them (in my limited experience) write back personally and are really awesome to fans.

I wrote Jack McDevitt and Julie Czerneda on separate occasions. Both wrote back personally. I have corresponded with Julie a few times now. Extremely nice people, both of them. Julie offered advice on breaking into writing per my request. Part of that was suggesting that I attend conventions and meet my favorites like Niven and McDevitt. She indicated that many such authors (the two mentioned specifically) are very approachable. It's that easy to sit down and have a conversation with your favorite authors, so she said. I have every reason to believe her, though I haven't had opportunity to test it. Also, I have written to several well-known authors in my field (education) and on two occasions, I have had (different) authors actually send me pre-release manuscripts to read! So, in my experience, authors are generally pretty awesome to their fans. I suppose there are the other kind, but I have yet to encounter them. TL/DR Yes. Most of them (in my limited experience) write back personally and are really awesome to fans.

printSF

t5_2rzjk

c8nm034

I wrote Jack McDevitt and Julie Czerneda on separate occasions. Both wrote back personally. I have corresponded with Julie a few times now. Extremely nice people, both of them. Julie offered advice on breaking into writing per my request. Part of that was suggesting that I attend conventions and meet my favorites like Niven and McDevitt. She indicated that many such authors (the two mentioned specifically) are very approachable. It's that easy to sit down and have a conversation with your favorite authors, so she said. I have every reason to believe her, though I haven't had opportunity to test it. Also, I have written to several well-known authors in my field (education) and on two occasions, I have had (different) authors actually send me pre-release manuscripts to read! So, in my experience, authors are generally pretty awesome to their fans. I suppose there are the other kind, but I have yet to encounter them.

Yes. Most of them (in my limited experience) write back personally and are really awesome to fans.

tinkerbelle91

I have another perspective for you. I have done this. I was actually giving another poster advise on this the other day. My SO and I lived together for about a year, having previously been constantly in each other's company. After we moved out of that flat and I was getting ready to find somewhere new, he told me he felt like we needed to live separately, and I freaked out. I went through what you're going through, thinking maybe he didn't love me anymore and was trying to let me down easy, that it was a step back and would eventually lead to a break up anyway. It also made me feel like the relationship was doomed, because if he can't live with me now, he'll never be able to. We actually fought about it because he wasn't really able to put the situation into words and I didn't understand. I knew our relationship was rocky, but I figured it'd get easier with time. I don't know much about your situation in terms of how long you've been together, how long you lived together etc. But I do know that in my case, I needed to have a look at what our relationship had been like for the past year. Before we started living together, we had lots of friends and we went out a lot. We went on dates, we got drunk with friends, we both spent time away from one another and with other people, and that was, ultimately, what made us fall in love. But living together took it's toll on all these things. We spent so much time together, we didn't really feel the need for dates, but we also weren't in a position to just be comfortable hanging out in front on the TV, because we hadn't dated **enough**. We lost our friends, because we became a little too isolated - not because either of us wanted to, but because it wasn't as easy for one of us to go out without the other, because it meant leaving them alone. This all lead to a lot of fighting which caused us to forget all the great things about each other. We weren't strong enough in the relationship to maintain our old selves and whilst it was easy to continue the way we were and just accept it, the relationship only got weaker. So here we are, about 6 months since he told me he didn't want to live with me. He lives in a house share and I live in a flat by myself. We see each other a lot and we date a lot more too. We don't fight as much and we've both had a chance to rediscover who we are outside of the relationship. I think if we moved back in together now, we'd handle it much better, and it would be wonderful. However, we're both still enjoying the extra bit of freedom, and I really feel like it's the best decision we ever made for our relationship. **TL;DR** So that was a long-ass post, but basically, I did it, it's great and it does work if you're both prepared to try.

I have another perspective for you. I have done this. I was actually giving another poster advise on this the other day. My SO and I lived together for about a year, having previously been constantly in each other's company. After we moved out of that flat and I was getting ready to find somewhere new, he told me he felt like we needed to live separately, and I freaked out. I went through what you're going through, thinking maybe he didn't love me anymore and was trying to let me down easy, that it was a step back and would eventually lead to a break up anyway. It also made me feel like the relationship was doomed, because if he can't live with me now, he'll never be able to. We actually fought about it because he wasn't really able to put the situation into words and I didn't understand. I knew our relationship was rocky, but I figured it'd get easier with time. I don't know much about your situation in terms of how long you've been together, how long you lived together etc. But I do know that in my case, I needed to have a look at what our relationship had been like for the past year. Before we started living together, we had lots of friends and we went out a lot. We went on dates, we got drunk with friends, we both spent time away from one another and with other people, and that was, ultimately, what made us fall in love. But living together took it's toll on all these things. We spent so much time together, we didn't really feel the need for dates, but we also weren't in a position to just be comfortable hanging out in front on the TV, because we hadn't dated enough . We lost our friends, because we became a little too isolated - not because either of us wanted to, but because it wasn't as easy for one of us to go out without the other, because it meant leaving them alone. This all lead to a lot of fighting which caused us to forget all the great things about each other. We weren't strong enough in the relationship to maintain our old selves and whilst it was easy to continue the way we were and just accept it, the relationship only got weaker. So here we are, about 6 months since he told me he didn't want to live with me. He lives in a house share and I live in a flat by myself. We see each other a lot and we date a lot more too. We don't fight as much and we've both had a chance to rediscover who we are outside of the relationship. I think if we moved back in together now, we'd handle it much better, and it would be wonderful. However, we're both still enjoying the extra bit of freedom, and I really feel like it's the best decision we ever made for our relationship. TL;DR So that was a long-ass post, but basically, I did it, it's great and it does work if you're both prepared to try.

relationship_advice

t5_2r0cn

c8nt7a0

I have another perspective for you. I have done this. I was actually giving another poster advise on this the other day. My SO and I lived together for about a year, having previously been constantly in each other's company. After we moved out of that flat and I was getting ready to find somewhere new, he told me he felt like we needed to live separately, and I freaked out. I went through what you're going through, thinking maybe he didn't love me anymore and was trying to let me down easy, that it was a step back and would eventually lead to a break up anyway. It also made me feel like the relationship was doomed, because if he can't live with me now, he'll never be able to. We actually fought about it because he wasn't really able to put the situation into words and I didn't understand. I knew our relationship was rocky, but I figured it'd get easier with time. I don't know much about your situation in terms of how long you've been together, how long you lived together etc. But I do know that in my case, I needed to have a look at what our relationship had been like for the past year. Before we started living together, we had lots of friends and we went out a lot. We went on dates, we got drunk with friends, we both spent time away from one another and with other people, and that was, ultimately, what made us fall in love. But living together took it's toll on all these things. We spent so much time together, we didn't really feel the need for dates, but we also weren't in a position to just be comfortable hanging out in front on the TV, because we hadn't dated enough . We lost our friends, because we became a little too isolated - not because either of us wanted to, but because it wasn't as easy for one of us to go out without the other, because it meant leaving them alone. This all lead to a lot of fighting which caused us to forget all the great things about each other. We weren't strong enough in the relationship to maintain our old selves and whilst it was easy to continue the way we were and just accept it, the relationship only got weaker. So here we are, about 6 months since he told me he didn't want to live with me. He lives in a house share and I live in a flat by myself. We see each other a lot and we date a lot more too. We don't fight as much and we've both had a chance to rediscover who we are outside of the relationship. I think if we moved back in together now, we'd handle it much better, and it would be wonderful. However, we're both still enjoying the extra bit of freedom, and I really feel like it's the best decision we ever made for our relationship.

So that was a long-ass post, but basically, I did it, it's great and it does work if you're both prepared to try.

CoomassieBlue

Hi there OP, Since /r/ihaveissues is one of the subreddits within our community, cross-posts onto /r/relationships aren't permitted - it's kind of like putting two of the same notices on different corners of a bulletin board. However, thank you very much for being sure to include a TL;DR. You'll get great advice from /r/ihaveissues.

Hi there OP, Since /r/ihaveissues is one of the subreddits within our community, cross-posts onto /r/relationships aren't permitted - it's kind of like putting two of the same notices on different corners of a bulletin board. However, thank you very much for being sure to include a TL;DR. You'll get great advice from /r/ihaveissues.

relationships

t5_2qjvn

c8nu47c

Hi there OP, Since /r/ihaveissues is one of the subreddits within our community, cross-posts onto /r/relationships aren't permitted - it's kind of like putting two of the same notices on different corners of a bulletin board. However, thank you very much for being sure to include a

You'll get great advice from /r/ihaveissues.

N00btell4

funny how complicated things can get if you don't have the balls to say: sorry, it was nice but i'm not down for any more. tl;dr you are a pussy and deserved it.

funny how complicated things can get if you don't have the balls to say: sorry, it was nice but i'm not down for any more. tl;dr you are a pussy and deserved it.

funny

t5_2qh33

c8nyyfe

funny how complicated things can get if you don't have the balls to say: sorry, it was nice but i'm not down for any more.

you are a pussy and deserved it.

shiningmidnight

Hey fellow redditor, I know this feel. I'm going to post about my experience quitting, and what has worked for me. Feel free to ignore it, but maybe it will help motivate you, and if not, maybe when you do decide it's time to be done, you'll remember it and it'll help you out. I tried quitting for months. I would not buy any, stay away for a day or two or even three; then I would go to a friends house and have a sesh and end up buying some for myself on the way home. I tried imposing rules on myself like "no smoking before work." It would last a few days until I worked a four-hour shift from 5pm-9pm and I'd be like "Well there's a few hours to go, I'll be sober by work," at noon and have a bowl. Eventually I stopped caring about not smoking before work. And I tried weaning myself off. Worked out how much I was going through in a week, then down to the day. For two weeks I let myself have that. Then for two weeks I went down to 3/4 of that. I planned one doing this over and over again until I was only having maybe a bowl a day or skipping the odd day. The problem was when I tried to go to the third step, my allotted amount for the day wasn't enough to get me high, at least not where I wanted to be. So I stayed at the second step for a few weeks and eventually before I even realized it, I was back to my regular amount. The only reason I quit and stuck to it was because my fiancée got pregnant and we didn't want smoke around the developing baby. She said it was fine if I did, so long as I did it outside the apartment and followed some basic hygiene things to keep her and the baby protected, but it seemed mean to flaunt this thing I knew she liked in her face while she abstained, so I quit for solidarity. My baby is literally the only reason I don't go out and buy some right now. It would be easy. I'm still friends with my dealer, we hang out sometimes, but he knows I quit and respects it. My best advice for you, if you're really looking to quit, is decide on the reason. Maybe print it out and hang it up somewhere to remind you, but you have to be able to keep it in your mind. For me it's easy, we have doctor's appointments all the time and I'm always reading stuff about what a guy should do during the pregnancy or birth or first week. Fill your days. I mean completely fill. I have a job where I work 10 hour days now and on my off days I make sure to either plan something with the fiancee or hang out with friends out in public all day. It keeps me away from smoking and generally I'm tired enough when I get home to not need to smoke. If my friends do smoke I stay inside or away from them while they're doing it cause I know the smell will tempt me and I know I have weak willpower. I "quit" at about 1am Jan 1st, 2013. Tossed the bongs and pipes and papers so there was less temptation. Sure papers only cost like a buck but knowing they're not at home and I would have to go out and get some first before I could smoke is just another step's worth of buffer for me. Plus I'm not the biggest fan of joints, I prefer a pipe. I will admit, I *have* had exactly two bowls since then. Both on separate nights, both on the last/second-last day of the month. Fiancée was out of the house for 12 hours doing placement for school and I was at a friend's place so I wasn't worried about second-hand getting to her. I don't try to rationalize it and make it "okay" or anything. I'm an adult and I made a choice to smoke some, no sense in getting all worked up about it. And there's no reason that having one bowl and enjoying it meant having to go and pick up a quarter of my own. I thought of my baby, my reason, and it was enough to not want to have it around the house. I actually find that while I still enjoyed it for the most part, certain aspects of it bug me now. I tried to tell the story of how I proposed to my friend after half a joint and lost my place three times because I couldn't remember what I was going to say next. I had enough memory of being sober recently that when I heard myself talking about what I thought was an interesting observation, I could hear that I was kind of repeating my thoughts, just in different words, over and over again. I've been eating healthier but I bought and ate a large bag of chips, two chocolate bars, a PB&amp;J sandwich, two spicy chicken wraps and a JBC from Wendy's. All within like maybe two hours. That shit's not normal. I used to go through a half oz in 4-5 days. At best I was spending $90 per half, at worst $120. And I never cared what the price was, I just wanted what I wanted and I paid what I was told it cost. Middle of the road, I was paying ~$600 per month. (That's $7,000 a year!) I'm not gonna lie to you and tell you I have a bunch of spare cash now, because I suck at saving. I spent my money, but instead of spending on something I burned and inhaled (arguably, something I **loved** to burn and inhale) I've bought half a new wardrobe, taken the fiancée out a handful of times to nice restaurants, can afford a crap-ton of groceries when I get the motivation to do shopping, I bought some dumb bells and added an inch to my biceps, and I'm sure I'm missing some things. After boredom, one of the hardest things for me to get over was a lack of appetite. I already told you how I combat the boredom: I fill my days. Even if it's with a gaming marathon where I don't leave the house all day, it keeps my mind busy and from thinking about having a bowl. Anyway about the appetite: I would smoke almost all day, but I literally never ate without having a bowl first. (For you hyperbole police out there, maybe not literally but if it was anything bigger than a snack.) Without smoking I just wasn't as hungry any more. Like to the point people thought I was becoming anorexic. For a couple of days/a week or two I just let myself not eat. Like maybe a single peanut butter sandwich for the whole day. Eventually I started to get hungry again, it was just a psychological condition I had written into my personality and the only cure for it was time. Sorry for going on so long, hope it's okay. **tl;dr:** You won't quit until you give yourself a rock-hard reason and remind yourself of it constantly. And you really won't quit until you're actually ready to do so. If you stumble, don't make a big deal about it and beat yourself up, but don't use it as an excuse to fall back into the same rut. Acknowledge the mistake and continue on your way. Try calculating how much you spend on green every month and either think about what that could mean to your savings, or if you're like me, what *else* you could be buying.

Hey fellow redditor, I know this feel. I'm going to post about my experience quitting, and what has worked for me. Feel free to ignore it, but maybe it will help motivate you, and if not, maybe when you do decide it's time to be done, you'll remember it and it'll help you out. I tried quitting for months. I would not buy any, stay away for a day or two or even three; then I would go to a friends house and have a sesh and end up buying some for myself on the way home. I tried imposing rules on myself like "no smoking before work." It would last a few days until I worked a four-hour shift from 5pm-9pm and I'd be like "Well there's a few hours to go, I'll be sober by work," at noon and have a bowl. Eventually I stopped caring about not smoking before work. And I tried weaning myself off. Worked out how much I was going through in a week, then down to the day. For two weeks I let myself have that. Then for two weeks I went down to 3/4 of that. I planned one doing this over and over again until I was only having maybe a bowl a day or skipping the odd day. The problem was when I tried to go to the third step, my allotted amount for the day wasn't enough to get me high, at least not where I wanted to be. So I stayed at the second step for a few weeks and eventually before I even realized it, I was back to my regular amount. The only reason I quit and stuck to it was because my fiancée got pregnant and we didn't want smoke around the developing baby. She said it was fine if I did, so long as I did it outside the apartment and followed some basic hygiene things to keep her and the baby protected, but it seemed mean to flaunt this thing I knew she liked in her face while she abstained, so I quit for solidarity. My baby is literally the only reason I don't go out and buy some right now. It would be easy. I'm still friends with my dealer, we hang out sometimes, but he knows I quit and respects it. My best advice for you, if you're really looking to quit, is decide on the reason. Maybe print it out and hang it up somewhere to remind you, but you have to be able to keep it in your mind. For me it's easy, we have doctor's appointments all the time and I'm always reading stuff about what a guy should do during the pregnancy or birth or first week. Fill your days. I mean completely fill. I have a job where I work 10 hour days now and on my off days I make sure to either plan something with the fiancee or hang out with friends out in public all day. It keeps me away from smoking and generally I'm tired enough when I get home to not need to smoke. If my friends do smoke I stay inside or away from them while they're doing it cause I know the smell will tempt me and I know I have weak willpower. I "quit" at about 1am Jan 1st, 2013. Tossed the bongs and pipes and papers so there was less temptation. Sure papers only cost like a buck but knowing they're not at home and I would have to go out and get some first before I could smoke is just another step's worth of buffer for me. Plus I'm not the biggest fan of joints, I prefer a pipe. I will admit, I have had exactly two bowls since then. Both on separate nights, both on the last/second-last day of the month. Fiancée was out of the house for 12 hours doing placement for school and I was at a friend's place so I wasn't worried about second-hand getting to her. I don't try to rationalize it and make it "okay" or anything. I'm an adult and I made a choice to smoke some, no sense in getting all worked up about it. And there's no reason that having one bowl and enjoying it meant having to go and pick up a quarter of my own. I thought of my baby, my reason, and it was enough to not want to have it around the house. I actually find that while I still enjoyed it for the most part, certain aspects of it bug me now. I tried to tell the story of how I proposed to my friend after half a joint and lost my place three times because I couldn't remember what I was going to say next. I had enough memory of being sober recently that when I heard myself talking about what I thought was an interesting observation, I could hear that I was kind of repeating my thoughts, just in different words, over and over again. I've been eating healthier but I bought and ate a large bag of chips, two chocolate bars, a PB&J sandwich, two spicy chicken wraps and a JBC from Wendy's. All within like maybe two hours. That shit's not normal. I used to go through a half oz in 4-5 days. At best I was spending $90 per half, at worst $120. And I never cared what the price was, I just wanted what I wanted and I paid what I was told it cost. Middle of the road, I was paying ~$600 per month. (That's $7,000 a year!) I'm not gonna lie to you and tell you I have a bunch of spare cash now, because I suck at saving. I spent my money, but instead of spending on something I burned and inhaled (arguably, something I loved to burn and inhale) I've bought half a new wardrobe, taken the fiancée out a handful of times to nice restaurants, can afford a crap-ton of groceries when I get the motivation to do shopping, I bought some dumb bells and added an inch to my biceps, and I'm sure I'm missing some things. After boredom, one of the hardest things for me to get over was a lack of appetite. I already told you how I combat the boredom: I fill my days. Even if it's with a gaming marathon where I don't leave the house all day, it keeps my mind busy and from thinking about having a bowl. Anyway about the appetite: I would smoke almost all day, but I literally never ate without having a bowl first. (For you hyperbole police out there, maybe not literally but if it was anything bigger than a snack.) Without smoking I just wasn't as hungry any more. Like to the point people thought I was becoming anorexic. For a couple of days/a week or two I just let myself not eat. Like maybe a single peanut butter sandwich for the whole day. Eventually I started to get hungry again, it was just a psychological condition I had written into my personality and the only cure for it was time. Sorry for going on so long, hope it's okay. tl;dr: You won't quit until you give yourself a rock-hard reason and remind yourself of it constantly. And you really won't quit until you're actually ready to do so. If you stumble, don't make a big deal about it and beat yourself up, but don't use it as an excuse to fall back into the same rut. Acknowledge the mistake and continue on your way. Try calculating how much you spend on green every month and either think about what that could mean to your savings, or if you're like me, what else you could be buying.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8o3av1

Hey fellow redditor, I know this feel. I'm going to post about my experience quitting, and what has worked for me. Feel free to ignore it, but maybe it will help motivate you, and if not, maybe when you do decide it's time to be done, you'll remember it and it'll help you out. I tried quitting for months. I would not buy any, stay away for a day or two or even three; then I would go to a friends house and have a sesh and end up buying some for myself on the way home. I tried imposing rules on myself like "no smoking before work." It would last a few days until I worked a four-hour shift from 5pm-9pm and I'd be like "Well there's a few hours to go, I'll be sober by work," at noon and have a bowl. Eventually I stopped caring about not smoking before work. And I tried weaning myself off. Worked out how much I was going through in a week, then down to the day. For two weeks I let myself have that. Then for two weeks I went down to 3/4 of that. I planned one doing this over and over again until I was only having maybe a bowl a day or skipping the odd day. The problem was when I tried to go to the third step, my allotted amount for the day wasn't enough to get me high, at least not where I wanted to be. So I stayed at the second step for a few weeks and eventually before I even realized it, I was back to my regular amount. The only reason I quit and stuck to it was because my fiancée got pregnant and we didn't want smoke around the developing baby. She said it was fine if I did, so long as I did it outside the apartment and followed some basic hygiene things to keep her and the baby protected, but it seemed mean to flaunt this thing I knew she liked in her face while she abstained, so I quit for solidarity. My baby is literally the only reason I don't go out and buy some right now. It would be easy. I'm still friends with my dealer, we hang out sometimes, but he knows I quit and respects it. My best advice for you, if you're really looking to quit, is decide on the reason. Maybe print it out and hang it up somewhere to remind you, but you have to be able to keep it in your mind. For me it's easy, we have doctor's appointments all the time and I'm always reading stuff about what a guy should do during the pregnancy or birth or first week. Fill your days. I mean completely fill. I have a job where I work 10 hour days now and on my off days I make sure to either plan something with the fiancee or hang out with friends out in public all day. It keeps me away from smoking and generally I'm tired enough when I get home to not need to smoke. If my friends do smoke I stay inside or away from them while they're doing it cause I know the smell will tempt me and I know I have weak willpower. I "quit" at about 1am Jan 1st, 2013. Tossed the bongs and pipes and papers so there was less temptation. Sure papers only cost like a buck but knowing they're not at home and I would have to go out and get some first before I could smoke is just another step's worth of buffer for me. Plus I'm not the biggest fan of joints, I prefer a pipe. I will admit, I have had exactly two bowls since then. Both on separate nights, both on the last/second-last day of the month. Fiancée was out of the house for 12 hours doing placement for school and I was at a friend's place so I wasn't worried about second-hand getting to her. I don't try to rationalize it and make it "okay" or anything. I'm an adult and I made a choice to smoke some, no sense in getting all worked up about it. And there's no reason that having one bowl and enjoying it meant having to go and pick up a quarter of my own. I thought of my baby, my reason, and it was enough to not want to have it around the house. I actually find that while I still enjoyed it for the most part, certain aspects of it bug me now. I tried to tell the story of how I proposed to my friend after half a joint and lost my place three times because I couldn't remember what I was going to say next. I had enough memory of being sober recently that when I heard myself talking about what I thought was an interesting observation, I could hear that I was kind of repeating my thoughts, just in different words, over and over again. I've been eating healthier but I bought and ate a large bag of chips, two chocolate bars, a PB&J sandwich, two spicy chicken wraps and a JBC from Wendy's. All within like maybe two hours. That shit's not normal. I used to go through a half oz in 4-5 days. At best I was spending $90 per half, at worst $120. And I never cared what the price was, I just wanted what I wanted and I paid what I was told it cost. Middle of the road, I was paying ~$600 per month. (That's $7,000 a year!) I'm not gonna lie to you and tell you I have a bunch of spare cash now, because I suck at saving. I spent my money, but instead of spending on something I burned and inhaled (arguably, something I loved to burn and inhale) I've bought half a new wardrobe, taken the fiancée out a handful of times to nice restaurants, can afford a crap-ton of groceries when I get the motivation to do shopping, I bought some dumb bells and added an inch to my biceps, and I'm sure I'm missing some things. After boredom, one of the hardest things for me to get over was a lack of appetite. I already told you how I combat the boredom: I fill my days. Even if it's with a gaming marathon where I don't leave the house all day, it keeps my mind busy and from thinking about having a bowl. Anyway about the appetite: I would smoke almost all day, but I literally never ate without having a bowl first. (For you hyperbole police out there, maybe not literally but if it was anything bigger than a snack.) Without smoking I just wasn't as hungry any more. Like to the point people thought I was becoming anorexic. For a couple of days/a week or two I just let myself not eat. Like maybe a single peanut butter sandwich for the whole day. Eventually I started to get hungry again, it was just a psychological condition I had written into my personality and the only cure for it was time. Sorry for going on so long, hope it's okay.

You won't quit until you give yourself a rock-hard reason and remind yourself of it constantly. And you really won't quit until you're actually ready to do so. If you stumble, don't make a big deal about it and beat yourself up, but don't use it as an excuse to fall back into the same rut. Acknowledge the mistake and continue on your way. Try calculating how much you spend on green every month and either think about what that could mean to your savings, or if you're like me, what else you could be buying.

jonba2

First: Unless the school has modified your devices or put on some additional software, they can't see what goes on between two people outside of the school network. They just can't. Second: I know for fact that there's encryption on the protocol iMessage uses. I pretty sure that the Twitter API does as well. As long as Apple and Twitter both use [certificate authorities]( (which I'm sure they do) your school can't do a "man-in-the-middle" type attack to get at your data. My guess? They *might* have been able to figure out some stuff if you use iMessage or Twitter on a school-owned desktop or laptop. From there they could monitor your (likely publicly available) tweets. Any confirmation of rumors that they can see what you're doing, on your own private devices, even if both students aren't at school, is probably just to scare you kids into behaving. If they really had this capability, they *wouldn't* tell you about it. They probably just want you to quit Tweeting and messaging and pay attention in class. **TL;DR:** They *might* be able to see some things if you're on school wi-fi, but the "no matter where you are" bit is probably a lie to make you behave.

First: Unless the school has modified your devices or put on some additional software, they can't see what goes on between two people outside of the school network. They just can't. Second: I know for fact that there's encryption on the protocol iMessage uses. I pretty sure that the Twitter API does as well. As long as Apple and Twitter both use certificate authorities your school can't do a "man-in-the-middle" type attack to get at your data. My guess? They might have been able to figure out some stuff if you use iMessage or Twitter on a school-owned desktop or laptop. From there they could monitor your (likely publicly available) tweets. Any confirmation of rumors that they can see what you're doing, on your own private devices, even if both students aren't at school, is probably just to scare you kids into behaving. If they really had this capability, they wouldn't tell you about it. They probably just want you to quit Tweeting and messaging and pay attention in class. TL;DR: They might be able to see some things if you're on school wi-fi, but the "no matter where you are" bit is probably a lie to make you behave.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8o5ii2

First: Unless the school has modified your devices or put on some additional software, they can't see what goes on between two people outside of the school network. They just can't. Second: I know for fact that there's encryption on the protocol iMessage uses. I pretty sure that the Twitter API does as well. As long as Apple and Twitter both use certificate authorities your school can't do a "man-in-the-middle" type attack to get at your data. My guess? They might have been able to figure out some stuff if you use iMessage or Twitter on a school-owned desktop or laptop. From there they could monitor your (likely publicly available) tweets. Any confirmation of rumors that they can see what you're doing, on your own private devices, even if both students aren't at school, is probably just to scare you kids into behaving. If they really had this capability, they wouldn't tell you about it. They probably just want you to quit Tweeting and messaging and pay attention in class.

They might be able to see some things if you're on school wi-fi, but the "no matter where you are" bit is probably a lie to make you behave.

Paz436

It is also very heavy. It randomly stops working and you have to plug and unplug it to work again, and the MIC is,horrible, randomly explodes into static that will net you the ire of your friends. Sound quality isn't half bad, its better than most headsets but,I feel like that's the only redeeming quality. No supports and driver updates as well. Tl;dr don't buy it.

It is also very heavy. It randomly stops working and you have to plug and unplug it to work again, and the MIC is,horrible, randomly explodes into static that will net you the ire of your friends. Sound quality isn't half bad, its better than most headsets but,I feel like that's the only redeeming quality. No supports and driver updates as well. Tl;dr don't buy it.

starcraft

t5_2qpp6

c8o61g5

It is also very heavy. It randomly stops working and you have to plug and unplug it to work again, and the MIC is,horrible, randomly explodes into static that will net you the ire of your friends. Sound quality isn't half bad, its better than most headsets but,I feel like that's the only redeeming quality. No supports and driver updates as well.

don't buy it.

LondonPilot

Many years ago, there was a case I followed quite closely (professional interest) where a helicopter pilot applied for, and got, a job flying police helicopters in the UK. Although he had a private pilots license for flying helicopters, he didn't have a commercial license, and was not allowed to work as a pilot, but he lied about that and worked as a helicopter pilot for some time before he was found out. He was represented by a solicitor who was very well known in aviation circles, and who used to post regularly on a particular Internet forum for pilots. Most of the charges against the pilot were dropped on technicalities, and the prosecution admitted they didn't stand a chance of winning on the one remaining charge and dropped that too. The solicitor wrote a very interesting post [here]( TL;DR: He said the officers who brought the charges against his client brought the wrong charges. His client had acted dishonestly, but was not guilty of the charges brought against him. It is the job of the prosecution to prove the defendant's guilt, not his job to prove his innocence. On this occasion they didn't do that, therefore the justice system worked.

Many years ago, there was a case I followed quite closely (professional interest) where a helicopter pilot applied for, and got, a job flying police helicopters in the UK. Although he had a private pilots license for flying helicopters, he didn't have a commercial license, and was not allowed to work as a pilot, but he lied about that and worked as a helicopter pilot for some time before he was found out. He was represented by a solicitor who was very well known in aviation circles, and who used to post regularly on a particular Internet forum for pilots. Most of the charges against the pilot were dropped on technicalities, and the prosecution admitted they didn't stand a chance of winning on the one remaining charge and dropped that too. The solicitor wrote a very interesting post [here]( TL;DR: He said the officers who brought the charges against his client brought the wrong charges. His client had acted dishonestly, but was not guilty of the charges brought against him. It is the job of the prosecution to prove the defendant's guilt, not his job to prove his innocence. On this occasion they didn't do that, therefore the justice system worked.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

c8o67nm

Many years ago, there was a case I followed quite closely (professional interest) where a helicopter pilot applied for, and got, a job flying police helicopters in the UK. Although he had a private pilots license for flying helicopters, he didn't have a commercial license, and was not allowed to work as a pilot, but he lied about that and worked as a helicopter pilot for some time before he was found out. He was represented by a solicitor who was very well known in aviation circles, and who used to post regularly on a particular Internet forum for pilots. Most of the charges against the pilot were dropped on technicalities, and the prosecution admitted they didn't stand a chance of winning on the one remaining charge and dropped that too. The solicitor wrote a very interesting post [here](

He said the officers who brought the charges against his client brought the wrong charges. His client had acted dishonestly, but was not guilty of the charges brought against him. It is the job of the prosecution to prove the defendant's guilt, not his job to prove his innocence. On this occasion they didn't do that, therefore the justice system worked.

opsomath

The Subie is a great car, but there are lots of them used out there. For 10k you can get something that is reliable and will haul the kid and dog no problem. As a parent of two with a big dog I recommend a station wagon if you can swing it, sedan gas mileage with SUV space and the dog fits nicely in the back. With the amount of cash you have on hand, you can get a *really* good used car without having to make payments. I paid less than half your number for our wagon and it has served us well. Yes used cars have more maintenance issues, but buying new doesn't guarantee anything and the money you save will pay for a AAA membership (recommended) and a thorough go-over at the mechanic with thousands to spare. tl;dr You don't need a new car because of the baby, just get something with four doors that holds all your stuff and pay cash.

The Subie is a great car, but there are lots of them used out there. For 10k you can get something that is reliable and will haul the kid and dog no problem. As a parent of two with a big dog I recommend a station wagon if you can swing it, sedan gas mileage with SUV space and the dog fits nicely in the back. With the amount of cash you have on hand, you can get a really good used car without having to make payments. I paid less than half your number for our wagon and it has served us well. Yes used cars have more maintenance issues, but buying new doesn't guarantee anything and the money you save will pay for a AAA membership (recommended) and a thorough go-over at the mechanic with thousands to spare. tl;dr You don't need a new car because of the baby, just get something with four doors that holds all your stuff and pay cash.

personalfinance

t5_2qstm

c8oelrm

The Subie is a great car, but there are lots of them used out there. For 10k you can get something that is reliable and will haul the kid and dog no problem. As a parent of two with a big dog I recommend a station wagon if you can swing it, sedan gas mileage with SUV space and the dog fits nicely in the back. With the amount of cash you have on hand, you can get a really good used car without having to make payments. I paid less than half your number for our wagon and it has served us well. Yes used cars have more maintenance issues, but buying new doesn't guarantee anything and the money you save will pay for a AAA membership (recommended) and a thorough go-over at the mechanic with thousands to spare.

You don't need a new car because of the baby, just get something with four doors that holds all your stuff and pay cash.

Mudbloods4Voldemort

Something I had trouble with when I was playing (and also the reason I did not go back this semester, but intend to next semester) is that the extremely fit men expected me to be able to be at the exact fitness level they are. I'm not saying that women can't reach that fitness level, but it is MUCH harder for us to get to that point than men (especially if we are busy with school and work). I had trouble keeping up with them. Also, it seemed like any time a guy got injured it was like "Oh we have tons of guys so you can sit out while you rest your injury." But when women are injured or feel like they're at risk to be injured they're pushed to stay in longer or do drills no matter what because of the lack of women on the team. Also, it would be nice if you showed how much you appreciate them. I never got any praise for a job well done (although other females on the team did), which was another reason I left because it feel like I was putting in a ton of time doing something and getting very little out of personally. I really only got talked to when I was doing something wrong and that just starts to pile up and makes you think you're doing EVERYTHING wrong and you suck at life. Another thing that irked me was that almost all the females on the team were in relationships with men on the team or friends with the girls who were in relationships with men on the team. I don't get along with women well so the fact that I was a newcomer and wasn't treated well kind of felt like I was being alienated. I think maybe doing more team bonding times would help with that and get to know each other more as friends off the pitch to up those social aspects. The reason I joined Quidditch in the first place was because I wanted to meet new people while doing something fun and physically engaging. When I was only there for the physically engaging point, it got boring and tedious and I felt like I was wasting my time because I could be getting the same results by hitting up the gym or pick up soccer games. TL;DR: 1) Understand female limits without making it seem like you're insulting them by making it too easy. 2) Praise the female members for a job well done! Encouragement goes a long way to making someone want to stay in an activity. 3) Make sure the team dynamic is welcoming to new female players and up the team bonding to make them feel welcome and part of the team. Again, this is from my own experiences and perspective, not every female experience and perspective.

Something I had trouble with when I was playing (and also the reason I did not go back this semester, but intend to next semester) is that the extremely fit men expected me to be able to be at the exact fitness level they are. I'm not saying that women can't reach that fitness level, but it is MUCH harder for us to get to that point than men (especially if we are busy with school and work). I had trouble keeping up with them. Also, it seemed like any time a guy got injured it was like "Oh we have tons of guys so you can sit out while you rest your injury." But when women are injured or feel like they're at risk to be injured they're pushed to stay in longer or do drills no matter what because of the lack of women on the team. Also, it would be nice if you showed how much you appreciate them. I never got any praise for a job well done (although other females on the team did), which was another reason I left because it feel like I was putting in a ton of time doing something and getting very little out of personally. I really only got talked to when I was doing something wrong and that just starts to pile up and makes you think you're doing EVERYTHING wrong and you suck at life. Another thing that irked me was that almost all the females on the team were in relationships with men on the team or friends with the girls who were in relationships with men on the team. I don't get along with women well so the fact that I was a newcomer and wasn't treated well kind of felt like I was being alienated. I think maybe doing more team bonding times would help with that and get to know each other more as friends off the pitch to up those social aspects. The reason I joined Quidditch in the first place was because I wanted to meet new people while doing something fun and physically engaging. When I was only there for the physically engaging point, it got boring and tedious and I felt like I was wasting my time because I could be getting the same results by hitting up the gym or pick up soccer games. TL;DR: 1) Understand female limits without making it seem like you're insulting them by making it too easy. 2) Praise the female members for a job well done! Encouragement goes a long way to making someone want to stay in an activity. 3) Make sure the team dynamic is welcoming to new female players and up the team bonding to make them feel welcome and part of the team. Again, this is from my own experiences and perspective, not every female experience and perspective.

Quidditch

t5_2rd3m

c8oluo9

Something I had trouble with when I was playing (and also the reason I did not go back this semester, but intend to next semester) is that the extremely fit men expected me to be able to be at the exact fitness level they are. I'm not saying that women can't reach that fitness level, but it is MUCH harder for us to get to that point than men (especially if we are busy with school and work). I had trouble keeping up with them. Also, it seemed like any time a guy got injured it was like "Oh we have tons of guys so you can sit out while you rest your injury." But when women are injured or feel like they're at risk to be injured they're pushed to stay in longer or do drills no matter what because of the lack of women on the team. Also, it would be nice if you showed how much you appreciate them. I never got any praise for a job well done (although other females on the team did), which was another reason I left because it feel like I was putting in a ton of time doing something and getting very little out of personally. I really only got talked to when I was doing something wrong and that just starts to pile up and makes you think you're doing EVERYTHING wrong and you suck at life. Another thing that irked me was that almost all the females on the team were in relationships with men on the team or friends with the girls who were in relationships with men on the team. I don't get along with women well so the fact that I was a newcomer and wasn't treated well kind of felt like I was being alienated. I think maybe doing more team bonding times would help with that and get to know each other more as friends off the pitch to up those social aspects. The reason I joined Quidditch in the first place was because I wanted to meet new people while doing something fun and physically engaging. When I was only there for the physically engaging point, it got boring and tedious and I felt like I was wasting my time because I could be getting the same results by hitting up the gym or pick up soccer games.

1) Understand female limits without making it seem like you're insulting them by making it too easy. 2) Praise the female members for a job well done! Encouragement goes a long way to making someone want to stay in an activity. 3) Make sure the team dynamic is welcoming to new female players and up the team bonding to make them feel welcome and part of the team. Again, this is from my own experiences and perspective, not every female experience and perspective.

Always_Doubtful

i gave up after one line. TLDR please

i gave up after one line. TLDR please

MensRights

t5_2qhk3

c8ojg6e

i gave up after one line.

please

jpaul3211

It's really wonderful to hear that you're proud of your daughter. I don't know why, but it is. Make sure she knows that. I don't know what her mother tells your daughter to make her cry, but if your daughter knows her dad is 100% behind her, and proud of her too, she's going to do 100% awesomely in school, in college, and in life in general. tl;dr you're awesome.

It's really wonderful to hear that you're proud of your daughter. I don't know why, but it is. Make sure she knows that. I don't know what her mother tells your daughter to make her cry, but if your daughter knows her dad is 100% behind her, and proud of her too, she's going to do 100% awesomely in school, in college, and in life in general. tl;dr you're awesome.

MensRights

t5_2qhk3

c8oonwp

It's really wonderful to hear that you're proud of your daughter. I don't know why, but it is. Make sure she knows that. I don't know what her mother tells your daughter to make her cry, but if your daughter knows her dad is 100% behind her, and proud of her too, she's going to do 100% awesomely in school, in college, and in life in general.

you're awesome.

7we4k

Take them in the RX bottle that your pharmacy gave them to you in. I've traveled almost all but 3 US states, and almost all of Canada that way, with no issues. I declared to Customs that I was carrying it in when going to Canada, and they didn't have a problem. Just as long as you have your RX information handy, you should be fine. TL;DR: Business Traveler says it's all good with your RX bottle.

Take them in the RX bottle that your pharmacy gave them to you in. I've traveled almost all but 3 US states, and almost all of Canada that way, with no issues. I declared to Customs that I was carrying it in when going to Canada, and they didn't have a problem. Just as long as you have your RX information handy, you should be fine. TL;DR: Business Traveler says it's all good with your RX bottle.

ADHD

t5_2qnwb

c8pn93g

Take them in the RX bottle that your pharmacy gave them to you in. I've traveled almost all but 3 US states, and almost all of Canada that way, with no issues. I declared to Customs that I was carrying it in when going to Canada, and they didn't have a problem. Just as long as you have your RX information handy, you should be fine.

Business Traveler says it's all good with your RX bottle.

FlyingStirFryMonster

To me, this is as good a plan as the curent global mindset allows but is still pretty bad. Fist, it relies heavily on mass production/consumption to bring down the cost of the product. Fair enough, this is the case with all cars but it is still a problem. Second, mining metal ore, refining it, transporting it, transforming it, transporting it further to make car parts that are then assembled and transported again requires a lot of energy. Energy that is curently supplied by oil. That is without counting plastic components of the car, also made from oil. Same goes for solar pannels that would ideally be used to power the car: made from oil. Although it is better than other buisiness plans, the fact that it is a buisiness means that it must operate within constrains built into the economic system: They must generate money, so they must sell and bring the costs down; People dont want to change their lifestyle, so the car has to perform like a gasoline powered-car for it to sell; etc. **TL;DR**: That car is not oil-free and the buisiness plan relies on mass consumption: not great in my opinion.

To me, this is as good a plan as the curent global mindset allows but is still pretty bad. Fist, it relies heavily on mass production/consumption to bring down the cost of the product. Fair enough, this is the case with all cars but it is still a problem. Second, mining metal ore, refining it, transporting it, transforming it, transporting it further to make car parts that are then assembled and transported again requires a lot of energy. Energy that is curently supplied by oil. That is without counting plastic components of the car, also made from oil. Same goes for solar pannels that would ideally be used to power the car: made from oil. Although it is better than other buisiness plans, the fact that it is a buisiness means that it must operate within constrains built into the economic system: They must generate money, so they must sell and bring the costs down; People dont want to change their lifestyle, so the car has to perform like a gasoline powered-car for it to sell; etc. TL;DR : That car is not oil-free and the buisiness plan relies on mass consumption: not great in my opinion.

Anticonsumption

t5_2r83n

c8p0gvy

To me, this is as good a plan as the curent global mindset allows but is still pretty bad. Fist, it relies heavily on mass production/consumption to bring down the cost of the product. Fair enough, this is the case with all cars but it is still a problem. Second, mining metal ore, refining it, transporting it, transforming it, transporting it further to make car parts that are then assembled and transported again requires a lot of energy. Energy that is curently supplied by oil. That is without counting plastic components of the car, also made from oil. Same goes for solar pannels that would ideally be used to power the car: made from oil. Although it is better than other buisiness plans, the fact that it is a buisiness means that it must operate within constrains built into the economic system: They must generate money, so they must sell and bring the costs down; People dont want to change their lifestyle, so the car has to perform like a gasoline powered-car for it to sell; etc.

That car is not oil-free and the buisiness plan relies on mass consumption: not great in my opinion.

robato

As the Pandarian say, "Slow down..." What good would it have done if Reid did away with the filibuster right now? The Republicans still control the house, and there will still be no legislation passed. Rather than fix the filibuster now and suffer all the political fall out for nothing, wait until the Democrats control the House. Then the only way for the GOP to stop legislation would be to obstruct the Senate. Then the filibuster can be fixed with little political cost, AND a legislative agenda can finally be passed. tl;dr: no point in doing it now because of the House.

As the Pandarian say, "Slow down..." What good would it have done if Reid did away with the filibuster right now? The Republicans still control the house, and there will still be no legislation passed. Rather than fix the filibuster now and suffer all the political fall out for nothing, wait until the Democrats control the House. Then the only way for the GOP to stop legislation would be to obstruct the Senate. Then the filibuster can be fixed with little political cost, AND a legislative agenda can finally be passed. tl;dr: no point in doing it now because of the House.

politics

t5_2cneq

c8ozhq8

As the Pandarian say, "Slow down..." What good would it have done if Reid did away with the filibuster right now? The Republicans still control the house, and there will still be no legislation passed. Rather than fix the filibuster now and suffer all the political fall out for nothing, wait until the Democrats control the House. Then the only way for the GOP to stop legislation would be to obstruct the Senate. Then the filibuster can be fixed with little political cost, AND a legislative agenda can finally be passed.

no point in doing it now because of the House.

dillinger__88

&gt;Playing hard support is a really good way to get comfortable faster, in my opinion. Not in pubs. To play hard support you need to have confidence that your carry is going to take advantage of it what you're doing and that your team is going to actually cooperate with you. What mostly happens is you're blamed for everything that goes wrong and flamed for only having boots 1 and mek at 20 minutes (EDIT: because your team doesn't want to follow up on a frostbite on an isolated carry and will wait for the rest of the enemy team to turn up, rape your face, and then role the rest of your team 5v4). ESPECIALLY at lower levels. While support is a good choice to learn the game, Hardcore warding/stacking/harrassing bitch will just lead to boredom and frustration. Source: Attempted hardcore support in shit-tier pubs. TL;DR Play support, but play them as a 3-4 instead of a 5.

>Playing hard support is a really good way to get comfortable faster, in my opinion. Not in pubs. To play hard support you need to have confidence that your carry is going to take advantage of it what you're doing and that your team is going to actually cooperate with you. What mostly happens is you're blamed for everything that goes wrong and flamed for only having boots 1 and mek at 20 minutes (EDIT: because your team doesn't want to follow up on a frostbite on an isolated carry and will wait for the rest of the enemy team to turn up, rape your face, and then role the rest of your team 5v4). ESPECIALLY at lower levels. While support is a good choice to learn the game, Hardcore warding/stacking/harrassing bitch will just lead to boredom and frustration. Source: Attempted hardcore support in shit-tier pubs. TL;DR Play support, but play them as a 3-4 instead of a 5.

DotA2

t5_2s580

c8ovi1d

Playing hard support is a really good way to get comfortable faster, in my opinion. Not in pubs. To play hard support you need to have confidence that your carry is going to take advantage of it what you're doing and that your team is going to actually cooperate with you. What mostly happens is you're blamed for everything that goes wrong and flamed for only having boots 1 and mek at 20 minutes (EDIT: because your team doesn't want to follow up on a frostbite on an isolated carry and will wait for the rest of the enemy team to turn up, rape your face, and then role the rest of your team 5v4). ESPECIALLY at lower levels. While support is a good choice to learn the game, Hardcore warding/stacking/harrassing bitch will just lead to boredom and frustration. Source: Attempted hardcore support in shit-tier pubs.

Play support, but play them as a 3-4 instead of a 5.

MattAlexander

So a doctor and all his patients shop at walmart exclusively. The doctor better hope none of his patients work in competition with walmart because walmart's strategy is to undercut the competition in a region even if it means operating at a loss as long as it takes to kill the competition. Once the competition is gone (and again, let's hope that doesn't affect the doctor's patients), they put the prices back up to where they can make money again. That's business and that's fine, but now everyone who worked at a store that walmart killed is out of work, or working for walmart. The owners of those stores are now out of work and no longer paying rent in the building where they were located. The basic idea is that walmart's strategy is to kill all their competition and in many smaller towns that can be easily accomplished, especially in communities that are already financially strapped. So when your whole town is seeking the lowest price on something, they won't want to pay taxes which will pay the doctor if you've got public healthcare like in Canada, and they don't want to pay the doctor if they have to pay for it themselves. Even better, when they're making minimum wage or a little better it becomes really difficult totaled time off when sick, or to go to an appointment. So yeah, it affects doctors (especially if no one in town can afford to go to college to be the doctor's assistant or receptionist) TLDR; Economies are complex, interlinked systems and the quest for ever-lower prices affects everyone.

So a doctor and all his patients shop at walmart exclusively. The doctor better hope none of his patients work in competition with walmart because walmart's strategy is to undercut the competition in a region even if it means operating at a loss as long as it takes to kill the competition. Once the competition is gone (and again, let's hope that doesn't affect the doctor's patients), they put the prices back up to where they can make money again. That's business and that's fine, but now everyone who worked at a store that walmart killed is out of work, or working for walmart. The owners of those stores are now out of work and no longer paying rent in the building where they were located. The basic idea is that walmart's strategy is to kill all their competition and in many smaller towns that can be easily accomplished, especially in communities that are already financially strapped. So when your whole town is seeking the lowest price on something, they won't want to pay taxes which will pay the doctor if you've got public healthcare like in Canada, and they don't want to pay the doctor if they have to pay for it themselves. Even better, when they're making minimum wage or a little better it becomes really difficult totaled time off when sick, or to go to an appointment. So yeah, it affects doctors (especially if no one in town can afford to go to college to be the doctor's assistant or receptionist) TLDR; Economies are complex, interlinked systems and the quest for ever-lower prices affects everyone.

canada

t5_2qh68

c8p4zb4

So a doctor and all his patients shop at walmart exclusively. The doctor better hope none of his patients work in competition with walmart because walmart's strategy is to undercut the competition in a region even if it means operating at a loss as long as it takes to kill the competition. Once the competition is gone (and again, let's hope that doesn't affect the doctor's patients), they put the prices back up to where they can make money again. That's business and that's fine, but now everyone who worked at a store that walmart killed is out of work, or working for walmart. The owners of those stores are now out of work and no longer paying rent in the building where they were located. The basic idea is that walmart's strategy is to kill all their competition and in many smaller towns that can be easily accomplished, especially in communities that are already financially strapped. So when your whole town is seeking the lowest price on something, they won't want to pay taxes which will pay the doctor if you've got public healthcare like in Canada, and they don't want to pay the doctor if they have to pay for it themselves. Even better, when they're making minimum wage or a little better it becomes really difficult totaled time off when sick, or to go to an appointment. So yeah, it affects doctors (especially if no one in town can afford to go to college to be the doctor's assistant or receptionist)

Economies are complex, interlinked systems and the quest for ever-lower prices affects everyone.

Melkath

A yorkie showed up in my front yard. I put up signs and checked with local vets and the police department, but noone came looking for him. At that point, they guessed him about 8-10 years old. When guesses put him at 14-16 years old, I had bonded with no animal in my life more profoundly than JD. The last couple years were a constant state of worry. It was when he started losing his teeth that I got worried. It was when he lost his first canine that I started panicing. Unfortunately, my advise for current elderly dog owners would be, you'll know. Odds are it wont blindside you (well, it will, but not how you think). He was such a crazy, high energy, little thing that I figured he'd go out like a light bulb. One minute jumping around like he always did. Next stroked out dead. Nope, one day he just decided he wasn't going to eat anymore. Being a yorkie (stubborn eaters), I had been through it and didn't cater to his denial for food for 3 days. Then I caved and got him a new brand hoping to get his attention. Then I tried going to the go to what got him eating when I first found him, lunch meat. After a week, I got desperate and got a baby syringe and started feeding him meat based baby foods. I was unemployed at the time. It was horrible. I basically just laid with him and died with him. It was 2 or 3 weeks of spending my full days laying with him, trying to force feed him some baby food every 2 to 3 hours, watching him waste away, hoping as hard as I could that he would just eat something on his own again. It got to the point where he would get up and try to walk to his dog house, and would only be able to take a step or 2 before he collapsed. After this back and forth, him trying to get to his dog house, but not being able to make it, me picking him back up and bringing him back to the couch, I tried to feed him again and he immediately threw the food back up. It looked and sounded painful. I had been wrestling with the thought, but that was the moment I thought "I need to call the vet". I couldn't compose myself enough to make the call, so my wife called a local mobile vet for us. I took him into his backyard, and he had a burst of energy (I think he knew) he hadn't had in weeks. Strong enough to walk half the length of the back yard to his favorite spot. He surveyed his yard from his favorite spot, hobbled back over to me, and collapsed on the ground. I picked him up, brought him back inside, and the vet arrived... summation in the form of a TL;DR: If you are close to your dog, you'll be sure when they die. Shut up the paranoid parrot, and just enjoy your pet while you have them. I don't expect anyone to read it or care about it if they do, I just needed to type that out... I'm still not done grieving the loss of my bestest buddie. [I miss you J Dizzle Fo Shizzle.](

A yorkie showed up in my front yard. I put up signs and checked with local vets and the police department, but noone came looking for him. At that point, they guessed him about 8-10 years old. When guesses put him at 14-16 years old, I had bonded with no animal in my life more profoundly than JD. The last couple years were a constant state of worry. It was when he started losing his teeth that I got worried. It was when he lost his first canine that I started panicing. Unfortunately, my advise for current elderly dog owners would be, you'll know. Odds are it wont blindside you (well, it will, but not how you think). He was such a crazy, high energy, little thing that I figured he'd go out like a light bulb. One minute jumping around like he always did. Next stroked out dead. Nope, one day he just decided he wasn't going to eat anymore. Being a yorkie (stubborn eaters), I had been through it and didn't cater to his denial for food for 3 days. Then I caved and got him a new brand hoping to get his attention. Then I tried going to the go to what got him eating when I first found him, lunch meat. After a week, I got desperate and got a baby syringe and started feeding him meat based baby foods. I was unemployed at the time. It was horrible. I basically just laid with him and died with him. It was 2 or 3 weeks of spending my full days laying with him, trying to force feed him some baby food every 2 to 3 hours, watching him waste away, hoping as hard as I could that he would just eat something on his own again. It got to the point where he would get up and try to walk to his dog house, and would only be able to take a step or 2 before he collapsed. After this back and forth, him trying to get to his dog house, but not being able to make it, me picking him back up and bringing him back to the couch, I tried to feed him again and he immediately threw the food back up. It looked and sounded painful. I had been wrestling with the thought, but that was the moment I thought "I need to call the vet". I couldn't compose myself enough to make the call, so my wife called a local mobile vet for us. I took him into his backyard, and he had a burst of energy (I think he knew) he hadn't had in weeks. Strong enough to walk half the length of the back yard to his favorite spot. He surveyed his yard from his favorite spot, hobbled back over to me, and collapsed on the ground. I picked him up, brought him back inside, and the vet arrived... summation in the form of a TL;DR: If you are close to your dog, you'll be sure when they die. Shut up the paranoid parrot, and just enjoy your pet while you have them. I don't expect anyone to read it or care about it if they do, I just needed to type that out... I'm still not done grieving the loss of my bestest buddie. [I miss you J Dizzle Fo Shizzle.](

AdviceAnimals

t5_2s7tt

c8phrtj

A yorkie showed up in my front yard. I put up signs and checked with local vets and the police department, but noone came looking for him. At that point, they guessed him about 8-10 years old. When guesses put him at 14-16 years old, I had bonded with no animal in my life more profoundly than JD. The last couple years were a constant state of worry. It was when he started losing his teeth that I got worried. It was when he lost his first canine that I started panicing. Unfortunately, my advise for current elderly dog owners would be, you'll know. Odds are it wont blindside you (well, it will, but not how you think). He was such a crazy, high energy, little thing that I figured he'd go out like a light bulb. One minute jumping around like he always did. Next stroked out dead. Nope, one day he just decided he wasn't going to eat anymore. Being a yorkie (stubborn eaters), I had been through it and didn't cater to his denial for food for 3 days. Then I caved and got him a new brand hoping to get his attention. Then I tried going to the go to what got him eating when I first found him, lunch meat. After a week, I got desperate and got a baby syringe and started feeding him meat based baby foods. I was unemployed at the time. It was horrible. I basically just laid with him and died with him. It was 2 or 3 weeks of spending my full days laying with him, trying to force feed him some baby food every 2 to 3 hours, watching him waste away, hoping as hard as I could that he would just eat something on his own again. It got to the point where he would get up and try to walk to his dog house, and would only be able to take a step or 2 before he collapsed. After this back and forth, him trying to get to his dog house, but not being able to make it, me picking him back up and bringing him back to the couch, I tried to feed him again and he immediately threw the food back up. It looked and sounded painful. I had been wrestling with the thought, but that was the moment I thought "I need to call the vet". I couldn't compose myself enough to make the call, so my wife called a local mobile vet for us. I took him into his backyard, and he had a burst of energy (I think he knew) he hadn't had in weeks. Strong enough to walk half the length of the back yard to his favorite spot. He surveyed his yard from his favorite spot, hobbled back over to me, and collapsed on the ground. I picked him up, brought him back inside, and the vet arrived... summation in the form of a

If you are close to your dog, you'll be sure when they die. Shut up the paranoid parrot, and just enjoy your pet while you have them. I don't expect anyone to read it or care about it if they do, I just needed to type that out... I'm still not done grieving the loss of my bestest buddie. [I miss you J Dizzle Fo Shizzle.](