bsbbtnh
1yr ago
I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out Wang and Ellison had orchestrated this whole thing, and SBF is simply a patsy. They are both admitting guilt, and that they knew at the time what they were doing was wrong. If SBF has a shred of evidence that they misled him, he'll probably get off, while Wang and Ellison get a slap on the wrist.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
The NFL player who collapsed had it happen due to a collision with direct impact to the heart. This was a completely different case than covid related myocarditis.
I'd assumed they were talking about Uche Nwaneri, but he wasn't in the NFL anymore.
It's kind of amazing how much coverage of current and former NFL players (and other staff) there is. Looks like (former) NFL player dying isn't some rare occurrence, even for younger ones. I wonder what the life expectancy of an NFL player is.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
In better films, Hartnett's character would have a proper character arc, where he's an arrogant and selfish Hollywood star that only cares about himself and his wellbeing, to the end of the film where he becomes a true member of the team and asks when the next mission is.
Or played it like he's super eager to be a spy, which leads to the comedy, and Statham plays the straight man.
I haven't seen the film (and don't plan to), but I wonder if it'd have been better if they made Aubrey Plaza the Hollywood star, have her eager to be part of the spy thing, she's over-the-top with being sexual/seductive, and then it allows her juvenile humour to shine.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
Yeah, he carried that film. That's around when Melissa McCarthy had gone full Chris Farley, relying far too much on physical humour and stupidity.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
IMO, the acting by everybody, except David, John, and the little girl, was sub-par. Beverly D'Angelo was rough to look at, but I guess she suited the character. Other than that, this was a great movie. I kind of wanted more of Santa's origins, but maybe we'll get a sequel. Though I hope a sequel doesn't become 'we have to find even more violent, over-the-top ways to kill people' because that will wear thin quickly.
Like you said, the script was tight. Should easily become a classic. I wonder if it'll get cut down to a PG/PG-13 for television.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
Grey shirt black girl and white shirt black girl were already behind the counter attacking people prior to this. Another angle.
That video is from after the carafe was thrown.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
The blonde white woman is clearly the hero of the engagement. It's
It looks like she's the first person to attack, throwing a coffee carafe at the black lady.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
Back in the 80s, most restaurants used lard or tallow for deep frying. But then vegans/vegetarians 'convinced' restaurants to move away from animal fats. Or at least that was the excuse many chains gave. It was likely a cost issue, along with the demonization of fat in those days.
IIRC, McDonald's spent a lot of time, money, and effort to maintain the flavour of their fries when they switched. I wouldn't be particularly surprised if McDonald's pushed the change, in order to get their competitors to follow along with inferior fries, thereby gobbling up marketshare (which they did).
In 2007, McDonald's began moving away from trans fats. I believe this was because of Fred Kummerow, who then went on to petition the FDA to ban trans fats, then sued the FDA, then the FDA decided to ban it. The ban went into full effect in 2019.
I know I've definitely found fast food to have absolutely plummeted in quality over the past decade or so.
Anyways, I'm surprised there's no 'lab-grown tallow'. You'd think that would be easier and cheaper to make than lab-grown meat. Maybe there is? I wonder if it'd even be legal.
Now there's a growing war on PUFAs. We're just whittling down a major component of our diet. It's strange how regulation after regulation, meant to 'help' keep people 'healthy', results in an allegedly 'unhealthier' ingredient taking its place, which becomes justification for more and more regulations. Fats are the greatest enemy of the food industry, since fats make you feel fuller and eat less. They are going to fight until they can eliminate every single gram of fat from our diets, so we can consume more and more food. They'll fight to eliminate animal proteins, and make us use whatever proprietary protein source they've developed. They are turning the people into bottomless pits.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
Elon didn't actually lose money. If I created a company with a billion shares, sold one for $1, I'd be a billionaire. If that company folds the next day, my net worth would plummet. But there was no actual value lost.
With Ukraine, actual cash, goods, services, missiles, are being used up. The economic impact is people actually losing money, not making productive use of their labour, or that labour being diverted elsewhere. Infrastructure and lives are being destroyed. Time is being lost.
This will be a setback for Europe. Though it'll probably be a net benefit for America.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
Nobody thinks housing prices are booming right now.
But with mortgage rates increasing, the monthly cost is still increasing more than housing prices are dropping, aren't they? At least in Canada it is true.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
It's quite likely that they choose 'people search more' because Google earns revenue from advertising. The more you search, the more money they make.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
This is sort of the Dead Internet Theory. When I first stumbled on that theory, it was basically about how Google has gotten worse, and if you dig into the results (go past 20 pages), there's nothing. And results repeat themselves.
Then the 'dead internet theory' seemed to magically evolve into 'nobody uses the internet and all the content is from AI'.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
Google something that does have results (usually they says x million), and go like 20 pages in. There's nothing. Hell, results repeat over and over throughout those pages.
And another experience I had the other day, I googled something and it told me there were like 5 pages of results. Clicked to the last page and suddenly it millions of results and pages after pages.
Anyways, I think there are multiple reasons this is happening. First, Google is constantly trying to keep spammy results out of the search (they've gotten pretty bad lately, imo). It is relatively easy to get a website to the top of the results for most searches. Google is constantly adjusting their algorithm to deal with shit like that, but people learn pretty quick how to overcome that.
The side effect of this is that you're only ever going to get results from large websites that have a dedicated team who are working to get their results on Google, and spammy websites that are literally solely dedicated to getting a high rank. Basically 99% of the internet from even a year ago will be penalized in the results, because they aren't following whatever 'best practices' Google has decided on today. You won't find the internet of the 90s or 00s on Google anymore.
Another thing is that Google wants to control what you see. The concern over 'misinformation' means that most websites are going to be penalized, while the mainstream media and some social media sites get prioritized.
I also personally believe that Google is beginning to create a walled garden. 95% of people are searching for the same 5% of content. From a business standpoint, Google can prune 95% of their results and most people won't be impacted (or at least most searches won't be impacted). This would save them a lot of money, and make them profitable as all hell. This is even more true for YouTube, which has an even WORSE search than Google. I'm simply amazed at how many repeated videos I see when I search something, how many videos completely unrelated to my search, unrelated to my search terms, and they are all from 'big' accounts. I pop on over to Google and search for YouTube videos, and suddenly there's an unimaginable amount of content that I am actually looking for. And I can only imagine that if this were the old Google search, that I'd get an even better experience.
Honestly, I prefer Yandex these days. DDG, Bing, Google, they are useless.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
Male appearance in the mug shot and the surveillance photo. I'm guessing they dress male unless its for a public event or fetish.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
The consent framework in the west precludes those in positions of power from being able to engage in intercourse with someone under their control. Teachers and students, police and suspects, prison guards and prisoners, etc. Those are typically outright illegal. Many professions don't allow it, like professors and students, doctors and patients. Some are iffy, like a boss and employee.
There seems to also be a push, at least culturally, to label other power dynamics as invalidating consent. Like a celebrity and a fan, an older guy and a younger (but legal age) woman.
Anyways, many people who are very 'progressive' on power dynamics and consent seem to also subscribe to the idea that only white people can be racist, because racism = prejudice + power. If we accept both positions, that unequal power structures undermines consent, and that there's an unequal power structure between whites and minorities (predominantly blacks), then this should mean that all interracial sex between a black person and a white person is rape.
This sort of popped into my head over the story about some folks in California being concerned that white people may qualify for reparations, because they may have been a descendant of a rape baby. It got my thinking about how interracial relationships are typically portrayed in the media; a white male slave owner sleeping with a slave is a rapist, since the female slave obviously cannot consent due to the power dynamics. Whereas a white female slave owner (or someone adjacent to the slave owner, who still holds power over the slave, like a wife or daughter) and her male slave are portrayed as having equal ability to consent.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
As far as I can tell, James Trusty is a competent attorney with the requisite experience to litigate issues at this level but he just fell flat on his face hard. No amount of legal acumen can compensate for having a client who insists on unreasonable demands and tactics.
Seems most likely that this was a (seemingly successful) delay tactic.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
I refuse to give out my phone number
Me too. More and more websites I can never use because they want too much from me, lol.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
Could also being leading to soft disclosure. Now, when conspiracy types talk about soft disclosure with UFOs, they are usually talking about the government basically priming the public so they won't be shocked to find out aliens exist.
But we've soft disclosures before, but usually they make the thing more farfetched than the truth, so that the truth looks mild in comparison.
A good example is chemtrails. This conspiracy popped up around the early 90s, and quickly went into the mainstream, with cable networks having all sorts of 'documentaries' about it. It would later turn out that congress was secretly investigating the use of chemicals, sprayed from airplanes, over the US (and other countries, like Canada, the UK, Mexico, etc). Also the spraying of chemicals on the military, predominantly US Navy ships.
By the time a report was published publicly, around 2000 iirc, it made little impact. Chemtrails were a 'crazy' conspiracy, 'debunked' by the media, and had largely been framed as being about mind-control (and the spraying on the Navy being connected to time travel). I believe the real purpose of the spraying was to test fallout patterns. But they were using chemicals (and bacteria) which may (or may not) cause cancer, and sprayed it over American citizens (primarily the west coast) for a couple decades (which coincided with the rise of crime and serial killers, though I doubt they are related; but maybe the chemicals/bacteria could trigger violence in certain folks? Though I doubt it..)
Operation LAC (Large Area Coverage) was one of the largest.
But if you mentioned to someone that the US government was secretly spraying potentially harmful chemicals over American citizens for 30+ years, most would connect it with the chemtrail conspiracies and immediately consider you to be a crazy loon.
So my feeling is that the UFO/UAP thing is simply a soft disclosure. People have aliens and craft that break physics in their minds. A few years from now congress will publish some random report that fully explains UFO/UAP (though the report will likely not contain ANY terms related to that), it'll be so dry and unexciting that the media will barely be able to stomach giving it a blurb, and the public will remain largely unaware of its existence. If you ever brought it up to a random person, they'd label you crazy and think you were talking about UFO/UAPs (which will get 'debunked' over the same time frame; it'll fill the public discourse and inoculate them against the truth, keep conspiracy theorists focused, instead of snooping into other shit looking for something; and basically get 'believers', particularly ones with an ounce of credibility, to take positions that they will be unwilling to abandon for a less tantalizing truth - and even if they do change their position, the machine can simply point to their old positions to discredit them among most of the populace, especially those in the media and academia).
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
A lot of success comes from your network and how well you can leverage it. So increasing how social your kids are will help. Get them involved in many activities. If you can get them in events where they'll rub elbows with people above their social class, that would probably help a lot.
You also need to socialize your kids with people older than them, particularly adults. I've noticed a lot of young people seem to have been confined to the 'kids table' throughout their lives (and I don't just mean at big holiday meals, but in any situation where adults are present). And there seems to be no point at which they transition to sitting with adults beyond their age; they are always relegated to their peer group. This goes on until they graduate college, and suddenly they are thrust into the real world, and they are basically socially inept at communicating with their elders. Then they self-segregate, gravitating towards people their age, and miss out on opportunities.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
My current proposal is:
If you block someone, you will no longer see their comments, receive PMs from them, or be notified if they reply to your comments.
This does not stop them from seeing your comments, nor does it stop them from replying to your comments.
If they attempt to reply to your comment, it will include the note "This user has blocked you. You are still welcome to reply, but your replies will be held to a stricter standard of civility."
I don't see an issue with blocked people seeing comments, since they can see them by logging out or opening an incognito window. But by allowing them to reply, and notifying them that the user blocked them, you create a situation where the blocked person can respond and undermine the OPs comment, and the OP has no clue.
Like if the OP says "I love dogs" and the blocked user responds "Really? Because last year you said your dog" but they are just taking something out of context, then some readers will simply believe the blocked user.
If you're going to let blocked users know they've been blocked, then they certainly shouldn't be able to reply to comments the blocker makes. For threads, it might make sense. For subcomments that aren't made by the person blocking, sure.
Also, one behaviour I've noticed on Reddit is that a user will reply, say their peace, and then block. This is the most infuriating experience. And people block over the stupidest shit, the mildest pushback. The other day there was a thread about a woman who visited an ape everyday, and it escaped and beat her up. I replied to some comment that said the woman was antagonizing the ape and wondered why she wasn't banned from the zoo. I simply pointed out that the incident began when kids were throwing rocks at the ape, and the dude replied calling me ignorant and blocked me. lol
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
Calories in salad dressings mostly come from fat, and fat is typically more filling than carbs. Of course the war on fat has eliminated it from many products, replacing it with carbs that leave you craving more.
Vegetables coated or cooked in fat are delicious.
You can drown your salad in dressing, and you're still adding fewer calories than a single twinkie. 4 twinkies have as many calories as a steak. The steak will leave me feeling fuller, as will the salad.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
I think it's largely because there's something inherently weird about talking aloud when there's nobody else around.
I'm the opposite. I love voice assisted stuff, but hate doing it when other people are around.
As for Asians becoming reliably conservative, I think it'll be more that Democrats leave them behind. Asians tend to have more traditional views around family, marriage, sex, education, work, etc. When it comes to urban living, they want safe streets, low-crime, not to be stepping over drug addicts. The successful pushback against progressive policies seems to come from Asians.
bsbbtnh
1yr ago
Maybe smaller animals have more efficiently evolved so their brains don't have much 'unnecessary' space. If you google about human brain sizes, it seems many sources say they've been shrinking for 3000+ years (though some sources say otherwise). If human brain sizes are shrinking, and presumably we've been getting more intelligent over the past 3000+ years, then maybe we're getting rid of 'unnecessary' space. Though maybe a large brain with 'unnecessary' space is necessary for having the excess capacity needed to develop higher level intelligence. But as we evolve and converge upon the most efficient brain size (which might be 400g?), we'll essentially become frozen as a species. We might even be more prone to devolve than anything else, as various groups don't 'use' particular parts of their brain.
Maybe a lot of our brain capacity was geared towards surviving in the natural world, used for religious/spiritual connections, socializing at a level beyond our comprehension, being connected to our environment. In our modern world, as we see the breakdown of families and people becoming more and more introverted, maybe we'll see the part of our brain that deals with socialization begin to shrink. Maybe it already has. Notice how the average Very Online type seems to be incapable of understanding sarcasm (even in person), they take entertainment media and jokes literally, they need to express their feelings vocally and require others to, seemingly unable to pick up on subtle cues.
Maybe westerners are going to lose that, our brains will shrink in a few more generations as we 'evolve'. We'll feel really smart since we can use our words to communicate, while the savages in far off lands read facial expressions like tea leaves. "lol, these idiots think they can tell when someone is angry, lying, happy, just from looking at their face. Just like bigots think they can tell who is a man or woman by sight. How can anybody possibly know what's going on in my head without me specifically telling them? Mind reading is pseudoscience." Then when those savages seem to be able to actually read minds, the enlightened will get spooked, call them witches, and burn them at the stake.
Kind of like how psychopaths seem to be able to manipulate people, as if they can see things the average person cannot. They can play people like an instrument. But maybe they just have an older brain, with a capacity to socialize at a higher level, and to them the rest of us seem like retarded children crying over spilled milk. We call it lack of empathy, but from their perspective, our ordinary problems are far below their horizon.
Which means that Finland deploying to Ukraine is right and necessary.
More options
Context Copy link