site banner
Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"

Showing 25 of 249760 results for

domain:apollomindset.substack.com

Do locker-room lads generally respond with twinkling eyes...

I don't think it's universal, but there's absolutely some spaces where variants of gay chicken that get that direction. It's... actually kinda awkward in mixed-orientation environments, especially where not everyone knows each other's orientation is common knowledge (conversation starts at 20:00, relevant bit continuing to 21:30).

Just in the last two weeks, I've had a male co-volunteer at an IRL project I've helped with set up,and continue a joke where the punchline involved him asking me to punch his v-card, and me responding 'I'd have to buy you dinner after', and him laughing at it. I'm pretty sure he's straight? But it's an education-focused IRL project, so it's not like I'm out, there, anyway.

A sincere question: if sexual-assault jokes are an essential and universal part of male bonding, do gay dudes joke about raping each other's dads?

Uh... at least for 'fucked your mom' level jokes, absolutely positively yes.

It is obviously the duty of the government to prevent its own people, and particularly children, from being murdered.

I'm sorry this happened. How are you doing?

They gave it to Henry bloody Kissinger of all people!

Yeah, sometimes that is the case, depending on the structure and personalities of the friend group. What I've outlined is how it tends to be in my own friend groups, which have been very nerdy, and tended towards playfulness and silliness rather than combativeness and dominance-testing.

Such an amendment would discredit the government for obvious reasons.

Not obvious to me, can you elaborate? I personally think that there doesn't need to be an amendment because the federal government doesn't have authority to restrict abortion anyways, but I don't see how it would be bad to include an amendment to explicitly prohibit it.

Being taller is one of those things I'd basically take 100% of the time up to probably 6'4-5 or so. It's not a cure-all, but it's like being richer in the sense that it's virtually all upside. That's not to say you can't or don't have other downsides that vastly outweigh it; I wouldn't take being incredibly rich if I were also a paraplegic. Nor would I be made incredibly handsome if I gained agoraphobia as a result.

But if I could get a height boost, a handsomeness boost, or a big pile of money for free I'd take it without reservation.

Oh my God I am just completely mind fucked for the night. It's like a ZHPL story. I just don't even... I'm watching a YouTuber talk about his phone call with Egon Cholokian and I'm just... So confused. My best hypothesis is "low-popularity Youtuber sees this weird story on Destiny's channel and wanted to make a fun stream about it by pretending that he had a phone call with a possibly-AI character" and it makes me crazy because it's so dumb but the least dumb hypothesis I can think of.

https://youtube.com/live/1IQh_kHj3Nc?feature=shared

Talking about fucking someone’s mom isn’t rape. It is about seducing.

Does he want to write about probability and statistics? Does he want to build models to predict events? Does he want to play professional poker?

He wants to do all three. He's built a very succesful substack that earns plenty of money and I think he has a moderately succesful pro poker career too, I don't think he's missing out by not hyper specializing.

And if anyone thinks they have better estimates of who'll win elections than Nate's models, feel free to bet against him. Either through prediction markets, or if you're willing to bet a large sum he'll probably be down to do a direct bet against you through an escrow service.

I'm pretty sure the French gambler could've just bet directly against Nate Silver too and probably could've gotten better odds/smaller fees than going through Polymarkert, for at least a portion of his bet.

The purpose of a system is what it does. This is related to the iron law of bureaucracy. The reason campaigns want money isn’t so that they can win elections. The reason campaigns want money is so that they can run the campaign. More money = more stuff for the people running the campaign.

As for why it seems to affect Democrats more than Republicans, guess which party has non-profit employees as a constituency.

Similarly, young men on voicechat on videogames have been talking about fucking each others' moms in various depraved ways for decades, while lots of women experience this as traumatising aggression.

This is such a weirdly off-base comparison, though. The proper analog would be men joking about raping each other "in various depraved ways," not each other's moms (as the saying goes, tragedy is me getting a paper cut, comedy is anyone else besides me getting raped). Do locker-room lads generally respond with twinkling eyes and good-humored grins when their bros graphically describe how they will bend them over, force them to the ground and ravage their assholes as they scream, because their bodies are somebody else's choice? Maybe so, I don't hang out in men's locker rooms. Sounds fun!

A sincere question: if sexual-assault jokes are an essential and universal part of male bonding, do gay dudes joke about raping each other's dads?

I’ve been on the IT side of healthcare, helpdesk with a few admin duties, and I do not envy you one bit.

Here are some of Ronald Reagan’s predictions from the 60’s about government-run healthcare:

‘The doctor begins to lose freedoms; it’s like telling a lie, and one leads to another. First you decide that the doctor can have so many patients. They're equally divided among the various doctors by the government. But then the doctors aren’t equally divided geographically, so a doctor decides he wants to practice in one town and the government has to say to him, "You can’t live in that town. They already have enough doctors." You have to go someplace else. And from here it's only a short step to dictating where he will go.’

These concerns seem almost quaint next to the never-ending grind of being at the intersection of public regulation, private underwriting, and technical debt.

It was funny but I don't like this sort of thing. It disturbs me that battle of the sexes has apparently become the leading interpretation of this election result, which is somewhat nonsensical given that Trump won White women. Men vs women strife is much worse than racial strife in my opinion (yes I understand that racial strife can lead to wars and genocides in a way that gender conflict doesn't, but I'm talking about at the non-violent levels we are currently experiencing). I've never had a conversation with a black person in my life, what do I care if they hate me? But I really would rather not see my family divided. I would much rather political battlelines become White vs non-White than man vs woman.

There's nothing nasty about making fun of the people who practice murdering their children so they can continue having careless sex with no consequences.

Of course not. The nasty thing is agreeing to and promoting their disingenuous framing, as Fuentes did here.

Such an amendment would discredit the government for obvious reasons. The abortion issue is a reductio ad absurdum of democracy. Apparently the electorate cannot even agree to prohibit the industrialized slaughter of infants.

Trump: Your terms are acceptable.

If Biden were smart, he'd pre-empt Trump and take the exact same deal. He might even win a Nobel Peace Prize if he did.

Kamala wanted to run the country. In the end, she couldn't even run her own campaign.

Apparently, the Harris campaign is $20 million in debt despite spending at least $1 billion over the last 3 months. On the other hand, the Trump campaign was frugal - spending only about 1/3 or 1/2 as much as Kamala (quibble about the exact numbers all you want). Staffing in particular seems to have been a major difference with Harris spending perhaps an order of magnitude more than Trump. Harris hired high paid consultants while Trump relied on free labor from passionate supporters.

It gets worse.

The Harris campaign has been accused of paying celebrities for exposure. Surely, already rich celebrities like Beyoncé and Oprah would be happy to support their favored candidate for free. Right? Apparently not. Fox News has reported that the Harris campaign paid Oprah a million dollars to interview her. Lizzo and Cardi B have also been singled out as receiving payments.

Is it any wonder that these celebrity endorsements don't work when they are so fake?

Contra Scott's too much money in dark almonds piece, I think the reason that political campaign donations are relatively low is that it's really hard to buy an election. Bloomberg tried to back in 2020 and his campaign went nowhere. Money does matter, but the candidate matters a lot more. $1 to Trump makes a bigger difference than $3 to Harris. And Trump appearing on Rogan might have been worth $100 million, but he didn't have to pay a cent.

Man you must have been around in the "shit I can't double click, I might as well just retire" days.

Alternately they're kicking 'em out now before the cheques start bouncing.

As another user pointed out down thread, one of the most effective things the first Trump administration did to stablize the Middle East was to cut US funding to Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, Et Al. Biden has since reinstated the old Clinton and Obama era policy of funding radical moderate muslim fundementalist groups in the name of "outreach" but the Qataris aren't dumb, and presumably don't want to find themselves left holding the bag when Hamas' money runs out.

I've only used Epic as a patient but from that perspective it's always seemed fine to me. My understanding is that on the other side of things, it's layers upon layers of complicated but then, so is the practice of medicine itself, so yeah.

AI is looking like we could probably feed it the bulk of our documentation and let it spit out nice notes for the majority of staff, but of course HIPAA. I don't use it much myself, personally, but then again I'm constantly context switching between our EHR side and our IT side and my personal goal is to pass on as much institutional knowledge as I can. I can remember when my old boss was jealous of me because I got to build fun things and learn while he had to ride herd on the clinical side. Now I'm doing what he did while the young IT Specialist is building fun things and learning new stuff. He did learn the hard way that anything he touches, he owns that way though!

He has announced the Pomeo and Haley won't be joining this time. https://x.com/wikileaks/status/1855399528909701537

I'm say this is the Deep state category, good to have it confirmed that they will not be joining.

With all the category listed, remove the ones he no longer needs and keep the ones he still needs for executing or passing bills.

Of course he will need his guy to get elected again in 4 years to make sure he doesn't get put in jail or his business or legacy destroyed.

If 1.5 ppm causes 2-5 points of IQ loss, how much does 0.7 ppm cause?

On the other hand, the benefits of fluoridation appear to be a (poorly studied) 30% reduction in cavities. That seems... minor. Especially given that fluoridated toothpaste exists which would appear to confer all the benefits with none of the downsides.

I thank god every day that I mostly use Epic (like at this point most damn doctors in the U.S.).

It sucks but it sucks way less than all the other options.

I don't know if you've run into any of this yet but AI assist tools are getting quite good. Should people be using them? Likely no, but they are hugely helpful.

Sure, the supply of Chinese students graduating exceeds demand. But there are a couple million around LA man.

Plus, they can make beautiful wasian babies.