domain:furiouslyrotatingshapes.substack.com?page=2?page=2?page=2?page=0
Acid neutralization is the best way to build a power grid on Vulcanus - a single plant generates a huge amount of steam, enough to run dozens of turbines and power the entire planet. Acid vents always produce a minimum amount, like oil patches on Nauvis, and the calcite patch at your landing zone will probably last you for the entire game, so there's no reason to be shy with the resources.
Although dropping free resources from space is indeed a useful strategy, especially once you hit advanced asteroid processing. The simplest is to harvest calcite from orbit and save the trouble of shipping it from Vulcanus.
If it were about the dude in a dress and his particular emotions, it'd be so nice little summer problem. I mean sure, there are mean people around that would bully everybody who's different, and they'd want to bully the dude in a dress so hard because it's so easy. But that's like 1970s problem. We are in 2024 now, and our problems are much different. Our problems are the dude in a dress now is the school teacher, and the parents aren't even allowed to know what and how he is teaching the kids, and the dude in a dress has full unrestricted access to spaces where the girls and the women were supposed to be in the company of women and if you mention there's something wrong with that, you are the one who is suppressed. The dude in a dress is now the government functionary, and we're supposed to put up with his antics on the job and hire more dudes in dresses because otherwise we're nazis, and if he directs the vast machine of governmental oppression towards people he doesn't like - it's ok, the dudes in a dress deserve our deference, so we must say nothing.
We are supposed to literally think the dude in a dress is no different from any woman in any way from the moment he dons the dress. Nobody of course thinks that, but you are supposed to pretend you do, or bad things will happen to you. We are supposed to loudly proclaim things we know are false, because the empathy to the dude in a dress is more important than telling the truth. And this is not just a voluntary choice you can make out of sympathy for the dude - if you disagree, bad things are definitely going to happen to you. We are supposed to think a dude in a dress competing in sports with women is beating them easily (sometimes "beating" very literally) because of his great sportsmanship and not because he's a frickin dude. We're supposed to watch the dude in a dress convince mentally vulnerable kids to cut their private parts off and change their lives forever and think it's normal and a kid can't decide to drink a bud light until they are frickin 21, but they are capable of informed consent to overhaul their whole body biology forever in kindergarten. We're supposed to institute speech police and abandon freedom of speech (and freedom of scientific inquiry) because this particular dude may feel bad if somebody says something he doesn't like. While of course a dude in a normal attire does not get such reverence (not that I advocate he should, but at least that would be some kind of insane tyrannical equality). We're supposed to reform our whole language and culture and brand anyone who says something as vile as "pregnant woman" as a violent criminal, while actual violent criminals get away with wrist slaps at best, because see, it's the dude in a dress, shouldn't you have some empathy here?
You notice how it's not about the dude in a dress and his problems anymore?
I am not saying the old problem aren't a problem. I recognize it is. But it is not the problems that we as a society are dealing with right now. I'm very willing to have a little empathy for a poor dude with mental health issues (I'm even go as far as inventing some way to say "mental health issues" without it sounding demeaning, after all, there's nothing shameful in having a migraine, why it should be shameful to have broken gender identification?), but that is not helping with the real issues now. Sure, I am going to give the dude as much empathy as I can find in myself, but given how many of those dudes are involved in making the actual current problems worse, the reserves are limited.
I'm assuming from the context of Columbine that this was probably a decade or two in the past when such suspicions were more common. In any case, I think this is also an overreach by the school's admin.
An explicit dress code is of course a different thing because it pertains to students following the official rules of the school, it does not at all follow the same reasoning of a teacher reporting a student to their parents for wearing different clothing that is also within the dress code or using a different name.
Evolution is controversial among creationists, yet we still teach it in public school because it is factual and leave it to private/charter schools to teach creationism. Something being controversial among a subset of the population is not inherently enough to decide it should not be taught in public school, which caters to the general public, not a subset.
I don't understand how you justify a different name and different clothing being a step towards a medical process (justifying parents being given third party info) on the one hand but being completely innocuous on the other hand when it comes to Goth/alt culture. The teachers don't have any special knowledge about what students are going to do in the future. Presumably some teachers think wearing Goth clothing leads to some things they disapprove of (Satan worship, depression, arson, whatever) but they would still be rightly reprimanded if they called home about these things. It doesn't particularly matter to me that the correlation between social transition and medical transition is likely stronger than the example I gave. Until it becomes somethng parents need to know about, it is not something parents need to know about.
If parents want to impose some special conditions under which their students are watched, that's something for private and not public school, which should cater to the general public as decided by the government's education department.
I think it's much less cringe than hiring 37-year-old prostitutes. And at 400-500 dollars per session she was a real bargain, to boot.
US physicians (I will not call them doctors unless they are an MD, the word doctor comes form the latin docere, meaning to teach; unlike how the uncultured may think about it, true doctors are those with a Ph.D, not those with a BChir, there's a reason why in places like Germany these people are not allowed to call themselves "Doktor" but instead go by "Arzt") are so far up their own ass with how highly they value themselves that it boggles the mind.
I have met many many doctors and the vast majority of them are sub 98th percentile mediocrities pretending they are the intellectual equals of the 99.5th+ percentile thinkers. I've said before that the 95th percentile human being has a lot more in common intellectually with a 10th percentile human being than he does with a 99th percentile human being and something similar applies for the average doctor who isn't much better than a 95th percentile human but has the ego of a 99.9th percentile one (not saying there are no amazing doctors, I've met some of those too but they are the exception, not the average and they tend to be MDs).
I'd be very interested in comparing the average outcome of a NP with the latest AI models trained on giving medical diagnoses vs a lone doctor. My prior is that the NP+AI performs at least as well as a doctor in most non-surgical specialties. If so then the optimal thing for humanity is to cry havoc, give NP+AI combinations the same powers and responsibilities as "full" doctors and let slip the dogs of war on the protection racket US doctors are running. Of course this is a pipe dream (never mind the extreme litigiousness of the US meaning NP+AI malpractice insurance costs will be through the roof but that's a discussion for another day) but yeah, either we all grasp the nettle and do something like this or the economic rent seeking of the AMA will continue to extract blood from the rest of society.
From the ‘ vibes ‘ I gathered about a day after the Gaetz nomination, most Trump supporters thought he was being set up to be a lightning rod of controversy and tossed aside.
I can't drive down twenty miles of highway without seeing a nurses wanted sign, usually with a prominent signing bonus advertised as well. Maybe it's a regional thing?
I wish that infographic could include population change on the z-axis, in addition to the voting change.
I live in an extremely blue enclave of an extremely red region, and one thing I've seen is that all the aspiring PMCs move as close to the blue enclave as they can manage, or they flee to the DC/Baltimore/Philly/NYC megalopolis, never to be seen again.
This would be a problem if every hospital was already a teaching hospital, but that is not the case.
If what you are saying was truly the real problem then the easy solution would be to allow foreign doctors trained in European countries/Australia/NZ etc. to come and work in the US without needing to redo their residency. Medical standards in these countries are no lower than the US in aggregate and may well be higher. Sure you can ask for equivalency exams (like how the UK does for foreign doctors) but there's no valid argument that the 90th percentile British doctor is worse than the 10th percentile American doctor, so why block the former from working in the US?
That we don't see this is Bayesian evidence that this is not the true objection for why the US medical cartel wants so few licenced doctors.
In general I recommend The Rest is History.
Make your point without the snide personal digs.
Since my first exposure to it via /tumblrinaction more than a decade ago it's been TRA's persistence in presenting contradictory, circular and otherwise faulty reasoning as their basis for justification that frustrates me more than any idea of a man in a dress winning a sports match against women and then using the same changing room after the contest, or similar object level conflicts.
I'd be just as vexed if people made serious arguments that magic is real and that if you ruminate on it long enough your wish to learn magic can come true by forcing everyone to call your school Hogwarts, changing your name to Harry Potter and cutting a lightning scar into your head. Legislating for Hogwarts accreditation and arguing whether Griffindors are allowed in Hufflepuff dormitories is redundant.
What's crazy is that rather than getting laughed off the internet the tumblrites successfully coerced the real world into entertaining their fantasy by little more than using the threat of being shamed for intolerance on social media.
This. I think "don't ask don't tell" is an excellent policy that needs to be the norm in the entire culture. If I am not in or considering a romantic/sexual relationship with you, then I don't need to know about your weird fetishes, and you don't need to know about mine. Even if it's not weird, even if a straight man just really likes tits, I don't need to hear him announcing it and going on about it in public and making it his entire identity. It's tacky. Keep it to yourself, or talk about it in private with your close friends.
I think a bunch of this is climate, as well- in the south it’s still too warm to hang deer in November, you have to pack the body cavity with ice, or quarter it in an ice chest, which means you need a freezer to store that ice, which means you need a deer camp with electricity. + there’s less public land, you need to secure permission to hunt on someone’s private land. Militates in favor of hunt camps, and since it’s usually private land with restricted access, there’s no free rider problem to setting up feeders and tree stands.
Deer stalking is a different sport which is more common on public land- heavier forest cover makes the Rockies-style ‘drive around on public land until you see an elk’ a way to not see any game.
The gender difference I’m reasonably sure is cultural, though. AFAIK the intermountain west and northern Rockies aren’t much less socially conservative than the south, so it seems kind of random.
I imagine that, like me, you don't pick unnecessary fights. For non-confrontational grillers like us, it's pretty easy to just let all the Pride stuff brush past us. Do I really care about rainbow flags everywhere and trans activists in the workplace sending out multiple emails every month about the importance of PRIDE!!!! and allyship and diversity? No, it doesn't affect me.
But... it's annoying. I notice.
More importantly, I know what the cost would be if, just once, I said something like "Why do we need yet another Pride event? Nobody is harassing you here, of all places. (And why do we need entire full-time positions just to support and affirm you?)"
I don't say things like that, because why pick an unnecessary fight? Yeah, mostly I can just ignore them. I don't have to go on their stupid Pride walks or attend their stupid Pride events or wear their stupid Pride pins or put their stupid Pride posters up at my desk.
But if I did say something like that, I'd be the office Nazi. I'd need to be educated.
Never mind that I am not "anti" LGBTQ. I want them to live their lives free of harassment. If someone was suggesting they be criminalized, or not allowed to work here, or forbidden to be public about who they are, I'd be strongly against that.
But that's not enough for them. You say no one is harassing or abusing me, and this is true, but only because I know how to keep my mouth shut and it's not important enough for me to fight over it.
If you're unfortunate enough to be someone who can't keep their mouth shut - like say, a James Damore - these are the people who will go after your job.
I will say that of the few trans people I know, personally and professionally, mostly they are pretty normal. But without exception, I have seen them go off a time or two at a relatively minor "microaggression." They definitely remind you that they are a walking social hazard zone.
When I say I resent having to keep my mouth shut, I don't mean that I really want to call someone a tranny or say "You know you're a man, right?" I'm not that big a jerk (though some of the biggest jerks among them make me want to be). I mean I resent that anything other than a nod or just benign silence when they are going off means you are now engaged in the firefight. I mean I resent that I can't say "Why yet another Pride event?" I mean I resent knowing that they expect us all to pretend and affirm and validate.
I think there was a blackmail element no?
Admittedly I never looked into this deeply. I also distinctly recall some other politician coming forward when the Gaetz drama dropped, saying that something similar happened to him: he met someone, they had girls in the back of the car who were overly friendly, and he left because of the strange vibe. But I don’t remember who that was.
If that were true it would be self-fixing. You'd have the number of surgical residents that are needed to do surgeries going forward. Or at least, current demand. But instead all these positions are basically people working more hours than is healthy a day, making a paltry salary, and then once freed from the artificially contained program immediately making 4-10x they were.
"Acknowledging" is the wrong word. You were advocating for or choosing those circumstances
No, I was admitting to where I am least certain of my position. In the circumstances I listed, it would still be better if they were dealt with by something akin to a legal process, so that Adam has just as much recourse even if Bob is much larger and stronger.
based on your own principles of what is most offensive.
Based on my priors of what is most likely to signal the likelihood of impending violence against Adam, or against people he cares about.
These do not turn out to be universal.
I think the notion of "(1.) Speech should not be responded to with force; (2.) if (1.) is ever not the case, it would be when the speech indicates the impending use of force."
For instance, insulting someone's mother's the way you mentioned is often considered sufficient provocation
Probably as a hold-over from societies in which it was a prelude to "...therefore your family is dis-honourable, therefore my family and our allies can get away with taking your stuff." (This was a much bigger threat in places with-out robust public order, which is why, even though I sympathised with many of the complaints raised in 2020 about the tactics and methods used by police, the calls for the total abolition of police departments never sat well with me.)
Thus, among the examples listed in the second group, it is the closest to the line, even if I would still not hesitate to find Adam liable were Bob to sue him and I were to be on the jury, whereas I would be less immovable in the first group of examples.
you'd only expect Bob to do it if he WANTED a physical fight
That is the other exception to "The person who threw the first punch committed a tort."; covering professional pugilists, people who mutally decide to settle their disputes outdoors, and certain non-standard carnal practises.
Manufacturing is a surprisingly large portion of the economy in rural areas. In dollar terms, manufacturing is a larger sector of Iowa's economy than agriculture.
It can be done on the phone if a sit down is not possible. I'd push for the sit down if you can. It's going to be uncomfortable and one easy way to get out of an uncomfortable conversation on the phone is to end the conversation. But getting out of one in person is harder.
The sooner it happens the better. Especially if a week or two has already passed.
Is that a function of education time/costs? Employers are willing to take on apprentice welders and electricians, but the educational hurdle for an NP is several years of training before someone becomes employable. Pilots need (preferably paid) hours to hit minimums for airline work. Nobody seems to be willing to hire to train engineers or lawyers either because those are harder to learn (earn licenses) while working at more entry levels.
an upcoming guy from a rich family gets elected as Seminole County Tax Collector who then gets women off of Sugar Baby websites paying them >$70,000, prints them fraudulent Florida driver's licenses listing them as >18, and then pays them to have sex with him and others, including perhaps a sitting Congressmen
looks like this could potentially be a blackmail operation also (although perhaps not on behalf of a foreign nation), but the guy doing it also engaged in a bunch of other ridiculous criminal behavior which landed with him being arrested for something else which is when the above was uncovered
The percentage of people who believe that ax2 + bx + c = 0 or that Shakespeare is mandatory reading off the top of their heads is also likely in a small minority, not to mention any more obscure things which are taught in school, but we don't change the curriculum to accomodate these beliefs if Shakespeare is stil genuinely the best way to teach English or we believe the quadratic equation is important math practica.
I really don't believe the distinction between factual and normative education is as bright a line as you think it is. 'every sentence must contain a subject, a verb and an object' is a normative statement, not a factual one. If you wanted to qualify with something like 'if you want to speak correct English as recognized by such and such body' then it would become factual, but as is there is clearly a normative element to this education where we are trying to get the kids to do things the way we want them to in the same way we dont want them hitting each other.
If you are claiming that educators are teaching kids en masse that "puberty blockers are completely reversible" then sure, we could agree that's likely not factual and a bad thing to teach. I don't think this is in the curriculum broadly. Just like sexual education which teaches kids about the existence of gay/lesbian people and how they differ from straight people is not the same as encouraging kids to be gay, I think there's a way to educate kids about transgender topics which you still might classify as 'gender ideology' that is relatively neutral.
More options
Context Copy link