Lurker > adjl

Ben111 posted...

Still one can too many

It really isn't. It's not like tobacco smoke or asbestos, where literally any exposure at all will have carcinogenic effects. A blood sugar spike will settle out; the body's quite capable of handling the occasional macronutrient spike. It's when those spikes happen too frequently that you run into problems.

Literally anything is okay to ingest if you don't have too much of it. The definition of "too much" varies from substance to substance, and the distinction between acute and chronic toxicity is important (as well as the potential for chronic effects that don't qualify as toxicity), but there is nothing that cannot be reduced to such a small quantity as to be harmless.

Revelation34 posted...

I don't think you know what the word valid means.

Then please, explain why soda is a valid dietary choice, bearing in mind that "I can drink this occasionally and not die" does not make something a valid dietary choice.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Zangulus posted...

Your belief isnt a reality though. It would allow areas to create basically dead spots where people cant live and function.

Pretty much. The whole "let the free market decide" thing only works in an infinite market, or at least one that's large enough to be effectively infinite, and a great many regions do not meet those criteria. If there aren't viable alternatives, people can't spend their money elsewhere.

Imagine if, instead of a bakery, it was the only grocery store in town (not that unusual in rural areas). Can you really say it'd be okay to force a gay couple to drive for an extra half hour each way to get to the next-closest store, effectively making them pay more (time=money, gas=money) for the necessities of life?
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

It just happens that "moderation" in the case of soda is like a can a week max. That's still moderation.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Golden Road posted...

Some of you should probably read some of those tweets. The difference between the two is outright stated. Donald Glover is getting attacked for bashing black women, not for hooking up with a white woman.

Who needs facts?
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Correct, life is pointless. Just have fun and don't take it too seriously, except to avoid infringing on other people's fun.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

JanwayDaahl posted...

Doctor Foxx posted...

JanwayDaahl posted...

Mead posted...

I always assumed potatoes lacked much nutritional value but I recently learned that I was wrong and they actually have all the macros you need, plenty of protein and fiber along with lots of other stuff especially if you dont skin them.

I guess Penn Jillete lost all his weight doing a diet of nothing but potatoes and then later he added vegetable soups. Guy didnt even excercise.

Potatoes don't have very much protein. IDK where you're getting that information from.

Penn Jillete lost fat, yes, but I'd wager he lost a lot of muscle too. IIRC he didn't exercise and if his diet was mostly carbs, then he likely didn't maintain what muscle he had. You should have a good amount of protein in your diet, especially if you're losing weight.

They sure do have more than you'd realize. If you ate 2000 kcal of potatoes you eat 52 grams of protein (and about 60 grams of fiber)

That's a huge calorie:protein ratio. For both men and women this isn't really adequate. Also, you're getting a ton of carbs with that, which spikes your sugar/insulin among other things. Probably not the best way to go about weight loss.

52 grams of protein a day is about what's recommended, as is 2000 kcal. Obviously it varies by mass and activity level, but so does recommended caloric intake.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Doctor Foxx posted...

This wasn't some random thing

His whole stream is full getting donations to have people be racist or scare the public

He's lucky he hasn't ended up beaten up

That does give him quite a bit more culpability, then, and he's an ass. That said, I'm still not sure how much blame he personally deserves. All he's doing is giving a platform to the people that are actually causing the problems. Would it not make sense to let him continue, but criminally prosecute everyone who uses his platform to commit a crime? His stream would die pretty quickly in that case without anyone having to intervene specifically, plus it'd allow a number of troublemakers to be suitably punished until they clued in that leaving a digital paper trail behind a bomb threat is a bad idea.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

LinkPizza posted...

I think this is one of those better to have and not need it instead of need it and not have it situations. For him, at least... probably...

But if he does need it and he's drunk, he's not going to be able to effectively use it anyway. That's a plausible justification for carrying in general, but where he was (presumably) planning to drink? He really shouldn't be considering using it.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Revelation34 posted...

Tell me how selling something is actually teaching somebody to buy it.

By treating it as being no less legitimate than the other things for sale. When a school sells soda alongside other beverage options, they're saying that soda is no less of a valid choice than those other options. It is in fact far less of a valid choice, ergo schools should not be spreading such misinformation.

Beyond the direct educational aspect, there's also the cultural point to consider. Not selling pop in schools means there will be less pop in schools, by the simple fact that it'd be less convenient. That means kids see fewer people drinking it and it becomes less normalized. That's a cultural shift worth cultivating.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Amuseum posted...

Are people / parents really still ignorant of the side effects and long term effects of soda? So one questions your premise that soda advertisements are misleading the consumer to detrimental habits when the population is very widely aware of the downsides.

Advertising's a funny thing. You can look at basically any commercial for Coke these days: it says nothing about the taste, or nutritional value, or anything else that's actually inherent to Coke, it's just a bunch of happy people doing stuff that makes the viewer feel good, which in turn causes them to associate those good feelings with Coke. Where the detrimental effects are so far removed from the act of drinking it, placing that good-feeling attitude in their heads makes them more likely to disregard the potential harm.

It's blatant emotional manipulation, and it's not exactly uncommon in ads (see any beer commercial that creates an association between drinking *brand* and having fun). Intellectually, yes, everyone knows soda's bad for you, and the soda companies know everyone knows that. That's why they've turned to manipulating subconscious emotions to soften attitudes toward their products.

wwinterj25 posted...

Gotta research that beer in fine detail before you can decide if you'll get drunk from it or not, ok?

That's an example of a consequence that does immediately follow using the product. Nobody drinks a beer expecting it to not have the immediate effects that alcohol has (new drinkers and people who were told it was non-alcoholic aside). That said, the ads for beer promote beer as being associated with fun and adventure and other positive sentiments. That's at odds with approaching drinking responsibly and considering the potential for harm (both short-term and long-term). You never see a beer commercial depicting a drunk driving death (and not just because many regions explicitly prohibit alcohol advertisements from depicting driving).

Now, in the case of alcohol, the broader culture surrounding drinking contributes far more to that than advertisements do. There, advertisements are more trying to sway viewers toward one brand over another than convince people to drink in the first place. Similar principles are at play, though, so it's not an unreasonable comparison to bring up.

Revelation34 posted...

I'm against banning them in schools too.

That, I'm all for, even as somebody who frequently bought pop from the cafeteria in high school. Banning kids from drinking them? That'd be an overreach. But schools are supposed to be educational; selling pop in the cafeteria is the food science equivalent of teaching creationism in biology. Let them buy it elsewhere, don't promote it in a place where they're supposed to be learning how to lead healthy lives.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Chewster posted...

The concept of owning more than one swimsuit is very strange to me, for instance

Eh, I can see two, in the event that you go swimming again before washing the first one. Reusing it isn't the end of the world, but it's still suboptimal. I actually have three, myself, but that's because I didn't bring one when I was traveling and it turned out that I needed one, so I bought one there. At ~$10, that wasn't a huge deal.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

It's not illegal to have your car keys on you when drunk so it shouldn't be illegal to have your gun holstered while drunk.

It is pretty pointless, though. Whether it's legal or not, it's not a good idea, given the potential risks and utter lack of benefit.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

If he's landing backflips, I have my doubts that he was drunk.

Depends how well he landed them.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

HagenEx posted...

Neither should be criminally charged. There was no crime.

Bomb threats are a crime.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Arguably, the streamer should probably be charged with negligence (since intent was lacking)

That is definitely debatable, since there's a real question of how responsible he is for what other people say over his speakers. If he was handing random people a megaphone and one of those people yelled "Fire!", should he be held liable for the ensuing panic? Most would say no. This situation isn't really that different. Here, he has the potential to screen things before they're broadcast, which he (presumably) didn't do, but does having that ability mean he's required to exercise it?
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

The issue isn't so much people choosing to do unhealthy things as it is companies being able to promote their unhealthy products without acknowledging how unhealthy they are.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

LinkPizza posted...

And even so, just drinking while you have your gun isnt always bad. Chances are, you probably wont have to use it.

In which case, there's no reason to have it. Basically, either he won't have to use it and there's no point in having it around (which always presents the risk of having it fall or be grabbed by someone), or he will have to use it but won't be able to do so safely because of his impaired motor control. Therefore, it's just better overall to not have it.

Now, that's presuming he intends to drink enough to be drunk. Much like driving, if he were only planning to have one or two drinks over the course of a few hours, he'd probably be fine. If he's doing backflips on the dance floor, though, I have my doubts that he was that sober.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Sounds like you did it right, then. Decorating should be fun; no sense in stressing over how good it looks.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Honestly, cake with a plain layer of icing is perfectly adequate for most purposes (namely putting it in one's mouth and saying "mmm, cake," which I happen to think is the most important function of any cake). Unless you're trying to sell it, decorating beyond that should just be for your own fun, so you should do whatever you feel like. If anything, I find trying to do any sort of frosting work tends to steer me away from anything other than "plain white/chocolate cake with vanilla American butter cream" (even though Italian butter cream is beautiful to pipe with), so I'm more inclined to decorate with things like chocolate shavings or fruit that don't place any restrictions on what the cake can be frosted with.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Hop103 posted...

He shouldn't have the gun when he was drinking, a reprimand is necessary.

Why?

Same reason you don't want a drunk person driving. Even if a situation arose where using a gun would be justifiable, being drunk means he's not going to be able to do so safely.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

My sister ordered a couple swimsuits online once from an Asian website and ordered XL ones (the largest they had). Apparently "XL" in an Asian swimsuit store means "C-cup," and they didn't remotely fit. She gave them to my girlfriend, who's a 32D, and they were still a little on the small side (wearable, but she couldn't exactly jump around at most beaches).

I personally feel that the whole small/medium/large sizing system is stupid. Just use measurements. Yeah, it's more to remember than a couple letters, but it's far more informative and far less prone to variations between brands (you'll still run into issues there, like apparently wearing 32"-waist jeans doesn't necessarily mean you'll wear 32" dress pants, but those can also be snuffed out). It also has the added bonus of not attaching any sort of connotation to the size, which helps maintain a realistic body image (both keeping people from feeling "large" with a 28" waist, and from feeling "small" with a 48" one).

Also, bra sizing is stupid and needlessly convoluted and that whole system mostly exists to make it easier to retailers to figure out which sizes to stock rather than because it makes any sense at all to consumers (at any band size, most people are going to fall into the B-C range, even though the cups in a 32C are like a quarter of the size of the cups in a 40C, so retailers can stock B-C's preferentially). Just measure actual band sizes (not measurement+4, as is currently done) and the distance from the centre of the boob to the bottom (when it's well supported).
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

I don't really see how any blame can be placed on him. All he did was provide a speaker that people could use. He should probably have screened content to prevent something like this from happening, but I'm pretty sure that's more of a common sense responsibility than a legal one.

Unless, of course, he did screen it and decided to play it anyway. Then they should be charged equally.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

It's only hypocrisy if it's the same people doing both things, in which case it should be pointed out to those people. Otherwise,
Mead posted...

People should keep their noses out of other peoples relationships

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

blu posted...

adjl posted...

blu posted...

adjl posted...

Greenfox111 posted...

Mead posted...

5am everyday time for yall to wake the fuck up

This, youre adults, you need to learn to have a big boy sleep schedule

Read: A schedule normalized by people who comfortably wake up early that disregards natural variations in sleep timing as merely being lazy.

Its not natural, because light bulbs and devices are unnatural. Natural is to wake up at sunrise and get ready for sleep sometime after at sunset.

Artificial lighting interferes with circadian rhythms, yes, but independent of that, some people just aren't morning people, and no amount of calling them lazy is going to change that.

Yeah, this is true. I feel the lazy-label happens because not lazy people see achievable rewards and desires which can be filled where lazy people dont.

It's got nothing to do with rewards, it's got to do with what time of day they function best at. Carpe noctorum, wenches.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

blu posted...

adjl posted...

Greenfox111 posted...

Mead posted...

5am everyday time for yall to wake the fuck up

This, youre adults, you need to learn to have a big boy sleep schedule

Read: A schedule normalized by people who comfortably wake up early that disregards natural variations in sleep timing as merely being lazy.

Its not natural, because light bulbs and devices are unnatural. Natural is to wake up at sunrise and get ready for sleep sometime after at sunset.

Artificial lighting interferes with circadian rhythms, yes, but independent of that, some people just aren't morning people, and no amount of calling them lazy is going to change that.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Nothing's worth fulfilling. Just enjoy your life and don't hurt anyone else's ability to enjoy theirs.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Greenfox111 posted...

Mead posted...

5am everyday time for yall to wake the fuck up

This, youre adults, you need to learn to have a big boy sleep schedule

Read: A schedule normalized by people who comfortably wake up early that disregards natural variations in sleep timing as merely being lazy.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

More than any legitimate concern, I think it's mostly a liability issue. GameFAQs would rather keep themselves as far as possible from anyone who commits suicide, even if it'd be hard to pin any actual responsibility on them.

On the off chance Koga's reading any of this: You're great and we all hope you're doing well (with the exception of a few dickbags who can safely be ignored because they are literally bags of dicks)!
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

By being clever and manipulative, mostly. That's kind of their thing.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

And, to contrast it, homosexuality was considered a mental disorder at a time when acting upon it did cause a significant amount of personal distress and conflict. Those issues have since been found to be entirely a result of gay people being treated poorly by society, though, which can be (and has been) fixed. As such, there's no more reason to consider it a disorder.

Child molestation, however, will never be okay. The closest we'll ever come to that will be simulations and/or sex robots, which may prove adequate as an outlet for some, but because of the stigma (see: outright bans on loli hentai in several countries), those aren't likely to appear any time soon.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

WhySoSirius posted...

I like how house points are huge deal in the first three books but after the fourth they're pretty much forgotten

To be fair, that's just how Harry's experience goes. His first couple years are all like "whoamg it's magic school is fun go gryffindor!", with subsequent years being more like "dude stop trying to kill me and everyone I care about you douche."
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Mead posted...

Pedophilia isnt a sexual orientation

Its a mental disorder

The only difference between a sexual orientation (or any aspect of one's cognition and personality, really) and a mental disorder is whether or not that orientation can be acted upon without having significant negative consequences on them and those around them. Pedophilia can't be acted upon without seriously hurting kids, so it's a mental disorder.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Zeus posted...

It *reduces* the risk, it doesn't eliminate it. Looters can always find a way around it.

Arresting anyone in the area on sight is a pretty sizable reduction. It certainly reduces it to the point where "your house will be intact and looters will have taken your stuff when you return" is a smaller risk than "your house will be buried by lava and you will die."
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Chewster posted...

Do we even know enough about pedophilia to classify it in the same way as other sexual orientations (or gender identity)? There is probably some kind of "incurable" component to pedophilia, but there is also some power abuse component inherent to carrying out any acts, which isn't inherent with other sexual orientations or gender orientations where, as we know, it's wrong to try to "cure" people.

I don't think it's been studied enough to be able to say for sure, but at its core it is just a question of what they're attracted to. In some cases, maybe that attraction is based on treatable psychological elements, and in others maybe it isn't. The bottom line, though, is that it's a sexual orientation that can't be acted upon without seriously hurting other people. That means pedophiles need whatever support is necessary to overcome their attraction and keep themselves from ever acting on it. Unfortunately, the default reaction tends to be to immediately ostracize (at best) such people, so the inclination is to keep it quiet instead of seeking help.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

ASlaveObeys posted...

I have to know where you guys get your info saying cops can't shoot through a closed door?
There was nothing in my training stating I can't.

Regardless of what's explicitly in training, it's a pretty terrible idea. Might as well close your eyes and start shooting.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Fam_Fam posted...

> we should be compassionate towards pedophiles and try to help them

> sick fucking people

We should indeed be compassionate toward pedophiles and try to help them, provided they want help. Pushing to legalize forcibly impregnating one's wife on a regular basis to have a steady supply of toddlers to rape, however, is not seeking help, it's trying to normalize unambiguously evil behaviour that should never be accepted ever. I'd be all in favour of curing this guy of his... himness, but that goes well beyond simply being compassionate toward people who just happened to draw the short, illegal straw when it comes to sexual orientation. This guy's a psychopath on top of his pedophilia.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Nightengale posted...

adjl posted...

Nightengale posted...

please stop trying to make discord a thing i'm begging you

It's kind of become a thing on its own. Dunno why NMB's shilling it so hard, given that it's doing just fine, but there's really no reason for it not to succeed Skype.

christ dude you know what i meant

I didn't, actually. You should probably have been more specific.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

What a dink.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Mead posted...

Im mostly indifferent towards it

I cant say I enjoy violence in games specifically but it also doesnt usually bother me if it is present

That.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Blightzkrieg posted...

It was always soccer baseball at my school.

This. Granted, we hail from the same region, so I couldn't tell you how isolated it is.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Jen0125 posted...

I don't understand people who won't evacuate in these types of situations. It's just property.

As I understand it, it's mostly a matter of wanting to deter looters. Obviously, being looted doesn't matter much if everything's going to burn up anyway, but I'm guessing people are holding themselves to a different risk threshold for that than the government has for issuing evacuation orders.

That said, saying "evacuate or be arrested" and barring anyone from entering the zone does conveniently eliminate the risk of looting, so that shouldn't be a concern anymore.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/ethanol-water-d_989.html

Looks like it'd freeze around -6-7, which a household freezer can definitely do. It's going to freeze a little unusually, though, because ethanol (and anything else with hydroxyl groups, including sugars) disrupts the hydrogen bonding that's involved in forming the crystal structure that water forms when it freezes. 14.5% wouldn't be enough to completely prevent that structure from happening, but it will definitely mess with it.

As for whether you've ruined it, I couldn't tell you. I could see it messing with the distribution of the flavour compounds, but maybe it'll be alright. Might be an idea to pour out a small amount of slush and let it thaw outside while letting the rest thaw in the fridge, to see if there's a difference.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Blightzkrieg posted...

There's pretty much no justification for a cop shooting through a closed door unless the door itself is brandishing a weapon

I could see it maybe if it's a hostage situation and the SWAT team's managed to conclusively locate the hostage-taker with a thermal camera or something, and shooting through the door is their best bet for a clear shot, but that's very much not blindly shooting through a door. This was.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

MM
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

adjl posted...

rogerskg1979 posted...

there are definitely people out there who think that dinosaur fossils were planted by Satan to fool us.

Which is actually blasphemy given that the power of creation is supposed to be limited to God, and saying that Satan has it too is elevating Satan to God's level.

Satan merely moved chicken bones underground.

Those are some big-ass chickens. Dibs on the drumstick.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Zeus posted...

People whining about the cops firing through the door forget that it was possible for the suspect to fire through that same door at the cops and, when the door goes down, they have no clue what he's doing with that gun.

So don't stand in front of the door? I'm pretty sure firing blindly through a closed door is never appropriate protocol.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

rogerskg1979 posted...

there are definitely people out there who think that dinosaur fossils were planted by Satan to fool us.

Which is actually blasphemy given that the power of creation is supposed to be limited to God, and saying that Satan has it too is elevating Satan to God's level.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

darkph0rze posted...

When a certain company bought Skype they made it into absolute trash

Pretty much. Since being bought out, it's become an unreliable resource hog plastered with ads. Once my friends and I figured out how to get Discord working like Skype was for us (namely, having a group DM instead of a channel to get notifications of messages and calls), that was it for Skype.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

rogerskg1979 posted...

Don't tell me that you don't have friends or people on here who you don't pay attention to their posting. It's not that unusual.

Not really, actually. Mostly just to chuckle to myself at gimmick posters by confirming that they literally never post anything else, like that butt guy. You clearly went in there asking "how many posts has he made on this subject and how can I use that against him?", which is definitely harassing behaviour, even if it's not a consistent enough pattern to qualify as actual harassment.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

If I've been able to stop close enough to see them go inside.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

rogerskg1979 posted...

ToothGamer posted...

rogerskg1979 posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/189706-nintendo-switch/76654786

NMB got owned hard in post #53 in that thread. LOL

Stalker confirmed.

Not at all. His posting history is public. Viewing someone else's public posting history doesn't make one a stalker.

Digging through it to find things to discredit them, however, is definitely getting into stalker territory. Especially if you do it more than once.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.