Lurker > adjl

Like to stalk people? Yeah, people will basically reverse pickpocket one onto a person they want to track and follow them home. Car thieves can do a similar thing and stick one on a car they want to steal while it's parked somewhere, track where it is, then steal it when it's least secured.

I think the only way to really prevent it is to have them communicate with every phone with which they aren't paired in a certain radius and trigger an alarm if there's something suspicious about that proximity (i.e. the unpaired tag has remained within a 3 foot radius of the phone despite the phone moving more than 50 feet). That probably wouldn't be terribly hard to program, but requires the person to have a smart phone and also raises some significant privacy concerns because it basically means a given tag is communicating with every single phone at all times, so it's perhaps not ideal.

OhhhJa posted...

2000 gets you a roach infested shit shack in most places now

At least, most places within a two-hour drive of jobs that will allow you to afford half of that. You can pay less if you're willing to spend 20% of your life commuting or settle for a much lower-paying job.

Chancery is an excellent fantasy town name, not gonna lie.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

Indeed. So what were you talking about? It certainly sounded like you were saying small business would pay their employees more if there were UBI.

I think you're confused by the parenthetical remark. If we take it out:
adjl posted...

minimum wage laws should be abolished in favour of UBI, which enables small businesses that can't generate enough revenue to pay a living wage [snip] to succeed.

In your defense, it's an awkwardly worded phrase because it's got two layers of verbs, and I put the parenthetical remark right between them such that one could easily be forgiven for thinking the sentence ended with "to pay a living wage." In this case, "small businesses that can't generate enough revenue to pay a living wage" collectively comprises the object of the sentence, so if we replace that with a pronoun to simplify matters, it becomes "[Obviating minimum wage laws] enables them to succeed."

Jen0125 posted...

It's really annoying watching you purposely misrepresent what people are saying.

It is, but I get it in this particular case. Some of the blame rests on me for communicating awkwardly this time.

Add less flour, then. Don't be afraid of the dough being a bit sticky; as you knead it, it'll come together.

The specific rulings that they've announced to be on the chopping block are those that protect contraception, gay marriage, and sodomy. Interracial marriage is notably absent from the list, which I'm sure has nothing to do with one of the judges pushing for these changes being a black man married to a white woman.

Only if quiche counts.

Everything being short-staffed isn't your fault. Why should you accept the burden of solving the problem?

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

That would be broader reaching than an academic exercise. If living is a task that is assigned to people by an employer then the employer can rate their job performance.

The nature of the term "universal" precludes that: By definition, everyone receives it regardless of any other factors.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

That is different from enabling small businesses to pay a living wage.

Which has never been what I was talking about, so you were indeed confused. It seems we're on the same page now.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

UBI isn't wages... unless you're suggesting that everyone has been made a government employee.

You could characterize it as a wage paid by the government for simply being alive, if you want to take a slightly out-of-the-box approach to thinking about it, but that would be more of an academic exercise than anything else. The takeaway point is that UBI negates the need for businesses to pay a livable minimum wage to ensure their employees' survival.

Occasionally, when they're being served. They're not my favourite, so I wouldn't go to the trouble of making them for myself, but they're not bad.

It is indeed horribly naive to believe that potential savings from lower wages would be passed on to the consumer. That's just not how companies work, especially large ones. When their costs go up, prices increase to match (as much as the market will bear), but if costs go down, prices will generally stay the same and they'll pocket the difference. Once consumers are used to paying higher prices, there's relatively little incentive to bring them back down because people aren't going to buy more in response.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

Why can't people live off the UBI? Why do business have to provide a living wage if people are already getting paid without working? It seems like having the one would remove concern over getting the other.

That's... exactly my point. Establish a livable UBI, then a job's wages don't have to be legally regulated because it's guaranteed that all of their employees will be able to survive regardless of what the job pays.

Better than that, minimum wage laws should be abolished in favour of UBI, which enables small businesses that can't generate enough revenue to pay a living wage (which is a function of cost of living and not necessarily the value the business brings to the area) to succeed. That way, businesses are competing on the basis of how much people want them, rather than how little they can get away with spending on their staff.

Yellow posted...

Yeah it's incredibly hard to actually burn off calories as opposed to not eating them in the first place

Yes and no. Active calorie consumption is generally much, much lower than people expect, but the simple act of maintaining regular physical activity has a very significant impact on BMR. That said, if weight loss is your gain, a significant increase in caloric consumption needs to be met with a slightly less significant increase in caloric intake, since too much of a deficit causes BMR to drop.

SunWuKung420 posted...

Considering I don't cook, your assumptions are inherently incorrect.

I brew and it's very physically demanding for 11 hours, akin to vigorous weightlifting in a sweat lodge.

No it's not. It is absolutely physically demanding, but 12 hours of "vigorous weightlifting" would be extremely dangerous and almost certainly result in a serious injury well before the end of the day. What you're describing is a demanding manual labour job, which is certainly enough to increase your BMR by about as much as physical activity can and will burn quite a few active calories, but you're not burning 2500 active calories.

SunWuKung420 posted...

Still wrong. I couldn't and didn't use a pallet jack.

If you need to move 5000+ pounds within a day on a regular basis, not being able to use a pallet jack or similar device to facilitate that is a grossly negligent engineering failure.

rjsilverthorn posted...

I just don't know that there is that much fandom for non-game content for Mario Bros.

I believe the Mario Lego is doing quite well. At least, it's doing well enough that they're still producing plenty of new sets.

Count_Drachma posted...

Notice that adjl didn't deny any of the claims or try to spin them.

You're still winning!

As I've invited you to do before, please provide examples of the right-wing viewpoints you believe you cannot espouse here. For some reason, you always seem to dodge that question. I can't imagine why.

I would think not having played any games that came out within the last 2-3 years would mean you aren't particularly qualified to comment on whether or not current games need guides.

SunWuKung420 posted...

I also easily burned 2500 calories while working.

Only if you're counting your BMR (which is a massive part of "calories out" that many people forget about, so that's not actually all that unreasonable if that is what you're doing). 2500 active calories would be the rough equivalent of 12 hours of vigorous weightlifting, and while cooking is a much more physically intensive job than many give it credit for, it's not that intense.

hera posted...

what was the cereal

Mini Wheats

hera posted...

what was the fruit

Frozen strawberries, blueberries, and cherries, fresh blackberries and banana

hera posted...

what was the sandwich

Whole wheat, mustard, salami, provolone, lettuce

wolfy42 posted...

Elves would naturally eat fruits and distribute the seeds like the plants intend.

That is of course the entire purpose of the trees and plants/bushes creating them in the first place.

This is also true. Fruit-bearing plants benefit from having the fruits be eaten. Even with grains and other seeds, the plants produce vastly more seeds than they actually expect to germinate, so if people eat most of the seeds but deliberately cultivate the remaining minority to ensure they survive, the plant is still see(d)ing a net benefit (this actually applies even when the seed-eating animals don't deliberately plant the seeds, since some inevitably get dropped or otherwise distributed). It's really just vegetables that don't benefit the plant for being eaten.

It's going to depend a lot on whether or not it's actually any good (in the sense of being enjoyable, since it's a given that it's not going to be a cinematic masterpiece). Generally speaking, Illumination has managed to break that milestone pretty consistently (Hop is their only film that didn't), so presuming it's roughly in line with the quality of their other movies, I expect it probably will, especially with such a recognizable IP powering it.

I don't think comparing it to Detective Pikachu probably is the most appropriate. As much as Pokemon is a massively successful franchise, Detective Pikachu very much was not a typical Pokemon movie, so it's not surprising that it didn't draw the kind of attention a regular Pokemon movie would. Meanwhile, I expect the Mario movie is going to be pretty firmly in line with typical Mario fare (if not the previous examples of Mario movies), so it'll likely appeal to most people with an interest in the franchise beyond the games (and the world of Mario merchandise does quite well for itself).

hera posted...

it's going to be a commercial success but a critical flop

This seems extremely likely.

Cereal with fruit for breakfast, sandwich for lunch, then the quiche that I'm having with broccoli for dinner will be coming out of the oven in ~5 minutes.

Revelation34 posted...

illegitimate adjective
Save Word
To save this word, you'll need to log in.

Log In
il le git i mate | \ i-li-ji-t-mt \
Definition of illegitimate

2a: not sanctioned by law : ILLEGAL

Lying is a politician's trait.

And what was definition #1 that you rather conspicuously left out?

T0ffee posted...

The elves in the mawha were mostly hunters though, and they operate more on a "let nature do its own thing, we'll just eat animals since we like plants too much" approach.

In that case, it kind of depends how long they've been there. If they've been established as a predator for a long time, then the ecological impact is minimal because the ecosystem has adjusted to them. If they've arrived in the area more recently and decided to become predators, though, that's going to have more ecological impact and probably result in more total dead plants than foraging would.

T0ffee posted...

Also, since it's a not-that-serious manwha the author made another trope reversal and made the elves somewhat meatheads, and let the MC bribe them with steak, so they don't really have that "old and wise angle" going for them either.

That also works.

That kind of gets into the whole "who gets to decide that a cow's life is worth more than a tomato's?" argument against vegetarianism that people like to break out occasionally. The simple answer is trophic levels: to grow 100 calories of herbivore meat, you have to feed them ~1000 calories of plant matter. The simple mathematical reality of the matter is that carnivory kills more plants than herbivory does.

While "I'm going to eat meat instead of plants because I respect the woods too much" seems reasonable on a first pass, in practice it's a pretty short-sighted mentality, which is generally at odds with the whole "wise and immortal" trope that's usually applied to elves.

I'm not even surprised.

2>1>Pre-Sequel>I haven't played the others.

Revelation34 posted...

You are literally the only person who thinks that museum artifacts should just be used.

By all means, please point out where I said that "museum artifacts should just be used" as a matter of broad policy and not an individual decision made in specific cases where it's going to be beneficial to do so.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

Then I suggest you reconcile "getting upset over deviations from the practice" as one of the "many silly things" that people "commonly do". At least to help you gain an understanding of why they did.

Alternatively, I can point out when the only reason people are getting uppity about something being done differently from how they assumed it should be done is that they never stopped to question that assumption. Such as this case.

Revelation34 posted...

I have never seen any wiki have actual good guides for games.

If you're looking for a step-by-step walkthrough? Indeed not (though the Dark Souls wikis generally have pretty good text walkthroughs, as a counterexample). If you're just looking for "who drops this?" or "where is this character?" or "where does this sidequest start," though, they tend to be a lot better because you can get your answer by just going to the page for that item/character/sidequest. A very large number of people look for that sort of guidance when they need help with a game: they just want to figure out the one thing they're stuck on, rather than getting a guide for everything.

And then when Wikis don't work so well, you get youtube as another resource, or Reddit for more active discussion of the game than you usually get on GameFAQs... GameFAQs can still be the best place to get the information you need in some cases, but there are a lot of alternatives now that tend to do a better job.

waterdeepchu posted...

I was never really sure why though. We have a huge amount of information about most games, and its very simple and intuitive to navigate. Also fast, this site is extremely fast.

GameFAQs' guides have largely gone out of style in favour of wikis that allow people to drill down to the specific information they want instead of scrolling through large documents. On the boards side of things, they've been very slow to modernize and that's resulted in a lot of the potential userbase going to Reddit or other forums to discuss games, aside from a handful of holdouts that stay here out of habit or the occasional new person that likes the more primitive style. Toss in the fact that the boards are pretty miserable to use if you don't block the ads, and you've got a recipe for a dying site.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

But do you acknowledge that it's a common thing people do?

It'd be pretty silly not to. That does not, however, mean it's a particularly sensible thing for people to do. People commonly do many silly things; that those things are commonplace doesn't mean they're above criticism, nor that anyone should be getting upset over deviations from the practice.

Revelation34 posted...

If it's in a museum it should stay in a museum unless the artifact was revealed to have been stolen.

Why? Why not exhibit the artifact in a creative manner like this to raise awareness of it? After all, virtually every single person talking about the issue had no idea the flute even existed before it became controversial. That sounds like a pretty successful exhibition to me.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

My example wasn't to claim that the flute was harmed in any way. It was to demonstrate that not using a thing for its intended purpose is a common way that people show reverence for it.

And in a lot of ways, that can be pretty silly. For something that can be consumed (such as your pen example) or is particularly vulnerable to damage, it makes sense, but otherwise there's nothing wrong with appreciating it by using it properly.

supergamer19 posted...

I don't think Kurt Russel caught this much flack, and he destroyed the priceless antique.

Kurt Russel, however, is none of fat, black, or a woman, and those factors tend to influence certain individuals' willingness to lose their minds over such things.

hypnox posted...

Company doesn't allow partial days. Which honestly I don't understand.

Mostly because of this:
hypnox posted...

I am the type that feels guilty for taking time off.

If you could take 1-2 hours off, you wouldn't feel as guilty about it, so you'd use up more of your PTO. Because you have to take full days, you feel guilty, so it goes unused and eventually expires, giving the company more labour for their salary dollars.

MagicalPrincess posted...

Birth control is not abortion so it can't be on the poll.

There is the possible, technical exception of copper IUD's: Normally, they function as a spermicide, but in rare cases fertilization will still occur, in which case they have the secondary effect of preventing implantation and could technically be considered a form of abortion. That is, however, pretty uncommon and not their primary function, plus it's an extreme technicality with no particular practical value.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

Well, since I don't understand why don't you demonstrate that you do by helping me out with that deficiency?

Well, for starters, it's not the Supreme Court pushing for a federal abortion ban, nor were states' rights actually the basis for overturning Roe v. Wade (as much as many proponents liked to bring them up). On the matter of gay marriage, it wasn't that the Supreme Court decided it was a federal matter (there's ample reason to say anything related to marriage should be handled federally, given how complicated taxes can get if somebody is married in one state but not another, but that's a separate discussion), it's that the constitution guarantees a right to marital privacy that laws against gay marriage violate (the same justification is the basis for protecting interracial marriage and access to contraception). It was, in fact, always a federal matter. Some states just chose to ignore the constitution.

Count_Drachma posted...

Can't be worse than Red Line Media or whatever which owned the site and was pushing its CEO's hard-left agendas... unless Fandom is also owned by a heavy DNC donor who wants to exert that influence more directly.

Every now and then, you opening your mouth manages to be the funniest thing I experience all week. It's still Monday, but I've gotta say you're looking like a very strong contender this week.

AndyReklaw posted...

I wanna say this too but man I don't even trust the US government to decide what that information would entail. I feel like it's so easy to see it turn into hours upon hours of counseling from both sides, the actual science and health information and the "family values" information. And if they can lock that up behind an additional cost and make it so that it has to happen before the abortion it'd totally just be another way to keep it from the poor.

Like, it is important to keep people informed but ultimately it should just be up to the woman.

I'm speaking more in general practical terms, rather than matters of policy. Mostly, the government should just stay out of it. There are already plenty of medical boards and whatnot responsible for ensuring doctors practice ethically, including securing informed consent from patients before conducting any procedure. Let them do their thing, and let anyone who has a grievance due to being inadequately informed sue for malpractice or otherwise register complaints with those regulatory boards.

AndyReklaw posted...

I can't imagine there's too many women out there that are gonna go through months and months of a pregnancy just to terminate it for the fun of it.

There really aren't. As much as pro-lifers love to clutch their pearls over the idea of women lining up to deliver their full-term babies directly into a woodchipper, late-term abortions are exceedingly rare outside of cases of medical necessity (when they should be happening regardless; sacrificing both mother and baby to pretend you didn't kill the baby is just stupid). It's really not something that needs to be worried about to such an extent that the whole policy gets hamstrung for it.

ZangsBeard posted...

I kind of wish Lizzo had gone full American Pie on it.

Given that it's made of crystal, that sounds potentially very dangerous.

Generally, the point after which inducing premature delivery would be likely to yield a viable baby, mostly because aborting that late generally doesn't yield much by way of health and comfort benefits over just delivering the child, so you might as well save them. Obviously, medical necessity trumps this, when applicable.

That said, placing any limits on when abortions are allowed just opens up opportunities for governments to enact de facto bans by bogging down the approval process in enough red tape to delay the request past the deadline, and while that's my personal reasoning and I think it's pretty logical, my personal reasoning doesn't mean shit for somebody else's abortion. There should be no legislated limits, only doctors providing every pregnant woman with all of the information she needs to make an informed decision about her own body and pregnancy.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

That's what the Supreme Court justices always do.
They originally decided gay marriage was a state matter to decide on.
Then they said it was a federal matter and states had to fall in line.

Tell me you don't understand what's going on without telling me you don't understand what's going on.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

Preventing people from using things for their intended purpose is an inherent part of preserving them for the future. That's why people seal graded comic books preventing anyone from reading them. That's why museums keep things in glass cases.

You can pretty safely trust that the Library of Congress has a better understanding of what's needed to preserve this artifact than you do. If they decided that Lizzo could play it without harming it, there is literally nothing you can possibly contribute to the discussion that will have any value in assessing that judgement call.

Lokarin posted...

"we want states rights to ban abortion"

ehhh, ok

"now we want federal abortion ban!"

...... you can't have it both ways, nerds

You mean the whole "states' rights" thing was just a Trojan Horse used to conceal the true agenda of banning abortion completely? Who could possibly have seen this coming?

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

Then following from what I said, it's all the more questionable that she would bring it out on a stage and play it.

Somebody (presumably a curator of some sort) brought it to her to play. I'm not sure of the full context, but it very much was not done without the consent of everyone responsible for the flute's well-being, nor was anyone involved in the decision ignorant or disrespectful of its history.

Metalsonic66 posted...

Kind of impressive if it doesn't sound out-of-tune after all these years

I mean, there's not a lot to go out of tune on a flute, plus it was made mostly of crystal, which would eliminate most concerns about metal corroding. You can adjust the head joint as needed, but a lot of the tuning comes from the player themselves.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

That, in turn, just makes it all the more questionable that someone who did know the history behind it would bring it out on a stage.

Having seen the actual video clip, she seemed to know the history pretty well.