Lurker > adjl

BlackScythe0 posted...

I'm calling you out because whenever something about Neo-nazis comes out you come to their immediate defense with no hesitation to say the most absurd things in your attempts to do so.

"Notice me, Fuhrer-senpai!"

---

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

What is it they like to say? "Nothing to hide, nothing to fear"? Go figure.

---

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

Zeus posted...

I imagine part of it comes down to the fact that -- as the article suggests -- he had been robbed on prior occasions and, given that it doesn't talk about anybody being arrested for the crime, the cops didn't bother investigating or turn up things on their side.

Doesn't matter. You don't use lethal force because you're pissed off. You use lethal force to prevent a similar level of harm from befalling you or somebody you're protecting. If being pissed off is enough to drive you to kill somebody, you should be locked away from society as a matter of public safety.

Zeus posted...

In fact, I imagine he'd have a much different opinion overall if it happened to be a pride flag.

It is generally a whole lot easier to be sympathetic toward somebody flying a pride flag than a literal goddamn (neo-)nazi, as well as toward the sort of person who would steal a literal goddamn nazi flag than the sort of person who would steal a pride flag, but neither case would justify using lethal force on somebody who's running away. Especially not six times.

Side note, that guy's "moustache" is something to behold.

---

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

SunWuKung420 posted...

Lol. Computers will always lag behind human skill.

He says, using a computer to turn his movements into letters far faster than he could ever hope to write said letters.

---

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

SunWuKung420 posted...

If I need to break down the various conditions as to why having complete control of your power is better than relying on a computer algorithm, then there is no need for me to continue this conversation since you don't have sufficient driving experience.

If your entire position is that there are conditions where having complete manual control is useful, refusing to list any such conditions means you have no position left. I know that I can count on one hand the number of times a year my automatic car goes over 2500 RPM, which would be when I would have shifted manually if I had the option, and it's never for more than a couple seconds. The only other application I can conceive is driving in extremely hilly conditions where it's a good idea to use a low gear for downhill stretches to avoid riding the brake, and in those cases, I use a lower gear because automatic cars still have the option to do that when needed.

---

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

SunWuKung420 posted...

All Nascars are manual because letting a computer control the shifting at that speeds is ludicrous.

What works best for Nascar has very little to do with what works best for everyday drivers.

SunWuKung420 posted...

But let's look at my first Google hit for regular cars:
https://www.budgetdirect.com.au/blog/manual-vs-automatic-car-transmission-pros-cons.html

LinkPizza posted...

I found an article that talks about that, as well.

https://www.edmunds.com/fuel-economy/five-myths-about-stick-shifts.html

You'll find conflicting information out there depending on which specific models the article is looking at. The bottom line is that neither is necessarily better if you look at the big picture because it depends a lot on the specific transmissions involved. Some models have more efficient automatic versions, some have less, so making blanket statements is foolish. This is also a relatively recent shift (pun not intended), so an article from 2014 (updated in 2020, but the specific updates are not indicated) may not be the most reliable source, Sunny.

SunWuKung420 posted...

Manual transmissions give drivers greater control over the vehicle.

Duh. That's inherent in the definition of "automatic." As such, that's a semantically null statement. If you want it to have value, you need to explain more concretely why greater control is actually an advantage (and not a vague "you can anticipate conditions and shift preemptively" without talking about what said conditions might be).

---

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

SunWuKung420 posted...

Except they aren't.

Baseless contrarianism isn't much of an argument strategy, you know. You should consider elaborating and/or providing a basis for your position.

---

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

This is really something that should be decided on a district-by-district basis. In areas with no cases at all (particularly if that area doesn't see enough tourism for travel-related transmission to be an appreciable risk), there's no reason to continue compromising education to protect against a virus that isn't even there. In areas where the virus is under reasonable control but still present, it's probably possible to get away with some precautions (such as splitting classes in half and having the other half do the work online, alternating daily or weekly), but that's going to be a more difficult judgement call that will need to be made in close consultation with public health officials (possibly even on a class-by-class basis). In areas where the virus isn't under control at all, no.

---

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

faramir77 posted...

I took a driver's education course on weekends one winter when I was a teenager. We didn't cover manual transmission, and the course was mostly pointless lol.

This was basically my exact experience, only I took it at 25. The actual in-car part of the course was vastly more helpful than the 30-odd hours I spent in the classroom going over material that I could just read in the driver's handbook if for some reason my basic common sense failed me.

---

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

Blightzkrieg posted...

His covid response is popular and every other party leader is basically on fire

Pretty much. The long-term financial impacts of CERB are going to suck, but personally, it's meant that I've been able to continue surviving despite not being able to work, and that's pretty nifty. The shutdown hit shortly before I graduated, when my savings were getting a bit lean and I was counting on being able to work more hours than I could during school to keep myself afloat. Though obviously the right choice, work closing down when it did really threw a wrench into that, but CERB has kept it from being a problem, and I know I'm not alone in that position. The management of the pandemic at a federal level has also been pretty good, though some provincial responses have been less so (*coughQuebeccough*).

That said, I still like Singh better, and the extreme amount of butthurt he's facing for calling the PQ leader racist is hilarious given how common it is for insults to be thrown around in Parliament, but I'm still a lot happier with Trudeau running things than I would be with Mr. "My kids' private school is totally a campaign expense."

ShadowDragon548 posted...

The guy who did blackface? How does that lame even have a career after that

Mostly because he apologized, both in word and in deed. It's a whole lot easier to forgive somebody who says "yeah that was bad and racist. Sorry" and who has done quite a lot to benefit minorities since then than somebody who says "Don't stifle my free expression!" and has done nothing to suggest not being racist. Around election time, it was very common to see the whole blackface thing compared to a video of Scheer's opposition to gay marriage from ~2005 (which consisted of him saying "any marriage that does not allow for natural procreation cannot be considered legitimate" (paraphrased)), largely because Scheer has refused to apologize for or retract that position (or even acknowledge that it goes far beyond gay marriage to suggest that infertile people shouldn't be married either). Apologies are cheap, especially in politics, but the refusal to apologize indicates that Scheer doesn't actually feel that he's done anything wrong. On the flip side, apologizing for wearing blackface while also working to help black people makes the apology seem that much more genuine and suggests that Trudeau does actually recognize that it was wrong.

Quite simply, doing something bad and then repenting for it is better than doing something bad and standing by it. Not doing anything bad at all would be even better, but good luck finding such a person, because that's pretty rare. I'm fine with people that own up to their mistakes and try to be better people than their past selves.

Zeus posted...

All of that is fake news

It is a fact that Trump has called Covid a hoax on more than one occasion. That's not explicitly his position on it anymore, but his resistance to personally take any precautions suggests he still doesn't really believe in it or consider it to be a big deal, as does his repeated suggestion to slow down testing rates to make the numbers look better.

---

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

SunWuKung420 posted...

They aren't. Manual transmissions allow for much finer control of the power transfer between engine and transmission.

It used to be true that manuals had better gas mileage, but they're more or less even now, and have been for like a decade. Computers are just plain better now at detecting when a shift needs to happen than humans are.

LinkPizza posted...

If theyre in the US, they might not learn in driving school... Plus, in the US, our licenses allow us to drive either automatic or manual. We do have different licenses for motorcycles, trucks, and buses, though...

This is also true in Canada. Manual driving wasn't covered in my driver's ed course, and Canadian licenses include no transmission-based restrictions.

---

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

I know the basic gist of it, but I've never put it into practice by actually trying to drive it. It'd probably be fun to learn, but there's really no practical reason for it given that modern automatic transmissions are almost invariably just as good or better at optimizing shifting and I can count on one hand the number of people I know with manual cars (let alone the number of said people whose cars I might someday want to borrow). Odds are I'll never learn, for that reason.

---

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

Revelation34 posted...

I guarantee there is no law in ANY country of the world that says it's illegal to download a car.

The closest analog that is likely to ever exist is downloading the car's schematics and using them to replicate it, which could potentially be considered a copyright violation because you're using the manufacturer's intellectual property in an unauthorized way. Interpreted that way, it's actually already illegal.

---

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

Usually just both index fingers plus my right middle finger. I often look at the keyboard out of habit, but in practice I generally don't need to.

---

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

MrMelodramatic posted...

scary how old were you?
@adjl same question

Currently 31, she's 25. I guess that would have been 29/23 at the time, them.

---

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

wwinterj25 posted...

If they turn down suitable job offers for no reason at all other than "I don't want to" then that is making themselves unemployed but still not fraud.

That's generally not enough to stay on unemployment benefits, though. Those generally come with the condition of actively seeking work, and if you're turning down suitable jobs, you can't claim to be actively seeking work (since, you know, you found it, but then didn't take it). If you've got a good reason for turning it down, sure, but the phrase "suitable job" preemptively indicates that that's not the case.

Krazy_Kirby posted...

and then they can be fired

Most OHS legislation protects employees from being fired for refusing work that they reasonably feel is unsafe. Given how incapable much of America seems to be of following basic infection control protocols, I'd say it's pretty reasonable to feel that a public-facing job is unsafe.

Krazy_Kirby posted...

sounds like they should get emails/voicemails/texts saying they will be fired if they don't start coming in

Making some kind of written record of the offer of work is indeed probably the best option, especially if they use multiple channels. The person can still claim to have not seen it, but if you're e-mailing, texting, and calling them multiple times, you can pretty safely fire back that they have failed to make themselves available to be contacted for work and are therefore unsuitable for the job.

BlackScythe0 posted...

Blame the government for giving people 2-3 times what they would make working by staying home drawing unemployment.

I mean, I feel the root issue is not how much the government is giving, but rather that the amount the government has needed to give to ensure everyone's survival is so much more than they were getting paid beforehand. Unemployment being so much higher than actual wages is more a reflection of how low the wages are than how high unemployment is.

Zeus posted...

The issue is s*** should be open.

Ah yes. Infection rates are higher than ever across the country, states are breaking records for new cases every day, the president wants to halt testing (and, by extension, contact tracing) to make the numbers look better without actually solving the problem... Clearly, the pandemic has been brought well under control and it's time to start reopening everything instead of continuing to try to slow it down.

Tired of stuff being closed? That's what happens when half the country insist on throwing a tantrum instead of listening to public health recommendations that have worked just fine in dozens of other countries. Now they get to safely reopen and the US doesn't. Cause, meet effect.

---

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

Zeus posted...

Pivot tables were available in Excel since the 90s. >_>

It may be that later versions updated their functionality somehow. All I know is that I've run into a couple of pivot table-based solutions to problems I was having that weren't possible to do in 07 (or at least, not without VBA or other such complexities).

Zeus posted...

And much of the time I'd rather use Access than pivot tables. Among other things, it tends to be a bit less quirky than pivot tables when it comes to handling data sets.

The few times I've used them, they've been a bit fiddly, but they've done the job well enough. That said, I've generally only used them for relatively small data sets (large enough that manually performing the desired analysis would be impractical, but not so large that a proper database would be reasonable). I can see that a proper database would be more sensible for larger-scale work.

Zeus posted...

Supposedly that's what M$ wanted to do all along, but they didn't really have the technology to make that sort of a thing feasible (in that they could monetize it effectively)

Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest. I still don't like it, though. Office is a case where I want a product, not a service.

---

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

I formally moved in with my girlfriend after ~15 months together, but within 6 we were effectively living together because we spent every night together at one or the other of our places. I kind of liked that evolution because it gave us a chance to test the waters of living together without making a formal commitment, and it worked pretty well. We actually moved in together when she moved to a different province to go to grad school and I went with her rather than attempting something long-distance (I didn't really have anything tying me down, plus I found a college program I wanted to do in the same city). That was 2 years ago now.

Formally living together has been a different experience than the sort of de facto arrangement we had beforehand. We got a two-bedroom apartment, so there is room to have space to ourselves, but we still have to make joint decisions about the household more so than before, and being so close all the time means minor annoyances can build up into bigger frustrations. The biggest challenge for me has been the fact that she really hasn't been happy in this city. She doesn't like the city itself, her grad program wasn't great, the college program she started after finishing the grad one (my program was two years, hers was only one) ended up being so bad she dropped out of it, the work she's found has been more frustrating than anything... All of that (to say nothing of the stress of the pandemic when she's a pretty high-strung person to begin with) has compounded to make her pretty grumpy and depressed for most of the time we've been here, which has been a strain on me because I never feel like I'm justified in getting frustrated by that (those being legitimate mental health issues that she has no real control over) and that frustration spills over into more trivial annoyances, especially given that we're only here in the first place because of her and I've had no issues making an enjoyable life for our time here (I'm also not huge on the city, but I'm a lot more ambivalent about it, and my school/job have been quite enjoyable).

That said, as much as I can find things to complain about and I'm unhappy about how unhappy she is, it's been a good time. I love being around her and getting to wake up next to her every morning, and I'm generally quite happy with our situation. We're also going to be moving back home in mid-August (the plan had been to stick around for another year so she could finish her 2-year college program, but once she made the decision to drop out we moved that up), which should improve things because that's where we both want to live long-term and she'll be a lot less miserable. You're pretty much always going to run into some problems living together that weren't issues beforehand, but provided you like being around each other, that's usually going to be easy enough to work through.

Advice-wise, get yourself a place where you've got some space to yourselves. That doesn't necessarily have to mean a whole 2-bedroom place, but you should make sure you aren't being forced to be around each other all the time by the physical constraints of your living space. I'd also suggest trying to avoid environmental stressors that affect only one of you. If you're both bothered by it, it's fine and you can both move on from it, but one person being bothered by it while the other is fine can be irritating. Unfortunately, that's hard to predict, but I think it's worth keeping in mind.

---

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

Careful not to punish him too harshly. You wouldn't want to be charged with battery.

---

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

SeahorseCpt89 posted...

History books and museums tell history.

Statues honor history.

Removing statues does not make us forget about slavery, it just removes the thing that glorifies it.

Heck, if you really want to educate people about slavery with a statue, put up a statue that depicts it in place of the ones that just depict some guy with no context. As an added bonus, that's likely to be a lot more artistically interesting than another simple human statue, as well as being a nice way of getting around the issue that humans are humans and every historical figure has done some bad things at some point in their life that shouldn't be glorified.

---

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

Zeus posted...

It peaked in 2003, but then M$ kept releasing new editions for $$$. It used to be about the artistry, M$. What happened to that?!

I used '07 quite happily for many years, but it's only in '10+ that you get access to pivot tables, which are really handy for some specific applications. I think it's even later than that that they introduced the ability to incorporate cell arrays into formulas, which is pretty niche, but when it's what you need, it's a godsend. As I've delved deeper into Excel, I've come across more and more solutions that rely on tools that are only present in later versions, such that I don't really resent the subsequent releases.

The current subscription model can die in a fire, though. I get that they want an update-based model instead of releasing new versions every few years, but I'd rather pay once and be out of date for a couple iterations (see: using Office '07 pretty much right up until I replaced my desktop's SSD last year and lost the installed copies) than pay every year for them to pretend Word and Powerpoint have changed appreciably in 20 years (not entirely fair, Word 2003 was leagues better than 2000, but I digress).

---

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

Zeus posted...

Erasing history is a great way of forgetting history.

What history is being erased? What do these statues tell that can't be found on even just the Wikipedia page for the Civil War, let alone any quarter-assed effort at genuine education?

---

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

helIy posted...

this is why a lot of games are now presenting the eula as the first thing that appears when you start the game.

some are even doing that annoying thing where you can't agree to it until you scroll through the whole thing.

Even doing that, though, the consumer is only being presented with the agreement after the point of sale. The actual sale of the game is the significant point at which any contract should be agreed to, since after that the choice is between accepting it or being left with a $60 coaster and you can very easily argue that's not a fully consensual agreement. Full refunds on opened games are pretty uncommon, so I don't think treating those as a third option is overly realistic. If the user is never given the option to back out of the agreement without losing anything other than the license they're agreeing to, they haven't been properly given a chance to agree to it.

Zeus posted...

lolwut? They entered into an AGREEMENT with the artists to use their music. There's zero parallel.

And once that agreement expires, the publisher no longer has permission to use the music, making it the same as any other use of an IP without permission. The only significant distinction between that and copyright trolling is that the artist has legitimately created something they intend to capitalize on instead of just squatting on a patent they have no intention of ever actually using outside of lawsuits. The fundamental logic is the same, the difference arises in the determination of what it means to have a legitimate claim to an IP (which is subjective, though most examples are obvious enough that that interpretation is going to be universal enough that its subjectivity doesn't matter).

---

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

Blightzkrieg posted...

Was it not always? Endgame is there too

Not at first. They had to wait for Netflix's license to expire before transferring it. Endgame released straight to Disney+ because it came out close enough to the service's launch to make it worthwhile to save as a launch title that would attract new users.

---

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

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

That's a lot of separate events to pin on the initial person.

Yes and no. Sure, the actual violence isn't perpetrated by the initial person, but when it's as predictable as that would be, they do bear some responsibility to recognize that potential consequence and act accordingly. It's like that swatter that got jail time because a guy ended up dying: He didn't pull the trigger, but he created a situation where that outcome was a real possibility (one which was realized), and that means he bears responsibility for the incident.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

The police should then be able to investigate the call and, if necessary, de-escalate a situation. If they can't do that then it's a failure in their training, not a failure of the part of the person who called them.

While I don't disagree, in practice, the presence of police rarely de-escalates an innocuous situation that's been reported as a crime in progress. Quite the opposite, in fact, as panic and confusion are very normal responses on the part of the person who's being arrested for entering their own house, and police don't have a good history of responding well to panicked/confused suspects (especially not black ones). Yes, police should be better trained at de-escalation (this is a key element of almost all of the ideas floating around for police reform), but the reality of the matter is that they aren't, and that's not a reality you can ignore. As such, dismissing "I presumed this black guy was robbing this house instead of living here" as just a silly, embarrassing thing to say is very much not a reasonable, correct thing to do, as that is a presumption that can have some very serious consequences if not kept in check.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

The correct sequence of events in this situation is that the police should investigate the claim and charge the woman with lying to the police and filing a false report. It doesn't benefit anyone if the police can't do this.

In practice, that is what happened, but pretty much only because the guy recorded a video of the encounter and ran away before the cops actually showed up. Had he stuck around, there's a very good chance he would have been harmed or killed by police that were planning and expecting to take down a violent criminal, and his video might never have surfaced. It was her word against his, and he ran away because - like her - he knew that the cops would believe a white woman over a black man until something more concrete was presented (which he later did once he was less likely to get shot).

ForteEXE3850 posted...

How would you know if you benefited from it if you were white anyway, does your job interviewer say "phew, glad to see you're white, I almost had to hire a minority".

It's generally not so much a matter of clearly being able to tell that you're benefiting from it as it is recognizing that others are at a disadvantage for not having it. The classic example is hailing a cab: White people think nothing of it, black people don't bother trying. This is an older example, and I think it being kind of a running joke has ended up killing it because it's not something you ever really hear about anymore (I honestly have no idea how true it still is, particularly where hailing random cabs has kind of disappeared in the age of Uber), but it very nicely illustrates the concept.

Basically, enjoy your life and don't worry about whether or not you're benefiting from privilege, but if somebody that isn't white (or really, anyone else, since the concept is hardly unique to race) is complaining about something being difficult that you have no trouble with, listen to, believe, and respect their experience, since odds are the reason you don't have difficulty is because of some sort of privilege. If you can help them solve that difficulty, all the better. You can pretty safely ignore the sort of person that tries to tell you that you shouldn't complain about anything because you're a privileged white person, since that's obvious nonsense and they're just parroting what they heard in a tumblr echo chamber instead of thinking about the concept for themselves.

---

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

Sometimes. In some games, I've turned it off, and in others, I've kept it for fine adjustment purposes.

---

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

It's very good for organizing and presenting data in a user-friendly form, and tremendously versatile once the user knows what to google to figure out the best functions for their desired purpose, but I can see that it would fall short for more advanced statistical analyses.

---

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

OhhhJa posted...

Saying the result is unsurprising is not the same as saying that it should happen

"Should expect to" is no the same as "should." Please try again with this in mind.

---

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

Aculo posted...

i don't care. i don't really give any thought to who is on the label of fake maple syrup that i won't buy, ok?

I wouldn't even call it fake maple syrup. Fake maple syrup should at least bear some resemblance to the taste of actual maple syrup beyond the sugar. Aunt Jemima syrup and its ilk are really their own distinctive flavour.

---

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

LinkPizza posted...

I was mostly joking. That being said, isnt one of the points of a mascot (Though they are used for other things, as well) to make people buy your product instead of another if the products are pretty similar? Like, if I have to choose a syrup on picture alone, Id probably choose a motherly looking Aunt Jemima instead of this guy...

https://i.imgur.com/OHOw4SC.jpg

That is, but that tends to be a subconscious association more than anything else, relying on imagery that makes the consumer feel good or that they recognize from commercials to bias them toward your product. Changing the mascot will certainly have an impact on PepsiCo's ability to attract new customers (whether a positive or negative impact will depend on good the new marketing is). Existing customers, however, already know what the product is and know that it's the one they want to buy. Provided they don't put actively off-putting imagery on there (like what happens with cigarette packaging) and they communicate the brand change well enough that people know what to look for to get the same syrup, that shouldn't dramatically impact their sales to existing customers.

---

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

ParanoidObsessive posted...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHbzSif78qQ

Life imitates art.

---

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

Lobomoon posted...

Well, you don't buy iPhones because you like apples so much. There are certain expectations associated with certain brand logos / mascots.

Sure, but that doesn't mean that changing the logo/mascot should change your opinion on a product you've been enjoying for years. The brand and the product remain the same, and it's really not hard to get used to and associate new packaging with the product. If Apple changed its name to Orange (ignoring that there are existing brands with that name), I'd keep on not buying them for the same reasons I don't buy Apple stuff now because the product qualities I associate with the brand won't have changed with the rebranding.

LinkPizza posted...

Sometimes, they stare at you with those Buy me eyes...

That's primarily a subconscious thing, though. What Zeus was talking about was consciously deciding that the products are less desirable without the mascot on them, which is absurd because the moment you start thinking consciously about it, you should be able to realize that there's no difference in the product itself.

---

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

I like the large crowd of people all agreeing to follow this one guy's instructions to not be a sheep.

---

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

ChaosAzeroth posted...

Yes.

However there are other factors that can negatively impact anyone. (Poverty, mental illness, etc.)

Saying there's white privilege doesn't mean you can't have disadvantages while being white, from my understanding at least. It just acknowledges that overall white people have certain privileges/advantages over non white people in the relatively same life circumstances.

Pretty much. Recognizing privilege is basically saying "maybe this thing I find easy isn't so easy for other people." That can come from any number of different personal traits and life experiences, including race. It's not something to be ashamed of (especially if it's an earned privilege), it's just important to be aware of and respect the fact that other people don't necessarily have it.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

There is a huge difference between saying something stupid and ending a person's life.

Depends who you say it to. If you tell a 911 operator that there's a black dude going into an apartment that you don't believe is his, there is in fact that decent chance the black dude will end up dead, or at least in a situation where death is a significant possibility.

This is why that lady who called the cops on the black birdwatcher in Central Park was such a disgusting piece of trash: She knew full well that calling the cops and telling them a black guy was threatening her would put the black man's life in enough danger to scare him off because the cops were more likely to believe that the black guy was the aggressor in the confrontation than she was. She knowingly exploited her privilege to endanger an innocent man's life, and that was horrifically awful.

---

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

That's 49k pounds, which is actually over 60k USD.

---

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

Zeus posted...

I liked Aunt Jemima as a brand mascot, so it's a little annoying. I'm unlikely to buy the associated products in the absence of that mascot.

You consciously base your syrup purchasing decisions off of which mascot is looking at you from the bottle? That doesn't strike you as being more than a little ridiculous?

---

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

I'd say you should definitely get tested, and should be isolating until you get a negative result and your symptoms resolve.

---

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

Sahuagin posted...

for the skin products thing... I don't think customizing your appearance should be considered racist, even making your skin lighter if that's what you want. a person can get a tan, too, that doesn't make it racist. or they can dye their hair, etc.etc.

but, to the degree that the company's marketing campaigns are pushing a cultural bias towards lighter skin and against darker skin, it's probably a good idea to stop doing that. it's one thing if it was completely neutral/benign, but as long as there's a group of people that are facing unjust discrimination partly because of that exact thing, then it isn't.

Yeah, that's about my position. Presented neutrally, there's nothing particularly wrong with adjusting skin tones. Presented in a way that promotes lighter skin, and you've got a marketing campaign that calls people failures for being black (to exaggerate slightly for dramatic effect), and that's bad. Current cultural biases and whatnot also make it difficult to promote such a thing neutrally, so it's probably for the best to dial any such promotion back.

Revelation34 posted...

Seriously? Teeth are supposed to be white which is where whitening comes from.

Eh, that's debatable. Plaque and staining and whatnot do cause discoloration, certainly, but many whitening products promote whitening beyond simply restoring the natural colour of the teeth. Given that there's some cause to question just how healthy they are and whether or not they cause damage to teeth, that's not necessarily a good thing.

---

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

ChaosAzeroth posted...

I mean this is true, fair.

My point had more to do with the if it doesn't bring you joy now/use in the near future.

Indeed, and it's quite a valid point. I think pieces of entertainment are in general kind of exempt from that because they're so individually unique and potentially irreplaceable.

---

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

Evil Ryu919 posted...

Does he set people on fire when he uppercuts them?

Possibly. I've never seen him uppercut anyone.

---

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

helIy posted...

and you legally agreed to it.

This is the main point of debate around EULA's, and what really limits their practical applicability. Nobody reads them, and everybody - including the publishers issuing them and any judge who would be presiding over the case - knows that. The agreement is also generally not presented prior to the purchase being made (sure, they're accessible online, but until Gamestop employees refuse sales to anyone that doesn't sign a document stating that they've read it, that doesn't mean much), and there isn't a lot of precedent for holding people to contracts that they agree to before being presented with the contract. The user agrees to it, but whether or not they legally agree to it is another question entirely.

---

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

Among the general public, I'd be willing to wager that more people think of the car brand first upon hearing the name "Tesla," not the inventor, and you'll definitely get more people saying that Edison invented the light bulb than anyone else. Anti-Edison/Pro-Tesla sentiment is pretty much exclusively limited to a small handful of nerds on the Internet.

---

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

ParanoidObsessive posted...

In her case, I wonder if she actually grew up with parents who were hoarders (either full-scale or just partially). Because from what I've seen people who grow up in that "OMG WE'VE GOT TOO MUCH CRAP!" sort of home tend to boomerang in the opposite direction and throw away as much as they can to keep things clean and spacious...

The reverse can also happen. My dad's parents moved around a lot when he was younger and made him throw out a lot of his toys and whatnot each time they did (in retrospect, they had a few abusive tendencies, and that was among them), and the end result of that was to turn him into quite the packrat, accumulating stuff and being very reluctant to throw it out, as well as being adamant that he'd never force his own children to throw out stuff they wanted to keep. I don't think he ever reached full-on hoarder status, and he did end up finding some degree of balance there, but he definitely erred toward the side of hoarding because of his background.

ChaosAzeroth posted...

I found this doesn't work with video games for me.

Physical games get hard to find, and I get sudden urges to play a game years later. And when I actually really want to play a game, that's all I want to do to the point it impedes everything else. Especially if I can't, because I can't get the initial 'I gotta' over with.

Fortunately, games are pretty easy to hoard without taking over your life. A single $50 bookshelf from Ikea will hold a few hundred easily, especially now that discs in cases are the norm, and that can very easily be made to look organized enough to be a collection and not just a hoard (the line between the two can be rather thin sometimes). There are absolutely games in my collection that could spontaneously vanish tonight and I'd never notice without taking inventory because I'll probably never want to play them again, but keeping them around just in case I get that prediction wrong isn't really inconveniencing me.

---

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

Muscles posted...

But they said the eu wasn't canon but it still gets referenced

What they say is canon and what actually ends up being canon are two different things. Saying that the EU wasn't canon was more a matter of telling everyone not to expect a faithful film adaptation of their favourite EU books than it was a matter of saying "we're using nothing from the EU." The actual reality is that some parts of the EU have turned out to be canon.

---

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