Split (1)

train · 6.74k rows

subreddit stringclasses 11 values	text stringlengths 246 28.5k
todayilearned	I feel like the "bad Asian driver" stereotype originates more with first generation immigrants. The attitude towards driving is very different and much more laissez-faire in other countries, especially in Asia (or many parts of the Middle East). Things like stoplights, road lines, et cetera aren't enforced - there's really no way to get around other than to just go and force yourself into traffic. This attitude where you just force your way into traffic is how they were taught. Their entire lives that's how they've driven because otherwise they'd never get anywhere at all. Good driving strategies there come off as terrible and dangerous when they try to adapt to US American roadways.
todayilearned	Yeah I can. It’s really not that hard. Language and dialect would be a dead giveaway in discerning the difference between the 5. Chinese, Korean and Japanese are not that similar that they are easily confused. There are significant cultural differences between the ‘Asians’ that make them easily discernible if you have a modicum of intelligence and can look past Asian. And while the same is largely true of the Brit, Australian and the American; due to the fact that all three are crown colonies there naturally going to be homogeneous when it comes to identity. You can call all three White or European and they would be fine with it. The converse would not be true for those of the Asian continent. You
todayilearned	You're a racist idiot, and I'm not surprised you're an American. Rah-rah USA morons like yourself are what's destroying your country. Reality is that America has long ceased to be a force for good. In this century America has invaded more countries, started more wars and killed more civilians than any other nation on this earth - and this includes Russia under Putin. The Mid-East is littered with graves of innocent men, women and children blown up by bombs from 30,000 feet. Dropped from American planes. How many countries did China bomb last year?
todayilearned	And pile on the human rights violations, not just in the monitoring of its citizens and jailing of political dissenters, but also the literal muslim concentration camps that Xi Jinping has going. Not to mention that good ol' pooh bear Xi got the republic to remove term limits, thus setting himself up for a mao-esque lifetime totalitarian regime. China is looking to be a pretty dangerous entity moving forward, especially with trump reducing America's trading relationship with the rest of the world thus enabling China to swoop in as the next best thing.
todayilearned	That sounds like a massive flaw in the system that desperately needs to be fixed, and is in no way your fault. Non tenured professors are unfairly vulnerable to dirty, no good, cheating bastard students. There REALLY needs to be a new movement in academia in America lead and supported by administration from k-PHD that cheating will not be tolerated. The penalties should be harsh for even first time cheats, as some one willing to cheat is almost certainly not a first time cheater. From K-6 it should be repeating the class, and a maker on their record as a known cheat. For 7-12 it should be a repeat of the entire year, and also the cheaters mark. Finally for college and higher level education - it should be expulsion from the school with no refund, and loss of all credits earned at the institution where they were caught cheating. For foreign students it should be the above plus immediate deportation. These cheats make the hard work and actual learning of those of us who actually try worth much less both in academia and in the job market. They are a plague and are obvious to those who actually learned when we were in school who run into them. They don't know what they are doing, and the tend to fuck things up that have to be fixed by legitimately educated people then have to fix wasting valuable time, and thus money every where they go. It has gotten so bad that you literally can ABSOLUTELY NOT trust the degrees of any one from China, India for most STEM fields. Foreign students who usually have to have completely fluent English speaking, reading, and writing skills to attend school in the west. These many examples where ones caught with there bullshit cheating and feign ignorance in that they cant understand English should be expelled on that alone, as they lied or cheated to get into the school in the first place. They should have surprise, random English language tests administered in a no electronics, heavily monitored environment in the west, before admission so as not to waste any ones time with the first rule, that they be able to speak English. This activity is bad for, and grossly unfair to every honest student in the western world who is seeking higher education, and who has what could be their slot filled by a non eligible Eastern "student". I use student loosely, as people doing this are not there to actually learn, but game a corrupt system back home, that we should not under any circumstances be aiding.
todayilearned	I had to go to a mandatory safety training. Now, some of this stuff we'll never deal with, but it was interesting. These two Chinese girls came into the classroom and one was on her cell phone talking to someone! Inside the class room. At work. Like it was nothing. The teacher was waiting to start the class and she was jabbering away. Finally the class started and it was 100% clear they didn't understand a word. Fell asleep in class, but not required to stay after or do it again. Not cool. They need to know what the hazards are and if nothing else, understand our culture.
todayilearned	I'm thinking this is because 'Creativity' isn't as highly valued and rewarded and consequently all effort is on rote learning. This could be a wider issue indicative of learners from nations of higher population. The positions:competition ratio being high, those vying for the 'prize' tend to take the easiest (which might mean lesser effort) route. A significant %age of people that are able to prove themselves and do make it, seem to thrive in the environment created by the universities and move on to achieve fulfilling careers once they have been tested in the 'crucible', so to speak.
todayilearned	难道你人字不多吗？ Honestly, I'm not sure which is funnier. The fact that you extol the greatness of the Chinese education system for it's lack of PC-craziness, when in fact the politicization and censorship is so heavy in China that a film about Winnie-the-Pooh was banned? Or that fact that when your groundless, faux-patriotic bullshit was thrown back in your face you retreated into the very same "but.. but, racism!" PC-isms you claim to hate.
todayilearned	Just because someone is linked with groups that are outspoken against Jewish usary doesn't mean it isn't objective, afaik McDonald is largely apolitical and doesn't really involve himself in right wing groups except to do speeches about his books. If somebody is smart enough to be aware of Jewish usary though the chances are they will have antisemitic leanings, so it's impossible to win. People who are "unbiased" and neutral politically are too scared to speak about Jews, it's not worth it for them. Maybe I'd have more respect for you if you at least read the book and then decided if it is biased or not. From what I can tell it is just observations about things that are known to have happened as they are taken from Boas' own writings
todayilearned	i tried explaining this to a chinese friend of mine that i met through university, he was the only chinese student i spoke too that you could have a natural flowing conversation with without having to resort to google translate or dumbing down your vocabulary to the ut most basic words you could think of anyway, after i explained that thing to him he said "why dont we just carry her for these projects, she passes then goes back home with her degree, gets married to some rich guy and never has to use it, its fine, she wont be applying it in real life"
todayilearned	i reported one student for cheating directly to the course co-ordinator why? "she" wrote a multi page paper on her part of a group project for coca cola with above average english, proper grammar and correct references. the paper was meant to be on coca cola amatil which is the oceanic section of coca cola, when told to redo it all since the metrics are different, she was basically forced to do it in class with everyone around her. the new paper was half a page long, riddled with spelling and grammatical errors and she used the front page of wikipedia as her only reference Yes, i mean https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page This page was her reference. when asked about it "i dont know why we cant just use wikipedia for our references" this is a final year finance student that combined with the fact that shes at least an hour late to every class (no its not transport, she comes in with designer clothes bags hanging off her arms) and when the teacher would ask her a very basic question she gives em deer in headlights look and a whole load of "uuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhh" made me think theres something fucky going on, so i spoke to the teacher privately and he said "provide some evidence and ill look into it personally" so i did. Her final contribution to a group project spanning a good 20 pages with included multiple facets of the course and required a whole load of jargon knowledge to complete? The opening introduction paragraph.
todayilearned	How hard is it to understand that it is a conscious choice to move one's eyes left or right in order to peek at someone one on either side of you? All it takes to not do so is another, easy to make conscious choice, merely choose to keep your eyes on your own work. You act like you have no control over your eyes, rather they constantly shift back and forth and burden you with the reality that you are forced to cheat merely because you lack self control and therefore clearly everyone is like you because you've spent your entire life ingrained into this thinking that cheating is the only way to get ahead. It's not. Although I do understand that you have discarded your own argument by this point and your motivation has shifted to trolling, because of whatever vindication or fear of being inadequate controls you id. Perhaps that's also why you're so supportive of cheating.
todayilearned	I'm not driving while taking a test. I'm sitting in a room where nothing is coming at me. Obviously I do not have to rely on my peripheral vision in that scenario. Noticing light or movement in my peripheral vision while driving is not cheating. It's part of driving. Roving eyes are not necessary for a test unless that is a test based on observation. I do not think that you are capable of reading something that is 90 degrees from you, especially pencil marks on someone's paper, especially when they are in a row and you wouldn't be able to read which number those cells go to. You might as well be cherry picking. The human vision is substantially poorer along the edges of our visual cone, we cannot focus on something within our peripheral vision unless we move our eyes to focus on it. Our ability to detect color is greatly reduced, however black/white contrast, such as dull lights, do stand out more. There are more cone cells in the center of the eye, which detector color, than anywhere else. All around that rod cells make up the majority, which detect value from black to white. I know this, because I lead night walks professionally and actually talk about human vision. It's actual science, not speculation you're desperately grasping at to form your argument. So you can accuse me of being stupid or whatever low balling ad hominem you like in attempt to somehow come out on top of all this but the facts are not on your side. >You've essentially told me you're incapable of processing information Processing information =/= choosing to disregard the possibility of information on either side of you. You however, in order to spin your argument, have tried to use my comments about choosing not to look as incapable of looking. That's either due your lack of reading comprehension or grasping at straws to maintain any weight in this discussion. Facts are how the worlds work, not the generalizations like the one you used with your "I cheat ergo everyone cheats" statement. Clearly, despite my slow and stupid arbitrary morality, I have been successful. &#x200B; &#x200B; &#x200B; &#x200B; &#x200B;
todayilearned	The way it works at most universities is that the endowment is not to be spent - it is only invested for the benefit of the school. The school's budget comes from dividends/distributions from those investments as well as donations. Schools almost always do not have the extra budget to do massive stadium renovations/building projects - in fact, most have policies that directly prohibit using >x% of funds for building projects like a football stadium. Thus, many schools have to solicit donations that are earmarked for very specific uses and projects. Both my current school, a large private school, and my past school, a large public research university, used policies like these.
todayilearned	It's really not just foreign students though--minus the fashion (which is a BIG DEAL in China)--I've seen all that fuckery from American students too, all of whom try to turn it around and blame me and have the language skills to do so. When I teach in China over the summer the school there backs me up actually quite frighteningly on cheating cases, so it's not ALWAYS the case that their schools don't care. I do know those students are still enrolled though and are just being allowed to retake the class again and again... :/ But at least they aren't passed on like here....
todayilearned	> What - exactly - is racist about accepting that different cultures have different values and giving people who have come from a different culture a quick "welcome to Canada, here's a few things that might be different to what you're used to" heads up? I don't think it is racist but a large part of american's do think it's racist. There is a lot of white guilt in america and this is one of the ways it rears its ugly head.
todayilearned	We agree, my dear. When the core values are to appear virtuous and survive at all costs there isn't a behavior that would surprise me in the universities. In corporate environments, management dictates how poorly you are treated, but there is a whole legal mill designed to sue them and HR exists in order to foil law suits. The universities are vulnerable to being sued for their double standards and chicanery, I believe.
todayilearned	A friend of mine once worked in a research lab with some international students, i think they were from india, rather than east asia. He made some backhanded joke, and it got reported by them. Apparently it was taken to such an extreme that he was put on probation and temporarily locked out of the research lab. This put problems on his finishing his grad school project, so the compromise was that he would have access when they weren't there (after-hours basically)
todayilearned	This reminds me of a professor who also worked in our machine shop. He was definitely a character, regardless, he was always skeptical of chinese grad students, especially when using a mill/lathe, primarily because they never had any practical experience working with tool, hardware, etc. We have a universal rule for using the lathe: * the key always stays in your hand. This is the key to secure your metal in the lathe. There is a very important reason for this. One of the said grad students forgot the key in the lathe, and turned the damn thing on. It went flying. Keep in mind, this is a 2+ lb SOLID STEEL metal key, being turned by a machine with an insanely powerful motor. The key went through a wall... Luckily no one was hurt, but holy fuck, if you get hit, it'll be a miracle if you aren't brain dead.
todayilearned	They're 72% from par. As a percapita basis, they're only 14% of the US. For this reason, it's the Chinese who will suffer. Their people won't be able to manage when PPP becomes tandem domestically. Then you have a society who can't critically think, problem solve and now they're losing the trade game, with massive tariffs and their economy now in the shitter because of it. When the trade renegotiations are managed, you'll see them fall into line and it couldn't have come soon enough. You'll see what I mean next Summer. I suggest you save this message and I can explain the details if you want.
todayilearned	I honestly have gone from so mad at someone for a very real slight to totally happy because they fed me. I remember picking up my sister’s then-boyfriend from work once, and his ass was just dawdling talking to his buddies for 45 minutes while I sat in my car waiting for him. This was an impromptu “oh crap his car won’t start and his GF is at work” situation that dragged me away right as my dad was ordering pizza. I was so angry and hungry 😂 And when he finally showed up, I was about to bite his head off, and he presented me with a cupcake... And we were cool again, lol. Now I hate his guts for unrelated reasons that even cupcakes cannot assuage...
todayilearned	Mike Rowe of Dirty Jobs fame wrote this yesterday. ""We're Going to Do Something." You’ve been very quiet about the Kaepernick PR disaster at Nike. Any thoughts? - Sam Wilder Hi Sam. Nike's free to celebrate whomever they wish, and Kaepernick is entitled to his opinion - kneeling, standing, or lying down. But if I was going to put someone's face on a billboard - someone who epitomized bravery and sacrifice - I might have gone another way, especially this time of year. I might have gone with this guy - Tom Burnett. Tom's last act on earth was one of the most courageous things imaginable. And his last words to his wife, Deena, are among the most inspiring I've ever heard. Those exact words are at the top of this page, and the bottom. They were spoken seventeen years ago, under conditions I hope to never experience. I'll never forget Tom's last words. I hope you won't either. Transcript of Tom's Last Calls to Deena 6:27 a.m.( pacific time) First cell phone call from Tom to Deena Deena: Hello Tom: Deena Deena: Tom, are you O.K.? Tom: No, I’m not. I’m on an airplane that has been hijacked. Deena: Hijacked? Tom: Yes, They just knifed a guy. Deena: A passenger? Tom: Yes. Deena: Where are you? Are you in the air? Tom: Yes, yes, just listen. Our airplane has been hijacked. It’s United Flight 93 from Newark to San Francisco. We are in the air. The hijackers have already knifed a guy, one of them has a gun, they are telling us there is a bomb on board, please call the authorities. He hung up. 6:31 Deena calls 911 6:34 The phone rang in on call waiting, Tom’s second cell phone call. Deena: Hello Tom: They’re in the cockpit. The guy they knifed is dead. Deena: He’s dead? Tom: Yes. I tried to help him, but I couldn’t get a pulse. Deena: Tom, they are hijacking planes all up and down the east coast. They are taking them and hitting designated targets. They’ve already hit both towers of the World Trade Center. Tom: They’re talking about crashing this plane. (a pause) Oh my God. It’s a suicide mission…(he then tells people sitting around him) Deena: Who are you talking to? Tom: My seatmate. Do you know which airline is involved? Deena: No, they don’t know if they’re commercial airlines or not. The newsreporters are speculating cargo planes, private planes and commercial. No one knows. Tom: How many planes are there? Deena: They’re not sure, at least three. Maybe more. Tom: O.K….O.K….Do you know who is involved? Deena: No. Tom: We’re turning back toward New York. We’re going back to the World Trade Center. No, wait, we’re turning back the other way. We’re going south. Deena: What do you see? Tom: Just a minute, I’m looking. I don’t see anything, we’re over a rural area. It’s just fields. I’ve gotta go. 6:45 a.m. Third cell phone call from Tom to Deena Tom: Deena Deena: Tom, you’re O.K. (I thought at this point he had just survived the Pentagon plane crash). Tom: No, I’m not. Deena: They just hit the Pentagon. Tom: (tells people sitting around him “They just hit the Pentagon.”) Tom: O.K….O.K. What else can you tell me? Deena: They think five airplanes have been hijacked. One is still on the ground. They believe all of them are commercial planes. I haven’t heard them say which airline, but all of them have originated on the east coast. Tom: Do you know who is involved? Deena: No Tom: What is the probability of their having a bomb on board? I don’t think they have one. I think they’re just telling us that for crowd control. Deena: A plane can survive a bomb if it’s in the right place. Tom: Did you call the authorities? Deena: Yes, they didn’t know anything about your plane. Tom: They’re talking about crashing this plane into the ground. We have to do something. I’m putting a plan together. Deena: Who’s helping you? Tom: Different people. Several people. There’s a group of us. Don’t worry. I’ll call you back. 6:54 a.m. Fourth cell phone call to Tom to Deena Deena: Tom? Tom: Hi. Anything new? Deena: No Tom: Where are the kids? Deena: They’re fine. They’re sitting at the table having breakfast. They’re asking to talk to you. Tom: Tell them I’ll talk to them later. Deena: I called your parents. They know your plane has been hijacked. Tom: Oh…you shouldn’t have worried them. How are they doing? Deena: They’re O.K.. Mary and Martha are with them. Tom: Good. (a long quiet pause) Tom: We’re waiting until we’re over a rural area. We’re going to take back the airplane. Deena: No! Sit down, be still, be quiet, and don’t draw attention to yourself! (The exact words taught to me by Delta Airlines Flight Attendant Training). Tom: Deena! If they’re going to crash this plane into the ground, we’re going to have do something! Deena: What about the authorities? Tom: We can’t wait for the authorities. I don’t know what they could do anyway. It’s up to us. I think we can do it. Deena: What do you want me to do? Tom: Pray, Deena, just pray. (after a long pause) Deena: I love you. Tom: Don’t worry, we’re going to do something..."
todayilearned	Nope. > Although US military forces had been alerted about the hijackings, and two Air Force F-16 jet fighters were airborne in the area, no official authorization to shoot down Flight 93 was given until the aircraft had crashed. (The question as to whether the 757 would have reached its target had those aboard not taken action on their own remained disturbingly unanswered in the report issued by a federal commission established to investigate the terrorist attack.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_93
todayilearned	> Hi Sam. Nike's free to celebrate whomever they wish, and Kaepernick is entitled to his opinion - kneeling, standing, or lying down. But if I was going to put someone's face on a billboard - someone who epitomized bravery and sacrifice - I might have gone another way, especially this time of year. I might have gone with this guy - Tom Burnett. I don't think your quote is accurate
todayilearned	I'd just like to comment randomly, and I expect downvotes, but... I can't say "all Jews are cheap", because that's absurd. But I live in a hugely Jewish suburb that is very very upper-upper-middle class, and I've never seen so much rude behavior, usually related to money or people working simple jobs, on a day-to-day basis. I've met plenty of people around here that are gracious and kind in many situations too, but I've had so many days where I go to the gas station or the coffee shop or the grocery or corner store and a middle aged man or women is making terribly rude comments to someone. I've heard a man tell a barista at Starbucks "If you're going to charge me $6 for a drink you could at least wear a little makeup." with what looked like his granddaughters with him. There's a Jewish deli here that's fantastic, but the people who come in to wait in line think that it works on an age-based system or something. They will literally walk in, look you in the eye, and if you're younger, just butt in front of you. I've asked an employee before and they don't care. My point isn't to defend comments regarding all Jews being one way or another. Just that it's not exactly surprising finding out Jerry Seinfeld is kind of a prick about his money and in general given it doesn't seem to be an uncommon attitude among families like his. Maybe it has far more to do with the money than the culture, but either way, it's not surprising to me.
todayilearned	Personally I thought both Kramer and Elaine were nothing but grounders. Both could be replaced with someone whose sole purpose was to ground Jerry and make him a bit more relateable in real world situations. George was out-loud voice for ideas and opinions many people have and was the regularly relateable guy who was always screwing something up. But I wouldn't say that Elaine and Kramer were key in any way. You had a 'lol purple penguin' guy whose sole appeal was being an eccentric who bumbled through life and a woman who was just kinda normal compared to everyone. But the major key here is Jerry and Larry created the show. They invested their time, money and took the risk to get the show going. This is literally no different then a start-up company. You don't turn to the guy who invested $500,000 on something just to turn around and in a couple years say "So, I work here. Can I have 5% of everything this company makes per fiscal year? kthx"
todayilearned	I live about 15 minutes from Oak Ridge. The Y-12 facility is still there, and they will shoot you if you get too close. The American Museum of Science and Energy located in Oak Ridge has a permanent display about the founding of the town and the work that went on there. What they don't tell you, is all the stories about mishandling of highly radioactive nuclear waste, which some former workers claiming they dumped barrels into bonds and lakes, then the military filled them full of hole with rifles so they would sink faster. None of the caches were recorded as far as anyone can tell (or will tell) and there is still a higher rate of illness in the area than the surrounding cities. We don't eat the fish from around here. Deer are suspect as well.
todayilearned	My grandad worked in one of the plants during the war, and my dad worked on "Environmental Restoration" for the government, DOE I think, near the end of the century. My understanding is that he went through old files and documents trying to find where stuff was dumped, like centrifuges, so that they could get cleaned up. So hopefully most of it got cleaned up? I'll have to ask him about it next time I see him. I hope that isn't classified or something
todayilearned	Brigham Young was a really shitty person. Some of his 'highlights': * Oversaw the Mountain Meadow Massacre. * Before that he forbade anyone from selling the non-Mormon pioneers needed supplies and encouraged rumors that they were attacking Mormons. * Coerced underaged girls into marrying him and having sex with him when he was well into middle age. * Amassed huge wealth off the sweat and toil of early Mormon church members. * Outrageously racist (even for his time) and incited violence towards native Americans. * Actively endorsed flagrant lying just to promote his religion. * Forced out other rival leaders (who were also fairly shitty people) to wrest control of the early church for his own power and prestige. * Brought in the concept of blood atonement. Joseph Smith was also a horrible person. And now to sit back any wait for the down-votes from all the Mormon apologists.
todayilearned	Basically, he was just as any powerful man in control of the church and power. We have a bunch of those in each era of our history in Europe. Most of them have monuments. Humans are shit, unfortunately. He couldn't do all of those horrors without the help of his followers. Sad truth. I'm actually shocked to hear this. Always had a romanticized view of the USA and its difference compared to the "Old World".
todayilearned	>In Mormonism, blood atonement is a controversial doctrine that taught that some crimes are so heinous that the atonement of Jesus does not apply. Instead, to atone for these sins the perpetrators should be killed in a way that would allow their blood to be shed upon the ground as a sacrificial offering. Wow, what kind of heinous crimes would be considered so heinous that they are not covered by Jesus' sacrifice? Pedophilia? Genocide? Genocidal pedophilia? > Sins that Young and other members of his First Presidency mentioned as meriting blood atonement included miscegenation Oh.
todayilearned	>The definition of a cult itself raises some issues. In France, there is no legal definition for cults. The Inter-Ministerial Mission for Vigilance and Combating sectarian Aberration (MIVILUDES), which is responsible for the monitoring and analysis of cult phenomena in France, prefers the use of criteria, rather than a single definition, to characterize groups (MIVILUDES, 2015). Some common elements emerge from these criteria and the definitions proposed by some authors in the literature (Chambers et al., 1994, Rodriguez-Carballeira et al., 2015). Thus, cults can be seen as an organized group or a solitary person whose purpose is to dominate cult members by using psychological manipulation and pressure strategies. Theories regarding cult commitment have evolved and developed over the past few decades (Abgrall, 1996), from those of influential stakes or psychological manipulation (Ungerleider and Wellisch, 1979) to those of addictive disorders. The latter theory was introduced by many researchers (Abgrall, 1996, Booth and Bradshaw, 1999, Roy, 1998) and has the advantage of viewing the cult member as more than a victim, contrary to the theory of psychological manipulation. >The first step in cult commitment, the narcissistic seduction, was described by Fournier and Monroy in 1999 (Fournier and Monroy, 1999). This process has many elements: the vulnerability of the subject, group effects, the use of emotions, detachment from outside influences, progress in doctrinal teaching, promotions and the assignment of responsibilities. This process takes a long time because a total and instant commitment has a poor chance of persisting if not followed by in-depth and multidimensional work with the goal of self-reinforcement (Miviludes, 2006). The feeling of emptiness outside of the sectarian practice creates the cycle but is also its consequence (Duretete et al., 2008). Thus, the ability to balance one's life becomes impossible and members lose their ability to choose. Moreover, active involvement in the cultic group could lead to affective dependence on the cult leader or on the group, which explains why people stay despite threats to their physical and psychological integrity (Garand, 2013). The protective factors that enable a member to leave the group always seem surprising and are seldom predictable given the magnitude of the hold and the constraints of the cult. >Taking into account the common characteristics between cult membership and addictive disorders — persistence despite negative consequences (Fournier, 2009), common neurophysiological mechanisms (Abgrall, 1996, Roy, 1998) and the scientific literature — we hypothesized that the etiopathogenic model used to explain addictive disorders might also be applicable to cult commitment. Therefore, the model of cult membership would be multifactorial, involving vulnerability and protective factors. These factors could be individual, environmental and/or linked to the characteristics of the addiction object, that is, the cultic group. As for addictive disorders, we suppose that vulnerability factors could be involved during the initiation and the maintenance of cult commitment, and that protective factors could help to stop cult involvement. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165178116319941
todayilearned	So what? As I said, scientists use a certain set of criteria to define cults to separate them from the relatively benign. Furthermore, when the person I was responding to used the word, they didn't use it to point out that it's a group that venerates a diety. They meant to associate the Mormon church with the crazy level of devotion, submission, and abuse that characterize cults as characterized in the study I quoted. Whereupon I pointed out it's no longer considered to be that kind of a cult.
todayilearned	these are complex political events. Mormonism was literally outlawed, and mormons chased out west. i'm not saying it's justified. I'm saying it's understandable. It's like slapping a dog, and then the dog bites you, and you say "It's not justified!" maybe, but who doesn't expect to get bite by a dog they are harassing? people are animals, as much as we want to believe otherwise. we react to violence with violence. it's written in our very genes.
todayilearned	germany and most of europe also just suffered the most horrible war in human history. those young men in their 20s were in their 40s, in charge of the world stage. violence begets violence. the holocaust wasn't a logical event. it was purely emotions and animalistic. the "other" members were deemed a threat to the german "pack". and those that experienced WWI blamed whoever it was hip to blame at the time. it certainly was no a religious affair.
todayilearned	yep, lets ignore that hitler and the nazis repeatedly said, taught, and defended the idea that jews were foreign (even if they weren't) and inferior genetically (even though german jews had almost identical gene patterns as other germans) , the fact that christian slavs and gypsies were also targeted for the holocaust, the fact that germany and almost all of europe had been secular govenrments for decades, and the nazis praised nietzsche constantly who said "God is dead" keep grasping at straws.
todayilearned	Also, McDs uses a different recipe of Coke. Supposedly it’s an older formula that tastes way better. I gotta say, their coke is the best that I’ve had. Edit - not a different formula from what I was reading, but coke delivers the product in stainless steel containers that better preserve all that goodness. Combined with a few other scientifically discovered things, it just makes it better there. Edit2 - everything I read was was a lie, and apparently not true in the slightest. The internet was a mistake.
todayilearned	Actually- this used to be true for me too, however my local Burger King has stepped it up and have better Coke now than McDs. While we’re on the topic- Wendy’s used to have the better chicken pieces and now McDs has the best hands down. Those buttermilk chicken crispers are the shit. And to twist it all up- Wendy’s has the best fries 🍟 which I think many would agree McDs used to.
todayilearned	Yea it's not a different formula, or else it wouldn't be coke. You mentioned the stainless steel which is pretty much correct (iirc it's only to corporate stores, which franchisees have the option most opt for the same cardboard Beverage in Box as every other Coke product). They also mix it a bit different than most places. The ratio of syrup to carbonated water is heavier in McDonalds than other restaurants which makes it a bit sweeter, and its exclusive to McDonalds standards.
todayilearned	It’s also due to McDonald’s really strict adherence to Coca Cola serving guidelines. Temperature of the water, level of carbonation, etc. many franchises are graded on their adherence to Coke’s specific standards. That being said, McD’s are franchises, so YMMV from store to store. There’s a WackArnold’s near me that does a shitty job and their Come tastes terrible, but that’s because they don’t clean the soda machine regularly, they probably haven’t flushed or replaced the lines since they’ve opened, so they’re one of the McDonald’s that makes you feel like you need a shower after stepping in the front door. Edit: it has been pointed out that iOS has autocorrected Coke into Come, making my comment very gay. I’m leaving it for posterity, ty to all who brought this to my attention.
todayilearned	Looking at your preferences (usually in personal format forms of coke) you may be more influenced by your senses than you think. I have copy and pasted a portion of the article regarding Coca Cola but the entirety is worth a read if you find marketing interesting. http://www.centreforsensorystudies.org/how-capitalism-came-to-its-senses-and-yours-the-invention-of-sensory-marketing/ "The solution lay in multiplying the sensory bases of product differentiation. This principle was hit on accidentally by the Coca-Cola Company in 1916 (if one may believe the display on this topic in the Coca-Cola Museum in Atlanta, which I had the opportunity to visit recently). At the time, Coke came in straight-sided glass bottles much like those of all the other soft drink manufacturers. The only thing that distinguished a Coke bottle from, say, a Pepsi was the paper label. These labels had the annoying tendency of peeling off when the bottle was jammed in amongst other bottles in the dispenser boxes filled with melting ice. Coke therefore held a competition to design a distinctively shaped bottle that would enable customers to identify their product even if they could not see it when they reached into the icebox. Out of this competition came what is known as the “contour bottle,” which is said to have been inspired by the curves and grooves of a cocoa bean. The inspiration may have been off (a cocoa bean rather than a cola bean – what were the designers thinking?) but the design caught on and became one of the most iconic shapes of the twentieth century. The Coca-Cola twin sphere bottle fits so snuggly in the fold of one’s hand that it is hard to resist reaching for one again and again and again. Coke patented the design, of course."
todayilearned	Nope. It’s not so much a myth because a lot of the Mexican Coke does in fact use more “genuine” sugars (cane). And some states like in the Southwest do have it constantly available but not all glass bottled Coke is Mexican Coke. So yes it’s trendy and they’re trying to capitalize on that and produce more in glass bottles but the fact is a lot of people do prefer genuine Mexican coke that do use different sugars.
todayilearned	It's my understanding that 90% of the time it's because the machines need to be completely disassembled to clean them and are super finicky about what they consider clean and fully assembled. That and there is some sort of timer or something that automatically takes the machine out of service for cleaning regardless of actual cleanliness. All that results in machines being "broken" when in actuality there just isn't enough time to clean them due to a rush or the staff doesn't want to because it's tedious.
todayilearned	It doesn’t help that those machines are really complicated. When I worked at a small town McDonalds there was exactly 2 people that knew how to clean it completely. When the store manager (not one of those 2 people, but should know) tried to clean it once, she assembled it wrong and resulted in a huge pressure build up and ice cream mix literally exploding, sending that stuff EVERYWHERE. We were still finding little drops of dried mix days afterwards
todayilearned	That’s because I was mainly trying to dispute that the sugar composition isn’t just a myth because that is not the case. And I wouldn’t argue that glass isn’t a factor either. Carbonation matters but glass is flavor neutral compared to plastics. So yes, glass is important but if you had two glass bottled Cokes and one was traditional vs Mexican, the Mexican is “usually” preferred because of its sugar composition.
todayilearned	Dude, on iOS the come/Coke typos are real. I don’t know what it is about those words specifically. I never discuss Coke, despite using the word “come” way more frequently I’m sure. And yet I literally needed to create a keyboard shortcut to autocorrect “Coke” to “come” because it would actually take the properly typed out word “come” and replace it with “Coke” even in situations where it only made sense as “come.” Like, “Hey, you wanna Coke hang out at my place after work” kind of changes. I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of these typos are from other people who had the same issue. It’s so weird because 99% of the time, iOS’ autocorrect is fantastic for me. I don’t know what it is about this specific set of words.
todayilearned	Worked at a few (non-franchised) stores in the UK and we used to get 20 litre cardboard BIB for all syrups except Coke which was a 100 litre enormous BIB that had like a reusable plastic crate housing. Do the steel tanks have automatic sanitation/flushing cycles? Can imagine they would be an absolutely bitch to clean otherwise and wouldn’t be that economical for McD’s to pay for the additional staff time to do so.
todayilearned	Yeah they had pumps that would flush and sanitize them. The 20 Litre Cardboard BIB is common for most places. Gas Stations, Other Restaurants etc. With the switch to the new Freestyle machines I think the Steel Tanks are going to be phased out as Coke cracks down on the taste of it. The new Freestyle machines all taste the same so i'd expect Coke has been trying to control the water filtration and such.
todayilearned	As a former McDrone here is what goes down, at least at the stores I worked in (USA): Depending on the size of the store there are two or three huge stainless steel vats (I don't recall the capacity). The Coca Cola is delivered directly by the supplier from the truck into the vats. IIRC it got its carbonation from a dedicated hookup, not like the other drinks. Only the other fountain drinks came "bag-in-box" like most restaurants. Those are the concentrated syrup pouches that get mixed with CO2 and water before being dispensed.
todayilearned	A wonderful drink. Super popular drink in northern New England, when I worked in Maine we sold more of it than Coke in some accounts. It was owned by Coca-Cola Northern New England, but TCCC just bought it from us. So we no longer will be the sole bottlers of it at the LPC. It's a dark soda almost like a Dr. Pepper/Pibb but it's based off uniquely flavored Gentian Root. You either love it or can't stand it. It's almost like an herbal black licorice but a little sweeter but not as sweet as most sodas overall. The 12 oz glass can be found in specialty stores across the country and sometimes found at Cracker Barrel. As the brand slogan goes, it is "Distinctively Different." It's an acquired taste but it's actually quite nice and smooth once you've had a couple. If you're in to video games at all, Vim! in Fallout 4 is based on it almost completely.
todayilearned	We found maggots at the bottom of the pan where the mix goes when I worked there. I don't mean a couple. I mean like the entire bottom of the pan was crawling with them. And we had been serving shakes all day. I also witnessed a cook drop a burger patty on the floor during a rush, and he laughed as he picked it up and put it right on the bun and served it up.
todayilearned	Because they weren’t convicted of any crimes. They were charged but still innocent in the eyes of the law. Can you imagine walking down the street, having some cops arrest you because you look like a suspect to a crime they’re investigating, and lock you up? Even if you’re fully innocent and have a full proof alibi and have mounds of evidence that will exonerate you and proof you’re not the guy they’re looking for, you’re still waiting to see the judge. And then a natural disaster happens and you’re left trapped to die in your cell.
todayilearned	They’re both tragic, don’t get me wrong. Neither the guilty nor the innocent deserve to die this way. I guess philosophically speaking, in my mind one is more tragic than the other. I guess I see it like this: Prisoner A is a convicted murderer. He dies of police negligence. That’s tragic. Prisoner B is convicted of being drunk in public. He dies of police negligence. This is tragic as well, but in my mind it’s more tragic than the first example. I know this is not connected and it’s a stretch, but I think about it from a mathematical perspective. Take the set of natural numbers (1, 2, 3, ...) and the set of even positive integers (2, 4, 6, ...). Both sets are infinite, but the first is “larger” than the second.
todayilearned	They’re both tragic, don’t get me wrong. Neither the guilty nor the innocent deserve to die this way. I guess philosophically speaking, in my mind one is more tragic than the other. I guess I see it like this: Prisoner A is a convicted murderer. He dies of police negligence. That’s tragic. Prisoner B is convicted of being drunk in public. He dies of police negligence. This is tragic as well, but in my mind it’s more tragic than the first example. I know this is not connected and it’s a stretch, but I think about it from a mathematical perspective. Take the set of natural numbers (1, 2, 3, ...) and the set of even positive integers (2, 4, 6, ...). Both sets are infinite, but the first is “larger” than the second.
todayilearned	Lol pussy? I’m not crying you’re crying. Easy to say shit on the internet that’s what’s great about it so soy boy cuck sucker, Trump diddles little kids, people like that have no place on this planet. I’m not even from the “left”. I just like seeing those people who gloat about winning get fucked up. Because that’s real pussy shit, winning then taking a victim stance and whining, so realistically you’re the one pussing out. Crybaby bitch boi.
todayilearned	doesn't it make more sense to call violent and bloodthirsty leftists communists? fascism has a specific meaning beyond generic political violence, which sadly occurs under almost every ideology under the sun “The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies "something not desirable"...In the case of a word like democracy, not only is there no agreed definition, but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides. It is almost universally felt that when we call a country democratic we are praising it: consequently the defenders of every kind of regime claim that it is a democracy, and fear that they might have to stop using the word if it were tied down to any one meaning.” -George Orwell
todayilearned	In the end, fascism is when any party gets control of government and decides that the "bad people" have to be gotten rid of for the benefit of the "good people". How good or bad are determined depends on what those in power say rather than any form of reality. So, it's meaning can take on many forms but in the end, it's a party controlling government to the sole benefit of it's believers rather than the country as a whole. Consider the current situation in America: We have the far left, the center, and the far right. The far left and the far right are smaller groups than the center group between them but for arguments sake, let's assume that each group is equal in population. That means that any single group represents only one third of the population. So, if any one of these gain control of the country, that two thirds of the country will be unhappy. To counter that, the only choice is to suppress any and all opposition at every possible turn in order to stay in power. That will inevitably mean that government forces have to be used to subdue opposition. In the end, it has to fail. The only solution that can work long term is a consensus of the three positions and that means that the right, the middle, and the left have to come to compromise. Until our elected leaders adopt this simple fact, we will never have real stability.
todayilearned	Bugs don’t make a game incomplete. Fallout New Vegas was super buggy on release, as are a fair amount of games these days. I never had nearly as many issues with PoGo in the beginning as people talked about online. Definitely try out the game right now if you haven’t played lately. The legendary birds are out (and 1/20 are shiny), Mewtwo is in raids on the 20th, and rare Kanto spawns are everywhere. I saw two Laprases yesterday, both Hitmons, among Chanseys and Clefairies.
todayilearned	Don't get arsey with me you little pussyfart, you might of fucked about like that but we most certainly didn't...let me introduce you to the treachery act of 1940 http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treachery_Act_1940 The first section of the Treachery Act 1940 read: “If, with intent to help the enemy, any person does, or attempts or conspires with any other person to do any act which is designed or likely to give assistance to the naval, military or air operations of the enemy, to impede such operations of His Majesty's forces, or to endanger life, he shall be guilty of felony and shall on conviction suffer death." A lot were imprisoned under the treason act of 1351 https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/enemy-within-the-network-of-britons-who-spied-for-hitler-during-second-world-war-9158455.html%3famp I would imagine America did far worse considering they rounded up their own citizens of Japanese descent...
todayilearned	Really? Because that's not what Google has to say on the subject lol When the attack ended shortly before 10:00 a.m., less than two hours after it began, the American forces has paid a fearful price. Twenty-one ships of the U.S. Pacific Fleet were sunk or damaged. Aircraft losses were 188 destroyed and 159 damaged, the majority hit before they had a chance to take off. There were a total of 2,403 American casualties, including 68 civilians, most of them killed by improperly fused anti-aircraft shells landing in Honolulu. There were 1,178 military and civilian wounded. Would you like to continue? But this time with facts?
todayilearned	For America it was 1941 after pearl harbor. Not sure how this is even a question considering you claimed you were going to educate me. There was a war already going on however the US was not at war with anyone when this rally and picture took place. I guess you also dont comprehend the term semantics? Except you have clearly done nothing but misuse the term and somehow you think it is ok because you dont agree with the actual definition? Perhaps you should just stop because clearly you are not educated enough to have this debate
todayilearned	Again, the "Stupid Motorist" Law is generally not enforceable to begin with unless the driver has committed another violation in the process of getting stranded in a flood zone. If anything, it's more like something authorities can tack on as a silent "F**k you" for being a jerk. I mean, if you're stupid enough to get your vehicle stuck in a flood zone, and then stupid enough to also mock law enforcement and other first responders during/following your rescue, you probably deserve every fine they can leverage at you. Just another reason why it's called a "Stupid Motorists" Law.
todayilearned	I knew a first responder (firefighter turned paramedic) who was all for this law and his cop buddies happily enforced it, because often assholes doing this would endanger the first responders by refusing to leave their vehicles and other such nonsense. Other times it was parents who had endangered the lives of their young children. I think it’s fair that those behaving extremely recklessly and putting others in danger because of that recklessness are fined.
todayilearned	I guess it depends on the cost of a rescue. Considering how expensive ambulances are I'd guess it'd be many many thousands of dollars, 50k maybe IDK. So....probably plenty. Plus I doubt those people thought they were risking themselves if it's just 6" of water like you guys are saying. Fuck I would have driven through that, I do all the time when we get small floods here in Georgia. If it only takes half a foot to be dangerous then it's not surprising at all that people don't know that it's dangerous. This sounds almost more like a "fine people from out of state" thing.
todayilearned	It's not that it isn't enforceable (it is) it's that the Police have said they wont, so that way no one is too scared to call for help. This law is really just used as a scare tactic because in AZ, flash floods are very real and very dangerous. For example, a barricade will be up closing off a road, but the guy in a jeep can see the road lines through the water, he decides that this sign only applies to low-rider caminos. While crossing the water, a huge rush of water comes and sweeps him off the road, trapping him under 5' of water that wasn't there two seconds ago. People still ignore signs, but it is definitely less than the amount of people who got trapped prior to the law.
todayilearned	I agree 100%. This is one of those things that gets everyones justice boners raging, but is \idiotic\ if you want a modern society, and not some pay-as-you-go third world hellhole. Arizona is the last place you want to model your laws after. It's how many people that need an ambulance don't call for one, because of the cost, but it just ends up costing everyone more money in the long run. &#x200B;
todayilearned	People may not get cited for it by the police, but public shaming is another story, at least in the Phoenix (and maybe Tucson) area(s): If the Stupid Motorist happens to be in the Phoenix Area, then when the dispatch goes out over the radio to the first responders, the local TV Stations pick it up on the scanner and - as soon as it's safe to fly - they dispatch helicopters to film the rescue. That footage is then aired multiple times it over the next day and a half or so, generally with commentary to the effect of "this person is putting the lives of first responders in danger". And the TV stations will always find 5 minutes during a 30 minute new cast to dedicate to the stupid motorist in question. The evening news is arguably a more effective deterrent - In one shot, the footage and commentary helps to provide a demonstration of just how dangerous flash floods are, spread awareness of the Stupid Motorist Law, , punish the person that tried to drive their hummer across the ditch, and holds up the rescue crews for the heroes that they are.
todayilearned	The people in this thread are just 100% convinced in their own brilliance and assume they're always going to be the smart people. Until they are the ones who need help, then I'm sure they'd scream and moan about how unfair it is to distinctivise people from calling for help in life and death situations. Buncha goddamn monsters. Sometimes I think the state of this country is exactly as it needs to be, the people are becoming selfish degenerates.
todayilearned	I don't buy your argument. You're saying we should use taxes to pay for idiots because it will increase overall revenue (compared to charging them). That's purely conjecture, and there's really no good way of substantiating your claim. One can just as easily claim the opposite is true, that charging them creates more economic benefit to the city than not. And between the two claims, the latter has a more direct logic to it. Also, your claim discounts the fact that people would be more risk adverse when they know they'll have to pay for it.
todayilearned	Just an anecdote. When i was 18-24 i lived in Tucson, Arizona. Those who know Tucson know that the North side of the city near the mountains have several of these washes. I worked in the north side at a furniture store, and the quickest way for me to get to work was by driving through one of these washes(they are paved, for those wondering, and act as normal roads 360/365 days a year). Now i dont know if these laws are the best solution to the problem, but what I do know is that one day i drove to work and began opening the store. A few minutes later several fire engines and ambulances rushed down the road i came to work on. Turned out, just a few minutes after i passed, a flood of water came rushing down from the mountain and washed a car down the natural canal. The woman inside drowned to death. I was just lucky enough to be 5 or 6 minutes ahead of the water. Its funny to think that such a dry arid place could have lethal flood waters. But it does... Edit: it was the Pima wash. Apparently two other people were killed in the same wash last month =/
todayilearned	We had a flood in my area a few years back and our local law enforcement refused to go rescue people who had refused to evacuate. We had enough warning (it was combo snow melt and tremendous rains upriver). The chief came out and said something to the affect if "We told you to leave, you ignored our advice, I'm not sending my officers into harm's way because of a few people's poor planning. We'll get you when the water goes down." The national guard still went and saved them, and I'm sure they learned absolutely nothing from the events.
todayilearned	The technical term is "confirmed bachelor" or "strong-willed woman" for lesbians. ___ For a bit more context. The whole "badmouthing people with passive-aggressive euphemisms" thing really got popularized by Hugh Massingberd, the obituary editor for the Daily Telegraph, in the 80s and 90s--he basically turned obit writing into one giant joke. It was really popular with the readers and other papers copied it. Some other of his euphemisms: * Convivial at all hours = drunkard * Colourful character = completely insane * Uncompromising ladies' man = rapist * Generous with one's affections = adulterer * Dedicated to one's work = neglectful of his/her family * Committed to charity work = tax dodger/white collar criminal * Gave colourful accounts of one's exploits = pathological liar or boaster * Not to have upheld the highest ethical standards of the City = criminal * Notable vivacity = nymphomaniac * Passed away unexpectly = suicide or AIDS (it was the 1980s)
todayilearned	If you've ever watched Deadwood, two of the main characters are Sol Star and Seth Bullock who are based on historical figures. Both men basically quit their lives and moved to Deadwood to start a hardware store. Seth Bullock married, but as an obligation to his older brother who died. (That was the tradition back then, if your older brother died and you were an unmarried younger brother, you were supposed to marry his wife and take care of his family.) Sol Star however is mentioned in his obituary as a "lifelong confirmed bachelor." Certainly paints a picture right? But that's not all. Bullock was also lifelong friends and personal confidant of Theodore Roosevelt. In fact he rounded up 50 young men to wear cowboy gear and parade on horses for Roosevelt's inauguration. It was said they had many adventures on the frontier, just the two of them. Rough Riders indeed, right? So in summation based on my tv knowledge and loose facts, Theodore Roosevelt: America's first gay president.
todayilearned	> He may be among the worst presidents as well, as he basically decided that trying to hold the country together was too hard and didn’t do anything about it falling apart, setting the stage for the civil war. That's only half of it; he also pushed the Supreme Court aggressively for a sweeping decision in Dred Scott. So he managed to be both ineffectual and have horrible politics at the same time - he was a terrible president no matter what standard you use to measure him. There's a reason gay people are much more eager to try and argue Lincoln was gay (he almost certainly wasn't, alas.)
todayilearned	I've used that term to describe myself. Not gay, although I don't really care if others think I am. I'm just not interested in marriage. Most married people I know don't seem that happy. I've been in plenty of committed monogamous relationships, all but one ended amicably. In almost every case my ex girlfriends married within a couple of years, usually to the next person they dated. I used to worry about this, thinking there must be something wrong with me. Maybe too selfish, too introverted, too afraid of commitment. But at this point I'm cool with it. I like my life, my family and my friends and interests keep me busy. Plus I get time to myself when I need it. I'm a confirmed bachelor.
todayilearned	FDR and Eleanor were in a somewhat platonic relationship. After they had their final child, they never had sex again. Eleanor apparently knew of FDR's affair with Missy LeHand and threatened to leave him - the only reason she didn't was because those close to FDR pleaded she not because it would kill his political career. There was also a chance she'd lose her inheritance if she did. The Roosevelt's also knew of FDR's unfaithful nature. Alice Longsworth Roosevelt secretly facilitated FDR's affair with Lucy Mercer because she disliked Eleanor so much.
todayilearned	Please, please laugh. Try and understand what's going on here, realize you're inept; and blame everything else but yourself. I'll be here, one way or another: I'll either get your half-hearted attempt to excuse yourself from your own vitriolic, hate-based rhetoric. Or, I'll get your ad-hominem attack after you've wasted hours scrolling through my post history to indeed claim that I am, in fact, a gay man. I've got some popcorn on; let's see where this rabbit hole leads us.
todayilearned	Man that was hundreds of years ago. You're applying conventions from the present to the past. Not marrying and living with another guy you enjoy being around does not mean they were 'totally gay for each other'. Men are capable of existing outside of their 'raging' sexualities. Also Newton probably never found a woman because he was ugly and an antisocial jackass. Possibly thought himself above marriage and that it (and children that would come with it) would've complicated his life. The possibility of him simply being an autistic savant that never married (due to the autism) is more likely than him being gay.
todayilearned	Naw he was gay as fuck... >"I am now 'solitary and alone,' having no companion in the house with me. I have gone a wooing to several gentlemen, but have not succeeded with any one of them. I feel that it is not good for man to be alone, and [I] should not be astonished to find myself married to some old maid who can nurse me when I am sick, provide good dinners for me when I am well, and not expect from me any very ardent or romantic affection." -James Buchanan in a letter to a friend about when his lover King went to France on business for a couple years. Dude was clearly, undeniably gay as can be.
todayilearned	From the Wikipedia article: >A similar euphemism was "confirmed bachelor", which was used in the second half of the twentieth century by the satirical magazine Private Eye. Rose Wild reported in The Times in May 2016, however, that she could only find around a dozen examples of the phrase in the paper's obituaries, some of which were of a non-coded form, causing her to wonder whether the phrase existed much outside the imagination of the writers of Private Eye.
todayilearned	All the single men All the single men All the single men All the single men Up in the grave, just tore up I'm doing my own little dead thing I never got to dip it and now you wanna trip it 'Cause another brother befriended me play whist with him, he play whist with me Don't pay that any attention 'Cause I cried my tears for three good years Ain’t no bitch marrying me 'Cause if you liked it, then you should have let me courted it if you liked it, then you should have let me courted it Don't be mad once you see that he went Dutch if you liked it, then you should have let me courted it Oh, oh, oh
todayilearned	Yes, but we had plenty of words for ourselves that were in use before that. For example, we were using 'gay' for ourselves decades before that definition came into common use outside LGBT spaces. The word 'bisexual' was first used to mean attraction to men and women in the late 19th century (to pathologize us), it just wasn't used in LGBT communities until later. > "Recently" in LGBT terms would be late 90s - early 2000s Right. I said "more recent" to mean "fairly recently."
todayilearned	Well gay and lesbian as I already mentioned. But then there were also subcategories to describe stuff like gender presentation and sexual roles, like how today we use twink, bear, stone butch, femme, etc. Those would be different depending on when and where you are, especially considering that communities were so localized and usually segregated in various ways. For example, butch and femme as identities began in working class lesbian communities, but eventually expanded to all lesbian communities and other queer spaces like [ball culture.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_culture)
todayilearned	You're seeing this from a modern perspective where women have rights. Not so much in the old days, if a man wanted to marry he got married and the women just had to deal with it. Heck, it still is the truth...if a man wants to marry no matter how horrible he is, he can just buy a mail order bride from Asia or Eastern Europe (or a "model" as he calls it)
todayilearned	>more likely than him being gay. Why though? I agree that it is likely, but why would it be more likely? It's not like people weren't gay back then, and if you were gay it's likely you would act as he did. We just don't know and you can't really claim either answer is more likely without evidence. He could have been gay, he could have been asexual or he could have really wanted to get laid but just never managed. We don't know.
todayilearned	I was going to pull up statistics on autism/savants in mathematics and the first result I looked at talked about Newton, so take that as you will. Gallop reports gay men to be 2-3% of men, while Time reports on a study finding 3.54% percent of a population of boys were diagnosed inside of a 3 year measurement period. Given the assumed (at least slight) correlation to mathematical aptitude and the autism spectrum, it's a very small step to say that "a mathematically gifted man is more likely to have been autistic than gay", even if there isn't strong evidence to suggest a conclusive categorization one way or the other.
todayilearned	Are you saying everyone who is autistic is likely to be a virgin their entire life? "Unable (or unwilling, though that might cross over into asexual) to have even one romantic relationship" is a very small subsection within that 4%. It is absolutely possible that he was autistic. It is also possible that that is the reason why he never married or had sex. But we just don't know. I know I would be annoyed if people came along 50+ years after my death and claimed to know my most intimate secrets.
todayilearned	Look I don't know what your problem is. Lavender Marriage is a term for a marriage of convenience in which one or both of the partners is homosexual. It comes from the idea that lavender is associated with gay people, it's a euphemism because lavender etymologically is a name of a flower and has nothing to do with gay people, therefore a person who didn't know the double meaning would have no idea what it meant. Likewise Gay has a traditional definition and has only recently shifted to become a euphemism for homosexual. You may think my terminology is wrong, but what exactly is offensive about those two statements?
todayilearned	The Norwegian fjords are relatively longer. ~~The measurements might also include Svalbard, which is technically part of Norway, but is a treaty territory.~~ Edit: Actually, the typically cited CIA world factbook length for Norway doesn't even include Svalbard - and the Svalbard coast is only 3 587 km there, which is far less than the 22 498 km length cited for the mainland and the 58 133 km length of the Norwegian islands. Both Norway and Chile have claims in Antarctica, but those probably shouldn't be counted when comparing coastlines, particularly because Chile's claim overlaps with other countries and has no practical consequences due to the Antarctica treaty.
todayilearned	One problem is that our world is made out of atoms, and even those atoms are mostly made up of space. And the only practically meaningful way to measure a coastline is "how far does a human have to travel in order to see it all" rather than "how far would an electron have to travel in order to visit all the atoms that make up the coastline". As long as we just use the same standard for all countries, the comparison is fair. This is once again an example of how goal-oriented not only perception, but even basic concepts like length are for us humans.
todayilearned	A significant proportion of the vast amount of CO2 us humans are pumping into the air gets dissolved into the ocean. This is making the ocean slightly more acidic. It's only very small shift relative to, say putting a drop of lemon juice in a glass of water, but over the entire ocean it makes a massive difference. The difference is that it makes it tiny bit harder for small critters to form shells. It's not going to dissolve clams - they're not going to fizz away like an Aspro - but when they're tiny microscopic baby clams their shells might not get started properly. This affects everything in the ocean that has a shell. It has already had an effect on corals and krill - two to the most important critters in the sea. A lot of sand in the world is made of rocks, but, the good stuff for both building construction and lying on while wearing a bikini is made of coral and shellfish. Sand is already considered a non-renewable resource because we are using it at a vastly faster rate than it is being produced. Killing off shellfish is more just a symbolic shooting of ourselves in the foot.
todayilearned	> A lot of sand in the world is made of rocks, but, the good stuff for both building construction and lying on while wearing a bikini is made of coral and shellfish. Do you have a citation to support the idea that the most valuable sand is carbonate-based? I'm aware the shape matters, and I'm aware how important limestone is in the construction industry, but I wasn't aware that carbonate sand is preferred in construction. As an aside.. Are you familiar with the concept of enhanced weathering?
todayilearned	No it isn't. People in Japan are conditioned to think new homes are safer. The government established 30 years for wood and 37 years for reinforced concrete as an arbitrary window so that new home constructions are continuous. It's to keep the economy moving. Also, Japanese people prefer new to used. They'll tear down and rebuild before renovating, just because they have it ingrained in them that new is more reliable and safer. Although renovations are catching on in Japan as the idea of customising your living space has become really popular in the west.
todayilearned	They're probably not wrong. Increased knowledge of building practices to make infrastructure safer to disasters would make new safer. This is true in many places. In North America older homes have products that are less fire resistant, older wiring which increases the likelihood of fire, older piping. There's a reason why the older cities on the east coast have more house fires than newer cities. There are so many safety features in new homes. Drywall has a burn through rate of 45 minutes, fire barriers on the outside of houses, windows with the house next door and your windows are offset to prevent the radiation of heat. Two windows are beside each other. If a 600 degree fire is in one room it can ignite the neighboring room through the window through radiation heat transfer. There's also the improved electrical code, fire walls built into attached homes apartments, and malls to help contain fires to one unit. While house fires burn hotter and faster today because of all the IKEA garbage and plastic carpet we fill our houses with, there are less house fires.
todayilearned	They have rights to their version of it, just like they have their version of the Grimm brothers' stories. Those stories are public domain, but you can't make your own merchandise resembling the Disney movies because they do have copyright over their own adaptation. So they'd just have to make a movie with a distinguishable art style, then they could use the fact that people recognize that style and the fact that they have more money than anyone else trying to make merchandise and they'd be fine.
todayilearned	I could literally make an animated movie about a little bratty boy named Melvin and his stuffed panda he believes is real named Robb and release a movie in that exact style about his overactive imagination and all the characters he creates in his head and nobody would be able to get a lawsuit to stick in court against it. If any movie studio wanted to make a rip-off movie they could, they would rather just have the real thing though because it's worth more.
todayilearned	It's not the same. Scientology got given religion status on a technicality and, depending who you believe, there was certainly some heavy lobbying involved and possibly even blackmail and fraud. Miscavige wanted it to get religion status to save it from financial ruin by becoming tax exempt and it worked. It's no different from any other exclusive pay-to-join club. You can't just become a scientologist because you believe in its cause, you have to have real money. There's a reason their HQ is called The Celebrity Centre. I don't want to get into it too much here but Tom Cruise has arguably single handedly led to the continued success of the cult despite all we know about its inner workings. And to compare it to not watching a film based on an actor's religious belief is not comparable. There will always be fundamentalists and lunatics in any organised collective (and believe me I have just as much a problem with Christianity, et al as the rest), but the difference is that the founding principals of those religions are rooted in good and moral causes. Scientology's are not. And they purposely destroy familys and brain wash people to fill the pockets of the highers up. Cruise is aware of this and still goes along with it. Therefore I can't appreciate the man despite his talent.
todayilearned	>It's not the same. Scientology got given religion status on a technicality and, depending who you believe, there was certainly some heavy lobbying involved and possibly even blackmail and fraud. Miscavige wanted it to get religion status to save it from financial ruin by becoming tax exempt and it worked. It's no different from any other exclusive pay-to-join club. You can't just become a scientologist because you believe in its cause, you have to have real money. There's a reason their HQ is called The Celebrity Centre. I honestly couldn't care either way, and I don't mean that in a sense to belittle your argument, it just doesn't matter to me personally wether or not you have to pay the "church" to be a member. >but the difference is that the founding principals of those religions are rooted in good and moral causes. Scientology's are not. And they purposely destroy familys and brain wash people to fill the pockets of the highers up. Cruise is aware of this and still goes along with it. Therefore I can't appreciate the man despite his talent. I really don't see how that matters, I also don't really want to get into any sort of religious debate, but if you're Catholic and it comes out that priests are literally raping little kids while the higher ups hide the evidence and move priests around because of these actions, and your okay with that, how is that any different than being a Scientologist? As for brainwashing, I'm also of the opinion that every religion's goal is to brainwash people. That's why I don't like the whole guilt by association thing, especially when it comes to religion. As far as I'm concerned they're all made up fairy tales written by people who didn't have basic understanding of things we learn in elementary school such as atoms, galaxies, and bacteria, yet they understood the very nature of existence itself. Anyway, I'm not trying to get into a theological debate, I'm just stating that somebody's personal life isn't going to change my view of their art, I still think Kevin Spacey is (was?) a good actor, despite being a pretty shitty guy.
todayilearned	Yes I do. Not interested in getting into theological debate that wasn't the point of my original comment. Read what I wrote. I have issues with ALL religions. Scientology is a business with a business model based on charging admittance. Christianity, Islam, etc. don't. That's the key difference. Of course there are charalatans and opportunists making money out of these too, but it isn't the very business model, it's select areas. Anyway that's all I want to say on it for today.
todayilearned	My cousin has a few rifles passed down through his family (the side though which we’re not related). I don’t think they are particularly rare and expensive, but they are heirlooms nonetheless. He told me they don’t work anymore, but he keeps them for sentimental reasons, and has plans to display them in some fashion. I think they are more representative of what people mean when they say “the family rifle.”

Subsets and Splits

No community queries yet

The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.