"Pathfinder has more classes than D&D" - Here's 3.5 class options.
OF content creators date non-creators all the time, just like other sex workers. There's more to relationships than sex, and content creation isn't the same thing as actual sexual intimacy and connection
First, I want to fully admit I didn't watch the video. Apologies ahead of time if that causes me to be redundant or reductive.
Second, I'm also a biologist, although a molecular one.
Third, I agree with almost all of your premise and train of thought. We're certainly more likely to get the likes of "bacterial mats" than intelligent life anywhere, and especially within a distance that we will ever realistically encounter.
I do wonder, though, how you (or maybe the video guy, but obviously not enough to watch the source material before making an ass of myself...) conceptually reconcile the small sample number of known planets with life (n=1) with the mindblowingly impossible number of worlds.
You say that intelligent life evolving only once indicates that it is difficult for evolution to "discover", which is surely possible to be true. But given that we haven't seen the evolutionary conditions on other hypothetical worlds, from what we know, the evolution of intelligent life has a perfect 100% success rate of occurring on planets with life.
In fact, you mention the independent convergent evolution of eyes as an indication that eyes are a "good idea", and that they must be relatively easy for evolution to discover if they evolve independently, repeatedly. But evolution is subject to the whims of selective forces, so a different world would surely select for different traits. Eyes (or other extremely common evolutionary pathways... looking at you, crab body) might be less frequently selected for or be entirely useless, but intellegent decision making and tool use might evolve in ways we can't even conceptualize in our context.
This also extends to the claim of how our world is evolutionarily dynamic (which you point out is hard to quantify in context). We don't know the dynamics of evolution on other worlds, if it happens at all. Recombination could be a unique characteristic of DNA-based life on Earth or it could be extremely common. Other worlds might have longer or shorter evolutionary time lines, also, since our sun's "working life" is shorter than average due to its size and density. Without another example for reference, we don't know whether we're evolving quickly and with diversity or slowly and conservatively.
I guess, I don't think you are wrong, exactly. I just think you are necessarily making assumptions based on how things work here in order to extrapolate how things might work there-- one has to! But the whole discussion (which continues, like this, to this day) revolves around just too many unknowns. We just don't know, and can't know.
Climbing down from my high-horse, though, I have to admit I'm biased, since I have a pet-belief that life is basically guaranteed to exist elsewhere (how freakish would it be for it to only happen once out of so, so many chances?). I honestly feel like there's a good shot that it's incredibly common, at least in a basic form. In essence, I suspect that if we find bacterial mats (or soup) on Enceladus or Europa then it's basically certain that life is everywhere. But we won't even likely know that in my lifetime, so... I keep dreaming!
I don't think that's true? They have a dysfunctional guilt/shame system but they still have other feelings, right?
The article is about how there are a greater number of co-occuring global elections than ever before, such that more than half of humans will be electing leaders this year.
It is not directly making a claim about the importance of the US presidential election this year.
What organization are you researching with? Why is the submission via Gmail?
How are you handling participant data (mostly email addresses, it seems)? Can participants opt out and revoke access to the data after submission?
Do you have a conflict of interest? Do you or any of your colleagues have an affiliation with Dolby or other companies involved in the research?
Did this proposal pass IRB? I'm guessing it's exempt, so probably yes, but do you have the approval number?
What do you plan on doing with the model? Are these data for training the model or for testing it?
I know those questions sound a lil aggro, and to be clear, I don't think there are necessarily right answers. Maybe you're an undergraduate or hobbiest, like... I don't think IRB is super important for a cute cat study. But I do think this kind of info should be included in recruitment calls as a standard!
Cheers, seems cute and fun
Okay, I agree it is "common sense" that advertisements are not usually indicative of reality. But it is only "common sense" because we have a culture where people are allowed to sell products using misleading advertising.
Honestly, I think advertisements as they exist in our culture mainly prey on our evolutionary biases. They exploit our drives that were originally designed to help us survive. The fact they are misleading is the point, in order to increase profits. Frankly, I don't think advertisements as they exist today are ethical at all, and I'd root for any party that wants to push to change that culture.
At what point would you draw the line of acceptability? Is it fine to advertise a fluffy loaf of delicious sourdough, and the product is a literal brick of hard tack? Is it fine to advertise a pair of denim jeans and receive polyester jeggings?
This is especially true when you must pay for the product before examining its contents. Sure, if your mesh bag of oranges at the store doesn't look like the label, maybe you're right that you should be fine with whatever you get, given that you can look at the product before purchasing. But what if you spent money buying a bespoke gift box of heirloom oranges as a present for a family member and they got a taped together amazon box with some green and half rotten oranges it in?
The promise of quality is part of the product. We could improve people's lives substantially by requiring realitistic advertising. It's learned helplessness to just accept the shit-cake because "well, you were stupid for expecting better".
What's the point of giving a huge, extremely powerful corporation even more leeway to exaggerate the quality of their products?
If they do end up losing, I wonder what prescience it sets for other food images.
Hopefully, like, the standard that the images on the packaging are reflective of the actual product, or severely labeled as exaggerations with a real description included elsewhere?
no, but they are often conflated
femboy = a feminine boy, sometimes like the opposite to tomboy-- a gender presentation and/or aesthetic sense or style choice
twink = an effeminate, small person, almost always referring to a man-- a description of body type and/or sexual dynamic
these are not exhaustive definitions and are kind of reductive, actually... but as a quick casual explanation I think they mostly stand
Wikipedia link to radium girls
I think you got the right idea but that description is missing the big points.
They were painting watches and their employers told them to use their lips to make fine points on the brushes, meaning they ingested a ton of the paint. The employers told them it was harmless despite evidence to the contrary. They chose not to use other options because wiping the brush on their lips increased productivity and they were paid per watch.
I don't think you meant to imply that they were doing it for trivial reasons, but I do think mentioning that they were doing it for a job and that their employers were intentionally deceiving them is important context!
Hi! Can you share information about the job description and compensation plan expected for the winner that joins your team? There's a lot of info here about how to nail the "interview", but not a lot of info about what the rest of the job is like. Expected hours? Is it part time or full time? Or is it on commission only?
I'm also curious about the more practical requirements, like if nationality/work authorization is important, if the job will be as a contractor or as an employee, etc. Any insight there?
Lastly, what kind of visibility should we expect for our example project? Like, who are the judges? Will only those judging the contest be able to see the example work? What will happen to the work after the contest? Just want to understand what I'm making before I make it!
OP asked what it means to not have faith in humanity, and the person who responded to your comment had a nuanced take on the answer. Is that really a tangent?
(btw your top comment is a very good answer)
Pretty much every day, multiple times a day, with strangers, acquaintances, and friends. I think it usually brightens people's day, and with strangers, I think delivery and content is much more important than what I look like or who I am.
For content, I only compliment choices, not attributes:
"Cool shirt!" is good, "Nice legs!" is not
"I love your haircut!" is good, "Your hair has such a nice texture!" is not
Tailored compliments are even better, ex. "That book (or other media) is awesome!" is great, if I really do like it, and it can start a conversation, but obviously I don't lie and pretend I know it when I don't.
For delivery, I keep it light and casual. I am mindful to only do it when they aren't preoccupied, like on the phone or reading something. For tone, I guess I pop the compliment, smile, and movie on. For example, if we're walking past each other-- I don't slow down, and I look away immediately after giving a friendly smile. I don't mean that I don't care about their response, because of course I'm mindful to be sure I didn't offend them, but I don't burden them with needing to respond with gratitude or happiness. I think of it as, I want this person to have the (hopefully pleasant) information that their choice was seen and respected by a stranger. I don't want anything back from them.
I would say 95-100% of the people I compliment seem to be genuinely happy I did, and of the ones who don't react positively, I'd say the vast majority react neutrally. In the rare case where my compliment has totally failed, I usually go "Oh! I'm sorry" and again, disengage.
Obviously, with friends and acquaintances the options open up a little more, and usually I do follow up/continue the conversation instead of moving on. But it's similar in the philosophy that I'm usually just trying to give them positive information, and not seeking anything in return. Compliments are not a tool to get people to talk to me or be friends with me. That can and does happen, but it's not the point. Honestly, I think that's the part that most people struggle with, if they feel like they don't get good responses with compliments. It's not for us.
I do think I'm probably an outlier, because I give compliments a lot. But I continue to do it because it seems to really make people smile!
Oh, good point! Yeah, in our old house (copper plumbing) plumbers usually did repairs with cpvc, not sure why.
Huge disclaimer that I'm not a plumber or even close to a plumber, but I did have a house and think about houses:
Isn't the current "standard" plumbing PEX plumbing, which is basically just a bunch of hoses?
Like I think you're on to something but the industry beat you to the punch 😉
Oh hey ugh I've been thinking about basically the same damn thing
I'm also afab, trans masc, enby, pre-stuff, etc. I did martial arts for 13 years and only stopped because I moved away from my school. Kills me a little.
The thing is, even when I was at the school I loved, I still had to grapple with disconnection between my gender identity and the way my perceived gender and sex interacted with the sport space. It's not that they were mean or exclusive to women, it's just that they inherently treated them a little different, and, well, my brain says I'm not a woman. Stop that.
Right now I'm having the same problem because I live near the coast and I really want to get into spearfishing. It's not that women are excluded, or even necessarily that they're intentionally excluding queer or trans people, but there's a hetero- and cis-normativity to these sport spaces that is so hard to penetrate.
I'm sure I could ignore my own gender identity and ingratiate myself with other spearos the way I did before realizing I was non-binary-- usually by acting innocent, accepting lots of help, and talking in a sweet, high voice. Basically, if I play to their expectations of how "females" work I'm sure I'll be included and eventually even respected. But... oh man do I not want to do that. And I can't approach it the "male" way either, because it would be so jarring and odd that they'd think I was like... A bitch? Aggro? Etc.
Uggghh anyway I don't know how to help you (other commenter's are doing a better job of affirming and encouraging) but let me provide the component of: yes I see you, yes I feel you, yes omg it sucks
You're right and it's still hard no matter what, but remember that most of that time you're going to be sleeping.
If you get 8 hrs of sleep going to bed at 10pm and waking at 6 am, you could split the fast evenly in the morning and night (eat your first meal at 10 am and you'd stop eating at 6 pm) or you could stick it in the morning or evening (last meal at 2 pm, OR first meal at 2 pm) or some combo in between.
It's even easier if you're a lazy person like me who sleeps ~10 hrs a day!
Still, absolutely no judgment if it still sounds hard or impossible. Everyone's eating styles are different :-)
What, in your opinion, is the semantic difference between the words plastic and polymer?
What is your word of choice to distinguish between naturally occurring and lab-made polymers?
It's fine if you want to draw some conceptual comparisons between biological and synthetic polymers, but it's 100% not true that "plastics" as defined as synthetic, organic polymers (I.e. acrylics, silicones, polyesters, polyurethanes, halogenated plastics, thermosets, thermoplastics et al.) are the same on a chemical basis as most biological polymers.
Like... where are you drawing the line? Are proteins a plastic? Is starch plastic? Is DNA plastic? RNA? Clearly not, by multiple definitions (bioavailability, reactivity, structure and function, persistence in the environment, etc.). Even biological compounds closer to synthetic polymers (cellulose, chitin, etc.) are definitively different, even if they do have longer persistence, lower reactivity, etc. And bioplastics (like what people mean when they say biodegradable plastics) are heat-modified biological polymers. They don't come out of a living thing that way; they are fundamentally altered from their previous form.
I guess I just... disagree that the distinction is "arbitrary semantics"?
I think they're making the claim that if we're looking at "varience", variety, etc. then pf1e has more overall variability. Pathfinder does it with a combination of classes and archetypes, where 3.5e does it with just classes. I don't think they made the explicit claim of there being more classes in pf1e by overall number.
I find that instead of pathfinder having more "classes" by number, it feels more honest about what is a class and what is a subclass/archetype. Imo, many 3.5e classes would be archetypes in pathfinder, as they fit your definition of "instead of x, you get y" without much substantial difference. And likewise, in my experience playing different archetypes in pf can produce vastly different player experiences (some archetypes and classes more than others, for sure).
All of this is pretty subjective, though... and I personally haven't heard anyone making fun of 3.5e for lacking classes, compared to either pf1e or 2e, but it could happen!