I think it's maybe changing, but pre 2000s it was not like that at all, and it's still really not common in those demographics from my experience.
- Posts
- 0
- Comments
- 294
- Joined
- 3 yr. ago
- Posts
- 0
- Comments
- 294
- Joined
- 3 yr. ago
If there was a single exercise myth I wished I could wipe off the earth it's the "women shouldn't lift heavy weights because then they'll get all muscly, so they should use low weight to 'tone' muscles"
MF do you think it's EASY to ACCIDENTALLY get ripped at the gym? If men struggle to gain muscle mass without a ton of drugs do you think a woman will just "accidentally" get ripped AF doing some bicep curls with a 15 instead of a 5??
I see so many women who have certain strength or body shape goals but actively avoid the exercises in the gym that will get them there faster because of this nonsense.
I liked reading your story, and I believe it. I've had PT earlier in life that literally started me with soup cans so I know this is a thing, it was in the literature my doctors were using to prescribe my home exercises.
That aside, I wanted to concur with your underlying point that you don't need a gym membership to do basic resistance training, especially not where we're talking about the goal is old ladies trying to keep the body moving.
Is it nice to have some dumbbells, a bench, a squat rack? Sure, but you can use anything. Basic exercise is free, minus the cost of shoes (for most cardio).
I've never heard or seen any of that. Can you provide sources?
To be fair though, cancer as a whole gets a lot of study dollars but it's incredibly complicated and every form of cancer varies wildly in how it affects the body, how best to treat it, how to screen for it, who are at risk, etc.
The comment you replied to was referring to a single variant that affects only men (incorrectly associating it with Steve jobs, but regardless), not the entirety of cancer writ large.
Studying bone cancer, skin cancer, and studying prostate cancer etc for example are wholly separate things and shouldn't really be put under the same bucket in this context.
I've watched let's plays of strategy games that I want to be better at, in order to see people who don't fucking suck like I do. But after I get a better idea on how to suck less, I stop.
I agree with you to a point, but you should read the full plaintiff's court filing: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.461878/gov.uscourts.cand.461878.1.0.pdf
It's crazy to see how a bot like this can throw an insane amount of gas onto the fire of someone's delusions. You really should look at some of it so you can see the severity of the danger.
The risk is real, so yes although it's just a piece of mindless software, the problem is that it hasn't been designed with any guardrails to flag conversations like this, shut them down, redirect the user for help at all - and controls like those have been REPEATEDLY iterated out of the product for the sake of promoting "engagement." OpenAI doesn't want people to stop using their bots because the bot gives an answer someone doesn't want to hear.
It's 100% possible to bake in guardrails because all these bots have them for tons of stuff; the court doc points to copyrighted materials as an example: if a user requests anything leaning towards copyrighted materials, the chat shuts down. There's plenty of things that will cause the bot to respond and say that they can't continue a conversation about _________, but not for this? So OpenAI will protect against Disney's interests but not basic protective measures for people with mental health issues?
They have scrooge mcduck vaults of gold coins to roll around in and can't be assed to spend a bit of cash to bake some safety into this stuff?
I'm with you that it's not going to be possible to prevent every mentally ill person from latching onto a chatbot, or anything, for that matter - but these things are especially dangerous for mentally ill people and so the designers need to at least TRY. Just throwing something out there like this without even making the attempt is negligence.
I'm also way more into sci fi than fantasy. But IMO, DF is a much, much better game. I've never looked for a mod that does what you're looking for but I wouldn't be surprised if it exists, at least for the texture packs. I think it would be pretty challenging to make a mod that redid all the generated flare (like when your dwarves carve stuff up and there's RNG of the scene they carve) but not impossible. I never cared about any of that crap so I never read it anyways, but lots of people love it.
Sounds to me like you need better pans that don't have paper thin ass bottoms
Burden of proof is on the claimant. That should always be the expectation, not "Do YoUr OwN ReSeArCh"
Someone already told you this, but I want to elaborate
Dwarf Fortress was essentially what Rimworld was cloned from. I've been downvoted into oblivion by rimworld fans for such heresy, but it's true.
For the longest time DF has been free, disgustingly ugly, and getting updates for like 20 years (think you can still download freeware version, but there's a steam version now you can pay for. I bought it because it's been a gem for YEARS and devs more than deserve my $20 or whatever it was).
Rimworld took the DF game, made it sci fi, and made it not absolute dogshit to look at.
You could always mod DF with icon packs that made it look a lot better but it was still pretty ugly.
The steam version of DF looks much, much better but it's not quite as pretty as Rimworld still, I think.
Either way, if you got any time out of Rimworld and want something similar, Dwarf Fortress is your best choice. They're both great and are IMO the best in class of whatever genre you'd call it.
Just learn to photosynthesize like that guy obviously does
I think that's pretty crazy that itten is taught in art schools of all places, except maybe as an example of how models have different strengths and weaknesses, to spark a deeper acknowledgement of the color space in general (as this conversation did for me).
The good news is that now there's two of us. Cheers!
Sure, bad implementation is bad. Hardware, software - whether lazy, ignorant, malicious, negligent, whatever. It's bad, and we agree on that.
My analogous argument is NOT that you should SUPPORT any vaccine no matter what, it is that you should NOT OPPOSE any vaccine no matter what.
The original guy I replied to was like "it's your civic duty to disable TPM" and went on an unhinged rant about how it's about forcing AI integration or something. Completely ridiculous claims that show a completely ignorant and emotionally charged opinion that I equate to an anti vax type of line of reasoning.
Repeatedly I've criticized bad implementation of TPMs and specified that they're effective only when used correctly.
Sounds like you and I agree on pretty much all points but you're getting wrapped around the axle on an analogy that I made to highlight the absurdity of a different person's statement, and then you're straw manning it to boot.
The reality is that there's a need for TPMs in systems these days as we get more and more reliant on devices to do literally everything for us, and bad actors find new ways to threaten the baskets we put all our eggs in. We should very much so criticize bad conduct and highlight what is bad, but not poison the well on the technology itself. That doesn't help. The conversation has nuance and watering it down to "TPM bad because Microsoft" completely misses the mark.
Bro why is it any other way, ever.
I despise setting alarms. Why do I have to scroll? Fucking let me type in the time on a numpad.
I have like 50 alarms that are 15 minutes apart and I toggle them on and off as needed.
It's a fucking mess, bro. Fuck.
Thanks for entertaining my struggle. I get it now.
When I referred to itten as "normal" I was making reference to its prevalence (which seems to be something that peeves you, given its inaccuracy), but I think it's so prevalent because it's so damn simple. I had to read and re-read your posts and look at your graphics in order to understand what the various layers were signifying, but the flat itten wheel is easy as pie to comprehend to the point that it's taught to children in preschool. I've never really needed any more depth of understanding in my day to day life since then.
Like many models, the simplest are often very inaccurate on a technical level. As a layman the difference between indigo and violet and purple and blue green or whatever are unremarkable in most cases, so the slight yet important difference of which is across from yellow on the wheel doesn't seem significant, until you showed an example of how they mix.
I can see why it bugs you if you have experience in a field that uses color theory as part of its toolkit. For me I've always just needed to know the bare minimum of RGB vs CMYK or whatever.
What would you prefer to see, that there's just better education about colors once people are old enough to get some more nuance?
I'm sorry I've really tried to understand what your position is but I can't wrap my head around it. I find this really interesting but I don't understand it, are you willing to help?
Itten is "normal" RYB color wheel, yes?
Can you ELI5 how Munsell is different? The graphic you linked pretty much looks like it showed the same RYB archetype, with some layers and different levels of brightness... Isn't that just RYB with extra steps?
Here's some things that might help us meet in the middle:
-I understand radio/light/EM spectrum/frequencies/amplitudes
-i struggle with concepts of hue, contrast, brightness, luminosity, flux
-i am not an artist at all. I have pretty strong aphantasia - I'm not sure if that's relevant but it seems like it might be in this case so I'll mention it here
I mean, philosophically all lives are equal.
But you value people you love, your family (I assume) more than your neighbors. And you care about what happens in your town more than in another city in your country, and you care more about your country than others...
USA had a pretty bad plane crash a couple months ago in Louisville; about a dozen people died. I care, it was a tragedy, but I guarantee you that the people in Louisville care a lot more than I do.
And it's the same reason a nation will care more about its citizens vs the citizens of other nations. Kind of obtuse to pretend that's not how people work, no?