70s and 80s movies come to mind where girls would be getting ready and lie down on the bed and suck in to get the button buttoned. Dazed and Confused comes to mind where they literally use a pair of pliers to put up the zipper because its so tight. Until you break it in, you are just having to suffer. Once they put elastic into jeans, people jumped on it because its just easier. I love my old-style selvedge denim, but it is more work and care than throwaway stuff.
Heat pump dryer. Basically, an HVAC system but instead of pumping the heat from your house outside, it pumps it into your clothes. Slower than an old-style dryer but way more efficient.
After Mcviegh, shouldn’t all U-Haul’s be seen as unarmed vehicular large IEDs? A drone isn’t like an artillery shell because an artillery shell is for putting in an artillery gun. A drone is for flying. Just because something can be modified to serve as some sort of weapon, does make it basically a weapon.
It was quite common in the wake of McVeigh and other large vehicle attacks that they should be seen as weapons and licensing strengthened.
The fact you can drive a 26,000 lb GVWR truck without any special license is something special we have in America compared to most of say, Europe. It's actually pretty mind blowing anyone can just rent 26 ft diesel 26,000 lb truck and get in and drive it on the highway.
It is testament to the fact there are a few vestiges of freedom left in America. Not much, but a few vestiges, since such trucks were around before the regulation hysteria of the late 20th century and 21st century.
I mean, do whatever you want that doesn’t hurt people around you. But when it hurts them, it’s time to ask whether our own convenience is worth the pain we’re causing.
Why is the airplane that chooses to place seats so close together not on the hook for all of the blame in this scenario? We could just offer a decent traveling experience for everyone.
Isn't it the passenger's fault for failing to purchase a seat that meets their needs? The airline isn't to blame for offering a cheaper alternative for those who find it sufficient. And other passengers certainly aren't to blame for using the product that they purchased.
Oh, it’s definitely their fault. They brought this about to cram extra seats on a flight, customers be damned. No doubt about it, they’re certainly the root cause.
But when you find yourself in an uncomfortable group situation, it’s good to ask how you can make it better for everyone, or at least not worsen it. “I paid so I’m doing whatever it takes to not inconvenience myself in the slightest” is the origin of “this is why we can’t have nice things”.
It’s different when there’s a compelling physical need here. If the person in front of me has a hurt back and can’t bear sitting upright, and I knew about it, I’d put up with it as best I can in the interest of we’ve all got to get along. But in the scheme of things, not that many people are unable to sit up and not crush their neighbors.
> It’s different when there’s a compelling physical need here. If the person in front of me has a hurt back and can’t bear sitting upright, and I knew about it, I’d put up with it as best I can in the interest of we’ve all got to get along. But in the scheme of things, not that many people are unable to sit up and not crush their neighbors.
How would you know whether or not the person in front of you has a compelling physical need? Are they supposed to explain their health concerns to you in the hope that you deem it sufficiently acceptable for them to do what they can to be comfortable? It’s unreasonable to expect someone in physical pain to suffer the indignity of explaining themselves to someone they don’t know.
Fair point! So when I scream in their ear for causing me pain, your contention is that I’m free to do that and I don’t owe them an explanation. I’m sure that logic will make everyone around us smile and nod their heads in approval.
That seems like quite the leap and will more than likely result in you being escorted off the plane when you reach your destination.
It may well be an inconvenience to you if someone chooses to recline their seat but nobody owes you an explanation. Expecting them to justify themselves to you isn’t a reasonable stance. And given that you don’t know what someone is going through, whether they have a hidden disability, whether they’re in chronic pain, I really wouldn’t advise asking, let alone shouting at them.
Why is it that people can't seem to grasp that the brain is just as biological as the kidney or pancreas? If your pancreas isn't producing the right chemicals in the right quantities at the right times for normal healthy functioning, of course we need to treat that. But if the brain isn't producing the right chemicals in the right quantities at the right times for normal healthy functioning, then obviously its willpower or laziness or whatever.
Literally no one is saying overweight people are magically defying the laws of physics. Managing weight involves the brain, and the brain is a biological organ that is affected by genetics and the chemical and hormonal signals from other organs in the body. this moralizing about using a drug to lose weight being wrong or lazy or cheating or whatever is no different than people saying depressed people need to just stop being sad or ADHD people need to just pay attention.
The solipsistic idea that because your brain has the ability to do X means that everyone must work the exact same way, therefore if my brain is able to do something everyone else must too. If I can sit down and focus, ADHD must just be lazy and choosing not to. If my feelings of hunger are mild and easy to moderate, overweight people must just be weak willed and gluttonous.
To frame this as trying to argue for basic thermodynamics is such a strawman that my pet crow flew out the window in fear. If you think fat people are lazy and refuse to use willpower, and using a drug is a lazy substitute for mental willpower, then say so and have an honest discussion.
I like how you are trying to appear sophisticated by hanging your film taste off someone else's opinions. What other great things have people told you to like?
Is that true though? Most quality animated features included quality animation. The visuals of the beautifully hand painted early Disney movies were part of the art form. Toy story looks basic to us now but it being the first totally computer animated movie and the visual style that came with that was part of it. Movies are a visual medium, so I guess saying that the visual part of the movie doesn't matter much to you is like saying that the words a writer uses doesn't matter much to your enjoyment of a book.
The fact that Toy Story or Incredibles stand up even today, as much as we notice the limitations of the time, speaks to the art and effort applied to what was possible at the time. For as simple as they can be in places, they still used the tools they had access to well. Classics.
This is a pretty massive assumption that your "craving level" is the same as everyone else. This takes a complex process (the feedback from the body to the brain on feelings of hunger, satiety, etc.) and pretends that it is a simple A-B thing. Just for type 1 diabetics, their insulin levels have a huge effect on feelings of hunger, with hyperphagia (feelings of insatiable hunger) being common. Diabetes is just an extreme example of the spectrum of how individual bodies regulate insulin, and insulin is just one hormone effecting and effected by food.
No, it was probably the incredible advances in everyday automation combined with massive increases in food availability. Survival is not nearly as physically demanding today as it was in the middle of last century.
It's almost like the difference in the way ultra processed foods are digested, absorbed, and the way hormones are released in response has something to do with that. It's almost like this is a biological process. It's almost like the brain is an organ and if its hormones and chemicals are messed with, that can have health implications. Or maybe it just "don't be lazy".
I hear about people winning the lottery all the time. There were two $100m+ winners just this week. The anecdotes just keep piling up! That doesn't mean the lottery is a valid investment tool. People just do not understand how statistically insignificant anecdotes are in a sufficiently large dataset. Just for the US population, a 1 in a million chance of something happening to a person should happen enough to be reported on a new person every weekday of the year.
You guys are getting downvoted but you're 100% right. You never hear the stories about someone typing symptoms into ChatGPT and getting back wrong, bullshit answers--or the exact answer their doctor would have told them. Because those stories are boring. You only hear about the miraculous cases where ChatGPT accurately diagnosed an unusual condition. What's the ratio of miracle:bullshit? 1:100? 1:10,000?
reply