| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not looking forward to work tonight, for some god awful reason we're open until midnight tonight.
Oh right, tis the something, something.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And, he's here now.
Let us know his excuse, I'm always looking for new material.
My favorite is a guy had to leave early to take his girlfriend's cat to the dentist.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I spent yesterday putting up all of the Christmas decorations. Today I am quite sore, especially in the glutes, from going up and down the ladders so many times. My husband's response to this? "So you're literally walking around butt-hurt today?" Nice. Very nice. Extra points for witty response to ridiculously stupid injury. :P
Today I continued to try and get ready for Christmas with the first of my Christmas projects, an advent calendar....and experienced a total Pinterest fail. I used a mini muffin tin and magnetic paper and painted the numbers on myself when the printable failed...it looked totally adorable. For about two minutes. And then the crappy magnetic paper gave out and the candy fell all over the floor. The kidlet is being a good sport about it. He doesn't care what the advent calendar looks like. He cares that he gets extra chocolate every day in December. But I am seriously annoyed to have spent the money on materials for a failed craft project. Ah, well. Hopefully the next projects will go better.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
probably because its a bit boring.So, considering that the press is usually all over articles as trivial as, "Astronomer finds rock orbiting Mars in the shape of Orson Welles' head; claims it proves The War of the Worlds was true," how is it that when something far more fundamentally important such as this article is, why can't I find it in any major news streams?
As a physicist, if true, it's incredibly elegant:
(1) It makes a very simple assumption, very much akin to Einstein's assumptions about relativity a century ago
(2) Given that assumption, it eliminates the need for dark matter, an elegant solution to a decades-old problem
(3) The research has apparently been published in The Astrophysical Journal, a peer-reviewed scientific journal.This. 99.999% of people don't know or care what dark matter and energy are, and have no inclination or desire to learn. Their problem being solved does not affect nor profit them in any direct immediate way. (Yes I know there will probably be benefits down the road directly resulting from this find and those it makes possible, if true. But that's down the road, not now.)
Meanwhile crazy stories like Wellsteroid Over Mars are at least entertaining or dramatic. Thus they attract attention, which means money.
Yeah pretty much. I mean, I like the article -- but even so I don't actually understand the maths and hypotheses from which DM and DE energy arose, nor why empty-space invariance is important (what would vary about empty space anyway?), and as a result I don't know why DM and DE have been called into question. And I'm an interested layman.
And let's not even get into what the average layman thinks DM and DE actually [hypothetically] are. Some sort of vaguely-alien comic-book sort of evil power, probably. In fact I'd bet anything that the next time I hear about DM and DE possibly being discarded in favor of yet another term of an equation I've never even seen, it'll be because some fundy culture warrior uses them in a strawman argument against science -- "Remember when science taught that dark scary stuff is all around us that we can't see? Talk about superstitions! That just proves that you can't trust science, it's all just theory like evolution..."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wish to clarify two things:
- 1) I love both of these systems a very great deal
- 2) they are not poorly made, but just poorly "balanced" (which, let's be honest, means little by those levels of power)
You’re talking to a man for whom a +3 bonus to attack rolls at 30th level is an unacceptable feat tax. Granted 4e math scales differently from 3.x math, but still – the bolded comment just does not compute for me.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Admittedly trying to compare stats between editions is an exercise bound in futility and headaches. It's like trying to compare apples to screwdrivers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Doesn't matter to me. I'm paid by the hour anyway. I just wish they'd find someone reliable instead of sending me the Bottom-of-the-Barrel types.I got my very first job at the high school tutoring center at the tender young age of 15. I learned that if you:
(1) Show up to work on time
(2) Do your job
You will be better than 99% of all other workers out there.Yeah, I know I've said it before, and I know CY violates this paradigm, but I'm still amazed at how hard people find such a simple concept...
I simply do my job.
Apparently this makes me good enough for people to put up with me being late...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My job is - apparently - immensely generous on overtime. If I clock in early, nobody complains; if I stay late, nobody complains. I've never done overtime at all at any other job so this one was the first time I had experience with it, and it was only after overtime became a "yeah expect to do this regularly" thing for me that I learned that many other businesses are apparently far more stingy about it.
And no I am not on salary.
They are touchy about being late, though. If you fail to clock in before 8:30 AM, the timeclock locks down until 10:30. You might as well just wait two hours to come in if you aren't going to make it on time. The payroll department head can overwrite it, but she generally doesn't want to, and usually only will if your reason for being late is something outside your control, like a traffic accident or a medical issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Rain with snow yesterday, making ugly mess from the morning until the afternoon. The weather turned surprisingly pleasant in the late evening, though, and today was much better.
So much better, that a few flies woke up today flying around lazily in my house.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's STOUT REVIEW TIME!!! Many whoopees.
Samuel Smith's Oatmeal Stout Generally, Sam Smith's stuff is excellent, but this is a bit too sweet. Still very drinkable, though.
Ilkley Brewery's Hanging Stone Oatmeal Stout This is more like it. Very dark, very bitter, and plenty of body.
Naylor Brewery's Pickwick Porter Tastes like cake. Beer should not taste like cake.
Elland Brewery's 1872 Porter Supreme Champion Beer. The Steaming Prince of porters. Not as thick and heady as a stout, but a good deal more substance than yer average bitter. Just right, and I'm dashed glad they decided to put it into full production.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Admittedly trying to compare stats between editions is an exercise bound in futility and headaches. It's like trying to compare apples to screwdrivers.
Point is, balance is important to me, and thus well-written is well-balanced by definition. :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Under UK law:
Manslaughter can be committed in one of three ways:
1)killing with the intent for murder but where a partial defence applies, namely loss of control, diminished responsibility or killing pursuant to a suicide pact.
2)conduct that was grossly negligent given the risk of death, and did kill, is manslaughter ("gross negligence manslaughter"); and
3)conduct taking the form of an unlawful act involving a danger of some harm, that resulted in death, is manslaughter ("unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter").
Id say the shooting of Kathryn Steiner falls under category 2. Now to catch up with the rest of the posts...
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lynora - you should have roped in your husband for the Christmas deco. Schadenfreude, if your husband got sore in the glutes, is a thing too =)
The rest - Eh I don't know jack about dark matter since it falls under physics, and Maths eats the thoughts out of my head, so attempting any physics, which is closely related to maths, would too.
I like having my brains mostly intact.
Did you know learning killed brain cells?
So there's proof that Maths eats the thoughts out of your head!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Cap'n, you're due for a lunch" - my favorite work quote.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It pays to be genuinely nice to people, especially when everyone else are a+**&@~s.
Just got a free piece of pizza. :-)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I've never understood the point of being mean. I'm nice to people, and they go out of their way to help me. Win-win, it costs me nothing, and it makes the world a teensy bit of a better place.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
probably because its a bit boring.So, considering that the press is usually all over articles as trivial as, "Astronomer finds rock orbiting Mars in the shape of Orson Welles' head; claims it proves The War of the Worlds was true," how is it that when something far more fundamentally important such as this article is, why can't I find it in any major news streams?
As a physicist, if true, it's incredibly elegant:
(1) It makes a very simple assumption, very much akin to Einstein's assumptions about relativity a century ago
(2) Given that assumption, it eliminates the need for dark matter, an elegant solution to a decades-old problem
(3) The research has apparently been published in The Astrophysical Journal, a peer-reviewed scientific journal.This. 99.999% of people don't know or care what dark matter and energy are, and have no inclination or desire to learn. Their problem being solved does not affect nor profit them in any direct immediate way. (Yes I know there will probably be benefits down the road directly resulting from this find and those it makes possible, if true. But that's down the road, not now.)
Meanwhile crazy stories like Wellsteroid Over Mars are at least entertaining or dramatic. Thus they attract attention, which means money.
"We have discovered the secrets of the universe!"
"Meh, I like dollars.":/
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
(There is nothing wrong limit dollars. It's the "meh" part I'm against.)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I will say this: a vacuum is not really "empty" - I mean, it is, but interstellar medium has a demonstrable energy level (albeit minute) that can, in fact, fluctuate. It's why there is a whole sudden horror (by some) of "vacuum decay" has become a thing - basically it's hypothetically possible for the medium by which we all exist finds a lower energy state and all the rules of reality kind of get weak and lazy and stop working while exploding and ceasing to exist at the same time. Except without pretty lights or colors that come with explosions because that require too much effort, now.
That is a terrible explanation, by the way, and entirely bad and should feel bad, but I'm in a hurry so.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That is potentially both true and false, and the argument may just be splitting hairs. While I've heard arguments either way, the most recently I've heard it propagating forward at the (effective) speed of light (though potentially ignoring the expansion of the universe, 'cause it's the collapse of the universe, which negates red/blue shift from its perspective). What this means to us, though, is absolutely nothing, because we literally won't notice anything is amiss by the time the "not existence" actually manages to get to us.
It's just *BOIP* we're gone.
(Technically it takes time to propagate across the universe and across the earth, but since it literally goes faster than any set of input/output we could ever have, it is effectively simultaneous to our purposes.)
Fun!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Uh yeah...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do think all our resident Texans except Jess have left the thread.
Texan-by-marriage (and went to Uni there), and I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Meanwhile, fourteen work days left until Winter Break.
The children may not be counting down yet, but the teachers certainly are.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As an ex-Texan myself, and one who has been politically moving away from my family for the past year and change, I can't say I'd miss it much, but there are a handful of people I'd like to help evacuate first.
That said, I still say it's only a matter of time before the place runs off on its own, or something else [insert politics here] happens.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Eventually, we're going to have to move back to the family home (which isn't really Texas; it's Dallas, which is worse) and take care of my mother-in-law, who is eighty next year and a very special kind of crazy.
We're taking bets as to whether I drink myself to death under a bridge or jump off of one.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Anybody wonder what I look like?
Sound like?
What my opinions are on modern Christian culture?
It's extremely low quality, as it was my first foray into YouTube video commentary stuff. But it's there.
This is technically religious, BUT it's an off-site link, and I mention none of that HERE, so...no bike tossing, please. :-D
I've already been told I should remove the hat, brush up on my um, and look off to the side less. This is because I didn't have notes. I do better with notes, but I kinda...winged it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, as Texas was brought up - I have family there. They keep asking me to visit. I tried to explain to them it would never happen, but they didn't get the point until I told them "if I'm ever in Texas again, I've been kidnapped."
That side of my family doesn't like me for some reason.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
(There is nothing wronglimitliking dollars. It's the "meh" part I'm against.)
Sigh.
Also: TOTALLY GOT MY LIGHT BLUE BELT TODAY~! WOO~!
(That's a step up from purple, where I'd been, just previously. For the record, our school goes: white -> yellow -> green -> purple -> light blue -> dark blue -> brown -> red -> junior black belt (or black stripe red belt) -> black belt -> other dans.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Eventually, we're going to have to move back to the family home (which isn't really Texas; it's Dallas, which is worse) and take care of my mother-in-law, who is eighty next year and a very special kind of crazy.
We're taking bets as to whether I drink myself to death under a bridge or jump off of one.
You better stay alive. Dang it. >:I
Tacticslion has 178,085 liked post as of today.
Assuming he will read these post please make that 178,087.
I’m about to make a large city statblock based on that number.
Tacticsliontown
Corruption -5, Crime -5, Economy +8, Law +5; Lore +5,
Society +10Qualities academic, prosperous, rumormongering citizens,
tourist attraction, festive piesDanger 0
<3
<3
<3D
Still:
<3
<3
<3
And also:
D
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, considering that the press is usually all over articles as trivial as, "Astronomer finds rock orbiting Mars in the shape of Orson Welles' head; claims it proves The War of the Worlds was true," how is it that when something far more fundamentally important such as this article is, why can't I find it in any major news streams?
As a physicist, if true, it's incredibly elegant:
(1) It makes a very simple assumption, very much akin to Einstein's assumptions about relativity a century ago
(2) Given that assumption, it eliminates the need for dark matter, an elegant solution to a decades-old problem
(3) The research has apparently been published in The Astrophysical Journal, a peer-reviewed scientific journal.
Ha that is cool. I feel like physics today is like philosophy 2000+ years ago.
Bonus when people on the starfinder thread mention the lack of dark matter (and yes I have seen this) link them to this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Anybody wonder what I look like?
Sound like?
What my opinions are on modern Christian culture?
It's extremely low quality, as it was my first foray into YouTube video commentary stuff. But it's there.
This is technically religious, BUT it's an off-site link, and I mention none of that HERE, so...no bike tossing, please. :-D
I've already been told I should remove the hat, brush up on my um, and look off to the side less. This is because I didn't have notes. I do better with notes, but I kinda...winged it.
As I said there: you are good and should feel good.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, considering that the press is usually all over articles as trivial as, "Astronomer finds rock orbiting Mars in the shape of Orson Welles' head; claims it proves The War of the Worlds was true," how is it that when something far more fundamentally important such as this article is, why can't I find it in any major news streams?
As a physicist, if true, it's incredibly elegant:
(1) It makes a very simple assumption, very much akin to Einstein's assumptions about relativity a century ago
(2) Given that assumption, it eliminates the need for dark matter, an elegant solution to a decades-old problem
(3) The research has apparently been published in The Astrophysical Journal, a peer-reviewed scientific journal.Ha that is cool. I feel like physics today is like philosophy 2000+ years ago.
Bonus when people on the starfinder thread mention the lack of dark matter (and yes I have seen this) link them to this.
One of the more interesting things is that physics and ancient thought often echo each other in really, really weird ways.
Take the ancient idea of a cosmic aether for example. Now, of course, we don't believe in the existence of an aether, because there is none (that we can detect). And so, what we've said is that the cosmic void of nothingness is what exists, and things propagate across a literal expanse of nothingness. ... except now we know it doesn't and that nothingness keeps expanding for reasons like <404 error, file not found> and requires an (extremely) low-grade energy level to even exist (and allow things to transmit through it) at all. That's... a weird parallel.
Or, for example, let's look at the four elements. You know them. Earth (substance), fire (energy), wind (movement), water (I dunno). From these four forces all things are made. Now, it's total poppycock, of course, but there's something weirdly similar in physics today: gravity, weak, electromagnetic, and strong forces. Hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhuh. That's... that's weird. (Alternatively, the standard model of elemental particles: quarks, leptons, gauge bosons, and scalar bosons. Literally all things are made out of four... elemental... forces...)
Or, as another concept, the conceptualization of a civilization at the end of time (by the incredible Isaac Arthur, go watch him on YouTube) where he speculates that any last vestiges of humanity will likely be running on a super-long (nearly eternal) variant of "limited time" in near-paradisic cyber ("non-flesh") existences by siphoning power from unfathomably large black holes. Those will, of course, fade out of existence/energy, eventually, and everything will dissipate "forever" until and unless it "randomly" restructures itself into a coherent force or existence again...
Or the increasingly broad acceptance as a society (based on mathematical probabilities and projected capability of computational states and concepts) that this reality is (probably, according to statistics and "best theory" of computational conception) some variant of a simulation.
... it's weird, though, you know, like, for some reason, if this were true, we'd have to have this (effectively) omnipotent super-creator (-device, I mean, "super-creator-device," yeah, that's it) that literally holds the universe together by it's Word cooooooooooooooooooooding language, yes, and has us orchestrated in a more-or-less infinitely predictable () to which we are literally only in existence because of it's providence "desired outcomes" which would be fundamentally unknowable to us, and hence owe our existence (literally) to something so vast, our full mental capabilities can only conceive that something like it might exist, not what it actually is or wants, yet clearly cares for each of us individually, as we are crafted in the system explicitly designed to bring up these eventualities (including the allowance within accepted standards of variance from the "main concept" due to "choice") and who (obvs) has an infinitely detailed and personal knowledge of each of us on a fundamental level. What's more, being a "simulation" to some outside universe (a "higher plane of existence" of sorts) functionally changes nothing within this one, as it's our actual, current reality, and to us it's functionally real.
... curious parallel, though, we are super-interested in creating AI that can do stuff for us. So, you know, the best way to do that, is build a box, give it orders and freedom, and see if it decides to use it for good or evil, probably with a bunch of others, if we're being efficient, and once proven one way or the other, then removing it from that box to a "freer" existence in "reality" (though it could be another box, for further refinement) and so on. Almost like a refiner using a fire, of sorts, to remove undesirable traits from desirable ones.
... all of which is, of course, just one reason why many scientists are (justifiably) starting to get a little rather leery of the rampant popularity of the simulation hypothesis. (Which, it must be noted, is strictly a hypothesis - there is no objective proof that this is real, and likely never will be, considering it's not really falsifiable to any method we know, at present.)
This is, of course, completely circumstantial, at best, and quite literally proves nothing - the probability of statistics is that it's random parallels instead of something fundamental that ignorant individuals with no education (or an explicitly different-from-ours education, lacking most of our knowledge) just knew - far more likely that these weird conceptions were stumbles of accidental vague parallels.
It is just a really interesting series of happenstance parallels. You know?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I Like to attribute a lot of human behaviors that come around in self-repeating themes (history repeats itself and often imo) to some sort of collective unconsciousness that Carl Jung theorized. Not so much for any other purpose then to say hmm that's an interesting parallel.
I think if technology didn't continue in pretty well a linear if not exponential increase every few hundred years humanity would just repeat itself over and over. Recorded history and perpetual innovation is what makes things change from generation to generation. yet despite that common themes keep repeating over and over.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Vagrant Erudite --
Relevant. Clear. Solid.
Good on ya. :)
And speaking of parallels (Tac! :D ) . . . . We've got a wonderfully weird 'congregation' of our own, right here on the boards.
God bless us all, FaWtLies. Much love.
I Like to attribute a lot of human behaviors that come around in self-repeating themes (history repeats itself and often imo) to some sort of collective unconsciousness that Carl Jung theorized. Not so much for any other purpose then to say hmm that's an interesting parallel.
I think if technology didn't continue in pretty well a linear if not exponential increase every few hundred years humanity would just repeat itself over and over. Recorded history and perpetual innovation is what makes things change from generation to generation. yet despite that common themes keep repeating over and over.
There's a lot to be said about the possibilities of the parallels being some sort of cultural collective blinders and/or accidentally limiting ourselves to a more "graspable" selection of conceptualizations (even if not on purpose). But that, too, remains strictly in the realm of hypothesis.
Vagrant Erudite --
Relevant. Clear. Solid.
Good on ya. :)
** spoiler omitted **
Word. :D
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think if technology didn't continue in pretty well a linear if not exponential increase every few hundred years humanity would just repeat itself over and over. Recorded history and perpetual innovation is what makes things change from generation to generation. yet despite that common themes keep repeating over and over.
This has all happened before, and this will all happen again.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think if technology didn't continue in pretty well a linear if not exponential increase every few hundred years humanity would just repeat itself over and over. Recorded history and perpetual innovation is what makes things change from generation to generation. yet despite that common themes keep repeating over and over.This has all happened before, and this will all happen again.
Yes thank you starbuck/morpheus/neo/half a dozen other sci-fi characters.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes thank you starbuck/morpheus/neo/half a dozen other sci-fi characters.I think if technology didn't continue in pretty well a linear if not exponential increase every few hundred years humanity would just repeat itself over and over. Recorded history and perpetual innovation is what makes things change from generation to generation. yet despite that common themes keep repeating over and over.This has all happened before, and this will all happen again.
"The man in Black fled across the Desert, and the Gunslinger followed."
. . . .
[Insert a bajillion words here.]
. . . .
"This has all happened before, and . . . . Wait. What?!"
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ah, there's nothing quite so old-timey masculine as actually using whiskey for medicinal purposes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What about poring gun powder on an open wound then igniting it to cauterize the wound?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
probably because its a bit boring.So, considering that the press is usually all over articles as trivial as, "Astronomer finds rock orbiting Mars in the shape of Orson Welles' head; claims it proves The War of the Worlds was true," how is it that when something far more fundamentally important such as this article is, why can't I find it in any major news streams?
As a physicist, if true, it's incredibly elegant:
(1) It makes a very simple assumption, very much akin to Einstein's assumptions about relativity a century ago
(2) Given that assumption, it eliminates the need for dark matter, an elegant solution to a decades-old problem
(3) The research has apparently been published in The Astrophysical Journal, a peer-reviewed scientific journal.This. 99.999% of people don't know or care what dark matter and energy are, and have no inclination or desire to learn. Their problem being solved does not affect nor profit them in any direct immediate way. (Yes I know there will probably be benefits down the road directly resulting from this find and those it makes possible, if true. But that's down the road, not now.)
Meanwhile crazy stories like Wellsteroid Over Mars are at least entertaining or dramatic. Thus they attract attention, which means money.
Yeah pretty much. I mean, I like the article -- but even so I don't actually understand the maths and hypotheses from which DM and DE energy arose, nor why empty-space invariance is important (what would vary about empty space anyway?), and as a result I don't know why DM and DE have been called into question. And I'm an interested layman.
And let's not even get into what the average layman thinks DM and DE actually [hypothetically] are. Some sort of vaguely-alien comic-book sort of evil power, probably. In fact I'd bet anything that the next time I hear about...
indeed.
Poor explanations do more damage to curiosity than outright punishment sometimes. Dismissing the layperson is unwise.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My job is - apparently - immensely generous on overtime. If I clock in early, nobody complains; if I stay late, nobody complains. I've never done overtime at all at any other job so this one was the first time I had experience with it, and it was only after overtime became a "yeah expect to do this regularly" thing for me that I learned that many other businesses are apparently far more stingy about it.
And no I am not on salary.
They are touchy about being late, though. If you fail to clock in before 8:30 AM, the timeclock locks down until 10:30. You might as well just wait two hours to come in if you aren't going to make it on time. The payroll department head can overwrite it, but she generally doesn't want to, and usually only will if your reason for being late is something outside your control, like a traffic accident or a medical issue.
that is amazing, on both sides of the coin. It is just...wow.
Not sure if i would want to work there or not.