I wont judge a whole movie just from three still images. I’ll reserve my true judgement for later. But I will say that the costume design looks suitable. And the actors, physically, arent far off from what I would expect for their characters, so I’m at least pleased with that. The tone invoked by the imagery feels a bit off, but, again, without context, that’s basically no information at all.
Not that I don’t think that Reddit’s favorite advice is ‘dump his/her ass’, because it is. But there is another relevant thing to consider here. Have the posts seeking relationship advice also become less nuanced/serious over time as people realize that they’re less likely to get valuable feedback and more likely to get cathartic (extreme) support? In other words, are posts being less complicated advice seeking like “My husband and I have different parenting philosophies, how do we resolve this?”, and instead becoming more obvious attention seeking, like “My husband hits my daughter with a puppy, what should I do?”
You mean the god that prioritizes fealty and “love” for him alone over virtue, righteousness and good works? One who will give entrance to heaven to a life long sadistic, violent, and self-centered man who repents in his death bed, but will eternally condemn a man who has fed and clothed millions, who saved lives, who reformed bigots and criminals but questioned the existence of God or worshipped another. Compared to Satan, an angel that wished to overthrow this selfish god. Who values knowledge and choice in humanity. Who rewards ambition and creative joy. Who is stuck in hell with the rest of those condemned by the Almighty. I mean, is really no wonder many Christians are how they are.
If you haven’t, read Horns by Joe Hill (skip the movie, it’s not the same). It plays a lot with this dynamic. The protagonist isn’t a hero, isn’t “the good guy”, but has a righteous cause and when God fails him, the Devil steps up.
I’m sure they have. Just relaying my personal experience with it, though it may be outdated by now.
It wouldn’t just drop, like suddenly out of nowhere. It was on a kernel update. This was, I guess, 2018 or 2019? Can’t remember exactly.
I have no love for Windows (and active hatred for Apple), and I highly value much of the features, customizability, open-source culture, and anti-capitalist aspects of Linux. But it’s not perfect.
I’m a software engineer. I part pick and build my PCs. I’ve worked in IT. And I manage my home networking and automate my self-hosted media server. But when I tried fully switching to Linux a few years back, I held out for a few months, but it just wasn’t worth the hassle. My PC had an Nvidia graphics card, and I had no choice but to use a wifi dongle at my previous residence. Support for both was an after market hack job that needed constant maintenance. It was just annoying, my monitor’s resolution just dropping to 480p and the internet cutting out until I reapplied some patch job.
If I had built my PC with Linux in mind, I would have done it differently. And I’m sure that I’ll try again with my next PC when I can pick compatible hardware. But my point is that I’m far from the layman and still didn’t stick with it the first time. The average computer user doesn’t need a project, doesn’t need highly customizable everything, and doesn’t care about open source. They need things to just work. And I know the problem is the lack of Linux support from major tech companies, which is BS. But that means that Linux simply can’t provide that stability and just work for a more casual user. So it is not the best option for most people.
Just remember that with challenges like that, the main purpose is to guage your problem solving skills. You don’t necessarily have to complete the challenge in time, don’t necessarily have to make it work error free, etc. They want to see how you work through it all. Don’t get me wrong, if you ace the challenge, that’s great. But they mostly want to make sure you have the fundamentals and skills to comprehend the problem and work through to a solution.
So A) depending on the state or country’s age of consent and/or Romeo-juliet exceptions, their may or may not be anything legally disallowed by a 16 year old dating and being sexually active with a 19 year old or older.
B) It certainly doesn’t get more morally wrong in your situation where you’re already seeing someone 3 years older than you, as you get older. That difference only becomes less significant as you age.
C) If the age of consent or Romeo-juliet laws do not make a carve out for your situation, and you were dating and sexually active when they were 17 then likely your partner would’ve already been breaking the law before they were an adult. The difference now is that they’d be tried as an adult if they were to be charged.
D) As for the question, is there actually anything wrong with it. In the vast majority of cases, yes, there is something wrong about it, objectively. But also, it’s not necessarily a big problem in the end, sometimws. The problem comes down to three things. 1) Generally speaking, people your age lack real world insight into adulthood and adult relationships and struggle to make mature, rational, long-term-thinking decisions without the overwhelming power of novelty and emotion that comes with young love. I don’t say that to be insulting, just call it the wisdom of hindsight. We were all, to some degree, still kids at your age, and made stupid decisions that many of us regret. That is something an older partner should be cognizant of too, when they are receiving your consent to sexual acts, that your lack of experience means you may not fully appreciate what you are consenting to. 2) Even if you are mature, understand your decisions, and consent with the full understanding and appreciation of what that consent means, the relationship will almost necessarily have an unhealthy imbalance. They being adults typically means that they have more money, more freedom, and more control over the relationship. Truly healthy adult relationships are a partnership been coequal people. 16 year olds are still kids and typically still the responsibility of parents or guardians, still in school, still responsible only for a small fraction of their own care. And many at that age see older partners as a way to jump the line and soup ahead to becoming adults early, but it doesn’t work like that. 3) Even if it is legal, there is a stigma (and not a wholly unjustified one) that your partner will face that you will not. And if it’s not legal, there’s an even huger risk to your partner, losing their freedom, having their name in a sec offense registry, struggling to find homes or jobs, that again, you don’t face. That’s not fair and it’s simply not a good idea and it’s a risk to both partners.
But like I said, it’s not necessarily all that bad. It could be legal, mature, fully consentual, coequal, and neither partner suffers due to the relationship. And it can workout long term. But I do gotta warn you, that is definitely not the norm.
If a law enforcement officer wants to put a gps tracker on someone’s vehicle, he has to give probable cause and convince a judge to sign off on it. But suddenly we are giving all law enforcement the power to track every single person at all times, carte blanche, no probablu cause, no judge’s sign off, no nothing needed. Make it make sense.
That’s because, per Christian doctrine, Jesus created a new covenant with his sacrifice that fulfills and supersedes the old laws, and put a more spiritual mercy/love-driven interpretation on the previous rigid adherence aspects of Jewish laws and traditions before.
That’s why I asked. Shorting would involve betting the bubble will pop in a specific time frame and has no upper end to what I could lose if the bubble doesn’t pop in time. I was asking if there is any other way to bet against them that I didn’t know about. Something without that time frame and/or lower risk.
Yea, that’s what I figured.
I’m not a big market speculator guy. Does anyone know if there is a way to bet against AI, to make money when the AI bubble pops? Not shorting.
deleted by creator
There was a period of time where anything superhero was almost guaranteed to do well,” Ahuja said on Thursday at the Bank of America conference. “I think [the bar] for superhero movies, it was relatively low. In the mid-2010s pretty much all of them would do incredible business, but now even superhero movies have to have a degree of originality. They have to add something different. They have to have emotional connection. They have to be cultural events that can be marketed that way.”
Fuck me. I knew they never got it, that they were prepared to churn out low effort schlock for a quick buck, but I never thought I would see the day that they openly admitted that that was their mindset and lamenting the days when they could turn major profit off of garbage.
AI hasn’t really taken much, if any tech jobs so far. If anything demand for building and using AI has taken up a good share of the job market in tech.
The bigger issue, currently, is that experience is required even for “entry” level jobs because they simply won’t pay for people who are learning and gaining that experience. It’s also cheaper on the whole to pay someone overseas with experience to do the “grunt work”, for lack of a better word, that you would normally pay a newbie to do, and they’ll get it done faster and more reliably. You’ll have a domestic leadership team and a few senior engineers to steer projects and manage the communication and timezone issues, but very few, if any, fresh graduates.
It’s short term thinking that’s going to fuck the industry in a generation when all the old school guys die or retire, the senior engineers, tech leads, and engineering managers move up to fill their roles and you don’t have enough Jr engineers to become the seniors, leads and managers. They’ll be trying to manage entire teams from overseas, trying to replace people with AI, which will never be a true replacement, and they’ll suddenly see the value in hiring new graduates, but there won’t be enough by then because they made the major useless. The few that exist will probably make bank straight out of school, though, as companies become desperate for them.
There are things on the internet that are free and fine to use. VPNs are not one of them. They have ongoing hosting and bandwidth costs. They are not eating those costs without recouping them somehow.
I don’t agree about the movie being better, mostly because I think getting Mark’s inner monologue made much of the humor land so much better than the vocalized stuff in the movie. And they had to handwave a bunch of the more technical sciences and engineering that I found genuinely interesting in the book. But it was very cinematic and a pretty solid adaptation.
I expect PHM will have to do some more handwaving on the science, which will be unfortunate, but I also think Ryan can deliver on the humor a bit better than Matt did, so I am anticipating that to work quite well. I feel like Ryan’s personality will be a good foil for both the ultra series nature of the threat and the characters dealing with it and the more out there sci-fi elements in PHM (compared to The Martian).