On the spectrum myself and I am a foodie with an insatiable apetite for new and interesting. My general rule is if it was good enough for them, it's good enough for me. I don't always like everything, but I'll try anything.
Lots of folks were talking about it, the gilette gouging went too far and pushed a lot of people back to grandpas razor. I have no idea if it was counterfit or not, but the blades were great. I should have bought more, but it's like 25 years worth. ;)
My guess it it was poor country prices shipped worldwide by this guy. For aome reason, I remember his username. Idiotdoc.
Merkur safety razors for the win. The problem is finding cheap blades. A long time ago I bought 5000 blades for $10 off ebay from a dude in the phillipines. I am down to my last 5 5-packs.
Ok. Here goes. The short answer is it depends on the arrangement. Big stars have more clout with publishers/producers, many artists self publish and maintain control themselves, other work with artist centric studios who respect artists wishes. Otherwise, it's usually the studio who have a say, and they rely on their mastering engineer's opinion.
The trend for the last long while was the "wall of sound" pionered by Phil Specter who developed a compression technique so it would sound good on cheap systems and especially cars and radio as that was the main means to introduce music to potential buyers. It has persisted into the age of streaming. Hi-fi friendly masterings are usually done because the buyers are into that kind of music and seek it, conversely, most pop is mediocre. The short of it is the loud and quiet parts are evened out so you can hear more over road noise.
I recall one example, Mary Star of the Sea by Zwan (Billy Corgan from smashing Pumpkins) who made a fantastic record, but wanted, as an artistic choice, for the album to sound like it was being played on a boombox. Great music, sounds like shit. I consider it one of the greatest mastering crimes of all time.
A lot of it is also in the recordings in isolation booths so you get a perfect individual performance, but you lose the stereo imaging and staging audiophiles love. Really depends on who is doing it and why. A lot of artists don't know anything about this stuff and count on the pros to take care of it for them. Its pretty diverse overall.
Getting to true sustainability is increadibly difficult, let alone for the 8-10 billion people on earth. But, if you build a sustainable civilization for 2-4 billion people, it is much easier to achieve, and ypu can return a lot of land back to wilderness to allow the rest of earth's species to flourish. Its an essential component.
Ecologists talk about it in terms of I=PAT. Impact = people x affluence x technology. If you cut the number of people, everything becomes easier.
No. I'm saying we don't need to be heavy handed with reproductive rights because people are making the right choices here. Some policy encouragement would be helpful, but people can be free to choose for themselves.
We need a lot of policy work on lowering average consumption. Income inequality/poverty, planned obsalescence, right to repair, fossil fuels, food production, building codes and municipal design standards, public transit and electrification, habitat restoration, chemical and pollution regulation etc, all still need a lot of work.
If tomorrow I wake up in a different body, I'd still be me
I think you are making an artificial distinction that doesn't exist. Bodies are not cpus that are identical and can run the same program on different hardware. Everyone's hardware is unique, and shaped by experiences and memories.
If we could load your memories and experiences onto someone else's hardware, you most definitely would not still be you. You would be something completely new.
No one said legislating neccessarily. We're doing it now anyways. Most people have the sense that the future won't be kind to their kids and choose to jave fewer/none.
Here is another fun fact, killing people is one of the favorite deliberate mischaracterizations of the degrowth movement that advocates for a lower population through fewer births. Not murder. We don't even have to force it. It's hapening already if you look at birth rates.
Really? My memories in someone else's body isn't me either. There is the biological me at birth, then the conscious me of experience and memory. I think they both play a part of the older you, but being reborn as baby you is still literally the original "you" at this point.
The article didn't specify memories, just a reversion to a juvenile form and rebirth. For the sake of my OP, let's assume no memory transference. Just the biological rebirth of you.
As to the good and bad in life, there have never been guarentees in life. You play the cards you have and get what you get. Sometimes terrible and unfair and cruel, and sometimes great and easy. Usually somewhere in between with a mix of both.
On the spectrum myself and I am a foodie with an insatiable apetite for new and interesting. My general rule is if it was good enough for them, it's good enough for me. I don't always like everything, but I'll try anything.