Yeah, I remember taking a walk through the polar vortex back in 2019 and feeling heat escape my clothing like air from a ripped astronaut suit, but that was a 20 minute walk and I anticipate being out in it for multiple hours this time. That means I need to prep differently.
I’m not skipping work, but when I put in the personal time off request and told my boss why it was such short notice he said to get out there and do the work, so that’s what’s happening.
I’ve been pretty nervous looking at the weather and how that may affect turnout. The forecast has a low of -23, which rivals some of the worst cold snaps I’ve seen up here factoring in windchill. But it turns out that’s just in the morning. By the time the march happens it’ll be closer to -10. That’s just adding sweatpants between my leggings and jeans and some thinner gloves under my inner glove layer.
There’s a time and place for shows like Shark Tank, Ancient Aliens, and Ghost Adventures. That place is a hotel room, and that time is after a full day of vacationing when you just want to wind down with some silly stuff.
As long you keep some self-awareness, it’s great fun to pretend to be an expert commentator on whether something’s a good deal or not.
On the PC Gamer hands-on I read they got about an hour running intense games standalone. There’s a port to plug an external battery into to extend that, but it seems the focus is on streaming from a desktop, which will use much less resources and extend the battery life quite a bit.
Is that EU picture supposed to look more aesthetically appealing than the US one? Because I flip a switch on the US panel and feel super serious, like Kurt Russell about to flip the switch on all power on Earth. I look at the EU picture and think of the electrical outlets behind the teacher’s desk in the 80 year old school building I attended.
If you go back far enough, there’s a lot of Scandinavian heritage in Minnesota settlers, especially Sweden and Norway. Historically, Scandinavian foods lacked spice because there weren’t a lot of spices that grew there. The settlers brought the palette that comes with that with them.
Instantly? It’s a somewhat vague term, but magnanimity, having “loftiness of spirit.” To me, it means that when they enter a room they carry a subtle gravity. Their eyes are focused on what and who is around them, taking in each in turn with a clear understanding of what they see but a respect for what they don’t. A trim smile that welcomes greetings and promises warm words in return. They breathe with the calm ease of someone healthy and comfortable in their own skin, and with each step they appear to not just approach their physical destination, but their own personal fulfillment.
You, me, and everyone else are the amalgamations and culminations of our individual life experiences. You don’t have to remember the details for those details to have happened and influenced you at the time.
I understand your concerns after having my first concussion almost two years ago now and unvaccinated covid three years before that. Both affected my cognitive state and speed of thinking/remembering, and I’ve wondered/worried how much weaker my mind may be than it could have been. But ultimately what I tell myself is that I can’t change those things, they’re just another thing that led me to now. All I can do is the best with what I have and trust that it will be enough.
But that’s just living with the doom and gloom. I think you may be surprised at what you do remember but can’t recall unprompted. One time I lost the game (I lost the game, sorry) around a friend of a friend who paused for a moment then exclaimed that it had been 15 or 20 years since he last thought about the game. So for all that time one could think he had forgotten, but as soon as something triggered his memory, it was there. Based on that, I advise that you trust that if you have a relevant memory, it will surface at the time it is relevant. Some level of self-reflection is good, but don’t let the reinforcement of old brain connections in memory stand in the way of forming new ones.
Honestly pretty relatable. I had a bit of a “you’ll shoot your eye out” moment this summer. I got some flower for the first time in a while (it’s mostly a thc drink culture around me) and was smoking daily. For the next couple weeks the thought kept crossing my mind that maybe I should only smoke every other day to keep my tolerance creep slow and prevent what I call “zombie mode.”
We talked a little and I asked if he still smokes. His answer? “Yeah, but only every other day.” To hear him echo the exact thing I had been considering internally really got me. I’ve been a lot better about keeping a day or more between getting high, and I have found that it has helped me enjoy being sober more as I have found things to do while sober, and also increased my enjoyment of getting high as I have more time to look forward to it and a lower tolerance that makes it easier to get to the right level.
Well, I guess I’ll just disagree. It very much reads to me as someone looking back and realizing they got everything they had been trying to get “by mistake” when they stopped trying to get it.
I think I can forgive someone using the language of their past self when reflecting upon that past. In the context of the paragraph, I think it's fair to say that "which worked" means something more along the lines of "and things did get better." Maybe he could have improved his word choice in that instance, but I don't think that negates everything else said.
I can already hear you saying "but that's not what he said, and that was his choice of words." And to that, I point to one of the key lessons I learned in college philosophy: questions of meaning come before questions of truth. In this case where one short two word sentence does not fit the rest of what he is saying, I think it's best to ask what they could mean that would fit.
No, over text they might sound similar, but in person it's easier to see that the difference is between being performative in his niceness as a means to have friends/a girlfriend versus being nice as a means toward being his better self, with friends following naturally from that.
Ater freshman year of college I learned there was a local brand of chocolate milk that is the bees knees. I started drinking a gallon or two a week, it was a problem, but I was also experimenting with weed for the first time and it was so good.
After a few months my buddy told me he had this stuff called DMT that you smoke through a meth pipe he had acquired for the purpose. So I sat down and as I leaned back from the hit and reality morphed I shut my eyes.
The world was technicolor, composed of rings and rectangles moving toward and past me. There he was, the figure, a cross between Slender Man and Truth from Full Metal Alchemist, a blank white face except for the big grin. He radiated pure love, and as we looked at each other a cascade of similar figures swirled round the periphery, filling me with a sense of love, acceptance, and belonging like I had never experienced.
It was during this time that the voice came close to my ear and spoke to me, clear and purposeful: “Hey, lay off the chocolate milk.”
It was so obvious that I immediately responded back with a thought, “Oh yeah, thanks!”
I continued to float through bliss for another minute or so before fading back to reality, and just like that my chocolate milk intake dropped to once every month or two.
It’s not super creative but I named my mom’s network “The Internet” so when she asks for help with getting online I can ask if she’s tried connecting to The Internet.
“Most people think ___.” No, unless you’re citing a statistic or roughly quantifying how many anecdotes you’ve heard agreeing with you to support that statement (both of which rarely happen), that’s just your opinion wrapped up in language to avoid actually justifying it.
Additionally, even if most people think something, I don’t care what most people think. In my experience what most people think vs what the best thing to think is are often not aligned.
When I consider changes to language, I try to start from a prescriptivist position rather than a descriptivist, which to me means assuming language should stay static to ensure a common understanding rather than fragmented meanings that lead to misunderstandings. If there is a change in language, it should justify itself through simplifying terms or adding a new meaning that other words lack, while avoiding harming the meanings of pre-existing words.
I use they/them pronouns for non-binary people as an example of this mindset in action because I think the benefits far outweigh any cons. With a greater understanding that non-binary people new language was needed, and they/them seems to me a very natural fit as I would already think to use it when asking about a stranger even before I knew of non-binary as a concept (“oh your friend is coming? What’s their name, are they a boy or a girl?). In my experience having a very close non-binary friend I have found that context tells whether I’m using they as a singular/plural pronoun ~90% of the time, and when it fails it adds maybe 20 seconds of clarification to explain I was referring to person’s name.
I think what you’re saying should be taken as inspiration for further evolving how we use those terms to better separate between singular and plural use rather than try backtracking on how it has already evolved in common use, and I think the answer (for me at least) lies in your very comment. Much like “you” vs “you all”, going forward I’ll put a little effort into using they/them in a singular context and use “them all” or “they all” as a plural. Maybe it will catch on and 30 years from now we’ll be saying “theyal” and “theyal’ll” as shorthand for “they all” and “they all will.”
34% is such a large number of representatives to defend a bad actor.