@Walterodim's banner p

Walterodim

Only equals speak the truth, that’s my thought on’t

1 follower   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 12:47:06 UTC

				

User ID: 551

Walterodim

Only equals speak the truth, that’s my thought on’t

1 follower   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 12:47:06 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 551

Sidewalks are legal to ride on in most municipalities. They're terrible to ride on. I don't know why you believe relegating cyclists to sidewalks would prevent accidents with vehicles - sidewalks cross intersections with less visibility than roadways and most accidents are at intersections.

If you just want cyclists to stop their stupid hobby, you should say that rather than proposing a solution that's obviously unworkable and that you've apparently been told is unworkable by cyclists.

Put simply, I think Elon Musk is an Antichrist. I'm not a religious man, but nothing seems to me to sum him up so neatly as the concept of an Antichrist. He has offered visions of salvation in the form of environmentalism, extraterrestrial travel, pro-natalism, and now DOGE. He is the richest man in the world and commands the world's largest microphone, using it to shape global opinion and change governments around the world. His relationship with the truth is flexible, to put it lightly.

If Antichrists are real, would they have many children via IVF with women like Grimes and Ashley St. Claire? Would he name them things like Exa Dark Sideræl and Techno Mechanicus? Absolutely.

There is a relevant in that first sentence. Let's try it out with different subjects and objects to see if we would call that a ban:

  • The law signed in April mandates a ban on liquor sales at Total Wine if bottles are not labeled.

  • The law signed in April mandates a ban on Toyota produced in Japanese-owned factories rather than American-owned factories.

  • The law signed in April mandates a ban on cheeses if the milk is not sourced from FDA-inspected farms.

I would not describe these as "bans". They impose requirements (divestment from ownership by an adversarial government in this case). Perhaps they're bad regulations, but they aren't bans on the products in question. That ByteDance is apparently going to elect to sunset the application rather than take the money and run is strongly suggestive of the real value being non-monetary advantages to the Chinese government.

OK, so I don't bring my dog to grocery stores or other places where the norms would suggest not doing so, but I do want to give you my gut response to the question anyway:

Are dog people convinced that all humans love dogs (except for evil humans) and therefore there ought not be a problem?

I don't care that you don't like dogs. I don't think you're evil for it, but I do think it's a sign of uptight neuroticism. My dog is a shy yellow lab that never barks outside her own home. She walks directly at my side and doesn't approach strangers. If someone was afraid of her, I wouldn't deliberately inflict her upon them, but I also think it is absolutely just their problem. If, for example, I was at a bar patio and someone was bothered by her presence, I would say that it's entirely incumbent on them to go somewhere else - the dog is normal and pleasant, the anti-dog guy is the unreasonable party, and that's up to him to act accordingly.

I'll agree that there is an annoying fraction of dog-havers that think their dog belongs everywhere. The flip side of this is that I've seen people on local Reddits whining about dogs on patios because they have allergies or they're scared of dogs. I am not at all inclined to accommodate their delicate systems and sensibilities.

This isn't true at all and is one of the mistakes people make that damages their long-term fitness improvements. Zone 2 aerobic exercise is definitionally easy. I can burn 700 calories/hour running at a pace that feels almost artificially easy and having a conversation. People that focus more on cycling tend to go even easier. If most of your aerobic activity feels hard, you're either out of shape or doing it wrong.

Getting started on exercise is difficult, maintaining it isn't.

all of which are 100% necessary

Street parking, especially free street parking, is not as necessary as it's often treated as by people that want to park for free on the street.

I do not assert moral superiority and I do not think people who muster the will to exercise and lose weight are morally superior to those who don't. That's all projection on your part.

I'll bite the bullet and be the strawman here - yes, all else equal, people that are fit and maintain their weight are morally superior to those that don't. You can explain to me the complex biological underpinnings of why some people have a harder time doing that and I will still think they are morally inferior to people that do it. I grasp that compulsive liars and addicts may lack the same full capacity for agency as others, but I still think they're morally inferior to people that are honest and temperate. Ultimately, I judge someone's moral positioning by their actions and the traits exemplified by sloth and gluttony are poor ones.

Does this come off as smug, self-satisfied, and self-serving? I'm sure it does, but I'm not inclined to pretend people that ruin their bodies through a lack of agency aren't demonstrating a condemnable moral failing.

In fact, it's not even being "banned" at all.

And intersections are currently very dangerous because cyclist are on the road, not on the sidewalks.

No, they're dangerous because you're not easily visible when cars are turning. This is true even at running speeds and would be dramatically worse at cycling speed.

It's just very difficult to believe that you have any meaningful cycling experience to draw from here.

The AI slop article in question is describing real events. For Silver, there simply was no need to go digging for a better source for something he had already heard about when he was just posting on X.

It's only when somebody talks about White Advocacy that everyone pretends they don't know what White is.

OK, I don't know what "white" is for this purpose. Is a half-Asian kid white or not? As near as I can tell, they'll get to face the academic discrimination of any other Asian kid if they happen to have inherited Chang as a last name or the same discrimination that a white kid would if they're named Stevens. Culturally, they'll be treated as whitish. This isn't some weird, borderline case that requires adjudication via genetic clustering maps, it's just a common product of the many Asian-white couplings in the United States. That white nationalists would feel the need to dig into the PCA plots to answer the question rather than just saying that they're white enough or that they're actually Asian highlights a reason this project is just not very appealing.

Trump and Elon Musk are extremely goal-driven people (I am choosing them because they are household names). Why are they both fat?

Poor impulse control and desire for immediate results. Of course, this has served both men well in a number of ways, but neither is known for their inclination towards gradual, incremental efforts that only yield results when done consistently for long periods of time.

OK, but who gives a shit? Would it change his point? Was the article he linked fundamentally false?

Why do you think people watch current NFL games, and would not view older NFL games if they were less expensive?

Because, contra your claims above, current NFL games are a source of civic engagement, discourse, and philosophy. Of note, people do watch older games. The other day, I went back and watched a fun Bills-Patriots playoff game while I was cycling on Zwift. NFL Network televises old games that people watch. The advantages to real-time developments are that it's all happening live, we're engaged with something as a community of viewers, and there are few shared experiences in the modern world.

Do you think a rational consumer making rational choices would pick a shoe because it has the name “Messi” attached to it?

Yes. In the area where I do buy expensive sports products (running shoes), I can observe that the best runners in the world wear a couple specific shoes - if it were possible to run faster and win prizes wearing something else, they would do so (or at least a few would). I can be confident that the shoes on the feet of the guys running 2:03 marathons really are as good as it gets.

Moreover, "rational" doesn't mean that someone doesn't enjoy aesthetics, in-group symbols, and branding. You might as well suggest that someone that's truly rational wouldn't prefer a green shoe to a blue shoe when they're otherwise identical.

As a Bills fan, I absolutely hated seeing that happen to Tua. May he get well soon, whatever that may mean for his future.

Is the general mood that the season is basically over, so you might as well roll with Thompson? I'm mildly surprised that there isn't something like a Ryan Tannehill reunion.

I don't think this is a realistic solution but somehow think it's still more realistic than just going back to the pre-10/7 status quo of waiting until a bunch of Islamists launch another attack on Israel. If you start with the presuppositions that Israel should exist as a Jewish state, that Israel is an important American ally, and that coexistence with a Palestinian state isn't possible, what are you left with? I'm not saying you should adopt those presuppositions, but they seem to be what Trump is working from.

None. I think the impact of tariffs will turn out to be wildly overrated. I have no actual empirical basis for that belief or an articulable mechanism, I just kind of don't believe that Nike is actually going to have more than a marginal price change. Maybe I'll be wrong, but my current stance is that "tariffs don't work" will be even more true than many people believe.

Do you consider the presence of a Melissa McCarthy lookalike in Trump's personal detail to be evidence? I can't imagine an institution with healthy masculinity allowing this slob to occupy any highly visible position.

However, I disagree that lack of a suit (for Musk or Z.) objectively can be interpreted as disrespect.

Why do you disagree? I don't think it can be objectively interpreted as disrespect if people are misaligned regarding the expectations for a given setting, but if everyone is familiar with the expected level of formality and one party unilaterally settles on wearing joggers instead, that is absolutely a sign of disrespect. In the context of meetings between heads of state, Zelenskyy's choice of attire is certainly a signal, the only question is what exactly he's signaling.

If the intent was to ban TikTok, they would have just banned TikTok. The intent was to stop having one of the most used social media applications in the United States owned by the chief adversary of the American government.

Dude nobody gives a shit about how early or late it gets light. It's not a big deal. Changing clocks, on the other hand, is an inconvenience for everyone and it messes with time calculation as the Count rightly pointed out.

I have no idea how to bridge the fact that this is the exact opposite of my intuition and experience. I couldn't possibly give a shit less about the clock changing. I travel pretty often and my clocks change by more than an hour without it being a big deal. Working hours starting while it's still dark out, on the other hand, actually sucks and this seems completely obvious to me. I'm baffled by people that feel differently. Getting up when it's dark sucks.

I say that it's hard to believe you have meaningful cycling experience not to "win" but because I simply cannot imagine that someone that has that has put in significant mileage at any reasonably decent pace could come to the belief that being on the sidewalk is a good idea for cyclists. If I'm wrong, OK, it is what it is, I guess, that is a bit of a showstopper.

Drawing from personal experience is relevant in this context because the suggestion is something that anyone could easily go try out for themselves. Try it out! Go out, head over to the sidewalk, crank it up to ~18 MPH, and see if it doesn't seem like absolutely deranged behavior that's going to end with a broken wrist or collarbone in short order. Sidewalks aren't smooth, they aren't wide, pedestrians are frequent and not attentive, road-crossing have low visibility for turning vehicles, and so on. On surface streets in cities, the speed of a bike is closer to cars than pedestrians by a pretty significant margin.

I'm going to abandon this one because the topic is genuinely infuriating to me for whatever reason. I find it hard to not be insulting and that's just not great.

Evidence I had but didn't really put together:

The bible talking about killing off entire families as punishments. Long lasting family feuds. Feudal level countries killing off entire families as punishments. Ongoing demands for reparations.

These don't strictly require any actual moral culpability. Pragmatists and cynics could elect to enact these measures out of a sense of vengeance, pour les encourager les autres, or simply using responsibility as a pretext.

Oh, I'm well aware of that. The point I'm addressing is the claim that exercise "cannot be easy, because the way it works is by being hard", which is just not even close to true. Aerobic fitness is developed primarily from easy efforts, not pain tolerance.

How long after sunrise or before complete sunset do you need to turn on headlights, and what amount of rain should you?

I remain baffled by people that don't just turn on their headlights as soon as they turn the key.