@charlesf's banner p

charlesf


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2025 May 19 17:35:54 UTC

				

User ID: 3706

charlesf


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2025 May 19 17:35:54 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 3706

Part-time wiki editor, I know enough to quickly identify and avoid problem areas and stick mostly to dry, non-CW stuff. That being said, always check the Talk page, including its archives. It can sometimes be hard to locate the links to the archives if the one of the pages "guardians" is especially good with the system and knows how to obscure them. This is generally done by archving a Talk page that is no where close to the size that would actually require it to keep the page tidy, in order to push inconvenient comments and topics off the "front" talk page and bury it behind hard to find links. If you know what the URL format for archived pages it though you can just manually edit the URL. I've found a few articles where this is the only way to see them too. The reason to do this is two fold, first you have to establish if a page has 'guardians': personally motivated editors with a dog in the fight who use their familiarity with the processes and rules of wikipedia to maintain a partisan/biased presentation in the main article and crush anyone who tries to correct their deceptions. Its usually only one person but can be a team on some higher profile articles (the Mao article is a good example of a team of guardians). Once you have confirmed that a page is camped out by a "power-editor", the next step is see what they are hiding. Page reverts, suspicious locking, agressive archiving, high levels of vitriol to basic questions about the article are all good signs. Its very hard to actually delete things forever on wikipedia, so they have to hide and obscure the history of the article as best they can. See what they are hiding to see what is missing from the article. Once you get fluent with reading Talk pages and version histories, its one of the more entertaining parts of wikipedia imo, though it does real harm to the quality of their obstensible 'mission'.

Are any of you pathologically secretive? Very, to an extent that has done obvious harm to my life and relationships.

have problems with feeling excessive amounts of shame? Not in the least. I'm not sure I actually experience shame, in addition to a number of normal human reactions/experiences.

I tried to expand on these points in more detail, but the aforementioned secrecy is preventing it. Its a constant priority since childhood to conceal my presence and actions from others. I'm also incapable of trusting other people at anything beyond the most superficial level so avoiding them entirely is much easier than constantly having to independently investigate and verify every little thing they say or do. This also includes hiding any traces of existence that I can: moving quietly, not distrubing the world arround me, drawing no attention to myself or my actions. I'm only capable of relaxing when I know with confidence I'm alone and can't be ambushed suddenly. So paranoia I guess, not shame.

All of this being said I'm incredibly happy and live what I consider a very privledged life. I'm almost 50 and have been with my wife for 30 years. She's helped a lot in ways she doesn't fully understand. I WFH and live in a very rural area (closest city of any meaningful size is about 2.5 hours away.) I can go multiple days in a row only ever encountering my wife. She sometimes expresses she wishes she could do more things for me like what some people call acts of service? I think. Like household chores. I won't let her (or anyone) do my laundry, prepare my food, or really any of the day to day tasks of being alive. I do all the shopping, bank/finance stuff etc. I make more than enough that she doesn't have to work so this tends to leave her with not much to do. She has her own issues that make it very hard for her to maintain regimented employment and in on SSI. Once a week she makes dinner for us both, though I have to watch the entire process or I can't eat it. We sleep in the same bed (her's) most nights but I do have to maintain a separate bedroom/office for when I'm overwhelmed by her presence, maybe 1-3 times a month. I'm fine with her entering this room but she knows not to touch anything and she understands if I move something from outside this room to inside of it to leave it alone. I'm very fortunate that I've a lifestyle that accomodates my issues and especially for my wife. Its worth mentioning she has her own mental health issues just as impactful as mine but of a significantly different nature. Our disorders "fit" together very nicely and its something we both noticed right away.

I am perfectly capable of going out and navigating society, interacting with people etc. Its not social anxiety at all. In fact I don't really expereience any forms of anxiety very much. Its more of a positive compulsion if that makes sense, not motivated by fear or anxiety. I can and do manage to be around and interacting with people just fine, but I prefer formal relationships with clear expectations of the workplace or similar situations. I can't interact with society just fine to achieve my goals, I simply consider solitude superior in almost every way, and just easier to live my life. People cause way more problems than they solve.

Unstructured socializing has 0 appeal and if I manage to make an attempt I usually bail out and go home pretty fast.

Concurring with this. Every time I've ever encountered a QR code in an email its been a printout image that was scanned/copied to an email and sent out. At the other end of this spectrum are web links in printed materials, with instructions to click here, with the typo red-squiggle line included on the printout.

The colleagues I've spoken with and I are generally pretty hostile to any processes that require a phone (like two step authentication)

Two factor identification is one of the best security features that most "normies" will interact with and should never be discouraged. For many people their current smart phone is the most secure electronic device they've ever possesed, assuming they maintain physical possesion of it, and this will be true of their next phone as well. I've worked with fraud vicitms who've combined lost millions of dollars that could have been prevented by simple 2FA on their bank and work accounts, in addition to their Amazon, Apple etc accounts. Many businesses have had enough of 'voluntary' 2FA and have begun to enforce it. People that don't have smart phones can even get a call to a land line where a robot speaks the 2FA code to them. There is a lot to dislike about the crappy techno future we've seemed to wind up in, using your phone to 2FA actively protects you from much of it rather than being part of it.

I think if you have the sort of communication environment where your partner (I'm assuming a women, and that you the reader are a man) feels comfortable enough to tell you anything/everything, this will eventually come up, generally in the first year or so. I'm probably not a great person to answer this as I've been with my wife since we were teenagers, about 30 years now.

It did come up with her way back then; we'd both had a handful of less-then-serious highschool relationships, neither were virgins. I'd had a lot more actual sex than she had despite my count of unique partners only being 1 higher as I was pretty active with my HS girlfriends and she actually struggled to get her HS boyfriends to actually have sex with her. I grew up in a large metro and she grew up on a farm in a rural part of the same state probably had a lot to do with the different experiences. If she'd gone to my HS she'd probably have been more experienced than me simply due to more opportunity.

I get the impression that our (romantic) lifestyle is likely pretty unpopular on this board, so the only additional detail I'll add is that we've both slept with way more people after getting married than before, usually the same people, always together.

When Amazon realized about 13 years ago that they wouldn't be able to dodge state level sales taxes much longer, they did a whiplash inducing 180 on lobbying and started advocating for a strong detection and enforcement system to make sure that all merchants were unable to avoid the state taxes and launched a new dept. to handle the taxes of merchants who suddenly have to charge sales tax and have no infrastructure for it. Not only are they better positioned to handle the changes, but they also profit off the competition paying them to assuage the impacts of said changes.

My sister in law is a nurse, not a doctor, but she has a lot of experience in surgery and trauma lvl 1/ER stuff. She's worked mostly in rural/super-rural/underserved areas for many years now, taking generally 6 month contracts all over the US. Wherever is paying the most she generally takes, with 2-3 months off in between, sometimes longer. Her kids are grown and she's single, no pets; we watch her place for her while she's out. Apparently there are some gov't programs that help fund this, I don't know all the details. She says she makes 4x-6x more doing this than if she just took a ER nurse job at the local hospital, and if they don't have surgeries or ER cases she spends a lot of the time not doing much work at all.

Its not just this, its not just Priests/Churches. All institutions, unless there are powerful forces working constantly to counter it, will eventually be run and organized for the convenience and status of the people who have power within it, and not whatever 'mission' the institution ostensibly was created for. Hospitals are a great example of this.

I think they should just be honest. Record the records, slap an * on it and explain in the notes. Assuming strong evidence; I've no idea what a sufficient level of suspicion would be to noteworthy though.

I’ve been thinking about a very similar topic to this one recently; the actual % of frauds in cheaters in every field, not just sports.

A man near me made a career in a certain field, climbing the ranks until he got to the top of the local version of this institution. It’s a public profession, and he was briefly in the news, so I want to stay vague to not compound his problems. His profession requires a 4 year degree and some professional certs, and advancing up the ranks generally demanded a masters, then a doctorate at the top. Not always, some get away with a master’s, but most of the people in the role around the nation have one. Turns out he didn’t actually have a phd, or a masters. He just self-studied the material while pretending to be in a program for the amount of time it would have normally taken. He’d worked in the doctorate level roll for over a decade before someone hired a PI to investigate the guy for some reason, and it all fell apart.

It seems like it was a lot easier to fake it in the past, before the internet. There were also fewer examples to make people suspicious. I wonder just how many people have to one extent or another “faked it”: PEDs in sports, fake degrees, fake job histories/references etc. Fake martial arts history or military claims were one of the first ones to really get exposed by the internet. I know more than one person who financed the launch of their successful, life-defining business with the profits of criminal enterprise, usually selling drugs. Is this even the same category? There’s also the currently hot trend of getting real advanced degrees and positions using fake (or plagiarized) scholarship.

Who knows how many skeletons are out there in how many closets. I think we are alive in a particularly fruitful time for discovering these stories.

I went to a Catholic high school and took a class on the different varieties of Christianity, both historical and modern, both extinct and existent. Jehovah's Witnesses we used as the example for a modern, existent, non-trinitarian division of Christianity. We learned about some older, extinct ones too like Arianism. While the LDS church does also seem to fit the non-trinitarian definition, they weren't generally lumped in with the JWs. The class was taught by a Jesuit, who despite being a member of the Catholic clergy did make an effort to teach the material objectively, with clear times in class where we could discuss what we thought of these different groups and he would also as his personal opinions at times, always in conformity to Catholic understanding. He tended to divide the 'wrong' Christians into two broad groups: those who have misinterpreted genuine scripture (he put the JWs in this group) and those who have elaborated, extended, and expanded what they think counts as scripture to an extent that they aren't really Christians at all anymore if you examine them in depth at all. He put the LDS church in this group (as well as Islam). He actually mused on the similarities between Mormons and Muslims more than once. His take as to why they were alike was that both groups (early Mormons and 6th century Arabs) had received the proper scripture, both descend from historically Christian populations, but found the New Testament unsatisfying to their egos and elaborated falsely upon the legit scriptures b/c they needed a way to make their group the main characters in the story of God, implying their motivations were both childish and selfish, and a deliberate rejection of grace. He was fun when you could get him going.

The Mumonkan. Again. Also the Konjaku Monogatarishū. Also again.

I feel similarly when I find an article that is supposed to be about a subject I'm interested in, only to be presented with an article that is about the author, with the ostensible 'subject' as the backdrop for a largely biographical story. I'm fine with autobiographies if they are explicitly that, but an article that is supposed to be about, say the history of telephone technology, is in fact about the authors trip to a telephone museum, or the crazy encounter she had while researching the subject.

I use a fair amount of cash as I make regular purchases that give a discount for it (or more accurately charge a fee for using a card of some sort, but its presented as a cash discount to placate the public.) I've not seen the old bills in a long time. My sister is a district manager for a bank chain and she says the machines they use to intake cash would sort those for return to the treasury for disposal a decade ago.

edit - ive got about 500 in 20s on me now and the oldest one is from 2021.

Not even seeing, let alone interacting with, a single other human.

A leftist doing what Charlie did, travelling around colleges to initiate debates, wouldn't really find debates all that often. This does kind of happen though, but they're just called guests, or maybe speakers. They get to use a theatre or or larger classroom and are generally welcomed.

Not a rebel song, but Parting Glass by Luke Kelly. Luke Kelly is going to show up a lot on lists on best versions of trad/rebel songs, as likely will Ronnie Drew.

The demo pyramid in the poorer parts of the US is not quite as bad as the more affluent parts. Our prospective clients are all locals; no one moves to Appalachia if they can avoid it. The whole region is slowly shrinking, but not this fast. We had 77% fewer new referrals in 2023 as 2019. Some of the smaller centers have closed or combined staff under one org. The older addicts also report essentially no 'kids' (people under 25 or so) at the dope spots. Arrests for the <25 demo are down across the board for pretty much everything. No real good causal links to anything, just more of the trend of kids not leaving the house I think.

Here's a recent story about a similar trend. https://www.npr.org/2025/06/10/nx-s1-5414476/fentanyl-gen-z-drug-overdose-deaths .

Another one: https://nida.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/2024/12/reported-use-of-most-drugs-among-adolescents-remained-low-in-2024

“Kids who were in eighth grade at the start of the pandemic will be graduating from high school this year, and this unique cohort has ushered in the lowest rates of substance use we’ve seen in decades,” said Richard A. Miech, Ph.D., team lead of the Monitoring the Future survey at the University of Michigan. “Even as the drugs, culture, and landscape continue to evolve in future years, the Monitoring the Future survey will continue to nimbly adapt to measure and report on these trends – just as it has done for the past 50 years.”

I've volunteered in a community drug rehab since my brother died from heroin abuse years ago. We've noticed a clear, sustained downward trend in new, young addicts in the last 4-5 years. We don't have any strong proof, but many of us suspect that legal cannabis in stores have prevented the new generation of potential dope addicts from every meeting a classic 'drug dealer' or engaging with the black market at all, never forming the relationships that eventually lead them to meeting heroin/cocaine/meth dealers. While the causal mechanism here is pure speculation, the rehab running out of new addicts is very real. I understand incarceration stats are having a similar trend. Probably a good amount of overlap in the people concerned.

Depending where you are, legal weed might not be any cheaper than it was under prohibition. Every state has its own idiosyncratic system placing artificial constraints on production, pricing, and availability. Where I live the prices are more or less the same as they were in the decade before legalization, and had been at that point since the late 90s. Overall quality has gone up in general, and the higher quality illegal cannabis in the past did cost more at times, but that was largely driven by wealthy consumers driving the price up to capture the limited supply. States are still artificially constraining supply through various licensing/acreage/plant # limits on growers, but prices are also controlled in many states so wealthy consumers can't really wipe out the market for high end like they did in the past. Now the dispensary just runs out of product pretty regularly. Cannabis is a very hardy, easy to grow plant. Its resistant to disease and drought. Processing the dried flower is also fairly simple and low overhead; even the various extractions and tinctures that power the wax/oil products and edibles are generally faster and easier than the process for other crops like tobacco. Without the states limiting production the various markets could be easily flooded. Its also quite easy for individuals to grow it themselves; its literally a weed.

On the subject of strength, you can get weaker products. I know because I prefer them. Since the cancer I've lost all of my tolerances for everything; I can't even consume alcohol in any amount anymore. The main problem is that potency information isn't always clearly labeled, is often inaccurate, and the weak stuff isn't as popular so there are fewer offerings. Its there though. You can also do what I do and slice the gummies with a razor into 10ths.

There have been a few books that were especially well written that I read twice. The first time I'm too consumed with finding out what happens, plot progression, resolution of tensions etc. I overwhelmingly am interested in how the story ends, which distracts from some of the finer points of the writing, sub plots and characters that weren't critical to the main storyline etc. During a second read I already know how these things are going to resolve and can more enjoy the total quality of the writing. Most books aren't actually good enough to warrant this though. I can usually tell when I'm going to reread a series pretty soon after I start it too. Steven Erikson's books are a first example I can think of.

Yea I remember a fair amount of this clustered west of Skid Row in a neighborhood called the Toy District I think. Not just toys though, just about anything that can be mass imported from Asia wholesale can be found there now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toy_District,_Los_Angeles

The article discusses the economy of the area a little bit. Looks like this: https://maps.app.goo.gl/1XyjCRMusLzY5SGBA

I'm to old to have ever used these, and my wife and I have been together since the 90s. However, where I work brings me into contact with a lot of college age and slightly older people who do use these apps to varying degrees. The young men are often getting together on breaks to critique each other's profiles, and the women get together to...also critique men's profiles. As far as I can tell there are a handful of distinct experiences being had here. If you are a good looking man, top 10% or better really, you can have sex with a lot of average women. If you are an average woman you can occasionally have sex with a very good looking man. If you are an average or worse man you can finance the above interactions while being strung along with the promise of maybe having the first experience described here, until you realize that's not going to happen and give up. Very rarely an actual enduring relationship will develop, but these seem more like a fluke than any intent of the app creators. The apps that empower the women even more than usual like Bumble seem to be loosing popularity too. In theory women like being the only party that can initiate a conversation. In practice they are terrible at it and generally unaccustomed to putting any effort into courtship at all. There also appears to be a fair amount of romance fraudsters as well, who seem to target both genders equally, through with different strategies.

In addition to the rituals of the active civic Roman religion, ancient Romans (and all ancient people) were incredibly superstitious to an extent modern people struggle to imagine. Magic and the supernatural were very obviously real to them. Worldly events, good or bad, had supernatural causes, or at least nudges, and the original Roman religion was the organic accumulation over time of how, when, where, why, and who interacted with this supernatural reality. Of note these needs did no go away when the empire adopted Christianity. Many changes were made to the religion of the apostles to satisfy the Romans need to interact with the supernatural forces that obviously drove all events on Earth.

The Indians I work with say its about 30%. Work has sent me to Hyderabad a couple of times, and a few other cities like Chennai and Delhi for shorter periods, and this % seems like its large enough that its much easier to actually be a vegetarian there. My coworkers there always just used the shortened term "veg", which was also the label used on menus and food packaging. My veg coworkers from the US always enjoyed being sent to Hyd for a while as you could reasonably expect effort to be put into the veg offerings almost everywhere, though we could all do without the heat and humidity of India in July/August, though Hyd seemed not as bad as some other cities. Also you can get beef in India if you really want to; ask the Muslims about it. You can generally identify them by their names in many cases I've found.

If imitation meats were a bit higher quality, a bit cheaper, and reliably available I'd switch to them without hesitation. I always try the newest offerings on the market; we aren't quite there yet, but I feel like we're getting progressively closer.

I've already stopped eating mammals. It started with pigs over a decade ago, then all mammals about 5 years ago. Just birds and fishes. I might eat a lizard but its never come up.