Unironically, that should be cheating. Tests should measure your mastery over the subject of the class, passing the test shouldn't be the goal
It's societal collapse type shit
theneverfox
joined 2 years ago
There's too many beans stories and search sucks these days... I just went on a tangent and read my daily limit of green texts
It is fun to know there's a story out there I've yet to come across though, I'm sure I'll stumble upon it someday
I mean, yeah, but you're not suspending your sense of disbelief enough
There's definitely people who literally have reached in, with their bare hands, and tried to pick up a casserole. There's even people who regularly give themselves severe burns because they just straight up forget things are hot
There's also people who don't know what oven mitts are, what they're for, or don't have them. They might use a dish towel or all sorts of other wacky work arounds. I mean, you can even get by fine without ever using an oven
There's a lot of humor to be had here if you're less rigid in your thinking. If you try to imagine how someone could fit that description, assuming that there's some degree of exaggeration for comedic effect
This isn't real, you're just baiting because it's lemmy... Right? ....Right?
I mean...I do sometimes. Usually pizzas or things on aluminum foil. I also used to pull out noodles from boiling water to test them while cooking
Obviously I'm not grabbing 350F glass or metal with my bare hands, but if you're very deliberate with your movements you'd be surprised what you can do without burning yourself
No, seriously
Which state is best?
That really depends on which benefits are most important to you. But, generally, the consensus among advisers and estate attorneys is that the trust laws of South Dakota and Nevada offer the best combination of tax benefits, asset protection, trust longevity and flexible decanting provisions.
Trusts are basically sovcit shit but real though
It's literally "you have to tell the government about your money so they can tax it, unless... you go to Nebraska, file some paperwork, declare yourself trust executor, and then you talk about your money like it's a person with free will that just so happens wants to pay your rent and buy you a jet ski. Then the government isn't allowed to ask about it, ever"
Sure. If it fills a gap in my model, I don't need any proof at all. Why would I? It just makes sense. Of course I'm going to tentatively fit it in
And if a study convincingly disproves it, I'll just as quickly discard the tentative idea. Why wouldn't I? It made sense, but it didn't math out.
But this is all in the context of my model. It's a big web of corroboration
You can't convince me global warming isn't happening, because I'm watching it in real time. No amount of studies are doing to do more than inform the facts of my lived experience... I'm the primary source, I was there
No? I don't care if the whole world is wrong, some evidence is strong enough to convince me forever, even if it's subjective
Quality is all that matters. One incontrovertible fact I can poke and prod myself means more than millions of subjective accounts. Or even all of science - I'll rearrange my entire model around a new fact if it's compelling enough
I have a model of everything. Everything I am, my understanding of the world, it all fits together like a web. New ideas fit by their relationship to what I already know - maybe I'm missing nodes to fit it in and I can't accept it
If it fits the model well, I'll tentatively accept it without any evidence. If it conflicts with my model, I'll need enough proof to outweigh the parts it conflicts with. It has to be enough to displace the past evidence
In practice, this usually works pretty well. I handle new concepts well. But if you feed me something that fits... Well, I'll believe it until there's a contradiction
Like my neighbors (as a teen) told me their kid had a predisposition for autism, and the load on his immune system from too many vaccines as once caused him to be nonverbal. That made sense, that's a coherent interaction of processes I knew a bit about. My parents were there and didn't challenge it at the time
Then, someone scoffing and walking away at bringing it up made me look it up. It made sense, but the evidence didn't support it at all. So my mind was changed with seconds of research, because a story is less evidence than a study (it wasn't until years later that I learned the full story behind that)
On the other hand, today someone with decades more experience on a system was adamant I was wrong about an intermittent bug. I'm still convinced I'm right, but I have no evidence... We spent an hour doing experiments, I realized the experiments couldn't prove it one way or the other, I explained that and by the end he was convinced.
It's not the amount of evidence, it's the quality of it.
How about: they're a major factor in the rise of post truth and in ruining the Internet. And in hacking democracy itself
Their control is endangering the human race. They've crushed countless innovations to keep a stranglehold on technology. They proactively helped fascists get into power
They don't deserve to make ever increasing money off us. They're not content creators - they're bad stewards of a public forum they bought and expanded through monopolistic practices.
I'd say it's not only moral to deny them ad revenue, I think watching their ads is a danger to society
Hide your wife, hide your kids, and hide your husband too because they're raping everybody out there