Such is the path to wisdom.
CHA stat permanently drops by 1, WIS stat permanently rises by 1
CHA stat permanently drops by 1, WIS stat permanently rises by 1
Tbf, a lot of the time nobody is having more abortions than black women. Something like 40% of all abortions in some periods.
They got shut down because they're scary and horrible, but that's because being surrounded by people with mental illness is scary and horrible.
Anyone who has worked with the chronically and particularly violently mentally ill has absolute horror stories. My girlfriend a long time ago I worked at an old folks home and even just the violently demented ensured she constantly came home covered in bruises. She's not alone, and 80 year olds with dementia are far from the most dangerous.
Problem is that a lot of time the postmodernists mistake the system containing the horror for the horror itself. They thought that containing the insane in asylums was causing the conditions around the insane to be bad, but often it's the insanity itself that causes the conditions and the difference is whether you contain the horror or force it into the streets.
The postmodernists criticized the asylums as "social control" or places that "crush individuality" and they were both. But the dangerously mentally ill need to be socially controlled, and if your individualistic impulse is to destroy yourself and hurt others in the process, then or course that form if individuality needs to be suppressed. The guy who murdered that Ukrainian refugee recently; let's assume he was actually mentally ill. Maybe he was. He was arrested for violent conduct 14 times before committing murder. I tend to think his 15 victims would be prefer that guy have been socially controlled and had his individuality suppressed.
They would argue that asylums existed to protect society from having to confront madness, and they were probably right, but the thing is that's actually a public good in many cases. Of course things get blurry where maybe someone is just a harmless eccentric, and maybe some people who end up in those institutions are just harmless eccentrics and would be better off living at home with their families. That's more a problem of implementation than the problem of fundamental constitution.
Some people might claim that the problem is that it would take too much money to build a mental health system that includes asylums to lock up the sickest individuals. I don't think so it all because fortunately we are living in an era of unprecedented government spending. The mental asylums were totally possible and in fact implemented back when the government represented 3% to 5% of gdp, so the money is there. Moreover, if we end up locking up people like please individuals who end up getting arrested 100 times for violent crimes, think about all of the different public services who will require less money because they aren't having to do the job of the mental asylum poorly.
Another part of the reason it was assumed mental asylums could go away was a modernist belief in "better living through chemistry" -- that the new anti-psychotic drugs would be powerful enough that people who previously needed to live in a mental asylum could we let go to live as they pleased. Sometimes the models just don't work out and that's what happened here. We know that many people who might be able to live normal lives end up not taking their medication because some of the side effects are horrible and without the drugs everything comes back in full force.
In the famous novel and movie One flew over the cuckoo's nest, nurse ratched is portrayed as being purely evil. But consider this: how many bones did she have broken over the course of her career? How many bruises? How many times did she see the grim reapers blade at her neck? Of course under such a situation such a person would become hard. It's not because they are a bad person or that they started off as wanting to hurt anyone, it's because they know full well if you don't keep such people under strict control you're going to lose control and you might lose your life. Someone coming in with their liberal arts education might think that if they just come in and treat the psychopaths like a human for the first time they will be magically cured -- and that might be the case for some of the fringe cases, but in reality virtually everyone who ends up in the system has had someone that cared about them once and had to make a tough decision to let them go because the alternative was facing the violence alone.
I really want to double down on this one idea: people will go into a mental asylum and hear the screaming and hear the moans and assume that the problem is that the institution is evil. In a sense, it is actually the mental illness that is evil. Many of those people who wail in a padded cell just end up wailing in the street. Many of those people who end up attacking their nurses would end up attacking innocent people in the street. The sounds of a mental asylum sound like hell because to live with extreme and chronic mental illness is hell. The people who do that service for society shouldn't be judged as inhuman for the sin of being around people whose mental illness has made them inhuman, they should be elevated and honored for the undignified, dirty, dangerous, horrible work that they would end up doing to protect the rest of society from the hell within the walls of the asylum. We honor firefighters who run into a burning building in spite of the fact that the burning building is a little slice of hell that causes indescribable harm to the people caught within, we don't ban firefighters because we blame them for the destruction of the fire.
I have a 3-year-old. The person who was watching him the other day saw him trip and scrape his leg, and chose not to clean out the wound because when you clean out the wound on the three year old the three year old screams bloody murder and you feel terrible about it. As a direct result, the three year old now has a moderately infected scrape on their skin that is not healing as well as it would have and is causing constant pain. To be a good parent or to be a good caregiver for a child, there are times that you need to do something that is going to cause them to scream bloody murder in the short term but sometimes as soon as a few minutes later they'll be just fine. This isn't to say that someone with chronic mental illness and a toddler who scraped his knee are the same, but is this society we have decided to live in the aesthetic world where we can pretend anything that looks uglier must be the worse thing to do. Our society would prefer we don't clean the wounds of our toddlers with a scraped knees, because it keeps the toddlers quiet in the moment. It's not healthy in the long term though, and you could end up with an infected wound that could end up scarring forever.
In the end, it is true that there are multiple competing truths that are in some ways mutually exclusive but must be navigated nonetheless. On the balance, I think that it makes perfect sense for us to bring back insane asylums, and make that investment in dealing with an uncomfortable but very real part of our society rather than choosing not to.
Anyone who has worked with the chronically and particularly violently mentally ill has absolute horror stories. My girlfriend a long time ago I worked at an old folks home and even just the violently demented ensured she constantly came home covered in bruises. She's not alone, and 80 year olds with dementia are far from the most dangerous.
Problem is that a lot of time the postmodernists mistake the system containing the horror for the horror itself. They thought that containing the insane in asylums was causing the conditions around the insane to be bad, but often it's the insanity itself that causes the conditions and the difference is whether you contain the horror or force it into the streets.
The postmodernists criticized the asylums as "social control" or places that "crush individuality" and they were both. But the dangerously mentally ill need to be socially controlled, and if your individualistic impulse is to destroy yourself and hurt others in the process, then or course that form if individuality needs to be suppressed. The guy who murdered that Ukrainian refugee recently; let's assume he was actually mentally ill. Maybe he was. He was arrested for violent conduct 14 times before committing murder. I tend to think his 15 victims would be prefer that guy have been socially controlled and had his individuality suppressed.
They would argue that asylums existed to protect society from having to confront madness, and they were probably right, but the thing is that's actually a public good in many cases. Of course things get blurry where maybe someone is just a harmless eccentric, and maybe some people who end up in those institutions are just harmless eccentrics and would be better off living at home with their families. That's more a problem of implementation than the problem of fundamental constitution.
Some people might claim that the problem is that it would take too much money to build a mental health system that includes asylums to lock up the sickest individuals. I don't think so it all because fortunately we are living in an era of unprecedented government spending. The mental asylums were totally possible and in fact implemented back when the government represented 3% to 5% of gdp, so the money is there. Moreover, if we end up locking up people like please individuals who end up getting arrested 100 times for violent crimes, think about all of the different public services who will require less money because they aren't having to do the job of the mental asylum poorly.
Another part of the reason it was assumed mental asylums could go away was a modernist belief in "better living through chemistry" -- that the new anti-psychotic drugs would be powerful enough that people who previously needed to live in a mental asylum could we let go to live as they pleased. Sometimes the models just don't work out and that's what happened here. We know that many people who might be able to live normal lives end up not taking their medication because some of the side effects are horrible and without the drugs everything comes back in full force.
In the famous novel and movie One flew over the cuckoo's nest, nurse ratched is portrayed as being purely evil. But consider this: how many bones did she have broken over the course of her career? How many bruises? How many times did she see the grim reapers blade at her neck? Of course under such a situation such a person would become hard. It's not because they are a bad person or that they started off as wanting to hurt anyone, it's because they know full well if you don't keep such people under strict control you're going to lose control and you might lose your life. Someone coming in with their liberal arts education might think that if they just come in and treat the psychopaths like a human for the first time they will be magically cured -- and that might be the case for some of the fringe cases, but in reality virtually everyone who ends up in the system has had someone that cared about them once and had to make a tough decision to let them go because the alternative was facing the violence alone.
I really want to double down on this one idea: people will go into a mental asylum and hear the screaming and hear the moans and assume that the problem is that the institution is evil. In a sense, it is actually the mental illness that is evil. Many of those people who wail in a padded cell just end up wailing in the street. Many of those people who end up attacking their nurses would end up attacking innocent people in the street. The sounds of a mental asylum sound like hell because to live with extreme and chronic mental illness is hell. The people who do that service for society shouldn't be judged as inhuman for the sin of being around people whose mental illness has made them inhuman, they should be elevated and honored for the undignified, dirty, dangerous, horrible work that they would end up doing to protect the rest of society from the hell within the walls of the asylum. We honor firefighters who run into a burning building in spite of the fact that the burning building is a little slice of hell that causes indescribable harm to the people caught within, we don't ban firefighters because we blame them for the destruction of the fire.
I have a 3-year-old. The person who was watching him the other day saw him trip and scrape his leg, and chose not to clean out the wound because when you clean out the wound on the three year old the three year old screams bloody murder and you feel terrible about it. As a direct result, the three year old now has a moderately infected scrape on their skin that is not healing as well as it would have and is causing constant pain. To be a good parent or to be a good caregiver for a child, there are times that you need to do something that is going to cause them to scream bloody murder in the short term but sometimes as soon as a few minutes later they'll be just fine. This isn't to say that someone with chronic mental illness and a toddler who scraped his knee are the same, but is this society we have decided to live in the aesthetic world where we can pretend anything that looks uglier must be the worse thing to do. Our society would prefer we don't clean the wounds of our toddlers with a scraped knees, because it keeps the toddlers quiet in the moment. It's not healthy in the long term though, and you could end up with an infected wound that could end up scarring forever.
In the end, it is true that there are multiple competing truths that are in some ways mutually exclusive but must be navigated nonetheless. On the balance, I think that it makes perfect sense for us to bring back insane asylums, and make that investment in dealing with an uncomfortable but very real part of our society rather than choosing not to.
There are bears in my area.
Turns out, that whole "man vs. bear" thing from before is completely different when we're talking about actual bears in your neighborhood right now.
Turns out, that whole "man vs. bear" thing from before is completely different when we're talking about actual bears in your neighborhood right now.
The scandal is a joke, which is why I used the phrase "shall be". The first half is true though apparently.
Gen z overthrew the government in Nepal because they were threatening to take social media away.
New elections held through discord.
First scandal shall be that it turns out the president is a furry and had some really bad looking DMs with a 13 year old he thought was 8.
New elections held through discord.
First scandal shall be that it turns out the president is a furry and had some really bad looking DMs with a 13 year old he thought was 8.
The one thing is that atproto as designed is effectively centrally managed and top down.
For fun, we can think about three different protocols in the way that they function. ActivityPub, atproto, and nostr.
Nostr would be the most decentralized and most individualist. You don't even pick a single server, you pick on number of different relays which will accept your messages and provide messages to you. It really doesn't matter if in the end which individual relays you pick because in practice it's just a ledger with all the messages that it received, and the protocol itself handles identity through your secret key. If the relay that you were using goes down, your user experience doesn't even notice because there's probably 10 others.
ATproto would be the least decentralized and most collective. It is hypothetically possible to host your own instance, but in practice user management and a lot of other stuff is Central to the main Bluesky organization. Getting banned or getting blocked or whatever, it's not that different from Facebook in that regard. If the main Bluesky service goes down, it will effectively mean the end of bluesky.
ActivityPub would be somewhere in between. You have individual servers that people will pick one or multiple, there is a centralized point where your identity lives, and each server has its own moderation policies and administrator team. If one server goes down, everyone on that server loses access to the fediverse on that server and they also lose their identity from that server, but they can very easily go somewhere else. If mastodon.social goes down, a lot of accounts will become inaccessible but the broader fediverse will be unaffected.
Bridges are obviously possible between the three because we see it, but I tend to think that the three are mutually exclusive and mutually incompatible in their aims and technical details such that integrating any two immediately means giving up some of what that protocol is trying to do.
For fun, we can think about three different protocols in the way that they function. ActivityPub, atproto, and nostr.
Nostr would be the most decentralized and most individualist. You don't even pick a single server, you pick on number of different relays which will accept your messages and provide messages to you. It really doesn't matter if in the end which individual relays you pick because in practice it's just a ledger with all the messages that it received, and the protocol itself handles identity through your secret key. If the relay that you were using goes down, your user experience doesn't even notice because there's probably 10 others.
ATproto would be the least decentralized and most collective. It is hypothetically possible to host your own instance, but in practice user management and a lot of other stuff is Central to the main Bluesky organization. Getting banned or getting blocked or whatever, it's not that different from Facebook in that regard. If the main Bluesky service goes down, it will effectively mean the end of bluesky.
ActivityPub would be somewhere in between. You have individual servers that people will pick one or multiple, there is a centralized point where your identity lives, and each server has its own moderation policies and administrator team. If one server goes down, everyone on that server loses access to the fediverse on that server and they also lose their identity from that server, but they can very easily go somewhere else. If mastodon.social goes down, a lot of accounts will become inaccessible but the broader fediverse will be unaffected.
Bridges are obviously possible between the three because we see it, but I tend to think that the three are mutually exclusive and mutually incompatible in their aims and technical details such that integrating any two immediately means giving up some of what that protocol is trying to do.
I don't use an unreliable power supply because they're unreliable.
Part of me wants to try a li ion one instead of lead acid, since the batteries are usually the thing that dies.
Part of me wants to try a li ion one instead of lead acid, since the batteries are usually the thing that dies.
All that time they're spending around radical Muslims is rubbing off on them
Press secretaries must wear burqas on the beach!
Press secretaries must wear burqas on the beach!
My man whatifalthist, over Christmas does a public 8 hour Ayahuasca binge, just keeps plugging out content like nothing happened, totally avoids any and all cancellation.
Good on you bro. Hide your steam key before the next trip.
Good on you bro. Hide your steam key before the next trip.
Hey guys I heard Donald Trump says nobody should replace their birth control with 1000mg of potassium cyanide daily. He says he feels like it would be pretty dangerous and wouldn't work as effective birth control.
Seems like prudent advice I'm going to follow it.
Seems like prudent advice I'm going to follow it.
The left likes to say Americans would never vote for a female president, but it seems to me a contemporary Margret Thatcher could have a serious chance.
They always like to say the problem with Harris is that she's a woman, but in reality the problem is that she's from The Z team -- if you don't want to run anyone else because you know that you've already made too many critical mistakes, and you think that the economy is about to collapse from all of the bad decisions you've made, and you don't want to destroy the career of anyone that you actually care about, you send in the z team. If she tries to run again in 2028, she would have to win a primary, which isn't happening.
They always like to say the problem with Harris is that she's a woman, but in reality the problem is that she's from The Z team -- if you don't want to run anyone else because you know that you've already made too many critical mistakes, and you think that the economy is about to collapse from all of the bad decisions you've made, and you don't want to destroy the career of anyone that you actually care about, you send in the z team. If she tries to run again in 2028, she would have to win a primary, which isn't happening.
I have ove rtime developed a bit of an eye for design for manufacturing in 3D printing, that looks like it would be really hard to print in one piece. You either put the bottom on the bottom and have this big gap to get over, or on top and you have a tough overhang, or you printed on its side and have a huge overhang you have to print there.
How did you end up printing it? Just a bunch of time cleaning up supports, or is it multiple pieces glued together or something? Or is there some internal design that's not obvious but limits overhangs?
How did you end up printing it? Just a bunch of time cleaning up supports, or is it multiple pieces glued together or something? Or is there some internal design that's not obvious but limits overhangs?
I think tylenol is one of the few painkillers recommended for pregnant women.
If you need it, you gotta take it. But the idea of hammering back any sort of drugs while pregnant, even "safe" ones is kinda nutty. My son's favorite foods are what his mom ate while pregnant. That's how much the two bodies are connected.
If you need it, you gotta take it. But the idea of hammering back any sort of drugs while pregnant, even "safe" ones is kinda nutty. My son's favorite foods are what his mom ate while pregnant. That's how much the two bodies are connected.
The money's coming from somewhere. Not to mention the influence to actually be able to get institutions to play along.
Scotiabank has a motto: "You're richer than you think". I have a motto: "Are you richer than a homeless person?"
I love watching the whole "damn boomers in the 70s" stuff creeping forward. I've seen it as late as the 2000s now.
I wonder if in 20 years it'll be like "Those damn Gen Zers with their million dollar homes they bought by driving uber" and a single family home will be ten trillion dollars. I only bring home a billion a year, I can't afford that!"
I wonder if in 20 years it'll be like "Those damn Gen Zers with their million dollar homes they bought by driving uber" and a single family home will be ten trillion dollars. I only bring home a billion a year, I can't afford that!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKceFlZmCpw
Five Times August is a truly based musician, and it's pretty nice to listen to as well.
Five Times August is a truly based musician, and it's pretty nice to listen to as well.
