thisisfine.webm
So, the DOJ released a memo saying basically that there isn't a list and Epstein killed himself. Why are the MAGAts changing their tune now? Is it because if the DOJ said it and Trump is currently at the helm, then (by their logic) Trump must approve of downplaying the whole "Epstein list" thing?
You're not wrong.
Definitely one of the scarier creatures in D&D, at least accounting for hit dice.
I kinda want to put it in a D&D campaign. Maybe an evil druid makes a magical device that births an army of evil treants or redcaps or something.
Can you define your terms a bit? What do you mean by "range" and "angle-range?" Also, if you're taking about angles, angles relative to what in particular? (Maybe relative to the line segment connecting the centers of the two circles? Relative to a tangent of one of the circles at the point of intersection?) Are you looking to solve this only for the case where the two circles have equal radii, or for the more general case where their radii may be unequal?
Also, I'll assume Euclidian space here. Non-Euclidian isn't my forte. I guess, though, to say I know nothing about it would be a bit hyperbolic.
Why isn't that common to cover with a blanket other parts of our body when we feel cold, like the belly or lower back?
It... is?
A million blessings on anyone who uses the term "crypto" to refer to "cryptography" and not "cryptocurrency".
There's at least one other condition that's commonly misdiagnosed as autism: schizoid personality disorder. I'd imagine at least some who don't quite qualify for an autism diagnosis would be well described as schizoid. There may well be other conditions that also share a lot in common with autism that might be similarly good diagnoses for certain folks who don't quite qualify for an autism spectrum diagnosis. But it's also valid for some folks who don't qualify as on the spectrum to just qualify as not having autism.
Have you heard of the "Rat Park" experiment?
Scientists, when studying addiction, put rats in cages and gave them a choice between water laced with drugs (heroin or cocaine or whatever) and water not laced with anything. The rats all got hopelessly addicted and most died of overdose. "Drugs cause addiction." So the scientists concluded.
But there were some problems with that theory. Old people get hip replacements and take heavy opioids for a while, but the rate of addiction is quite low. In the Vietnam war, American soldiers were all very addicted (mostly to heroin) and experts worried that when the war ended and the soldiers returned, we'd have an epidemic of heroin addiction here, but it didn't really happen that way.
Someone got the bright idea to try another experiment. He got rats and divided them into two groups. One, as a control, he did exactly what was done in the first experiment. Cages plus laced and unlaced water. Unsurprisingly, the same result. For the other group, he made a rat paradise. "Rat Park" as he called it. Real grass, toys they could play with, food they liked, social interaction with other rats, but he still offered the same choice of laced and unlaced water. The rats in Rat Park tried the laced water (after all they didn't really even know it was anything but regular water at first), but virtually none showed any signs of addiction.
Turns out conditions make a big difference to things like addiction. But the real clincher? He took the addicted "control" rats and put them in Rat Park and they voluntarily detoxed.
The conclusion? Addiction isn't so much about "drugs" as it is about unfulfilled needs. Of course rats in solitary confinement in drab gray cages with crappy food are going to do the only thing within reach that has any chance of making them feel good. The "selfish" thing, if you will. But rats with fulfilled needs are a different story.
This isn't a story about rats or about (only) addiction. People in good circumstances -- people whose needs are met -- have a capacity for being "good" that people with unfulfilled basic needs don't. (Abraham Maslow, anyone?) Now, look around you. Is the world as it is today set up to fulfill people's needs or keep them wanting? (Maslow estimated -- very generously, I think -- that 3% of the population had their basic needs fulfilled and were "self-actualized.") Capitalism is predicated on the idea that want is bottomless. (It's basic economics to pretend satiety doesn't exist.) Every company out there with a solution has its fingers in whatever they can do to cause the very problem they purport to solve. The news is all about creating addictive FUD. Humans are kinda fucked right now. Of course in this situation folks are going to be selfish.
(Mind you, the richest folks aren't necessarily the ones whose needs are best met. Just think whether Musk comes across as someone who isn't deeply unsatisfied.)
Yes, the vast majority of people are selfish assholes. But it doesn't have to be that way. It's not human nature. This is what happens when you put humans in very unnatural situations.
I guess if it splinters the GOP any, it's a good thing, maybe?
Then again, look how the whole Tea Party thing worked out. (Spoilers: not good.)
view more: next ›
"After all, we aren't best friends in this one."
#killedthevibe