yup was going to say, greatest problem with design of dating apps. Working is a failure. Not giving hope is also a failure, so the sweet spot of capitalism for them is basically to run like a casino… set up as many people into a game you know they won’t win, with just a sliver of false hope to make them think they can win… while knowing that most won’t.

They don’t need to be mutually exclusive.

They aren’t exclusive, but they aren’t the same thing, so there’s no real confirmation that a pornstar knows more than your average woman on, enjoyable sex rather than looking like she enjoys it.

Concept of Pornstars teaching satisfying sex is to me on par with WWE wrestlers teaching self defense classes. Sure some WWE wrestlers probably have actual training in that category. But there’s probably more people with just a focus on actual self defense fighting that could do the job better.

They make the world worse so their lobbiest friends can make more money. I’d say lawyers are pretty far down on that line. They’ve got shares in big tech, health insurance, Oil, Weapon manufacturing etc… I think all of those are bigger money makers.

They basically flip the term around. IE criticizing a specific government, is anti-semetic. Blanket blaming an entire population of people for things they aren’t even directly associated with, is OK.

Now the real question of the survivorship bias, you are seeing less AI, but there’s 2 possible reasons for that.

1. The AI has gotten better and harder to identify.

2. Your brain has degraded due to excessive presence of AI and reduced air and food quality and thus is worse at identifying AI.

it wasn’t intended to be a study on what’s right or wrong to have or what not, the point is simply that, going with a less likely to be brought up country say France. If for some nation were to launch an invasion on france. They wouldn’t be bothering to compare their quantity of tanks, aircraft carriers etc… are present, as that tier is in and of itself a factor.

Or to go purely into fictional, you could say talk about anime characters like

Mob from Mob Psycho, Gojo from Jujitsu Kaisen, Reinhart from re:zero, Saitama from one punch man etc… Characters that are so overwhelmingly ahead of everything else, that any other character in the battle is basically cosmetic. IE it’s not just that they are better than the D-A tier characters, It’s that they are so much better that it’s laughable to think that all the A tier characters teaming up would come close to making a fair fight for them.

The rest are just normal ranking, IE in order of their tier, In english sometimes they to give them meanings “advanced, basic, competent” but generally that’s a forced on to it. Typically it’s just an alternative to doing 1st, 2nd, 3rd category. “S” meant is to imply it’s so good it’s not the best category, it’s so far ahead that it’s not fair to compare the A tier to it. Like say when talking about military strength in the real world, having nuclear weapons is a whole separate category. IE there’s no bother to question how many tanks or bombs it would take to invade north korea, because the mere potential of them to launch a couple of nukes if threatened, is enough to prevent anyone from taking their plans past the most basic hypothetical stage.

usually special or super.

Worth pointing out, Nimrod wasn’t an insult until bugs bunny used it sarcastically at Elmer Fudd, and a generation of viewers didn’t get the reference and just assumed it as an alternative for idiot.

They seem to fail to understand, the coersion is the only bad part. That’s like saying “things don’t change, some black people chose to work on farms, the coersion has gone but it’s still a problem”. No it’s not a problem, anyone should be allowed to choose to be a farmer.

I imagine it’s just the added difficulty that the dollar dispensers are finicky and break down enough when dealing with small amounts of money. There’s a reason why coke machines themselves are shifting more to card payments now that everythings over a few dollars. Plus being outdoors overnight is kind of a security nightmare as they don’t want people taking crowbars to them. hoping for cash (even when there’s no cash in them)

Like, I get his appeal — kind of. But the last thin we need right now is a neoliberalist centrist. Also, if the US has a would rather elect a fascist conartist than a woman for president, I somehow doubt the US is ready for a homosexual for president.

I agree with this, it’s another virtue signal. He’s too moderate to get anyone excited (Obviously I’ll vote for him in the general because he’s better than the best imaginable republican), But I 100% agree that being gay will cut out his support for the moderates, and there’s nothing exciting enough about him to energize the people who aren’t motivated by “not a republican”. Obama had a special kind of charisma and a strong way to push an attitude of “I’m going to do a lot of good things” that helped overcome his racial challange, Harris and Hillary both ran on a “I’m not going to shake things up, the last guy was great”. attitude that I believe cost them their elections.

I agree on the general concept that, the party needs better controls, and to laude the fact that they get rid of bad leaders, rather than just that be seen as a weakness…

Biden and Platner are 2 solid examples of that where IMO the concept is a stregnth… though in biden’s case, the major mistake was not doing it from the start… IE only holding a sham primary to begin with, and him holding on until the debate where he completely shit the bed.

Platner I feel there was some major mistakes in not seeing it sooner, IMO the hint of alegations of being abusive, and the history of being in black rock should have been bigger red flags than they were to people. But the speed at which his resignation was pushed, and the party stepped in to replace him, at least bodes in the right direction

Of course the voters are open to change… however we need a non First past the post system to even dip our toes in change, and in order to get that in place we need a majority from… that’s the real hinderance with fixing politics in general is the people who currently are in charge are the ones who have to change it. It’s like if in a sport we needed to pass a ban of a steroid that’s been rampant in a sport for 50 years… and all rule changes must go through the currently seated champions of the sport.

It’s such a sad state of affairs, my local next door forum is full of things like, headlines of people getting slap on the wrist punishments for sexual assault of a minor and then people responding with “this is what socialism is doing to this country”.

Umm yeah, I’m sure mandami winning mayor in new york this year is why this bright red state, with a bright red state senate and bright red state house of representatives has had such lax laws that haven’t been updated in 30 years.

But like, how can it be wise to lean so heavily on an individual? Is it a symptom of how 'high stakes" US elections are?

I agree with that, but also see why the problem exists. We as the left hate having a single point of failure like a leader, but occupy wallstreet I think was the biggest demonstration of what happens without it. IE when the movement is a large group, the media says “OK there’s no leader so anyone we talk to in the group speaks for the group, therefore we can look for the person in the crowd who looks the least capable of making an arguement, interview them and declare the whole movement as aimless”.

Honestly I think the tick tock concept is pretty valid.

3.1: Stable, usable, good GUI for it’s time.

95: Unstable mess, pretty, but so many blue screens

98: after reaching 98:SE it was basically almost as stable as 3.1, while having most of the UI improvements of 95… all in all a pretty solid OS.

ME/2000: Microsoft split off into 2 equally unusable variations. ME, which was just an unstable mess, like as bad as windows 95 without any real improvements, and 2000, which was far more stable and usable, but could run like 25% of software.

XP: So they finally combined overall the pros of both ME and 2000, got a pretty stable well loved OS, with more or less the ability to run most legacy software.

Vista: Oh god kill it with fire… it’s like ME all over again, unstable, buggy, and an enormous jump in resources needed just to run it.

Windows 7: ah ok so they finally made what’s the propor upgrade from XP.

Windows 8: What the heck is this… full screen… it’s like they wanted to make a tablet OS, but failed to make a good tablet. or tablet OS for that matter… it’s just a horrid hybrid of desktop OS and tablet OS that did neither well.

Windows 10 - Kind of figured out what it was supposed to be… though the start of the bloat, unavoidable ads, xbox integration etc…

Windows 11 - Lets keep going, more co-pilot… more things you never asked for shoved down your throat.

I can agree with the concept that yes making fun of the people is a different matter than the issue. but to be fair their metaphors on all climate change and environment issues in the early seasons, were almost always universally put with something that flat out doesn’t exist. Hence why their semi-correction episode that came out years later, specifically involved admitting it did. IE the message from that episode wasn’t “Al gore is going about this in the wrong way”. it was “there is no right way because he’s chasing nothing”. Seconds in a different episode where the kids destroyed a dam, blamed it on global warming, and all the scientifically minded characters blindly listened.

IE you can compare that to say how Sally Struthers was treated in the “Starvin Marvin” plot, or the anti-bully organizations etc… where they didn’t pretend that the activists were hallucinating/fabricating the problem… but did attack the hell out of them for the directions of their solutions.

They have very different ways they handle “bad solutions to real problems”, and “the problem isn’t even real”.

I’d say they are a mixed bag with how they handle handle things. Obviously they are a very mixed bag on LGBT+, They have little bits of support here and there, and huge mockery and issues at other points. Climate change and environmental issues, they fell straight into the liberterian hole of “it’s all a hoax”. With every character who believed it being a complete idiot or a manipulative monster. Though I do have to give them props for eventually realizing their mistakes and making newer episodes basically mocking their former view. I have far more support for a group that can realize their own mistakes and take the time to communicate a correction in their format.

Explanation for those who don’t watch south park. One of the most famous ones is Manbearpig. Basically in the episode Al Gore was constantly leading the kids into danger and causing destruction trying to protect everyone from a monster he called manbearpig. Which is basically implied in the episode that it’s all in al gore’s head.

Several years later they did a different episode in which, manbearpig actually appears and starts wrecking the city, and everyone stands around either saying that they don’t believe manbearpig is real (right in front of wakes of destruction and death), to immidiately saying “oh no manbearpig is real, but it’s too late to do anything so we just have to watch him destroy everything”

Not even just unrealistic, if I recall it regularly was posting the same handful of things multiple times