MikeHfuhruhurr

The one bright side of this article is that it's coming from The New Republic, which is traditionally more conservative. And the author is calling out how sad this plan is.

edit: I'm wrong? This never happens! see reply below.

Jamb bands

The Doors are the only jamb band I can think of.

As some of the article's comments say, the answer is probably the simplest: IBM.

IBM said they'd let Red Hat operate independently, but it was a matter of time before some of that corporate "culture" (aka stock-driven decisions) started showing through.

Hopefully the employees themselves aren't slowly sinking into the IBM workload. I think a lot of them intentionally left IBM for Red Hat specifically because of the ideological difference.

There is definitely some problem solving involved that could probably be mapped to logic circuits (lots of For and While loops). Good excuse to play that game though!

Some of them don't even know how amendments work. They think the 2nd amendment was passed down by God on stone tablets.

I've argued with a person that didn't know amendments could change other amendments. Nor did he know how amendments were voted on. But he swore the amendments were perfect when written and couldn't possibly be changed.

I'm back! I couldn't find the specific thing I read, but I found something probably better, an actual study published in Pubmed:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8871314/

Statistical analyses showed that the psychological disposition during the religious worship experience speeds up the physiological responses, which was indicated by increases in HR [hear rate] and RR [respiratory rate]. Hence, the activation hypothesis was accepted, and the pacification hypothesis was rejected.

And the window of correct opinion keeps getting narrower. Any time there's a chance to gatekeep morality, someone out there wants to prove they're the most <whatever>.

On any of the popular subs, no one's going to read your comment in good faith. They'll see what they wanted you to say and just reply to that.

In the article at least, De Santis hasn't explained how that works for the "good" Americans he wants to keep. Is every infant just not a citizen anymore until they can pass the test?

Don't even try to think about the downstream affects of that on healthcare and education.

I'll try to look for it. It was a loooong time ago though.

I read an article years ago that explained why so many people get "religious" feelings at big revival-type events at Six Flags, Carowinds, etc, even if they're not particularly devout.

There's a thing called respiratory alkalosis (essentially hyperventilation) which makes you light-headed and confused. At it's really easy to trigger by making people stand up quickly, sing really hard, sit back down, stand up and cheer, etc.

I really hope they adapt more of the books. I don't need everything, but an abbreviated story that hit Leto II and Miles Teg would be awesome.

lied about almost literally every achievement in his life – university, multiple years of work experience, etc

I suppose it shouldn't be a surprise, but it's funny how common it is for these people to also be complete liars about what they've accomplished in life.

Is it too much to ask to be an honest racist nowadays? Don't make me argue with you about racism and lying. That's just annoying.

You're welcome! I had a personal experience with this, too.

When I was a kid, my parents used to make me go to church and youth group stuff. We went to one of those "hip" events at Carowinds (like a Six Flags, Disney type amusement park). Before it started our youth leader said - to his credit - "No matter what you feel, DO NOT go down to the front when they call people up."

Sure enough towards the end, I start feeling "the spirit", and I'm the most skeptical, atheist/agnostic in the whole group. But I stayed in my seat. And when we got back to the hotel I was thinking "what the hell happened there?"

I don’t know, I think even in real life people get silly when discussing topics they have strong feelings about, and politics seems to be one of them fairly often.

I saw an economic's professor start an argument in a coffee shop about Bernie Sanders. And he legitimately said something about Sanders's socialism leading to firing squads.

Getting into an argument like that isn't even worth it or possible to win.

Right?! And then when being asked if they could maybe charge $10 million (or give people 6 months to figure things out), they just said no. I can't remember another company that blatantly cut off all partner relationships like that.

I think the reasoning is that Reddit didn't realize these *were *partner relationships. They thought these apps were just taking and not actually helping.