14,553 karma · joined April 28, 2018
Which is to say that it matters very much? The dollar only has value because people say so as well.
But QR codes shouldn't even exist.
Because this is a base intuition and inclination, we employ this clumsily even in cases where it's not really the right tool for the job.
Thank you for your service. I mean it seriously. These things have to be socially enforced as well.
No, I mean, per capita, how many people as compared to the number of people you know total, have perpetrated violence.
>I don't hang out with the violent types in the first place, so the question makes no sense.
But if violence were ubiquitous, you wouldn't be able to avoid it. I don't know any violent people either. My point is just that most people (per capita) do not commit violence most of the time. The idea that everyone's just chomping at the bit to perpetrate violence is at odds with reality.
Originally, there was barely a story, and it existed just to give some motivation and context for the various video games. This encompasses Zelda 1 - 5. ie, NES, SNES, Gameboy Zeldas, and Ocarina of Time. When Majora's Mask came out, it was a direct sequel, which hadn't really happened before, and moreover, you carry on as Child Link rather than Adult Link. (recall that you end OoT as Child Link in the credits)
By the time Wind Waker came out, Nintendo had officially started talking and thinking about Zelda timelines, although I think you can argue that they had already started down this path in Majora's mask. Wind Waker is the first game to formalize the idea that there are many Links, and it's more of a status or title than a person. The person who saves Hyrule. At some point (I really stopped following Zelda closely after Twilight Princess) Nintendo seems to have bowed to the pressure on the internet, and released the "official" Zelda timelines. ie, Nintendo followed the trend of trying to formalize the timeline, but did not really invent it)
The "official timeline" is convoluted because (much like religious stories) much of it was never planned in advance, and the current understanding is something of a retcon that would have been unrecognizable back in the old NES / SNES Zelda days.
Rally round the flag accounts for "violence done by others against us" and not "random violence against ourselves" so I think it's completely meaningless in the case of this conversation.
With regard to human sacrifice, how much violence have you been involved in? Maybe a few fist fights in middle school or high school? Do you know anyone who has committed real violence? I'll bet you don't. It's exceedingly rare these days compared to historical norms. People might disagree on why its become so rare, but the general rarity is a fact. Even for areas with high violent crime, there is usually a small minority of violent re-offenders, rather than a large majority of people committing random violence.
The idea that a movie could get so many basic things so badly wrong, that it could float a scenario that made zero sense, but still gain such cultural traction was one of the first times I felt old. It's speaking to a youth with crazy and new ideas. They're ready to make their own grand and terrible mistakes, which a future youth will one day hate them for.
That's your one-two punch right there. On Instagram, and viewing ads. Best thing to do is avoid both.
"The people I don't like are always unskilled." You shouldn't hate your enemies; it affects your judgement.
- Compulsory military service means the government captures the best and brightest of the country.
- An extraordinarily outsized number of nobel prizes belong to Ashkenazi Jews, and other indicators of intelligence (lack of propensity for violent crime, lifetime earnings, etc) are also quite high for the whole group.
This is what you don't get. _I_ already know it's not worth it. I've always known. It's everyone else! It's a wife who cares whether or not her husband has a good career. It's the police who care if you look like you're poor. It's the way every single person in society obsessively cares about the status of others.
What in the world makes you think I've had to build up status for my own sake? It's absolutely baffling that anyone could be confused about this.
I'll keep that in mind. If I'm suffering more than you are, the solution is to bring you down to my level.
A voice assistant is similar in an analogous way. A button works every time you press it, but a voice assistant works very sporadically. It's hardly convenient to repeat yourself frequently and randomly. A voice assistant requires internet access, which wastes your data (again, when you could have just pressed a button) and the quality of the voice assistant will change over time. It's less consistent, more expensive, and more complex. And for what? So you can use your phone more often? You already use your phone too much.
Just wait until you're not driving.
What most of these sorts of features do is not to add convenience; instead they remove the need to exercise impulse control. They reduce "friction," which means you do the action more often. But they don't improve convenience. Convenience is not needing to walk outside to the well to fetch a bucket of water. It's not someone making an app so automatic that you no longer need to use your executive function.
I have a similar experience but I don't think this disagrees with the parent. My mental exhaustion makes me seek out low-friction "junk food" behaviors. But much like drinking after work because you had a long day, the phone exhausts you in another way. The cure and disease are one in the same here.
Agreed, but I'm not so sure this was previously true. Or at least not _as_ true. There used to be a lot of more socializing by default. People who were poor in this skill set still had relatively regular social opportunities.
This seems to be gone today, and now it's purely manual.