We named ours after our blind cat, Musetta. She would walk in straight lines until she met a wall, at which point she would turn and continue in another straight line. She had recently died when we got our first Roomba, so it was like reincarnation to us lol.
I’ve been on Linux exclusively for a decade now and I am super excited to get an HDR monitor when it gets implemented (there was some major work being done by redhat and others).
In the meanwhile, I am still having fun with games, hdr or other fancypants features won’t vhange that.
“I’m aware that consciousness still exists under general anesthesia, but the brain is no longer capable of forming memories, so have fun stabbing me with knives, I’m actually going to feel it!”
But hang on, there’s an interesting topic. Is consciousness the current processing, or is it the memory (and perhaps something additional)? Since not all nerve signals arrive in the brain at the same time, consciousness provably isn’t immediate. Perhaps it’s the recent memory of what just happened?
Separately, is it still pain if you’re not conscious of it?
Doctors used to assert that babies didn’t feel pain, because 1) they couldn’t tell us about it, and 2) they didn’t remember it later. They would just not anesthetize babies. Of course, that endpoint of this line of reasoning is horrifying, but it’s still a fair question. When we say “pain” do we mean the firing of the nerves, or do we mean awareness of it?
and there’s zero record of whether they have any drug allergies or intolerances
Nowadays, you can test for anesthetic drug resistances with DNA site testing, (as in, a blood test), though of course, this does not mean that it is always used, for various reasons.
A personal anecdote:
I’ve had one done after I had bad side-effects to ADHD medication I had tried, and I haven’t had any bad effects in the medications I’ve tried since. (besides drowsiness)
Edit: I want to say, I’m not saying that getting the dosage right is not incredibly difficult, I just wanted to mention that we can detect drug allergies without putting them under, (so to speak).
That’s good to know! I just swelled up for a week because my new dentist used a different kind of local anesthetic, so it was close to the front of my mind. That would have helped a lot
Note that you’re getting into something that was a big deal in the 70s and 80s. They’d perform any surgery on babies without anesthetic (which is dangerous to babies) because it was believed that they wouldn’t remember anyway so it wasn’t a big deal after all. I suspect that people will learn about this with horror.
When we say “pain” do we mean the firing of the nerves, or do we mean awareness of it?
I’d say awareness of it, especially considering AFAIK local anesthesia (as in, fully awake during) doesn’t stop the nerves from firing, just from the signals getting to the brain, and I’d say that’s blocking the pain.^
Also there’s an interesting point in there: (this is not a rebuttal, just an addition)
Doctors used to assert that babies didn’t feel pain, because 1) they couldn’t tell us about it, and 2) they didn’t remember it later.
The reason doctors nowadays use anesthesia, (besides it being squick-y not to) is because it was discovered that, (though they may not consciously remember it) it can manifest in PTSD and other trauma related disorders later in life.^
In addition, it was found that there is a heightened level of stress hormones during surgery on infants, which were absent in surgery done with anesthesia.^ (These stress hormones also increased the risk in post-operational complications, due to the hormones acting to break down carbohydrates and other fats in the infant’s bodies)
I’ve had a lot of different injuries. On heavy morphine and pethadine, you definitely feel pain just as bad but you don’t care and just kind of forget about it. It’s like it dulls the nervous system in a way that it’s not blocking signals, it’s blocking how your system reacts to them. It’s hard to explain, but it’s a pretty surreal experience. You should be stressing, but you’re not. You’re very aware of the severity of the injury, but you’re totally calm about it and it slips your mind, like pain is the lowest concern.
I’m usually thinking like, “I wonder how the fix will go? What if I need to pee? I hope recovery isn’t months… Oh, yeah, and my limb is on fire with a bone sticking out, but they’re on it. I hope there’s no snorers in my ward and the food’s good. It’d be nice if they operate this evening because this sucks. I hope I can self-medicate morphine for sleep tonight. That really helped last time. I feel fucking great and am dribbling. Oh, yeah, and my limb is on fire with a bone sticking out. Meh…”
To the best of my understanding this is why local and general anesthesia can be the best combo.
General keeps you from being conscious of the damage of the knives during the surgical procedure. Local numbs the area to keep the brain from being aware that damage is happening. Reducing trauma sounds like a good idea to me.
Pain is fascinating (particularly if you’re not the one experiencing it.) Two people experiencing the exact same nerve stimulation can be painful to one but not the other. Context, life history and experience, and expectations all play into the experience of pain. In general, your brain determines if something is painful, then you do or don’t experience that pain. People can be shot or stabbed and be completely unaware until the brain decides it’s time to let them know.
Yes, pain is pain. People can still feel it and suffer even if they do not remember it. Anesthesia in context of surgery is too complex of a topic for me to comment on but I do frequently manage patients that are sedated, on ventilators either going to or coming from surgery. There are different scales and tools we use to assess if someone is under sedated or in pain. Keeping explanations simple pain can reflect as changes in vital signs, rigid or tense muscles, facial expressions. Sedation in the context I’m referring to is more a scale of either how awake someone is or what type of stimulation they respond to, for example do they open their eyes if someone says their name? Or do they open their eyes if I gently tap on their shoulder or do I need to put pressure on their nail bed for them to respond, if they respond at all. If they’re sedated enough they won’t remember the pain but they would still feel pain. Again this is NOT referring to general anesthesia during surgery, that is too complex and anesthesiologist have a very difficult job ensuring people are adequately medicated for surgery while also ensuring that they treat the side effects of the anesthesia medications so they don’t just kill people.
The two do have some overlap and my previous statement assumes no chemical paralysis. There are also times where it is acceptable to just sedate someone, or do something emergent without sedation and then giving something like Versed which causes retrograde amnesia. The person may have been fully conscious and felt everything that just happened but still won’t remember it.
This is a bit of an oversimplification but I’d say firing of the nerves is pain. I don’t have literature available to support but I know giving babies anesthesia is very dangerous so I would like to believe that the reasons you listed where just an over simplified “it’s really okay to do X or Y because they won’t remember it” rather than explaining to a parent in a way that they would truly understand the risk of anesthesia for a baby AND still allow whatever procedure to be done or force a parent to knowingly elect to put their baby through pain and suffering for a procedure. But again, not a doctor and I don’t work with people/babies during surgery
I broke my ankle a few years back and the bones had to be surgically reattached, but the OR was full so they had to set and splint it in the meantime. The shot of fentanyl didn’t do anything, so they gave a cocktail that knocked me right the fuck out and set my ankle. My husband said I shot straight up like I was in the Exorcist, yelled and swore a bunch and passed out again. I remember nothing, thankfully.
I’ve had that. They said I’d be awake but won’t remember anything. I’d feel it but won’t care.
Sure enough, I’m sitting up in bed, doctors are gone, and my leg is set, I feel totally normal. I had no idea what happened except that they said that’d happen. It was the weirdest experience. I hadn’t even changed positions. Like 15 minutes just got stolen from me.
I didn’t wake until the next day, they doped me right up or the fentanyl had a delayed reaction cause I slept for a good 15 hours after I was knocked out.
Ah. Mine was to set while waiting for surgery so things didn’t tighten up and be harder in the OR. I had tibia and fibula snapped and dislocated ankle. They got the joint back in place and straightened the leg, then put it in a splint to wait in.
They practiced the movements while I was with it and it seemed very violent and physical. Then they dosed me to do the real thing and the next thing I remember was sitting there wondering wtf just happened.
Yep same, I just slept a lot longer, probably cause of the cocktail they had to give me. And waiting for the OR took a little over a day so I was grateful to be out of it the whole time.
My docs had a bit of fun with me, after gassing me up a bit they turned on Tina turners ‘what’s love got to do with it’ turned around to give a look and a grin.
They definitely think they’re the good guys, both the men and women. Not many people knowingly choose to be villains. They are convinced that their ideals are just and true, and their opponents are godless child-murderers and rapists.
I’m glad you feel that way. I have a lot of family down south who 100% think we’re all evil and that our explicit goal is to destroy America. Even in this thread there is someone saying liberals want to murder babies.
Yeah, it’s the expected outcome when you grant a group of people a monopoly on violence but with insufficient to non-existent incentives for good behavior and insufficient to non-existent disincentivizes for bad behavior.
That’s exactly the opposite of nonsense; it’s proving the point. They get called “bad apples” specifically because the idiom is that “a few bad apples spoils the bunch.”
The people who say “it’s just a few bad apples” as if that excuses it are the ones who don’t have the slightest fucking clue what they’re talking about.
All I can offer her is anecdotal evidence heard from retired officers but they made it sound like this is a problem in every department. Maybe not to the same degree everywhere, but in general bad things happen to people who follow the rules when the rules implicate wrongdoing on the part of another officer. Weather that’s shunning, teasing, pranks, being assigned to only specific duties or shifts, or worse is gonna depend on the situation. The impression I got was this was commonplace and most officers understand the unwritten rule to not report thing little things (and sometimes even the big things) that could get a fellow officer in trouble. It works too because at the end of the day you gotta entrust your life to the people you ratted on, people who know how to make things look like accidents and have a network of people that will vouch for them.
All Cops Are Bad because good cops don’t last long. You’re either doing bad shit, standing behind the thin blue line while you watch other cops do bad shit, or you’re getting harassed and bounced out soon.
This has been my experience with my own family, neighbors, coworkers, etc. They think of themselves as the good guys “standing firm” against the hoards of those “scary other people” who want to take their guns, raise their taxes, and wage war on Christmas. Even though what those “other people” really want is affordable healthcare, education, and housing.
Right. If the 20 teens and 20’s taught me anything, it’s that everyone has a story going on behind their eyes and they’re always the main character/hero in their own story.
Some women I know in this position believe they’re somehow different or better than the people who the cops treat like animals and that it would never happen to them, only to the undesirables that deserve it. Over 40% of them are wrong according to statistics.
Cops are waaaaay more likely to commit domestic abuse against their spouses and children.
It’s unproven if shitty violent people are more likely to become cops, or if the training they receive and the culture they work in turns normal people into violent psychopaths.
But whichever is true, a cop is more likely to turn to violence in a disagreement/confrontation than pretty much any occupation.
I can guarantee that the training and culture certainly encourage those who are already likely to be shitty violent people to feel comfortable about it.
These one, oldies but goodies. If you take verbal abuse out of the equation the number drops 12 points to 28% instead of 40% and that’s the biggest ‘controversy’ I remember about these numbers. But I don’t think abuse thats only verbal helps someone think about their spouse as a good guy so imo the whole number is useful for this case. Theres also a strong bias in favor of the cops as its an observed phenomenon that cases of anything against cops, especially Domestic Violence, don’t often go very far, there are very real blind spots in the justice system for cops.
The wildly speculative ones that were the result of an informal ( and since retracted) survey, that used a very broad definition of domestic abuse to include yelling.
It’s basically the 13/50 dog whistle of the ACAB crowd.
Meh, he had various sources in hogwarts that where able to challenge the views he got taught by his parents.
At a certain point something is not just the fault of the parents but also from the person in question. A victim doesn’t double down on beliefs he knows are wrong.
Draco was raised by wizard supremicists then sorted into a house exclusively filled with people just like him. His only exposure to anyone different was through rival houses. The school heavily encouraged competition between the houses and segregated children into ideological bubbles. All after one sorting ceremony when they were 11. Draco was a child. Imagine being judged by the beliefs you held when you were 11 for the rest of your life.
There was a point after Half-Blood Prince where he could choose to change. There was a point where he had to see error of his ways between that and the Battle of Hogwards. It seems he took that step for a while, there was redemption arc brewing - but never happened.
He was indocrinated, yes. But he saw how terrible their side is and still chose to stick with it when he had a choice. He was 17 and adult in Wizarding World. Old enough to know right from wrong.
It is likely that some time after, he regretted it. Otherwise I don’t see Harry and him nodding at one anoyher in the epilogue. But at the time of the books, he was not a good guy at all.
I wouldn’t go so far as to say he was a good guy, but I still don’t think it’s fair to label him as a bad guy by the end of the book (pre-prologue). By the end of half blood prince he’d started realizing that he was on the wrong side, but how many 15/16 year olds are out there that have the confidence to openly defy their parents, especially ones so renowned as the Malfoys? Nevermind the fact that Voldemort would have him killed for defecting
And I’d agree with you, of he didn’t come back at the Battle of Hogwarts to actively stop Harry. He chose to do that himself, proactively. He had to just go with the flow with the other people leaving and not sneak back.
Damn, I haven’t read the books in over a decade so I’m hazy on some of the details. I remembered him trying to stop Harry in the last book but I was thinking he was still rolling pretty deep with the other death eaters
We have limited looks into what he was doing through the book but mostly he was in school. We (nly see him at the startin one of the meetings with Voldemort where he is clearly not comfortable. And then at Malfoy Manor where he refuses to identify Harry (or Hermione or Ron).
Also the book before when he had Dumbledore at his mercy, he was lowering his wand when other Dead Eaters marched in on him. He clearly had his doubts - no wonderv the whole Half-Blood Prince he was tortured with the impossible task he was given as a punishment to what his father has done and the whole year after they suffered Voldemorts displeasure by them.
And still, he went out of his way to serve. Honestly, I was not happy with this because I sensed his redemption arc coming and no he just became villain again. There is a cut scene from the movies where he throws Harry a wand and runs over from the Death Eaters when Harry reveals himself alive, which is something I think would be great for his character - to show that in the end he was a brainwashed boy who was victim of his upbringing but managed to overcome… but that’s not what happened.
They think the things you’d be surprised to learn people actually think.
I.e.
Crying makes you weak. They’re with manly men who don’t cry or go to therapy or any of that woke commie bullshit. They’re with strong men who will protect them. Louder = smarter.
If you are voting Republican in the US, you’re advocating fascism. Full stop.
And also lol what a dumb thing to say. Fascism is by definition right wing. It is the terminus of the right side of the spectrum. That isn’t an opinion, that’s it’s definition.
It is not sealioning. You are arguing something cars are blue, to address that I first have to understand what you mean by a car, and what you mean by blue. To me, fascism seems much more contradictory with right-libertarianism than with certain forms of socialism. Hence why I think its more reasonable to say its not far-right. That is unless your definition for right-wing is “bad”, and the badder it is, the further right it is. That’s why I asked for clarification.
What do you mean "again"? You haven't asked me before. And right-wing is another way of saying the side of the political spectrum that conservativism occupies.
The opposite side of the political spectrum, which progressivism occupies.
Also what do you consider the main traits of conservatism to be?
Fundamentally, the belief in hierarchy. Which manifests as support of capitalism, private ownership, and traditional social values.
Opposed to progressivism which opposes unjust hierarchies, and favours egalitarianism. Which manifests in desire for more equitable distributions of wealth and power, and critiques traditional social values.
No not any. But conservativism is characterised by belief in inherent hierarchy. That all people are not equal. That some people are more or less worthy than others.
And note I've said "characterised" and "belief". In reality ideologies are complex, and the humans and organisations implementing them are even more complex and subject to corruption. So it's not a simplistic "presence of hierarchy == right-wing". Some ostensibly left-wing governments fall to authoritarianism. After all politicians are vulnerable to greed and corruption. Though notably those governments begin to quickly abandon their left-wing principles as they do so. For example, the Chinese Communist Party has certainly gone all-in on capitalist ideas of private ownership of land and the means of production.
That characterisation is simply a useful lens for understanding political movements. One can easily see that when there is a push to distribute power "down" the hierarchy, people who refer to themselves as conservative will be more likely to oppose it. They oppose social safety nets that benefit those at the bottom, they oppose transgender recognition, they opposed gay marriage, they opposed ending slavery.
Would a technocracy be right wing?
Depends. If you mean replacing the democratically elected government with a government of "experts" (who gets to be an expert being decided by, you guessed it! The experts)? Then yes. As that is basically just a form of aristocracy.
But if you mean democratically elected politicians relying on expert advice to make policy decisions, then no.
Or leftist states with a leadership structure? Like, any leftist state.
Depends. How is that leadership structure maintained? If those positions are elected, and the elections are fair and representative, then no. Because the power ultimately lies with the people, with one person having one vote.
But, do you have a point that you are approaching? Because at this point it seems like you are just asking endless questions. In which case I kinda agree with the other person, you're sealioning.
You can do what my 4yo did before his last surgery: shout out “WAIT WAIT WAIT!” right before they put on your mask or give you the drip, then hold out your fist and say, “FIST BUMP!”
asklemmy
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.