I always took a light jacket with lots of pockets. In line, transfer all your things to the jacket and put that through the scanner. After security transfer everything back and pack the jacket.
The problem with psychiatry is that it’s expected to have quick fixes like other schools of medicine. Often the conditions are chronic and the treatment is long term at best which makes it slow and expensive. Drugs can help in the short term but they’re often not able to be replaced by correct treatment due to funding.
I’m not an expert by any means but just happen to have some knowledge on the subject.
It really depends on the condition, how severe it is and if there are any compounding issues. Take something like depression as an example. In my country, UK, you’ll often end up on antidepressants, and get a referral to a specialist if you’re lucky. The specialist likely won’t have the funding or at least a huge backlog of patients to work through so they’ll be trying to get you out on your own as soon a possible, which means getting you to ‘good enough’. As a result you’ll likely remain on antidepressants when continued therapy would be much more beneficial and could take you off the medication. Drugs are cheap but time with a therapist is not.
It’s a statistical science. While other branches can be all like “splitting atoms will definitely give you an energetic reaction” psychology is like "this helps in 60% of cases so we’re gonna try it on you ".
To be fair here, technically throwing neutrons at matter has only some probability of causing it to fission, and statistics tells us how many do. It’s just that there are so many more neutrons and nuclei than there are people, so we can say with statistical confidence that under such and such conditions, y will occur when x happens.
Not that different. Just more samples and observations.
Idk if its authors count as artists, but I’m a fan of the US Constitution. A lot of its authors were slave holders though, so nearly the worst a person can be.
This is probably a controversial one. As someone who studied modern political history, the U.S. Constitution is - taken completely subjective for its time, authors, situation, etc. - an amazing piece of human achievement. It’s a shame that so many people view it was some static command from the past, rather than the living document that it’s authors intended it to be.
The simple version of the answer is: each question has a 1/4 chance of getting right, and since they’re independent and you can mark two answers you have 2/4 or 1/2 of getting each correct, which gives you a combined chance of 25% for the entire test. The correct analysis is the combination of chances of:
First time you picked a wrong answer on both (3/4 * 3/4) and second time you eliminated one answer from each and picked the correct one (1/3 * 1/3): 6.25%
First time you picked both right, so didn’t need the second time: 6.25%
First time you picked the first one right, but the second one wrong (1/4 * 3/4) and second time you picked the correct one on the second one (1/3): 6.25%
Same as above but for the second question: 6.25%
Which is also 25% btw, the other analysis is also correct, it’s just an alternate problem with the same chances as this one.
Edit: sorry, didn’t read the part about getting one question right would be a passing grade, so that’s easier, to get a non passing grade you need to mark wrong both questions the first time (3/4 * 3/4) and mark both wrong the second time around (2/3 * 2/3) any other combination provides at least one correct answer, this has a 25% chance, so you have a 75% chance of getting at least one question right.
Yes, I took that into consideration, those are my scenarios 1 (0% on the first try), and 3 and 4 (both with 50% on the first try). Scenario 2 has 100% in the first try, thus accounting for all the possible ways to get to 100% in up to two tries.
An unknown factor is if you even get to make a second try at getting 100% if you already passed with 50% on the first test. If it is possible to redo a passed test, I still find it unlikely that anyone would do so given that they know that they don’t know the answers.
Including the edit that you’re not told which one was right in the first attempt with a 50% score, it makes a lot more sense to accept the first 50% pass. Choosing different answers for the second try would only give the maximum score of 50% again, while choosing completely random answers again would only give the same chance as the first attempt, in which 0% is still more likely than 100%
Similarly, if you do get 100% on the first attempt, why’d you want to try again… a lot of the answers here calculate the overall statistics when using both attempts regardless.
’ Steve mould - does cool little kiddie explanations of physical phenomenons.
Foureyes furniture - a bit asmr, but a woodworking channel. Guy makes neat stuff and talks about life while doing it.
Wristwatch revival - alsp kinda ASMR, but guy takes apart and repairs mechanical watches. Very repetitive after the first few watches, but I keep watching anyway.
Dave2D - Not a huge creator, but he lived in a van and made videos mocking other van-lifers who did the glamping thing and only showed the positive side of van life, not the negative side where you poo in a bucket and live in fear of a crackhead breaking into your car while youre asleep in it.
One of the glam-van-life couples broke up and he made a video publically mocking them. Then the girl killed herself. There was a huge shitstorm in the vanlife community and he ended up deleting almost all his content. Now he mostly does fantasy artwork livestreams.
Alright, the real reason why you see terrorism in France more than others, is from what we in Denmark call the Muhammad Crisis.
A Danish satire drawing of Muhammad with a bomb was published in a Danish newspaper. The papers HQ got attacked. A small one, but still significant in Denmark.
France newspaper L’Equipe then reprinted the drawing more than once as a protest for free speech. After that France became a prime target for these kind of terrorists.
The driving terrorism in Nice, bombings in Paris and at L’Equipes HQ, it all happened after that.
This created alot of bad blood between these cultures, and that long going hate is what keeps France a prime target.
The Hebdo drawing wasn't light hearted fun though, it was right wingers trying to wind up religious people. Obviously there's never any excuse for murder but publicly attacking a whole religion will upset a lot of people, and things can lead on from that.
Her clothing wasn’t tasteful, though. It was a woman’s attempt to wind up men. Obviously there’s no excuse for rape, but wearing clothing in public designed to be provocative will attract attention from a lot of people, and things can lead on from that.
But making a drawing isn’t (a personal choice), how interesting.
Well actually not interesting at all, because you seemt just to be trolling (you just invented the part of ripping clothes off in the streets, talk of false equivalence) how boring.
Is their reaction to the Turkey earthquake, There were roughly 51k killed, and their cartoon was that this was good because that was less muslims they had to kill.
Their 'Mohammed edition' was a full comic about how much they hated muslims. It was pure racism and in many countries they would have been prosecuted for hate speech.
They are a hate group.
This is the meaning of two wrongs don't make a right. Charlie Hebdo are disgusting, the people who attacked them so severely were absolutely wrong, but neither act makes either of them right.
I don’t think Charlie Hebdo is very funny often, but you just grasping at straws here. You willfully misinterpret, no actually you just blindly follow a twitter that misinterpret something.
You know, they do this to anger people. To get followers. Etc.
This is not a twitter I follow, I had to search out the cartoon to explain the issue and this was the first result.
But I do agree with your second point, Charlie Hebdo do this to anger people, to get followers. They are looking to recruit the far right and create backlash against certain groups.
Who should decide that someone has the right to draw an image and not another one? That’s how dictatorships starts, by limiting criticism.
If you think we should limit criticism (it’s not like believing in Jesus, Mohammed etc haven’t got millions killed and worse) you could start by limiting your own criticism. You know, to show how good it is to do it.
It's not that simple is it? If you set a church on fire then should you go free because of past issues by the church?
On drawing, should you be able to draw your friends child being shot? Again, these are not issues you should kill for, but you can understand why people are mad.
They were not right winger by any way, quite the opposite, they were100% anticlerical far left. Maybe stop talking about something you know nothing about?
To blame the terrorist attacks France has suffered on a cartoon by a niche newspaper is a rather blinded look at the situation, and ignores pretty much everything about the state of the world in the past few hundred years as well as modern times.
I hope no one walks away thinking this comment is correct.
I totally agree with you on this. I can somehow sense that the law against Islamic practitioners has been tightened more and more, e.g. regarding hijab, after that. It’s like if you cant be us, you can no longer be tolerated; you’re not one of us.
L’équipe ? The sport journal read by football circle jerkers ?
You probably meant Charly Hebdo.
And France is a though subject, it is historically a welcoming country for northern Africa and Muslim population (former protectorat or colonies, same language) but France partly failed mixing its population with the boom of huge ugly suburbs in the 60/70s. They ended up being poor class zone, that became foreigners zones, that became forgotten by politics leading to their population growing poorer and angry (with a right to be). Some of those were targeted by extremism advocate as they make a good place to cultivate anger and recruit new peoples.
So France is often a target because it is historically close to Muslim populations of Africa and often the final destination when migrating to Europe because it has good social security and no language barrier, unlike Italy, Greece or UK where you have to learn a new language. France is also still very present in Africa (language, industry, politics even money bills for some) so maybe if you ask a poor lost angry boy to name one Euro country, he will probably say France.
Then of course Charly drawing Muhammad or the gov forbidding religious clothes in schools was just another easy justification to attack the country.
I agree, mrwhosetheboss got so boring for me. Every video just felt pretty much the same. Same old jokes, same old style, every single time. For me, another one is Linus Tech Tips. Their content just feels kinda boring nowadays. It was much better maybe 2-3 years ago.
Check it now. I’m not even sure where it’s slant is anymore. It’s full Palestinian support now. Unless that’s become right territory now. I don’t even know in this world anymore…
I just recently started watching him, so I’m kinda bouncing around from his old stuff to his recent stuff, and i’m not really noticing a significant difference besides what you would expect with time and experience.
I think it’s kind of understandable due to latter but I feel like he became a lot less personable and more full of himself. It was a lot of little things so it’s kind of hard to pinpoint.
Admittedly I haven’t watched his content in probably about eight years but I don’t image things like his podcast would help.
I mean, I do get the pretentiousness, bit it feels like its more played for laughs as a character and not real? at least to me?
But like I said before, I just started watching him, and i only watch the game videos, none of the podcasts or anything, so I don’t have any basis to even have an opinion yet, much less make any solid statements, just curious about info and whats being talked about… Which is why i appreciate the reply with examples.
Though I could definitely understand a tonal shift happening if some random entitled internet fuckface randomly showed up at his door.
I mean, I do get the pretentiousness, bit it feels like its more played for laughs as a character and not real? at least to me?
I think it suddenly started to feel like less of an act around that time. I am having a hard time explaining it but he just seemed kind of full of himself. Like he was making himself out to be bigger than he was between the constant rebooting of his channel, less jokes and more opinionated content, and trying to branch out into everything at once.
Just not for me but I feel like those kind of changes happen a lot anyway when content creators grow to a substantial level of popularity.
A long-ago girlfriend made us these for breakfast, and called them glory holes. Seriously, circa 1975. She had no idea, said her family had always called them glory holes.
asklemmy
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.