The age at which you meet has nothing to do with it. Healthy relationships are about evolving together. If you can’t do that or if you do it separately, that’s when it falls apart. Sometimes you’re lucky and you find a compatible person early, sometimes you don’t. That’s all there is to it.
I wish I was taught about the usefulness of maths growing up. When I did A-level with differentition and integration I quickly forgot as I didn’t see a point in it.
At about 35 someone mentioned diff and int are useful for loan repayment calculations, savings and mortgages.
In the US it’s common to give students “word problems” that describe a scenario and ask them to answer a question that requires applying whatever math they’re studying at the time. Students hate them and criticize the problems for being unrealistic, but I think they really just hate word problems because because they find them difficult. To me that means they need more word problems so they can actually get used to thinking about how math relates to the real world.
Nah, the word problems suck because they’re intended to teach you how to convert word problems into math problems. They did absolutely nothing to show how math is used in real world scenarios.
Part of what makes all the hatred for Common Core math so hilarious to me is that when I finally saw what they were teaching, it was a moment of “holy shit, this is exactly how I use and do math in real life.” It’s full of contextualizing with a focus on teaching mental shortcuts that allow you to quickly land on ballpark answers. I think it’s absolutely wonderful.
But it’s so foreign to the rote manner that a lot of parents were taught that many of them have a hard time grasping it, and get angry as a result.
There are three problems I had with word problems in school. Not every problem applied to every word problem.
“This is way too vague.”
“Why would someone buy 35 apples and 23 oranges?”
“Why would the person in the problem want to try to figure this problem out? It’s completely unrelated to what they were doing.”
I get the point was for us to be able to convert information given in a text format into something we can actually solve, but the word problems were usually situations you’d never realistically find yourself in in real life.
No, 2 is more “why are they buying this many”, and 3 is more “why would this person want to figure out some random thing that popped into their head about this”.
Okay, concerning 2 I thought you meant, why count and buy exactly this number. But it’s actually realistic, for a big family, or for desserts for a party, etc.
I do some 8-bit coding and only last month realized logarithms allow dirt-cheap multiplication and division. I had never used them in a context where floating-point wasn’t readily available. Took a function I’d painstakingly optimized in 6502 assembly, requiring only two hundred cycles, and instantly replaced it with sixty cycles of sloppy C. More assembly got it down to about thirty-five… and more accurate than before. All from doing exp[ log[ n ] - log[ d ] ].
Still pull my hair out doing anything with tangents. I understand it conceptually. I know how it goddamn well ought to work. But it is somehow the fiddliest goddamn thing to handle, despite being basically friggin’ linear for the first forty-five degrees. Which is why my code also now cheats by doing a (dirt cheap!) division and pretending that’s an octant angle.
Thats not the definition of a genocide… Germany killed 1 % of the french population in WW2 and its wasn’t a genocide.
A genocide is characterized by the intention to annihilate a people. And while the far right in Israel is voicing support for a genocide, the current offensive is definitely not a genocide. This doesn’t mean that its not against international law or just. But it simply doesnt fit the definition of a genocide – no matter how often you call it that way.
That is what he says, it’s time to look into the intentions. And saying that it is just far right fringe figures that are making genocidal statements is a nice way to play with the facts, because the far right is currently in power in Israel. The SA case at the ICJ contains a long segment of quotes from Israeli officials and ministers making genocidal statements on the record.
To add to this, western governments are fully aware that Israel is breaking international law (and proud of it), because they refuse to answer any questions on this topic. For example David Cameron called on Israel to allow for fresh water to enter Gaza, implying that Israel is currently blocking this. Blocking access to drinking water is in violation of international law, when pressed on this Cameron said he was quote “not a lawyer”, and said he could not remember if he has been shown any evidence of violations of international law by Israel (as if that is something you would forget).
The west is showing that a rules based international order only applies for the global south, many people in the west might be too stupid or ignorant to see this but outside of the west this is doing irreparable damage to the credibility of the west.
I was making some for a while, but I think the hard part is coming up with new ideas for pictures, and also not getting fatigued from looking through hundreds of similar pictures and thinking “is this one the best? Or is this other one sliiightly better?”
Yeah, because everybody knows the obvious answer. It’s untethered capitalism. And no it hasn’t always been that way. Politicians weren’t always whores for the rich. That’s a rather recent development that can absolutely be stopped by the will of the people.
Lol, that’s the mildest form of corruption I can imagine.
But do you really think a village has zoning laws in the first place?
At that scale, it’s also much easier to just remove the chief’s son from his hut on the “nice hill”. And the chief along with him. Scale being the key factor is the essence of my argument.
Before Caesar, Rome actually had checks and balances to keep one person from amassing too much influence. For example, they had two consuls, which was the highest political position at the time and acted like as the heads of state.
Until Caesar fucked up those systems by literally declaring himself “dictator for life”. So really, it’s not always been this way, it’s usually just a few individuals that keep fucking it up for everyone else. Until they end up with a knife in their back.
There were substantial conflicts between rich and poor Romans well before the end of the Republic. It was not uncommon for a lower class Roman to go off and fight with the army only to come home and find some rich fuck effectively squatting on his land.
This was turning into something of a large scale crisis 60+ years before Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon. At the same time, politics was dominated by the wealthy and/or those who were successful military leaders.
The Republic didn’t really have “checks and balsnces” in some cases so much as “social conventions”. More a common understanding that something is just not done. They were actually rather Ill equipped to deal with individuals who had a thirst for power. Tiberius Gracchus, who served as Tribune, gave away lots of state owned land to some of the poorer Romans. He did so without consulting the Senate which raised a lot of eyebrows. When he attempted to stand for a second term as Tribune in 133 B.C. – which was just “not done” – the Senate responded by murdering him.
Tiberius’ brother, was elected as Tribune. He went further than Tiberius and sponsored a whole bunch of legislation which would have benefited poorer Romans. The Senate responded by murdering him as well. Over the next few decades, there were a handful of successful military leaders who clamored for more and more power. At the same time, the public was growing increasingly dissatisfied with the Republican government.
Julius Caesar was smart enough to recognize that the Republic was becoming frail and ballsy enough to give it a good shove down the stairs. In 82 B.C. he marched his legion into Rome – a clear act of treason – and effectively declared himself dictator. He was met with little resistance. He was viewed as a champion of the poor in some ways and, based on the way the Republic treated poor Romans, they were probably looking for a champion.
There were others who wanted to wrest Caesar’s newly acquired power from him. Pompey, another successful Roman general, went to war with Caesar. Pompey had the support of the wealthy Aristocrats. Pompey lost.
The Senate murdered Caesar in 44 B.C. Caesar’s supporters responded by killing his assassins. Then they turned on each other. That marked the beginning of another civil war from which Octavian, Julius’ nephew and adopted son, ultimately emerged victorious. By then, the Republic was effectively dead.
To make a long story short, Julius Caesar didn’t break the system. It was already broken. He managed to exploit it further than than anyone else had up until then but there were glaring cracks in the foundation of the Republic that directly contributed to it’s demise. The imbalance of power between the elite and the poor was definitely a big “crack”.
My dad used to refer to something he called “Scottish engineering”, which meant you start a project with good intentions but just end up swearing frequently and throwing everything in the fire lol
i’m going through a really nasty divorce. ex called child services on me to say that i’m a danger to my kids. they started an investigation. the whole process got really dragged out. i haven’t been able to spend much time with my kids because while the investigation is ongoing, the judge ordered that i only would get them every other weekend from saturday morning til sunday evening. investigation wrapped up at the end of 2023. child services didn’t find any evidence that I’m a danger, and did in fact find evidence that my ex has been putting them in danger. 2024 will be the year I get my kids back and the year this divorce is finalized.
the land is being developed, and crime was getting out of control. and they only had to move three blocks to a different one, supplied by the city. to cite the very article you posted:
There were more than 100 emergency calls for drug use, sex acts, theft, vandalism and unresponsive people in and around the camp. A number of neighboring American Indian nonprofit organizations urged the city to close it.
it’s a little more nuanced than mean people kicking out poor defenseless citizens.
I’m not big on people supplying hard drugs, and theft often goes with threat of violence and trauma, but the criminalization of drug addiction, human sexuality when homeless, and whatever “unresponsive people” specifically refers to… yeah, I’m gonna say that there’s a lot less nuance than you might prefer.
theft and vandalism? don’t conflate the issue this isn’t about the cruel treatment of the addicted. it’s about keeping the law abiding citizens safe. empathy has been granted for years, this didn’t happen overnight. coupled with the fact that there were calls for closure from non profit organizations… maybe read the article
I agree that the situation in the article is complicated and that these homeless people were not exactly saints.
My point above is that these homeless people living in tents in an empty lot in January are worse off than the homeless people in the article that OP references. Those homeless people live in cars in a protected lot which I think is a big improvement from tent life.
The worst part is, corporations treat their own employees with the no loyalty mindset. The idea of finding one good company and getting raises and a pension out of them is pretty much dead.
That is why I hope that people start unionising more and start switching jobs more regularly. The increased turnover should mean that companies try to retain employees for the sake of projects not being constantly delayed. I also hope that this also leads to more people starting their own businesses and competing with their former employers both in employing terms (by having better work conditions) and eventually consumer loyalty.
Yeah, my boss expects that. He’s been at the same company for almost 20 years, since the department was created.
He also gave me a 3% raise this year. It’s nice to get cost of living, but why would I try to invest in a workplace where I know I’ll be able to make more and more elsewhere every year.
Since ancient times in Japan, the heart symbol has been called Inome (猪目), meaning the eye of a wild boar, and it has the meaning of warding off evil spirits. The decorations are used to decorate Shinto shrines, Buddhist temples, castles, and weapons.[6][7] The oldest examples of this pattern are seen in some of the Japanese original tsuba (sword guard) of the style called toran gata tsuba (lit., inverted egg shaped tsuba) that were attached to swords from the sixth to seventh centuries, and part of the tsuba was hollowed out in the shape of a heart symbol.[8][9]
memes
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.