Haha imagine trying to explain that to people.

“I have a superpower, I can speak to animals they just can’t speak back”

“But everyone has that superpower, I can do that too”

“Yeh but I’m actually really talking to them, like in their language that they can understand”

“How do you know?”

“…”

I rather like the idea of having a word for “the conversation is over, I expect no response.” In daily life lol. Feels boss.

I reckon it’s probably to do with internally trying to downregulate the smile so it doesn’t look really weird or crazy or fake or stupid and you just overcompensate. You don’t know what you look like while you’re doing it and that information void gives rise to some self consciousness and pre-emptive embarrassment. Natural smiles don’t require you to think about how to do it at all so most people don’t really know how to smile in a socially acceptable way on demand with a few seconds notice. Some people are better at it than others, maybe they have a better intuition, maybe they have a better awareness of what muscle movements correspond to what changes on their face and also a really good grasp of which tiny subtleties lead to a photogenic smile or the grimace of a maniacal murderer. Actors are probably pretty good at it either through intuition or just a lot of practice. I should imagine you could train yourself to be better at it, but it’d feel weird and vain to spend your time doing that so a lot of us just make weirdly flat or stern faces in photos.

If you can actually just enjoy the moment so it makes you smile as a result it’d probably get better results but that idea leads to its whole own self reflexive internal monologue trying to concentrate and force yourself to be happy that probably results in a frown while you summon that concentration.

It basically needs to be a sea, or at least a very large lake, supporting an eco system of some kind if the body’s not going to removed at any point.

That’s absolutely normal and expected. The illness is taking a toll on your body and it needs all it’s resources to fight it. Don’t take this as advice not to see a doctor if you were already going to because if you personally feel like something is wrong and out of the ordinary for you, then it’s better that you decide to go to a doctor even if you’re told that it is indeed normal for a cold because who knows if it’s not something worse or if “normal” for you is different. But in general, yes, for colds and most illnesses tiredness is very much to be expected, even to a pretty extreme degree.

Haha I never knew there was a real person attached to that myth. I was hearing about that as a big conspiracy theory from teachers when I was kid all the way here in Australia.

That’s interesting he did produce an actual machine that could move though. I was reading the Wikipedia about him and they don’t go in to that exactly. They point out that his design and vehicle were just using conventional electrolysis and thus couldn’t work as claimed, but it still moved. What was the catch then? It uses a battery to do the electrolysis, does it just use up all the battery to inefficienly split out the hydrogen using more energy than gained from the hydrogen in the process? Making it a really weird electric car?

You’re unsurprisingly getting a lot of replies along these lines, taking issue with this strange and unfounded blanket statement about an entire country and you’re replying back to them with similar riffs on the theme that those commenters are being disingenuous and masking a kind of widely known understanding that the reason people visit there is for the sex industry.

I have to say I think you might have gotten the wrong idea there. There’s a kernel of truth to it in that yes, it is known to be a place where sex tourism occurs so you could say it was famous for it, but I also don’t think that that’s like, their thing. Other commenters have tried to persuade you of this by pointing out compelling reasons one might go there other than for sex tourism but you seem unwilling to believe them because of this idea you’ve latched on to that they’re being deliberately naive. I think it might help just to point out that, at least amongst Australians, this is a very mainstream holiday destination, like it’s not a place where anyone would raise their eyebrows to hear you were going there. You could happily discuss this at any workplace and say you’re going to Thailand for a holiday and you’d probably get a lot people saying how much they love the place and asking which part you’re going to. I’d be surprised to learn if somehow all or even most of these people, sometimes families with children, had all gone there for a shag and also that this practice was so widely known that it was somehow a reasonable, immediate assumption to make about why they’d chosen Thailand and yet they also decided to broadcast this intention to everyone they know.

While I don’t know the stats, I would guess that a lot of the world’s sex tourism probably occurs there, so I imagine that’s where you got the idea that that’s THE reason to go there but it’s also just a place where a lot of tourism generally happens.

Nah, but a couple surprised me with how much they saddened me because I’d always thought it was kind of stupid to get genuinely upset about the deaths of celebrities you don’t know. Sometimes your cognitive opinions take a backseat without your permission and you just feel actually mournful about someone who has so little direct connection and who’s worldly contributions are almost always in the entertainment space. For me that was David Bowie and Trevor Moore. Both of these surprised me because it’s not like I was a hardcore David Bowie fan so it didn’t feel like that death should have hit me particularly hard and Trevor, I still can’t figure out why that’d upset me so much. I mean I loved his sketch comedy but I’d largely forgotten about him at the time, I think it might have something to do with him being so young as well as all the laughs he’d given us.

This’d be great since it’s a whole lot less morally compromising when it wasn’t even us bumping them off.

Would they have any money to buy anything?

That’s not totally disingenuous. If you’re cooking for yourself rather than eating out or buying ready made things and you plan to do that a lot of it, some outlay on things that get used across multiple recipes over long periods (can be years with spices) is reasonable to expect and also not to be costed in recipe estimates. What exactly is reasonable to expect someone to have in their pantry already for a recipe is very subjective so what to me seems fair to assume won’t seem so to others, but there are assumptions you can make. You wouldn’t for example criticise a recipe for failing to incorporate the cost of a pan if it tells you to pan fry something or a spoon to stir it or the cost of the water out of the tap. Most of those examples are equipment but I think there’s an extent to which you can write recipes with similar givens for ingredients as well, otherwise it becomes untenable to estimate costs. You don’t typically have to use the same spices as recommended by a recipe either. For some it’s essential but for many it’s just what you like or what you have so, don’t buy 80 quid of spices for one recipe, but if you can figure out which are most important for that recipe and which you also really like the taste of, buy just those and use them in that recipe and many others going forward. You gradually add to your collection as you try new things and when you have some spices and a recipe calls for you to get more, it’s not such a stretch because you’re not buying a ton of them at once just the few you don’t have and consider it worth trying. It takes a long time to get through spices and eventually you get to a point where you have most of the spices referenced in a given recipe or decent substitutes or you only need like 1 extra one that will help you cook more things in future. If you’re sure you won’t use a spice outside of the one recipe you’re looking at, just skip it.

I really appreciate the recent trend of some cooking websites to do this on mouseover. Best of both worlds for readability and convenience. Not great when you’re in the kitchen and not using a mouse, I’d hope a mobile or printable version just writes it out like you did there. Love Auto scaling recipes too where you can click to adjust number of servings, bonus points if they have some logic so they don’t tell you to use .71 eggs or something.

Reign of fire. Don’t know if that’s what you were referencing in the picture but it’s immediately what came to mind when I saw the drawing.

Oh

Hmm but that article says that in both cases the jets were lost due to some embarrassing fuck ups that seemed to have nothing to with combat, with the first being literally dropping one in the ocean 🤦and this latest one being overshooting a landing and having to eject while the plane ran off the end of the carrier in to the sea.

I didn’t hear anything before now about this issue and am not well informed at this moment. Some preliminary reading from a CNN article indicates that the Houthi leadership acknowledged the agreement praising it as a victory because it separates US support from Israel. I didn’t immediately find anything regarding further attacks since the announcement but also I see that the agreement was specifically about halting the bombing campaign in exchange for the cessation of attacks on specifically American assets in the region, which I think would be why the Houthi leadership were quick to call this a victory. Are the attacks you’re referring to on American assets?

This suddenly triggered a memory of one specific art attack but I’ve been scouring YouTube and so far haven’t had much luck finding it. I haven’t seen all that’s available but I’m getting a bit sick of it despite my desire to still see it again. Maybe someone here remembers it.

• I would have watched it in the 90s I think sometimes between 94-96. But I can’t say for sure it wasn’t a rerun from an earlier period
• The particular art attack was a night scene of traffic on what I think was a wet road with a truck or lorry, the perspective is of the lorry heading towards the viewer, though a little bit profile, not directly head on
• I think it was drawn on black paper
• It may have been done with white and yellow chalk, certainly I remember the colours white and yellow being used
• It was demonstrating ideas around being able to hint at the impression of objects at night without drawing the full object, only the outline of parts of it that would be illuminated by light sources which were headlights and smaller lights attached to the sides and corners of the lorry
• It involved doing something kind of like how a little kid would draw a sun with a crude circle and rays but then some quite clever technique was employed to smudge those little suns and their rays in very straight lines used to trace the hint of outlines of traffic
• It was finally finished off with some kind reflection on the road surface, don’t recall how he did it

I’ve going through ep after ep, nowhere to be found. The wiki for art attack has only two mentions of “night” and it’s neither of the two mentioned episodes, there’s only one mention of “traffic” and it’s in regards to using traffic cones. There’s a mention of “truck” but that wasn’t it either, I checked. There’s no mention of “lorry”. Couldn’t find anything to do with “wet roads” either. Driving me nuts.

Look lady you had a pretty good run with getting rich AND famous by marrying a rock star and you even leveraged a later in life tv career out of being that woman married to that guy but I seriously wouldn’t push it when your notoriety is on such tenuous grounds.

Is that either way or either way?

Ironically, either of them depending on the situation. Sometimes I even express the concept that I am indifferent to the choice between two things or happy with both of them by saying “ee-ther, eye-ther”