= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Nono, I mean they describe their nice behavior as super-nice, while the other person describes it as ok/slightly defensive? I'm still inclined to think people don't realize that their own defensiveness is showing when they think it isn't. Also, I think I wouldn't expect someone to be especially accommodating for a crazy loon.
In response to
comment
by
on
[LINK] An internet source of offended people misunderstanding each other.
In response to
comment
by
on
[LINK] An internet source of offended people misunderstanding each other.
I'm just saying, my experience is that it does go both ways: Alice is offended, and so plays Bob off as being middle-of-the road when he was super-nice, and crazy-loon when he was middle-of-the-road. Or Bob is genuinely a loon, but insists that okay, he was maybe middle of the road a few times, but super nice the rest of the time.
I've seen this as an impartial observer, and I've been on both sides of the fence. My friends know not to take me too seriously when I'm upset about someone...
EDIT: You're probably also right about defensiveness not being apparent. I'm not suggesting this is ALWAYS the case, just that it's a bad idea to seriously assume that the first poster is ALWAYS in the right and that the rebuttals MUST be mere defensiveness and not genuine outrage at such a false portrayal.
In response to
comment
by
on
[LINK] An internet source of offended people misunderstanding each other.
But they're writing down their own behavior wrong. They say that they said, "How can I help you make this evening better?" and the person reports that they said something like "Look, can we make this evening better?!" So that's not just about causation, it's attributing actions to themselves.
In response to
comment
by
on
[LINK] An internet source of offended people misunderstanding each other.
When two people are saying different things, it seems unreasonable to assume that the person is describing their own behavior wrong, as opposed to the other party reporting it inaccurately.
Especially on a website where you'll get karma/attention/sympathy for making the other party out as a crazy loon or a sadistic villain...
To say nothing of cultural differences that genuinely lead to one person saying X, and the other person understanding Y instead[1].
And then there's the weird tendency to hold first dates in noisy environments, where it's easy to mishear...
[1] I almost broke up with my girlfriend recently over similar. She told me "I would have shown up if it was planned" and I took that to mean "You failed to make a concrete date, so I felt okay blowing you off" when it was actually "I got dragged in to support an unplanned intervention for a family member" >.> That was awkward, especially since she really had been blowing me off due to insufficiently concrete plans a month ago.
Are they dimmable or multiway? Does the dimmer switch control the number of diodes illuminated?
The dimmer switch does indeed control the number of diodes (as well as the RGB balance)
When someone says something offensive to you - they're racist, homophobic, sexist
Taboo, "racist, homophobic, sexist". In my experience these words, especially when spoken by the offended, frequently mean "you are making an argument/stating a potential truth that I don't like".
For example: is it racist/sexist to point out the differences in average IQ between the people of different races/genders? Does it become racist/sexist if one attempts to speculate on the cause of these differences?
In my experience these words, especially when spoken by the offended, frequently mean "you are making an argument/stating a potential truth that I don't like".
"Gay people shouldn't marry because it will undermine the very fabric of civilization" "Women shouldn't vote, because they don't understand male concepts like War and Empire" "Everyone knows Irish people get drunk on St. Patrick's day!"
This is the sort of stuff that frequently arises in the world.
I would suggest you probably live in a very filtered environment. It's cool, most people do. I've been trying to re-filter my own environment. But, trust me, these things are all still alive and kicking out there. Following the news, activist blogs, or just having friends who are oppressed in their daily life and talk about it, will quickly draw this sort of racist, homophobic, sexist comments to your attention.
If you really think this qualifies as "stating an unpleasant truth" then... wow.
The mechanism of dimming is to strobe. Professionals claim that it is imperceptible, and it indeed can't be noticed consciously. However, it becomes painfully obvious when looking at a moving object.
Get a bulb of the appropriate brightness and use it.
I'm fairly sensitive to strobing and I've never noticed that from the strip of LED lights I have. But it also has multiple LEDs (at least 6, 2 each of RGB), so perhaps it's just a different design?
Everything I see in a quick search on google scholar says that healthy adults excrete extra and there is no established upper limit, this implies the upper limit is far enough away that almost no one ever hits it.
One data point: One banana contains 400+ mg of potassium and no one has had potassium related issues on a 30 bananas a day (12,000mg) diet.
no one has had potassium related issues on a 30 bananas a day (12,000mg) diet.
If I eat 1 banana per day, every day, I will get horrible leg cramps within a week. I really like bananas, so I've spent a lot of time testing this, although it's hardly a double-blind high-sample-size study.
Not to mention the fact that getting it 80% clean will take much less that 80/99 of the time it'll take to get it 99% clean.
My understanding of the 80/20 rule was "80% of the work takes 20% of the time", so this seems already covered?
And the rest of the article says that there is no conclusive evidence either way.
That feels a bit mis-representatative: There's no conclusive evidence, but there is weak evidence in favor.
The first doctor says it doesn't matter, the second says it does, and the three linked studies say (mildly harmful, no effect, no effect), with small sample sizes. The first doctor also explicitly states that he'd still wipe front-to-back if he were female!
I'd call that weak evidence towards harm, i.e. this is potentially harmful advice.
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Related: buy a small and reliable compass. Not a compass app for your phone, but an actual compass. GPS, your own spatial awareness, and reasonable assumptions about geography can all let you down, but north is always north.
Edit: I will now ruin the punchiness of this comment with an explanatory edit. I do a lot of walking around a large city. Google Maps is fairly reliable but leaves much to be desired. Establishing GPS location, battery consumption and occasional out-and-out wrongness are common bugbears, so I started trying to navigate without it.
The biggest problem I found was orienting myself. Surfacing from a subway stop only to have no idea which direction was which, I'd sometimes fall back to GPS just to check what direction I was facing (which Google Maps is really bad at anyway. Anyone who's ever done that "let's walk ten metres in this direction to see what way I'm pointing" thing will know what I mean. I played around with some compass apps, which are just as much of a pain as Google Maps. Eventually I just gave in and bought a compass.
Most areas of most cities have fairly intuitive street layouts, if you learn them. If I'm in Northeast Portland, and I am on a numbered street, then I am either heading east (number gets bigger) or west (number gets smaller). If it is a named street, then I am either heading north (number gets bigger), or south (number gets smaller).
Most named streets do have numbers, but you can also go off the building numbers.
I don't know why it took me 25 years to really accept this, since I grew up being told about this, but most cities genuinely DO use a coordinate system, and learning it makes that sort of thing trivial :)