Yeah, my copy is in decent condition, and I’ve had offers of 200 for it.

Alas, I’m a giant geek and refuse to sell it

Just like lemmy more

Yeah, if you only go by the quality of vocals, his solo stuff is nuts. I’m going by overall song crafting.

He just never managed to make songs that were as iconic on his own. Great songs, yes. But they never really hit that magic point where they’re a cultural treasure the way Maiden could

Ooooh, damn!

Well, unpopular as the opinion is, you have a point.

However, I think you over state it. Bruce’s solo work is definitely his best vocal work on average (imo, obviously). But his solo work being better than Maiden is a hard sale.

Reason being that bands are synergistic when they’re working right, and Maiden has a ton of synergy every individual musician is top tier, but the way they work together is more than the sum of their individual talents.

Yeah, Bruce sounds amazing on his own. But, He also pretty much ran the show, and the songs suffered from that, on average, compared to the gestalt if Maiden songs.

I’d also argue that the best solo songs are on par with great, but not best Maiden songs. I mean, c’mon, the entirety of somewhere in time is packed with songs that, individually, are as good or better than any of Bruce’s solo songs, and as an album, it smashes his albums across the board, and SIT doesn’t have a majority of tracks being their best ones

But I dig where you’re coming from for sure. Bruce’s solo stuff doesn’t get the recognition it deserves.

Trust me, when it comes down to chickens, the chickens always come first.

Why? Because they are vicious little buggers, and if you try to make them wait they will eat you.

"Oh, hello monkey, is that a treat for me in your hand? How lovely, nom nom nom. What? I took your finger with the lovely dried bug? So sorry. Oh, hello monkey, is that an open wound in your hand for me? Nomnomnom. What? I’m not supposed to devour the flesh from your bones? So sorry. Oh, hello monkey, is that a bone sticking out from where your finger used to be…

You get the idea.

So, I can say with authority that if the egg had come first, the chicken would have eaten it.

I definitely see your point, and appreciate you expressing it :)

Well, the location and specific cause don’t actually matter.

When deciding what, if any, medication you should take, having a reliable supply is a major factor, and that can go kerflooie even in a perfect system if something goes wrong during manufacturing.

So, what it comes down to with depression meds, is what are the consequences of stopping cold turkey?

Some of them, if you stop with no “weaning” period, the effects can range from mildly unpleasant all the way to lethal, though the lethality isn’t like it can be with things like beta blockers where there’s a rebound effect possible.

So, if you’re in a situation where you’re concerned about sustained access to a medication, research it thoroughly before starting. Not all antidepressants are the same, so working with your provider to get on one that’s easier to come off of suddenly is a wise choice. Or, discuss the issue with them and see if they can arrange something in house if your access is dropped.

Some psychiatrists, psychologists, and mental health clinics can actually provide meds directly, in some cases. So you might be able to be weaned off safely at no cost or very low cost, if the worst happens.

There’s also the option with some medications to wean yourself off if you have a supply in place to work with. It’s going to vary a lot because the type of med matters, the delivery method (as in caplets vs capsules vs pills, etc) matters, and how long you need to wean off can be longer than whatever supply you have.

The key is to be as prepared as possible.

With all that in mind, it should be reasonably safe to begin treatment currently. Just talk it through with your provider, and go from there

Definitely an unpopular opinion, and not just a rant or rage bait either, so kudos!

I don’t agree, but this is a damn fine post for this C/

The reason I don’t agree is that consumer goods are priced out of scale. It they can’t price things at a realistic level, then they should stop making them. That goes for every single brand/platform out there

If they’re going to be sucking at the teat of capitalism and enjoying massive profits, but the rest of us are struggling as households, they can go fuck themselves, to be frank. They want the benefits of a “free” market, but don’t want to recognize that the market pressure of demand actually matters. If they’re making games that aren’t affordable to the median, then that’s the developers’ problem. They can scale back for a while, change pricing, produce fewer games, whatever. They have options.

Now, yes, it’s games. This isn’t insulin we’re talking about here, so it certainly isn’t something anyone needs to be up in arms over. But it also isn’t something where they need defending either. Fuck em if they can’t play fair.

I don’t, because it would require a trip to the hospital. Ain’t allergies fun?

But they’re not exactly easy to digest anyway, and how they’re cooked matters to the people I know that do eat them

Infintevalence pretty much nailed it

We’re country as fuck up here. Not a small town any more, but still more rural than suburban.

While we’re in driving distance of a good hospital, it’s a drive, not something in town. There’s just not enough people to keep a hospital in use often enough to make it reasonable in a capitalist system at all, but even in an ideal, post scarcity system, the resources to build and run hospitals are going to be best located where the most people can benefit from it.

And pretty much everything scales the same. Why locate a big university in a town with maybe 10k people if you include outlying areas? To support that kind of endeavor, you’d need more people to do the work, so the town would get bigger because of the large undertaking.

It’s a balance. If you want to have bigger centralized services, you need more people to make it work. And, if you don’t already have the population, attracting bigger things is harder, so the chances of things like public transit, resource intensive facilities, exotic supplies/foods coming there are lower.

It results in people that value the benefits of a smaller population center over the usual benefits of a bigger center being the only ones that’ll move out

Yeah, it’s an issue for sure.

Southeast.

Sin tar is the usual way, though it’ll sometimes come out more sin tawr, where the au is a bit more drawn out.

Sin tore is a fairly common one.

However, sin tar is more common, at least with what I’ve heard in meat space. That’s a fairly limited thing though, since most of the people I have talked to over my fifty years have been fellow southerners. We do tend to use softer vowels in most cases, and tar is softer than tore in the way we tend to do vowels.

However, with the latin and Greek origins of the word, I’d argue that the tar or tawr would lean closer to that than tore, just because of similar words. When an au is present in medical terminology (which is where almost all of my latin and Greek comes from) it usually gets pronounced aw or ah, not oh.

But, I never hear anyone pronounce the initial C as a K, and that’s the way it would have been in both of those languages originally. The Greek version is spelled with a K, when written with the usual alphabet rather than Greek. Kentauros.

Which is an aside.

Wikipedia lists the two I did as the usual pronunciations, fwiw. And all the dictionaries with audio options are either those two, or slight variations of them, where the au sound is rounder or flatter than the norm.

Thing is, it’s a word in a living language. Whatever the original English pronunciation may have been, that can change, so supporting a pronunciation is kind of meaningless. What matters is consensus over time, and by location.

So, a regional accent that sounds more like cent-ur is just as valid in that region, it just isn’t standard. So would any other variant be, if there’s enough people using it to be called a consensus.

Yeah, you block and report. That’s all you can do

Nah, the roman system developed from even older systems.

They’re tally marks, with a twist.

You take a stick and cut a notch, that’s one. This works up to a point, and that point is 4 or 5, when it becomes unwieldy, and our brains have trouble using the groups of notches.

So you need a new mark to denote a grouping. The v notch is basically adding a / to the already present \ or | tally mark, denoting that the new symbol represents a group of the previous ones.

Different methods have 3 base marks, with the fourth being the new one, others do it at five.

Roman numerals stop at 3 individual marks, and there’s no record of why. But avoiding 4 repeating symbols is consistent with the higher numerals as well.

Basically, once you hit |||, the next number with be the | subtracted from the next higher digit. It works with IX, as well as XL, XC, etc.

But, the idea you suggest is sometimes presented as a possible origin for the earlier systems. Thing is, other tally systems that originated separately follow the same basic concepts, without using the same V symbol, but using other cross marks. Not that it matters because nobody knows. Nobody back then passed the information along.

It does kinda make sense, but the idea that it’s the simplest way to make marks on sticks and stones does too

The problem answering this is that there’s an uncrossable barrier involved.

We can’t, at this point in time, accurately and definitively detect the internal perceptions of animals.

We can, to a limited degree detect how their brains change during a given events. We can observe behaviors as they exist. And, it is possible to compare those to human equivalents.

But they are, at the end of the day equivalents. There’s simply no way, at present, to ascribe human concepts to the way they think. The best we can ever say is that animals seem to respond and change in rewards ways that are similar to, or even identical to, the way humans respond to a given stimulus.

“Cute” is a pretty vague concept to begin with, and it’s a concept that refers to a complex series of internal reactions we have to external stimuli.

With all of that said, some animals do seem to respond to humans in a similar way we do to animals considered cute by most humans. That’s the best we can do until someone cooks up something that lets us more fully track what’s going on inside an animal’s mind.

Thing is, mind is a concept in the first place, and it isn’t exactly defined in measurable and totally objective ways as of yet. So, we’d first have to find a way to “read” human minds before we could start to try and compare that to animal minds. So, that some seem to is likely the best answer we’ll have in our lifetimes

Yeah, not the right C/

You want one of the rant or vent communities

Flip a coin between cinnamon and plasma

Yeah, things like tags and the nsfw flag makes sense. It’s a useful tool that doesn’t hurt anyone, and reduces the hassles involved in removing a post just because there were errors in that surface level stuff.

Now, editing the content, no. Hell no.

The nsfw flag is the more important one tbh.

But, tags allow users to search and sort things (or ideally would, no idea what the actual implementation might be). Having consistent tagging for that purpose is a net plus as a user because if mods can change them, then when you search or sort, there’s a higher chance that the results will be consistent. When users pick their own tags and they can’t be changed, results get messy unless a mod removes the post, contacts the user, tells them what tag to use, then watches to make sure they use it when they repost/edit.

There’s no use for tags other than sorting, searching and filtering. So a mod kinda needs to be able to change them if they’re in place at all

Removed by mod