Furry artist, spatial data scientist, and streamer 🦝 My site: https://malleyeno.com/
I’m not American so I’m speaking out of turn. But could it be resourcing?
Curriculums have to be made, and that sort of thing takes time and money. So I imagine it’s easier to take a curriculum for European Spanish that already exists and just keep using it under the assumption that it’s “close enough” for students to jump to Mexican Spanish from there, rather than reinvent the curriculum for Mexican Spanish.
It should be illegal to remind people (me, particularly) about Steins;Gate while they’re at work
I can’t be fucking crying on the clock, dawg
Anyone got any show recommendations on CBC Gem? Bf and I just downloaded it but not really sure what’s good yet.
We’re fans of sci fi and fantasy if anything like that is available on it
(Edit: thanks for the recs folks!)
Yep! This would be something you’d be expected to do in a royal court (or even in a regular noble’s presence) if you held lower station.
You know I didn’t think about this comparison until reading your comment, but like:
Back in the medieval period, it was vitally important (socially) that people understood your background and standing in society, because there were pretty strict rules about how one class of people is supposed to treat another. Like whether you were a social “superior” or “inferior” type shit. That’s how we got things like “your majesty” and how you might not be allowed to turn your back to someone while leaving them if they were a “superior”. In a lot of places in the world, wearing a kind of hat was legally required because that signalled “who you were” and how people needed to act.
A lot of those rules were done away with post French Revolution/modernity because the idea that people were supposed to be equal caught on. So nowadays the idea that you might have to kneel at the sight of someone because of who they are or not refer to them directly in speech because they’re “above you” is considered unthinkable.
I dunno, I guess now I see parallels between that old way of social thought and coming out today. It’s not as strict as the medieval thing (I don’t think we’re at the point where you legally have to come out or else you have committed a crime) but it seems like something cishet people socially expect queer people to do to “know who they are dealing with and how.”
I completely forgot that he used the notwithstanding clause within like… the last few years. I don’t know what it says about the times we live in (or maybe just my memory, im probably just exaggerating) that something that should be a major constitutional crisis for us happened and nothing came of it
I wish we had more Watergates because at least Watergate toppled a president
Given that Canadians don’t typically vote in American elections, I don’t see how that has anything to do with us or should affect our decision making.
The USA is tariffing us, not just the red states.
Also just as an observation: monotony is boring and I think aversion to boredom is a big reason people seek different things (maybe even things that require more skill to perform). Who wants to dance the same dance their whole life?
I feel like people in the past were as susceptible to being bored that we are – maybe even more because there were a lot fewer things to actually do back then.
I think I get the point they’re making, but eeehhh? I don’t think “art is something inherently human” and “you can (and maybe even should!) be improving your abilities in art” are in conflict with each other. Humans have been able to make art for as long as we’ve been human, but we’ve also had an implicit understanding of seeing two pieces of art and picking which ones we preferred in the moment. Capitalism didn’t really change that, we’ve had masters and apprentices since antiquity.
Couldn’t we say that the desire to make better art and the anxiety that comes with examining your own progress just as easily be called a behaviour unique to humans?
(Edit: writing that last part made me come up with the image of bees that have imposter syndrome about how they build their hives and I don’t know how to feel about that)
“nobody wants to work anymore”
1940
Lmao not even World War 2 is enough for people to stop trodding out this line
Don’t forget the tennis balls on the tips
I believe in Friends, it’s justified as Monika pretending that her grandmother is living there so she still gets her rent controlled tenancy agreement. I thought I remembered that there was an episode where she and the custodian were having a fight so he threatened to reveal the grandma isn’t alive anymore so that Monika would have renegotiate the agreement (and it was resolved so he didn’t do that.)
As for Joey and Chandler’s apartment, no clue how that one happened lol
You’ve replied to another comment in the thread indicating that you get it, so nice! But just in case other readers are looking here, I’ll reply to your comment here as though you were someone else.
we have computers that can pretty accurately represent depth
No, computer (monitors/screens) cannot represent depth. Those are still 2d planes, and cannot represent 3d information without distortion. When computers calculate and display depth, they do so through illusion of depth, perspective, and parallax.
This is not a technological problem, it’s physical and mathematical. You cannot consolidate 3d information into 2d information without distorting something.
the old projections we drew on maps.
We still use projections on maps, both paper and electronic. Because we must. They are the only way of taking 3d information and rendering it to 2d information. All projections have distortions, and the map makers takes her pick of what she is distorting (usually size and shape, but it could be direction or continuity a la Waterman Butterfly.) There is nothing special about computers compared to doing a projection by hand, other than it’s much faster to do it on a computer.
Stretching it out flat (zooming in on google earth) has less distortion than these projections shown here, don’t they?
“Stretching it out flat” is projection*. It may appear to be less distorted to your human eyes because you’re zooming in continually as you scroll your mouse, so it looks like it all blends in together. But that doesn’t mean it’s actually more accurate or less distorted than a map with a reasonably chosen projection for the area. Because you fundamentally cannot take a 3d object and make it 2d while keeping all the information. (Try it yourself! Try to peel an orange while keeping its peel entirely intact and while making the peel come out in a rectangle. No cutting off bits allowed, we want that peel to come right back to wrapping around the orange after.)
Yes. Why wouldn’t it be?
Projections don’t have to be limited to the entire earth. You can subset the area represented and still apply a projection. (Though you do have a decision if you’re taking an arc-area to “re-align” your projecting shape so that it best fits your area. But that might be more complicated than you’re looking for, other projections best suited for your locale would be a better fit)
With modern concepts of 3D imagery, we must have solved this distortion problem.
? You’re still taking a three dimensional earth and displaying it on a 2d screen or plane. That will always have distortion on some axes. That’s not a technological “problem” to be “solved”, that’s just mathematical reality.
What, you don’t like mandatory fun? You don’t like pretending to be buddy buddy with the people who definitionally are part of a transactional relationship? You don’t enjoy being part of the workplace “family” that would disown you if you said the word union around them?
Gosh, I can’t believe it!
Based, fuck the categorical imperative lmao
We had that taight in our high school too!
(And as a totally unrelated fact I’m sure, our biology teacher was a major figure in our local church and was pro abstinence. Completely unrelated, of course)
Thank you! Everyone has been saying this and it’s so cop-brained that it’s frustrating.
They have not proven that he killed anyone. He is innocent until proven guilty. When you accept that he actually did anything before he is convicted, you are aiding the police’s and prosecutor’s job by making the assumption that arrest = guilt.