|
Belated EC talk from a few pages back - there aren't any liberals or Democrats wringing their hands evilly for the EC to work in their favor, then decrying it when it doesn't. Because it never does, and districts are drawn up intentionally to swing right. Republicans are the only ones who would miss the EC because they're the only ones who keep getting their garbage-tier presidents elected against popular vote in recent history. And of course if Clinton won the EC but lost the popular I'd take it, because our president wouldn't be a literal piss pig, but I wouldn't be any less horrified and I'd still regard the EC as dubious at best. Someone said they wouldn't trust the coasts to know what's best for the Midwest, but the reverse is also true and there's a hell of a lot more people on the coasts.
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 07:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 19:43 |
|
|
One time I had a really bad fever and hallucinated that my back was cut into strips and I had to use brass pins to piece it back together. Another time I had insomnia for days and hallucinated people talking in my ears and the shower spraying blood at my feet. My body supplies its own trips.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 08:14
|
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:One time on acid I figured out the meaning of life and immediately started crying because I knew I wouldn't remember it because I was too hosed up. It's ok, if you had remembered it or written it down, sober you wouldn't have understood it at all (or would've laughed at how stupid it was). Unless your life is based around drug consumption, no epiphany you have while on drugs is meaningful.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 08:55
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Why are you such a square? I was only partially serious. I would argue that hard drug (i.e. heroin, meth) addicts or alcoholics shouldn't be allowed to have important jobs like doctors or anything else where you're responsible for other peoples' safety/health, no matter how well you hide it and how good you are at the job. Like that Flight movie with Denzel Washington - it didn't matter that he saved a lot of people, the fact that he was drunk and high was a betrayal of the public trust and he deserved to go to jail/be fired. The same should happen if your doctor took some heroin before work even if nothing bad happens. Anyway, Blue Star, if drug addicts are humans at their full potential, why are they invariably mentally unstable (unless on drugs) fuckups at life? Why do they never do anything meaningful with their expanded consciousness other than preach about drugs to other people?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 09:30
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:Drug testing employees is stupid and a waste of time, and completely invasive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 09:42
|
|
|
yeah I eat rear end posted:Why do they never do anything meaningful with their expanded consciousness other than preach about drugs to other people? What constitutes meaningful?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 10:06
|
|
|
Ever try doing a SAT prep test while blasted? It's humbling.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 10:22
|
|
|
yeah I eat rear end posted:I was only partially serious. I would argue that hard drug (i.e. heroin, meth) addicts or alcoholics shouldn't be allowed to have important jobs like doctors or anything else where you're responsible for other peoples' safety/health, no matter how well you hide it and how good you are at the job. Like that Flight movie with Denzel Washington - it didn't matter that he saved a lot of people, the fact that he was drunk and high was a betrayal of the public trust and he deserved to go to jail/be fired. The same should happen if your doctor took some heroin before work even if nothing bad happens. Not all drugs make you "hosed up". Opiate addicts (and there's no effective difference between heroin and oxycodone in this regard) do not become "high" from the drug; it just staves off physical withdrawal. Functional opiate addicts are quite common - you just rarely notice them because the drug doesn't influence their behavior. (Granted, I don't think this is really true of stimulants like meth or whatever marijuana is, though I could be wrong about the former since I don't really understand how stimulant dependence works.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 12:29
|
|
|
Without drugs we'd have almost no pieces of art or music
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 12:41
|
|
|
lol if you really think that
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 12:46
|
|
|
All those great musicians that have enhanced your life with music throughout the years? Reeeeeeeal loving high on drugs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 12:51
|
|
|
I honestly can not comprehend why so many people get upset about spoilers for movies, books, tv shows etc. I usually enjoy things more if I already know what is going to happen, and have never felt like a "twist" at the end of a narrative was ruined because I knew about it in advance. When people try to explain to me why spoilers ruin the experience for them or whatever it never really makes sense. This usually only ever comes up when someone tries to recommend a piece of media to me and I ask them what happens in it. People get all cagey about the details and refuse to tell me because they think I won't be able to like it if it's been spoiled for me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 12:55
|
|
|
slouch posted:I usually enjoy things more if I already know what is going to happen Serious question: have you been diagnosed with autism?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 13:07
|
|
|
Devoyniche posted:I talked to a dude who speculated that most economic movements and protests today were started by the 1 %. Like, all the movements like Black Lives Matter, even feminism, they didnt gain real traction until after Occupy Wall Street. The dude speculated that the rich, the 1% were actually rattled by the idea of OWS and realized that what was needed more was to turn people against each other rather than threaten the oligarchy; which led to what you see today where people of the same "class group" are angry at each other over political disagreements, rather than both of them being angry and working against the guys at the top. It was a form of 'divide and conquer' in his words. This is pretty much true. I doubt they secretly start poo poo but anything that discourages solidarity gets loads of attention and is generally allowed to run its course as a 'controversy'. Race stuff especially. Anything that has a whiff of class consciousness about it is ignored, ridiculed into the ground, or shut down by force. The ruling class don't have double agents hiding in the movements or anything retarded like that, but they know what they're doing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 13:43
|
|
|
yeah I eat rear end posted:Anyway, Blue Star, if drug addicts are humans at their full potential, why are they invariably mentally unstable (unless on drugs) fuckups at life? Why do they never do anything meaningful with their expanded consciousness other than preach about drugs to other people? I could list a bunch of writers, of literature, not "rock songs", who did lots of drugs but really the list is not needed, you can probably think of many of them on your own.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 14:39
|
|
|
Artist types are all huge fuckups and need to be largely taken care of in society by those who aren't artistic/huge fuckups. In exchange for this, artist types are who make life worth living!
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 15:04
|
|
|
slouch posted:I honestly can not comprehend why so many people get upset about spoilers for movies, books, tv shows etc. I usually enjoy things more if I already know what is going to happen, and have never felt like a "twist" at the end of a narrative was ruined because I knew about it in advance. When people try to explain to me why spoilers ruin the experience for them or whatever it never really makes sense. This usually only ever comes up when someone tries to recommend a piece of media to me and I ask them what happens in it. People get all cagey about the details and refuse to tell me because they think I won't be able to like it if it's been spoiled for me.  Actually, I don't feel like spoilers make anything better, they just don't make it worse. The only exception (sort of) is comedy, where hearing the punch line ahead of the setup can definitely ruin a joke, but as far as stories go it makes no difference. And people complaining about spoilers are the worst. If you're that bothered by it, just make sure to watch stuff in a timely manner. Don't expect everyone you know to avoid discussing popular media just because you might not have seen it yet. Get over it. doverhog posted:I could list a bunch of writers, of literature, not "rock songs", who did lots of drugs but really the list is not needed, you can probably think of many of them on your own.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 15:15
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:And people complaining about spoilers are the worst. If you're that bothered by it, just make sure to watch stuff in a timely manner. Hard to do when FYAD changes it's forum name to "Han Solo Dies" a week before the loving movie came out. Tiggum posted:Most of those are exaggerated or taken out of context (like, they did drugs but not actually while they were producing their best work) or just made up (because they must have been on something to come up with that!). Drugs making you "more creative" is just how you feel when you're on drugs because you're too impaired to realise how dumb your ideas are. Carl Sagan said he would have insights about math/physics while high and could retain them afterwards. http://marijuana-uses.com/mr-x/ quote:There is a myth about such highs: the user has an illusion of great insight, but it does not survive scrutiny in the morning. I am convinced that this is an error, and that the devastating insights achieved when high are real insights; the main problem is putting these insights in a form acceptable to the quite different self that we are when we’re down the next day. Some of the hardest work I’ve ever done has been to put such insights down on tape or in writing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 15:17
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:Most of those are exaggerated or taken out of context (like, they did drugs but not actually while they were producing their best work) or just made up (because they must have been on something to come up with that!). Drugs making you "more creative" is just how you feel when you're on drugs because you're too impaired to realise how dumb your ideas are. I didn't claim they did their work while high (though some did), just that they both did something meaningful and did drugs, and really we should be including alcohol to "drugs", and then you're gonna have a hard timing finding any writers who didn't partake.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 15:27
|
|
|
slouch posted:I honestly can not comprehend why so many people get upset about spoilers for movies, books, tv shows etc. I usually enjoy things more if I already know what is going to happen, and have never felt like a "twist" at the end of a narrative was ruined because I knew about it in advance. When people try to explain to me why spoilers ruin the experience for them or whatever it never really makes sense. This usually only ever comes up when someone tries to recommend a piece of media to me and I ask them what happens in it. People get all cagey about the details and refuse to tell me because they think I won't be able to like it if it's been spoiled for me. Yeah I agree with this. Spoilers have never actually spoiled anything for me, because knowing a technical detail to a fictional story doesn't do anything for you. I always think of spoilers in the comic book sense. Because generally comics spoil poo poo right on the cover for you. It will say this issue Captain America dies. Because they're trying to get you to buy the book. The actual knowledge of captain America dying isn't what's important it's how it happens and what it took to get there that is important.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 15:39
|
|
|
69 isn't all that great.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 17:37
|
|
|
RE: Spoilers A lot of the time the reactions are overblown but I've had some instances of watching a movie wherein the first viewing is special. Something happens and you can feel your brain just stop, stutter and panic trying to make sense of what you just saw. No Country for Old Men did this for me, as well as Ida and Rebecca. Hell, I had it the first time I read 1984. But then I also had it when I watched Dear Zachary. That wasn't the good kind and I cried all weekend. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
I can't imagine people liking Arrival nearly as much if they spoil the ending. The whole movie builds up to it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
The thing about spoilers is that they rob you of an experience. You will never have the experience of seeing the story unfold without knowing what will happen.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:I can't imagine people liking Arrival nearly as much if they spoil the ending. The whole movie builds up to it. Kinda sorta spoiler not really: How do you spoil the ending if it's at the beginning? SOMEONE DIDN'T PAY ATTENTION.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
spit on my clit posted:I wonder if chinese goes well with sushi... Hung out with my cousin a few months ago, and it was his idea to stop at an Asian supermarket to do this. Alternating between sushi and General Tso's with fried noodles is awesome.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 18:27
|
|
|
Goons are way too protective about spoilers. They act like every single little detail of the story is a huge reveal, and knowing anything about it means it's completely ruined.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
Jerry Cotton posted:Serious question: have you been diagnosed with autism? No but my father once sent me an email containing a link to an article about autism asking me "thoughts? read it and let's discuss." I also have a bunch of seemingly autistic family members so maybe I have the spectrum running through my blood. The_Rob posted:Yeah I agree with this. Spoilers have never actually spoiled anything for me, because knowing a technical detail to a fictional story doesn't do anything for you. I always think of spoilers in the comic book sense. Because generally comics spoil poo poo right on the cover for you. It will say this issue Captain America dies. Because they're trying to get you to buy the book. The actual knowledge of captain America dying isn't what's important it's how it happens and what it took to get there that is important. This is my thinking, more or less. Are roller coaster rides not exciting if you know that they will eventually come to an end? Does seeing a loop in the ride while standing in line make the experience of being flipped upside down any less thrilling? Presumably not. Even If I already know the narrative beats of a story, I am still able to enjoy on the moment-to-moment experience of the cinematography and I can still empathize with the fictional experience of a character who does not yet know they were Actually A Ghost The Whole Time. I live my whole life on the precipice of a terrifying, unknowable future. Why the hell wouldn't I want a two hour long break from that? I'll look up The Arrival before watching it and report back. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
The Arrival is a different movie starring Charlie Sheen.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
Spoilers no matter how big never absolutely ruin the experience. They can make it less enjoyable though. There's no sense in getting super pissed about it though, it's just a movie/tv show/book. If the "twist" was the only good thing about it it wasn't a good movie - I know almost every line to movies I rewatch all the time but they are no less enjoyable. There's a happy middle ground between the people who refuse to go online or talk to people before seeing a movie and the type of person that looks up spoilers before seeing a movie. Avoid them if you can, but it's not the end of the world if you see one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
Intentionally spoiling things for people is dumb
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 18:40
|
|
|
free basket of chips posted:Intentionally spoiling things for people is dumb Hachi machi that's one spicy opinion 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
Backing the side that doesn't care about spoilers. Knowing that someone is going to die doesn't ruin the author depicting people dealing with grief, or how visually spectacular someone blowing up is. If the writing is actually any good, then stuff like character development isn't going to be ruined from knowing some focus point in advance. It is probably unfair, but people whining about spoilers is nearly always into some trashy sci-fi or fantasy garbage. I mean, it is fine to like whatever, but there is a reason why it is always someone talking about Star Wars or Harry Potter who feels that spoilers ruined everything, and not someone freaking out about being told that Fyodor dies in Brothers Karamazov. Intentionally spolering people and ruining their experience is rude, but grown-ups freaking out about super-heros lore is also pretty funny and that is the exact people who get wound up about spoilers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
Meg dies in Little Women
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:I can't imagine people liking Arrival nearly as much if they spoil the ending. The whole movie builds up to it. not that i don't think there are works whose intended impact hinges on a pivotal reveal or some kind of twist which reframes all preceding events, i think i liked arrival in spite of the ending tbh - tho it wrapped up the film nicely and did reframe preceding events neatly i felt that the ending was the weakest part ... but that isn't exactly a damning critique since i thought it was a pretty good film overall and even its weakest link was okay - i bet that counts as an unpopular opinion
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
It is absolutely about how it reframes the preceding parts that makes the ending good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
I've not seen it, and probably won't in the foreseeable future, one of you just tell me the twist and all that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
it did a thing i detest when plots involving non-linear time shenanigans have the protagonist in a completely inescapable situation but then have a future version of themselves intervene in their favor, it doesn't just kill the tension of the one scene for me, it retroactively kills any preceding tension
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
My apparently unpopular opinion about the arrival is that the father was right to be super pissed at her and leave her for not disclosing some extremely serious info she had before making a major commitment. This is apparently an unpopular opinions because a bunch of people disagreed and told me it's a woman's right to have a child and men shouldn't have a say and there's always risk in life (and I'm practically accusing her of spermjacking which makes me an mra). I tried to explain that's not the point, the point is that she purposefully withheld extremely life-changing information from the father that had a right to know because she had time-travel mind powers he didn't have, information that would have absolutely influenced his consent to try for a kid or not. Also why not try to change the future, just to see how that works? The ending had this real "everything is predetermined so just enjoy the experience who cares if you hurt other people that's just their destiny" message, or at least that's how I interpreted it, and I've never cared for that message.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 19:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 19:43 |
|
|
Baronjutter posted:My apparently unpopular opinion about the arrival is that the father was right to be super pissed at her and leave her for not disclosing some extremely serious info she had before making a major commitment. This is apparently an unpopular opinions because a bunch of people disagreed and told me it's a woman's right to have a child and men shouldn't have a say and there's always risk in life (and I'm practically accusing her of spermjacking which makes me an mra). I tried to explain that's not the point, the point is that she purposefully withheld extremely life-changing information from the father that had a right to know because she had time-travel mind powers he didn't have, information that would have absolutely influenced his consent to try for a kid or not. Also why not try to change the future, just to see how that works? The ending had this real "everything is predetermined so just enjoy the experience who cares if you hurt other people that's just their destiny" message, or at least that's how I interpreted it, and I've never cared for that message. Because she didn't just see the future, she existed in it simultaneously. For all purposes her daughter was alive to her already. If giving information to my wife would cause my son to potentially be removed for existence (even if I wouldn't remember, possibly) I would never tell her that, because my child's existence is more important than our relationship. Cancer or not. I see your perspective, I think I just came at it a different way. Also, playing future experiment with the potential destruction of your own child doesn't seem to make any sense, so I'm not sure if that's what you meant there. There's probably a thread for this in the cinema subforum I never go to. I just saw it last night, so I'll probably head there for chatter about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2017 19:47
|
|