• 0 Posts
  • 14 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: January 14th, 2024

help-circle


  • That is interesting. I imagined it more like an abstract physics problem than an actual scene. My ball was about 6 inches diameter, made of a nonspecific hard but not very dense material similar to, but not necessarily solid plastic, of no specific color. It was in the center of a table roughly 3 x 6 feet in surface at normal sitting table height, and was also of no specific color or material. The person was just the vague notion of a person applying a push slightly off from across the short axis of the table. The ball bounced slightly on the generic idea of a floor as it rolled away. My mind quickly supplied the additional details when requested, but not until then. (Yellow ball, wood table, etc). If I’d been asked in a way that didn’t feel like a physics problem, but instead asked me to imagine a scene, I would already have had many of those details in my mental view.


  • The analysis I read from a lawyer explained how Wisconsin’s state laws on self defense are weirdly complex, and due to the exact order of events, under those laws, his intent technically didn’t matter, and that’s why it was inadmissible evidence. In most states it would be admissable, and he would be guilty. He even listed the laws out and while I don’t recall any of the details now, it did seem perfectly logical to my layman’s understanding. So it’s not that the judge was biased, it’s just that Rittenhouse, through dumb luck, happened to fall through a legal loophole. Wisconsin needs to fix it’s laws, because it’s abundantly clear he wanted to kill those people and morally speaking, I consider him to be an unrepentant murderer.


  • It’s not an official requirement anywhere I’ve heard of, but I do recall cases where people have noticed police departments declining to hire applicants who scored too high on their aptitude test. I think someone even sued over it, but the court found that being too smart was not a protected class, so the department was within their rights to do that. Or something like that, it’s been a while since that story broke.




  • EpeeGnome@lemm.eetoScience Memes@mander.xyzWeevil time
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    27 days ago

    Ties are worn around the base of the neck, and the neck is the flexible thin part that connects the head. I see position A as being well below the flex point, which would be like wearing the tie low on the shoulders. That’s why I would prefer it at the bottom end of the joint, position C. One could reasonably argue that anything above where the body narrows down towards the neck is part of the neck, in which case A would also make sense.

    Semantics on where a neck starts aside, position B is clearly at the top of the neck and is therefore just nonsense not even worth considering.

    Also position C lets the tie hang neatly down the front of the body as it should, rather than dragging the ground or dangling loosely in midair.


  • EpeeGnome@lemm.eetoScience Memes@mander.xyzSquare!
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    27 days ago

    A square? A square?! Wake up sheeple! That things not even a rombus! Don’t you see the lies? Look at the lines! Look! Not all rhombuses are squares, but all squares are rhombuses! All squares are rhombuses and look at this thing they try to call a square. Where are the parallel lines? There’s got to be parallel lines, don’t you see, or then it’s not a rombus and all squares are rhombuses. Don’t forget that, don’t let them take that fact from you and perpetuate their geometric lies. Does no one even remember what a rombus is? This is, this is basic geometry here that you should have learned in middle school or elementary school, but then you just forget it, and let people trick you with these misleading definitions and fancy diagrams but you have to remember that a Square. Is. A. Rombus.




  • No, don’t you all see? He’s actually so genius that we mere mortals can’t comprehend his brilliance, as attested to by his multiple friends who are totally real English professors who exist and spend time with him, and are definitely not fictitious people he just made up on the spot to try to strengthen an obviously bullshit argument. Well, no, you wouldn’t have heard them, because they, um, teach at a different school, but the important part is that they are intelligent enough to see the clever underlying structure of his wide ranging and definitely intellectually brilliant speeches, which the rest of us apparently aren’t.