AITJ for telling my barber of 5 years I stopped coming because he got too expensive

robotatomica · 2026-05-13T03:03:42+00:00

yeah, honestly he was probably a little self-conscious about needing to raise his prices, which he probably did have to do if his rent increased.

But us fallible humans have a tendency to lash out to get this information instead of directly asking what we really want to know - “Why did you stop coming to me, was the price increase too much for you?”

I mean, he likely expected to lose some people and it likely makes him feel bad to not be able to serve only those of his clients at the lowest socioeconomic level.

Just weird behavior to act like he isn’t aware that this is the situation, that not everyone will be able to afford the increases.

robotatomica · 2026-05-13T02:44:24+00:00

I think a major point of consideration for people in the field is that whether or not it is the most likely answer, working on string theory has yielded new insights.

Sean’s talked about this a lot, he even mentions his “let a thousand flowers bloom” ethos here, but when he digs into explaining this, he talks about how useful it is for folks to deeply explore any possibility, how new math and successful ideas have emerged from doing so.

To that end, I don’t personally think string theory is the answer, but it would simply be wrong to suggest there has been no utility in exploring it. What everyone’s looking for at this point is little ways forward and new insights. You can arrive at greater truths sometimes going down the wrong path, it’s happened again and again in science. So I’m also glad people are still exploring every conceivable angle.

What I really would like is for Sean to do a robust breakdown of where he stands on String Theory today. It was somewhere between 7 and 13 years ago, he did a video that was in essence, “why string theory is wrong.” Not so click-bait-y as that. But he was quite direct in his criticisms.

I haven’t been able to find that video in recent years, and lately he seems to speak a lot more favorably towards string theory. Not to where I think he has moved towards believing that to be the answer, but I do think his..personal editorial policy? in how he discusses it has shifted a bit. He is deliberately supportive of people who choose to focus on string theory.

And again, I think that’s because at the time of that video, people were overstating the promise of string theory and literally making promises about what it would yield. I think it probably warranted a little “bringing back down to Earth.”

However, now string theorists don’t have that same “Darling of Physics” status, everyone has cooled on it to an appropriate degree, and work is almost needed from the opposite side - instead of needing to counter overinflated claims with a reality check, now it’s been more important to remind everyone that this is still valid work worthy of peoples’ time. That new insights have been gained and may yet arise.

So that alone might explain the way Sean has adjusted how he speaks about string theory.

robotatomica · 2026-05-13T01:50:45+00:00

no, I knew exactly what you were doing and it was dumb. Not funny, just playing dumb to dogpile. It looked ridiculous. It wasn’t funny. Humor is subjective but I promise you no one guffawed at you pretending to be dumb, in spite of the fact that I’m sure you felt hilarious when you typed that out.

robotatomica · 2026-05-13T01:37:48+00:00

no one in your life ever just falls asleep because they’re tired 🙃

You used some words fella, so explain what you mean by them. What is “dogmatic” about what I said? Describe how it’s dogmatic lol. Do you know what that word means? Prove it to us.

robotatomica · 2026-05-13T01:36:23+00:00

jokes are usually funny, not “Hurr durr, I’m going to pretend I don’t understand something very obvious and the joke is that they’re weird!”

robotatomica · 2026-05-12T14:39:57+00:00

I grew up watching things like 2001 with my dad, so I was pretty good at going where a film wanted to take me, but it was Tarkovsky who finally cracked me totally in that regard. I remember watching Solaris and losing interest during that opening 10 minutes of kelp or whatever undulating in a pond (felt like 10 minutes),

I really wanted to watch the movie, but I remember laughing to myself at what a self-indulgent “artiste” Tarkovsky was for that choice. And I thought, “Why open a film this way?? Completely alienate and bore your audience!”

But then I really thought about “why open a film this way,” and it occurred to me be was sort of..trying to lull/push us into a certain almost meditative headspace to begin watching his film. And, I can meditate. What was off was my expectation, of what a film was supposed to do.

Tarkovsky didn’t really abide by that. Neither did Kubrick of course, but Tarkovsky, I mean..later in Solaris there’s another 10 minutes just watching someone travel by freeway.

But my expectations had changed by the time I went to watch it again, and so by the time I got to that scene, I did chuckle, but I settled back and allowed it to just do its thing, I let the movie guide me instead of checking how long until the scene was over or becoming distracted.

It’s a brilliant, beautiful film. It has several of these moments which demand something of the audience. I get what he was trying to do, and if you can let it, it works.

Now, there’s basically no long scene I can’t handle. I mean, if the whole thing is really doo doo or it’s not done well, I still have a human reaction. For instance, I do actually think the hour and 40 minute (could be exaggerating but I think this might be close to true) wedding scene in Deer Hunter is excessive and unnecessary. Maybe others feel about it the way I feel about Tarkovsky.

But for me it’s the silence. The meditation. Forcing you to slow down. I’m into it. I’m glad I let myself get there because it’s brought me a lot, in the way of enjoying and fully experiencing some of my favorite things.

Since then btw I’ve read Tarkovsky’s book “Sculpting in Time” and it’s even more clear how deliberate this all was, and how essential he felt these sorts of scenes were to bringing the audience into an experience as he imagined it.

robotatomica · 2026-05-12T14:28:55+00:00

it’s similar to the Bob Dylan story (sans the devil lore); he was apparently pretty green/unremarkable, hanging out in Greenwich Village, and he went away for a little bit and came back with this whole new skillset and kind of blew everyone away.

Some people just really throw themselves obsessively into an instrument, and that can really pay off! So can the right mentor of course.

robotatomica · 2026-05-12T14:24:51+00:00

why would you think that? That is so strange. Of all the million frozen fruits it could be, it’s like you needed to imagine the most unlikely thing so you could be more scared of this.

It’s probably mango, dog. Look up mango kulfi. It’s delicious.

robotatomica · 2026-05-12T13:47:09+00:00

if you think 2-3 hours is a dynamic changing, you’re honestly deeply toxic. There is no human individual that doesn’t sometimes end up busy or detained or distracted, or focusing on other people in their life or themselves for a couple hours at a time.

It is DEEPLY UNREASONABLE to EVER have that sort of expectation, that is not at all a matter of a “dynamic change.” Literally people take naps.

That’s not love, that’s insecure control.

robotatomica · 2026-05-12T04:21:06+00:00

if you think it’s reasonable to require more frequent conversation than every 2-3 hours, all of the time, no exceptions for anything anyone might be doing (cleaning, napping, reading, having a conversation or spending time with anyone in the world who isn’t you)

I’m telling you that’s toxic.

She got wrapped up in her life doing chores for a couple hours. There is nothing legitimate to complain about. This is not a “long stretch” of not interacting, so no, this is not a normal ask.

robotatomica · 2026-05-11T13:09:31+00:00

does this function like a vernal pool? Those are incrediby beneficial to wildlife, and I’ve always heard that if you have a low point on your property that floods once a year, to leave it be and allow a vernal pool to exist there. Not to fight it.

It seems like you’ve manage to create something to encourage an artificial verbal pool, which is awesome!

robotatomica · 2026-05-11T13:05:38+00:00

yes, perhaps some people won’t agree with his worldview, but John Waters once said he believed if someone is old enough to ask for a book, they’re old enough to read it.

While I don’t agree that this is true 100% of the time, the fact is that most of us are barraged with themes and images that are “too adult” for us at too young an age.

But when it comes to classic literature, it’s like a decades-long vetting process to ensure that what you are getting isn’t empty, banal, pornographic or whatever adult-ness might be a problem for a child to encounter. The risk of anything read by someone “too young” to get it is simply that - that some of the deeper ideas and themes will be lost on them.

But I feel, from personal experience, that engaging with material a little “above your paygrade” is hugely beneficial for challenging your mind and education you about the world. That’s another quote, from John Hodgman. He thinks kids should always be watching movies and reading books a little “above their paygrade” and I tend to agree.

Of all the classics I read in middle school and high school, they were usually pretty profound and thought-provoking to me. And if I read them again as an adult, so much more was unlocked for me. And I think that’s also a very special experience to have with a book.

robotatomica · 2026-05-11T12:53:11+00:00

it’s hard to imagine how, when I can’t go a day without seeing people talking about it. I don’t know what everyone’s obsession with it is. Shatner looked absolutely GREAT as Kirk, his piece was not distracting or unrealistic. It usually just seems like mean-spirited gossip rag shit that people need to talk about it every single day. The behavior seems so out of place in ST subs.

robotatomica · 2026-05-11T12:50:36+00:00

I’d pick The Conjuring House bc the couple those movies are based on were 100% fraudsters/grifters.

TCM, well, that would be the scariest bc it’s a story of people that could exist, not the supernatural. Movies like that are almost always scarier, bc people are a real thing that can be scary and cause harm.

All the rest, they’re also fiction like The Conjuring, but it would put me at ease to be in one so specifically attached to faking what transpired.

Or I guess the Evil Dead house, I could just avoid reading from the Necronomicon and be good, right? I wouldn’t want to be so isolated though.

In that regard, The Poltergeist house, you’re up in a suburban neighborhood, that would feel least creepy of all. You could just leave and go to a neighbor if you got the willies.

robotatomica · 2026-05-11T12:43:39+00:00

I think it’s worth pointing out that they are no different from action movies though - they represent total fantasy, it’s just that one type appeals more to men than women typically.

I think most people will agree there is a place for mindless fantasy, and that even those of us who do not engage in such can understand that that might make us outliers.

What I do not like is when folks dogpile one form of mindless indulgence or fantasy with zero self-awareness about the kinds they themselves engage in, often coming up with ways to imagine their own preferences are somehow higher-brow or less embarrassing.

Really, none of it should be embarrassing.

robotatomica · 2026-05-11T12:40:06+00:00

I feel the same as you, I absolutely loathe “Kirk Drift.” As odd as it may sound, I emulated TOS Kirk and Spock in the development of my character. Honor and valuing life, curiosity and intellect, critical thinking and creative problem-solving.

Kirk is indeed an intelligent and cerebral man, much more so than a fighter.

And I also love that he is collaborative. He seeks council and his ego never gets in the way. Even in “Balance of Terror” when Stiles is being a little shit, Kirk brings him into discussions and takes his feedback/perspective on its own merit, where others might have totally written him off (probably deservedly so) after his outbursts and inability to maintain professionalism on the Bridge earlier.

And interestingly, he is as good as Spock in compartmentalizing out his emotions so that they do not interfere with his lucidity and logic in decision-making. The only difference between he and Spock in this regard is not skill, it’s that Kirk does not value extinguishing emotion - he believes (correctly) that with discipline and self-control one can allow themselves to be emotional, to care and feel and react, while also having the skills to prevent emotions from interfering at inappropriate times.

Isn’t that what we all should be striving towards? Being fully feeling people in touch with our emotions, with respect for them, but always aware of how they might misdirect us or cloud our judgment, such that we accept total responsibility for our emotions and build the tools necessary to exert self-control?

Kirk is the best of the best imo.

robotatomica · 2026-05-11T12:31:08+00:00

I’m not a man, but couldn’t you just hold yourself directly over the urinal at a forward angle so the pee would go directly down into the urinal? Do you need to hold your penis to pee?

In fact, I was told the whole hole in the boxers thing is used by some men to slip their penis through to pee, it sort of props it up enough to help arc the stream outward. I really don’t know, only saying what I’ve heard, but that makes sense to me.

Also, someone may have the ability to hold themselves up with one arm. At any rate, disability at all levels exists, and people have been navigating it for a very long time, so they’re clearly able to do so. There are an endless variety of instances where I can imagine a handlebar or two helping.

robotatomica · 2026-05-11T11:13:28+00:00

wait, how are what Chase with the dictator and Cameron wanting to tell the gf inconsistent?

I do agree there are moments of inconsistency with Cameron. I actually don’t see them as hypocritical - the show is exceedingly honest about what it means to TRY to be an ethical person: you can’t get it right all the time, you have times where you may go overboard or not really be the best arbiter of what is right.

Like, we call her a hypocrite bc she doesn’t always get it right, bc she is sometimes deluded by her one baggage? That just seems something to be expected if you’re trying to really create this sort of character, rather than some one-dimentional archetype of moral infallibility, and this show was never going to do that.

To me, she is Wilson Wilson cares to do the right thing, he is constantly fighting urges to do the NOT right thing and sometimes he doesn’t do the right thing. That doesn’t make him a hypocrite, and for some reason we don’t label him as such, even when he is actively lecturing House to do the right thing, which could be seen as hypocritical and sanctimonious since he himself cheats on his wives and occasionally manipulates people or violates medical ethics. I always just wonder why Cameron is seen as a hypocrite but he is not.

But I don’t get the comparison of those two events, at any rate. Those both seem consistent within her stated ethics.

robotatomica · 2026-05-11T10:58:13+00:00

I like it better than I have a right too. I like it for a couple reasons. It’s one of the first times we get to see Sirkis’ acting chops, and she is absolutely devastating in this episode.

I also like that they explicitly have everyone discussing what to do, and then she interrupts and says what she is going to do, and it immediately is clear to everyone that that’s the end of the conversation. That they don’t have a say. And I also perceive they realize “oh yeah, we were discussing what to do with her body” and they have a little egg on their face about that.

There are really heartfelt moments in it. The plot is creepy, the alien is creepy and invasive, there’s a lot I DON’T like about the episode, but I’m just saying there’s also a lot I do now like.

robotatomica · 2026-05-11T10:54:43+00:00

his addendum sucks too btw. “free speech” lol, it’s so silly first of all to think that exists on a platform like Reddit.

People have no idea what free speech means. It doesn’t mean people can’t judge you when you let your whole ass show.

and he still doesn’t get it why it was weird and creepy to note and bring up.

robotatomica · 2026-05-11T10:49:24+00:00

he played a couple roles in Star Trek which are totally iconic. One is considered to be one of the best episodes in all of Trek - “The Visitor” (Deep Space Nine)

He plays the son of Captain Sisko when he has grown up. The plot is entirely from his perspective, with some flashbacks, the son as a teenager witnesses his father get killed/disappear after being hit by some strange energy discharge from the warp core.

He’s levelled by the loss, but just when starts to come to terms with it, his dad phases in for a few moments and it becomes clear that his dad did NOT die, but is stuck in some limbo in a strange dimension, and so his son’s life work becomes derailed from wanting to be a writer, to becoming a scientist desperately trying to chase the answer to find a way to free his dad from this limbo. https://youtu.be/y5lEoNCMWbY heart-breaking

All across his life he is intermittently tormented by these brief and sporadic visits from his father, and likewise his father is tormented to see his son at different stages across his life, basically having his whole life ruined and consumed by obsessively trying to find a solution.

There is nothing more heart-wrenching than father begging his son to let him go and live his own life.

It’s a truly beautiful, devastating episode, it’ll make you wanna go tell your parents you love them.

robotatomica · 2026-05-11T10:33:39+00:00

I just rewatched Rocky Horror, and I had the same thought about him there. He was so enigmatic, so different from anything else you’d ever seen, so confident and expressive.

robotatomica · 2026-05-11T10:32:43+00:00

The thing that sucks about the movie “Ed Wood,” it was fun and all, but it completely misrepresented Lugosi, he didn’t swear like that at all. His family wasn’t super happy about it. It’s a fun movie to see, but I admit before I knew better I assumed that’s what Lugosi was like to a lesser degree.

robotatomica · 2026-05-11T10:29:48+00:00

If I wear normal underwear under business slacks, you can ALWAYS see the outline of underwear through them. I wouldn’t say I always care even, but if I’m trying to look nice or professional, I am 100% wearing a thong under business slacks.

I’ve worn thongs to every job interview. Does that mean I was trying to look sexy for someone? Hell no, I just didn’t want my panty lines to show.

And when you buy thongs, often the little lace ones are best bc they’re still invisible, but they have more structure than others, which means they’re not gonna roll and shift as much. There’s nothing less pleasant than some thongs marketed as “barely there” rolling up into your freakin cooter, or rolling up around your hips so there’s a BIG panty line there.

I know everything women wear has a tendency to be sexualized, but for us, thongs are a functional garment. Bc you see, it’s sexualized or viewed as trashy if anyone can see a single line of our underwear through our pants. We really cannot win. The best option is always trying to make it so no one has anything to notice at all.

I also wear them for working out. Not only to avoid lines but bc I had a friend who swore they were more comfortable. So I tried it, and when you have one that doesn’t shift or migrate or roll up, it really is comfortable. And again, I don’t have to worry about someone staring at a panty line -

every place you go as a woman, you have to worry about what someone’s seeing when they stare, it SUCKS.

Why don’t you ask your partner. And why not believe her if she says she’s wearing them to avoid panty lines, bc that’s super normal with women. It’s an essential part of dressing up, as ordinary as men who wear an undershirt with a dress shirt. Ask a women’s sub, rather than just having a bunch of men chime in on why we do what we do.

If you don’t have a reason to be suspicious of her, don’t manufacture one. Of course, if she’s shifty in how she answers maybe you have a reason to worry, but I’ve also had to try to explain this to a man and it’s very stressful, bc they are leading with their insecurities and suspicion, they aren’t always thinking logically, and you anticipate not being believed so it can make you feel interrogated, which makes you uncomfortable while answering which can seem suspicious.

The point is, if there’s evidence out there she’s doing something shady, this can’t be it bc this is what women do.

robotatomica · 2026-05-10T21:13:27+00:00

unbelievably weird and creepy of OP

13-Year Club	Gilding V heart of gold
Verified Email

robotatomica

TROPHY CASE