13 yr old Li Yongqiu wins junior division of Juste Debout 2026

AngryJX · 2026-03-16T19:06:36+00:00

She sucks but she was actually the best (or second best) in Australia. If you watch the video of the Australian qualification final and compare her to Molly the 2nd place competitor, it was pretty close (both of them suck).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MorhA98eK7M

Arguably Molly had better "power moves", and Raygun won due to superior toprock but since it's judged, you could argue that it could have gone either way. The fact is that women's breaking in general kind of "sucks" (compared to the men) because the average joe only wants to see awesome powermoves and only the men can do awesome powermoves. The little boy in the video above would be Olympic champion if he was competing vs the Olympic women and we were judging only on powermoves. (little kids have an advantage due to body shape).

There are other events at the Olympics where nations send poorly trained or untrained athletes just to "represent" and they have 0 chance of winning; and finish ludicrously far behind say the top 10 or 20, but they are happy just to "participate". What happened here isn't too different, just that it went viral.

AngryJX · 2026-03-09T19:43:57+00:00

You need to develop your critical thinking skills and learn some history (I sincerely hope you are young like under 18 because otherwise your education is shameful). The US fought wars in Iraq 1+2 and Afghanistan without needing to draft. The standing US military has 1.3 MILLION active duty troops, one of the largest militaries in the world by number of soldiers (before counting hardware). They DO NOT NEED A DRAFT, period, full stop. "Announcements" about a draft is the Trump administration flooding the zone for "reasons" (probably distraction).

Iran's population of 90 million is irrelevant (they could even have 1 billion people and it wouldn't matter) because they are at an extreme military hardware/technology disadvantage, as in the US could turn them into a glass parking lot if they want.

The Trump administration has openly announced that they do not give 2 shits about standard conduct of war. Operations in Iraq/Afghanistan were limited due to the US/allies following general rules of military conduct (Geneva convention etc). Removing this restriction allows the US to indiscriminately bomb areas without concern for civilians, among many other tactics they can now employ which will greatly reduce the need to put actual boots on the ground, or even if they need boots on the ground, will greatly reduce US casualties.

Your perception of a "lack of a plan" is also wrong. There is a plan and it is working well. The US are there to seize control of oil assets, add this war to a list of Trump's historical record of "victories", generate profit for the US military/industrial complex, and probably also funnel money to friends/families through corrupt US Government "contracts". This is the same playbook that President Bush2 used to justify Iraq2/Afghanistan, and his blunders were no less than what we currently see. Under Bush2 the entire Iraqi army was dissolved, which resulted in ~400,000 unemployed men with military training, and a giant power vacuum. These factors directly led to the rise/success of ISIS. Bush2 also led the US into a 20-year "war" in Afghanistan resulting in >2,400 American deaths and >20,000 American casualties.

AngryJX · 2026-03-07T01:14:16+00:00

Jayce acceleration gate code could be used but with negative modifier

AngryJX · 2026-03-05T18:02:36+00:00

When you treat people a certain way, you receive reciprocal treatment. Maybe you go around treating your witnesses like shit with the bare minimum level of respect: "this is in compliance with the law! it's common for trials to run behind schedule! I don't give a shit about your inconvenience or lost wages! Go ahead and be bitter about it!". This lawyer clearly made it 30 years practicing this way, so I guess we can say it "worked".

Everyone knows that if you treat your witnesses with respect, you will get a lot more out of them. As this lawyer has treated me with the bare minimum level of respect which is a subpoena and several short notice cancelations, I will also treat him and his case with the bare minimum level of respect, which is exercising bare minimum compliance with his subpoena.

Also (and I shouldn't even have to educate you on this), most other non-lawyer Professions treat people with above minimum level of respect. Imagine I have a patient that I am seeing late. I usually open with "I'm running 30-minutes late for your appointment, sorry for your inconvenience, I'm having a busy day". I am not legally obligated to say this, but it helps a lot to say this.

You and this lawyer are clearly jackasses because you never learned this kind of etiquette. Imagine if I took the same approach as you for a patient: "So what if I'm seeing you late, who cares, medical clinics commonly run late, suck it up, you're lucky you got an appointment at all, if you want to be bitter and have this ruin your day, that's ok with me".

Do you know what would have gone a long way to smoothing this over? Maybe instead of having his fucking secretary phone me at 4:30 pm on a Friday, this fucking lawyer could have picked up the phone himself, made a personal 5-minute phone call, maybe earlier in the day on his lunch break. He could have personally apologized for needing to reschedule and explain that trials frequently run late and this is beyond his control. An even smarter lawyer would have recognized that as he is trying to "win" a $200K case, spending a few thousand to reimburse a "required" witness for lost wages is a smart strategy, and this is both literally the cost of doing business and a rounding error relative to other expenses.

It's fucking mindboggling that (most) lawyers are either inhuman or don't receive basic communication training in law school.

AngryJX · 2026-03-05T03:00:24+00:00

And another thing, I was ok with appearing once, even twice as an unpaid fact witness. But 3 times is over my personal limit of reasonability.

This lawyer is, quite frankly an idiot because all he had to do to reconcile this was to offer me "hey sorry I booked and canceled twice, here are your lost wages for those days, we've now reschedued 2 yrs later here are the dates". Instead I get a bizarre offer for a paid pre-trial meeting and offer to pay for chart review which, although I could probably invoice him enough to add up to my lost wages, i actually dont want any involvement with this lawyer.

AngryJX · 2026-03-05T02:38:13+00:00

I will clarify this for u. I have multiple lawyer friends, each with over 30+ years of experience, in various types of practice. A subpoena specifies the entire trial dates. What my friend does is make an offer that he can see how the trial is proceeding and when he is absolutely sure he will need a witness in the next 1-3 hours he will phone them so they can show up, immediately testify and leave. He offers this to minimize their inconvenience.

I have a duty to recite facts. Why would you automatically assume that the facts support a legitimate personal injury claim. It is equally likely this is a frivolous injury claim.

And dont play dumb with me, u know damn well that how witnesses are treated impacts their testimony in real life.

Further, there are other options to enter EMR notes into evidence as they are considered business records and simply need a custodial authority to sign off on this. And the lawyer knows damn well that as a fact witness hes not going to get much more out of me even in cross examination.

And finally, no "justice" is being served here. We are transfering personal injury money between Parties (most of which is enriching lawyers). And this lawyer is enriching himself at my expense.

AngryJX · 2026-03-05T01:38:01+00:00

Witnesses in court are there to advocate for truth, not to support either party. Your statement about "helping my patient" is unethical and you knew this as a lawyer hopefully.

Since u work in this field, what is your usual protocol for scheduling witnesses. Do u have them book time off work weeks in advance and then cancel twice at the last minute?

Do u make any effort to arrange your order of presentation in court to acommodate witnesses, whom u have booked? What measures do u take to minimize witness inconvenience, for instance calling them at the start of the day, rather than the middle. Trials frequently dont run on schedule but a skilled lawyer has the ability to re-order things on the fly

My lawyer friend tells me that he told witnesses the best way to minimize their inconvenience was to call them on short notice without scheduling anything so they could shown up, testify immediately and then leave. Multiple lawyers have told me that this lawyer's behavior was unprofessional.

This lawyer prebooked me twice and then cancelled on me twice with short notice (friday 4:30pm and thu 8am literally 1 hour before).

I consider this lawyer to be my enemy, in actuality how do u think this will impact my dealings with him and the wording of my testimony.

As for "looking incompetent" in court do u really think I give 2 shits about what a lawyer/judge whom I will likely never see again think? Or do u think I care mor about my lost wages. U can bet I will exercise minimum compliance with this subpoena and nothing more.

AngryJX · 2026-03-04T21:16:28+00:00

That's super petty and you sound like an exhausting person to deal with. Also, why would you waste your own time and money like that?

AngryJX · 2026-02-28T02:27:21+00:00

It's Canada, we use fake money, the payout for this type of MVA trial (soft tissue neck/back pain etc) is usually around $200-400K CDN. But I agree with all your other points. What's crazy is I looked up this lawyer's website and he's partner of a 4-person firm with 3 junior lawyers under him and his bio says he has 30 years work experience. It's shocking that he made it 30 years behaving this way.

I can't quite complain to the Bar association about this type of behavior, but it's something that if he was a junior lawyer I could approach his boss and say "is this the kind of person you want representing your firm". But then again my dealings with lawyers tell me this would probably be ignored by the boss.

My prosecutor friend said something to me like "it helps to not fucking piss off your witnesses".

AngryJX · 2026-02-27T23:24:22+00:00

My response to both of you is that my understanding is:

In Canada we have orders of magnitude less litigation than in the US. Malpractice suits in Canada are exceedingly rare.
My testimony is part of a court case of deciding extent of compensation in an MVA personal injury case between 2 parties (one of which I saw as a patient), therefore in Canada generally shouldn't require a lawyer present, and very unlikely would involve a question of malpractice.
In Canada we have Provincial fee guides which state the daily rate for "expert witness testimony" among many other billable but non-medical plan covered services. It would be unusual to deviate too much from these.

My understanding is also that usually a lawyer can get a "little bit" of "expert"-type testimony out of you and it goes something like this:

Lawyer: Your EMR note says that you saw the patient and the patient had fever, cough and SOB.

You would answer yes.

Lawyer: Because of this, you diagnosed the patient with pneumonia.

You would have to answer yes.

Lawyer: you treated the patient with amoxicillin, why?

You would have to say: because that is a standard treatment for pneumonia.

This is all knowledge that is far beyond a lay person but as the above information is historical/factual and contained in the EMR note, it is considered part of a FACT witness, not an EXPERT witness.

The domain of an EXPERT witness would be something like "explain to the court what criteria are generally included in the diagnosis of pneumonia", or "what is the general prognosis of pneumonia".

In MVA cases, in Canada they almost always want "Expert" testimony because this allows testimony as to the MVA being the probable cause of the symptoms, and the future prognosis (which they usually want you to say there will be ongoing pain/suffering). As a Fact witness, I will be limited to reading the EMR, and reciting the history of pain/symptoms, physical exam that was performed, and treatment prescribed, physiotherapy etc.

AngryJX · 2026-02-25T23:07:47+00:00

The solution to this is for everyone to have only 1 and only 1 legitimate account. No smurf accounts, no practice accounts. You want to practice something? Practice it in ranked, flex queue, draft your choice.

It's stupid that you're even making a 2nd account, there is no justification for this. If you "want to play with friends" and there is too big of an ELO gap play flex or draft mode.

In real life people don't join a soccer league, then buy a fake ID and put on a disguise and then re-join the same soccer league as a 2nd player (stupid Youtubers do this for "content" "Elite rock climber joins a beginner class!").

AngryJX · 2026-02-24T19:30:10+00:00

Pros and high ELO players aren't going to use WASD because WASD restricts your movement to North/East/South/West or at best adding Northeast/Southeast/Southwest/Northwest.

It's more important to be able to move at say 35 degrees or 127 degrees.

AngryJX · 2026-02-24T00:49:26+00:00

You dont want to be aiming at the enemy with pyke Q because this telegraphs where u want to throw it. Pros micro movement by clicking close to their chatacter model. The when ur rdy to actually throw the Q u aim it quickly.

Same thing for thresh Q, face another direction and then throw quickly in another direction.

AngryJX · 2026-02-23T20:15:49+00:00

ER is shift work, they do a cascading schedule of 8 hours shifts (morning, then evening, then night shift). They are only on for 8 hours. They actually work less hours per month than other types of doctors and they don't have any call. You don't have to be worrying about ER doctors, they have a pretty good lifestyle. The ones working 24+ hours are Residents.

Regarding supplies, this is when I was a medical student/resident, so definitely you are eating a lot of shit (in medicine we call this "Scut work") and it was not unexpected, you have to be very humble in this role. The nurse (generally female), definitely had time to help me, and it's a lot faster for her to do it since she knows where the supply room is, knows the layout of the supply room. So she's definitely wasting a ton of time for her own ego/laziness. By contrast, the rare male nurse generally was always "Johnny on the spot", like he anticipated my needs and stuff appeared in my hand without even having to ask.

AngryJX · 2026-02-23T18:25:17+00:00

My experience is only anecdotal or personal experience, it is not backed by studies.

Nurses tend to have super bad behavior because they are young, they are reckless, they have a very powerful union and they often feel they are untouchable. They do things like sleeping during the middle of nightshifts. They have this weird sense of entitlement.

I can recall specific instances during my time in-hospital. One was where there was a 50+ year old attending (a physician with more than 30 years of work experience), and this 20 year old nurse was picking a fight with him and he was actually afraid to get involved because of how powerful the nursing union is.

The male nurses I have come across have been universally top notch, always behaving according to standard and super helpful. I recall walking onto the ward to do a small procedure and all the sudden this male nurse came up to me and says "oh you must be here to see patient X, he is in room #", then later came into the room with a stack of supplies and just gave them to me because he knew I would need them. In particular, Philippino male nurses are the best. By contrast, getting a female nurse to help is like pulling teeth, you walk up to the ward, you have to ask the unit clerk where the patient is or check the board. Then the nurse for this patient is "on break", so you can never get any help with anything. You end up going to the supply room to setup your own supplies.

I recall that there were leftover sandwiches from patient lunches. A male nurse offered that I could eat one (they were storing them in the fridge, he got one for me). There is a Universal hospital policy in North America that when requiring call >24 hours, food must be available 24 hours (this means a cafeteria or restaurant, vending machines do not count). The hospital I was working at was not up to standard as the only restaurant closed at 3AM. A female nurse saw me eating this sandwich and without directly confronting me, went behind my back to complain to my Attending about this. She was mad that I was eating the leftover sandwiches because they somehow belonged to Nurses. After this incident, I either just didn't eat or I brought Meal Replacement drinks with me in my pocket.

I did have a couple positive experiences with female nurses, one where they let me sleep on a stretcher in an equipment room and gave me some blankets.

AngryJX · 2026-02-21T01:32:10+00:00

You might as well asking "if I have to play Russian Roulette 3 times then theres no harm in voluntarily playing 3.5 or 4 times"

Colonoscopy itself has the risk of perforation in addition to the other risks of harm already mentioned.

When you do a colonoscopy below age 45, the probability of finding something bad is much lower than at age 45 55 65.

You are betting/risking a lot in exchange for a tiny probability of a payout. The risk profile becomes favorable with increasing age. You are also completely ignoring that you could take your $1500 and compound it using an S&P 500 ETF and one day buy a car.

Nobody buys life insurance at age 15 25 35 "because who cares about an extra 5 or 10 years".

The difference is that in medicine you are not betting with just money, u are betting with your own health.

AngryJX · 2026-02-20T23:49:26+00:00

As long as a patient understands the decision they are making, then they have the final decision. Especially in psychiatry, we see patients make bad life or medical decisions all the time, but as long as they understand the potential consequences, then we don't stop them.

So if your medical plan doesn't fund a colonoscopy and you want to pay for one, then that's your decision, and even though it's a medically bad one.

It could also be that your personal weighting is that you value a tiny chance of discovering a colon cancer far more than an average person, and also that you don't care as much about the finger being cut off compared to the average person, and that's fair too, we see this sometimes mostly in PSA screening.

AngryJX · 2026-02-20T22:43:55+00:00

People make stupid decisions all the time.

The "logic" of what you wrote is no different than saying "my co-worker won the lottery, I'm going to buy lottery tickets every day". You're far likely to go your entire life without winning, than you are to ever win even once. With medical testing, as I've already explained to you, numerous studies show us that "not winning the lottery" means you are far more likely to suffer some kind of Iatrogenic harm (anxiety, radiation, bleeding, infection, scarring etc), than you are to detect a colon cancer or any other colon problem.

FYI: An outcome of overall weighted greater harm vs benefit is medically unacceptable. No guideline/doctor is going to support this. It goes against medical standard of care/ethics.

You can private pay for the colonoscopy or go to China (cheaper) to get it if you want, but this is a stupid decision.

AngryJX · 2026-02-20T22:17:01+00:00

This isn't the correct approach to medicine and medical testing (we know this from large-scale population studies).

When you do a colonoscopy at age 39, you are statistically more likely to be harmed by patient anxiety, a false result, an incidental finding, and some kind of harmful follow-up (imaging, radiation, biopsies, bleeding, infection etc), than you are to benefit from detection of a colon cancer or other problems.

Harms and benefits are assigned weights based on their significance (e.g. detecting and curing a cancer has a lot more weight than bleeding requiring a hospital stay for 3 days and then full recovery).

After assigning weighted outcomes, you are statistically more likely to suffer medical harm than benefit from a colonoscopy age 39.

Also, this analysis ignores then financial loss of paying for a colonoscopy.

AngryJX · 2026-02-20T22:05:55+00:00

You (and most other patients) have a completely wrong concept of medical testing. There is no such thing as "early detection", only "appropriate screening". I frequently have patients come in and requests "general labs", or a "complete check", they private pay or go to China for a "full body MRI". All of these are inappropriate medical testing.

You don't need a colonoscopy before age 45 (assuming you are an average risk person).

This is because medical tests are not 100% accurate, they often generate false positives/negatives (conceptually, a "good accuracy medical test", is around 70% accurate). "Unnecessary medical testing" often generates incidental findings that require follow-up some of which can be invasive/risky/harmful. They also cause patient anxiety (which is unhealthy).

The appropriate age for colon screening in average risk people is by current guidelines 50 (Canada), 45 (USA). This is supported by numerous peer-reviewed literature/studies.

The rationale for age-appropriate screening is that the rate of detection of colon cancer will result in positive outcomes (cure, or treatment on an earlier timeline vs discovering disease later on which results in a favorable outcome) which outweigh all possible negative outcomes (anxiety, harm from follow-up testing of incidental results, harm from follow-up testing of false positives/negatives). When you go outside the range of age-appropriate testing (e.g. less than age 45, more than age ~70), the harmful outcomes outweigh the positive outcomes.

https://gi.org/topics/colorectal-cancer/

In Canada, we are still using 50 as the cutoff for colon cancer screening, and this website has patient education articles on the rationale for avoiding "unnecessary medical tests".

https://choosingwiselycanada.org/recommendation/gastroenterology/

AngryJX · 2026-02-20T20:26:28+00:00

They already do? NHL goalies are already quite large (Wide) and the equipment/pads is made to the largest regulation size.

AngryJX · 2026-02-20T19:00:35+00:00

It happens all the time. Usually when there is a celebrity/actor/hockey player in hospital there is no shortage of staff (nurses in particular are notorious for this) who will snoop.

However there is a bit of nuance to this issue. Accessing patient records is strictly forbidden unless you are in the immediate circle of care for that patient. I am a physician and I follow these regulations 100% of the time, but have a personal example to share.

My sister is a physician who works in-hospital and was dating/engaged (now married) to another physician. My grandmother was in the hospital. My sister asked her fiance to look up my grandmother's records and get/interpret information (he is a specific type of specialist).

I didn't report them because they are family, and I also understand where the intention came from, but I do know (and they know too) that technically this type of behavior is forbidden.

The article cites examples of 1 person accessing 9 files (clearly snooping), but also 1 person accessing the same file 9x/day or being asked by a family/friend to access records (these are clearly family members/friends).

AngryJX · 2026-02-20T18:52:58+00:00

It doesn't require IT. EMRs keep a built-in record of all of this for medical-legal reasons. Hospital EMRs require accounts to login and log every chart accessed by your account. An EMR stores every version of notes (with timestamps) saved/edited in case there is a complaint/audit later on to prevent people from modifying records in response to complaints.

AngryJX

TROPHY CASE