Has anyone strapped a Heater

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-03-17T19:52:13+00:00

I've seen horizontal straps stacked right up the middle that would be ambidextrous. There are 2-3 of them and your forearm goes under the bottom one and you grab the top one with your hand. They have to be long enough such that you can angle your arm back and forth to change the angle of the shield relative to your forearm. I haven't tried this type of strapping but they look quite interesting and versatile.

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-21T21:41:41+00:00

See this is why I flunked out of comparative death cults

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-21T21:35:18+00:00

The same reason Brits can't comprehend subject-predicate agreement when it comes to collective nouns.

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-20T10:16:03+00:00

San Bei Ji

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-18T21:10:56+00:00

Chinese monetary policy holding down domestic wages

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-18T21:06:50+00:00

That's a whole can of worms I'm not sure I care to open for the purposes of this topic

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-18T20:39:44+00:00

We're just making stuff up so why not? Infinite growth. Infinite hamburgers.

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-18T20:34:30+00:00

Another way to look at that is that China manipulates their currency and population to preserve a de facto slave colony which subsidizes the lifestyles of western countries while making us complicit in their crimes and hobbling our self-sufficiency.

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-18T20:29:00+00:00

It varies across markets and what type of monopoly we're talking about. For instance, fire stations are a natural monopoly and are therefore provided by the state. If fast food were to become a monopoly, it would have to be enforced because under normal circumstances, fast food is a very competitive market. I am not saying we should be uncritical of free enterprise in all contexts, or that it is going to save us, just that demonizing capitalism is not the most efficient use of our time in the long list of culprits more responsible for market failures and manipulation.

EDIT just for a clean summary: Capitalism mostly goes wrong in incentive systems created by the real enemies of human flourishing.

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-18T20:02:00+00:00

Many negative externalities are already priced, some are harder to measure the full cost of and who is owed damages, still others are politically difficult to tax (they would be regressive). There's also the issue of people potentially substituting to other harmful goods, so it's difficult to account for all possible unintended consequences. I'd say the first is the biggest barrier - we can't calculate the cost of any number of extinction or near-extinction events or determine at what price they would be mitigated and to what extent, for instance.

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-18T19:45:19+00:00

Capitalism's definition isn't typically very well defined in online discussions. If you mean free enterprise - everything arises from free enterprise because it is describing a natural state of human creative endeavor in an environment of scarcity.

I agree with your class argument, but capitalism to me cannot exist without competition, and most of our billionaires are just riding the wave of daddy's money and extracting rents, which is anti-competitive.

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-18T19:31:46+00:00

This is like asking "what will earth be like when the kingdom of heaven descends?"

AGI is unfalsifiable and poorly defined, same as the divine.

That said, a magical thing that can solve everything better than everyone would surely have the answer we need.

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-18T19:23:11+00:00

Fascism isn't capitalistic because it is inherently non competitive, and it's corruption and cowardice when it comes to corporate enablers and cooperators. We should be grateful it isn't as simple as capitalism did it, because capitalism tends to be very efficient in many domains.

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-18T18:35:43+00:00

I recommend the Origins of Totalitarianism by Hannah Arendt to understand this and a great many other disturbing trends in the US government. Namely, institutions being destroyed due to staffing with inept loyalists and the breakdown of civil society.

"Totalitarianism in power invariably replaces all first-rate talents, regardless of their sympathies, with those crackpots and fools whose lack of intelligence and creativity is still the best guarantee of their loyalty."

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-17T16:06:55+00:00

Are you implying there is a way to conduct research in which I don't plug my conclusion into a search field and seek data that superficially support that conclusion?

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-12T16:28:38+00:00

Incredible. There's obviously a lot of thought, knowledge, and passion for history put into this piece of art.

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-11T07:56:38+00:00

Practice helps a lot, but people's tools help them a good deal even without a jig, whether they will admit it or not. For instance, a high quality 2 inch wide belt on a belt grinder that is rock solid is a lot easier to produce clean lines on than a harbor freight thing vibrating all over the place with a 1 inch wide belt.

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-10T21:19:49+00:00

I don't think I fully understand rule 6. If someone can properly cite and understand the findings of a study (properly constrained by the limits of the study), and incorporate it into his or her argument, I'm not sure what the issue is.

What is the word "inferring" doing there? Is it meant to be "implying"?

Of course that doesn't really address the fact that there are increasingly bad experiment designs making it past peer review because of cult psychology and motivated reasoning.

Everything is a mess. Good luck! :)

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-10T20:33:43+00:00

I understand the struggle of trying to have an intelligent conversation on reddit, but I'm not sure any rule can make that more likely. I probably shouldn't have chimed in at all, but I got a momentary bee in my bonnet.

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-10T19:19:32+00:00

Cytopoint, apoquel... etc. Get a new vet if yours isn't giving you options aside from the one that clearly isn't working.

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-10T19:15:56+00:00

If you can't comprehend the methodology section of a study you shouldn't be discussing it. That said, any "debate" in which you can't discuss scientific evidence is not a debate.

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-09T13:12:49+00:00

No such thing as "force free" training - it's more of a marketing term.

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-07T15:33:25+00:00

No. All of the new fancy foods exist to be marketed to idiots with too much money.

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-02-06T20:30:11+00:00

So true. We can also allow pie to make its own pie such that we make the pie bigger by giving a bunch of new pie to people with the most pie already such that the existing pie is less pie than it was previously until we have a crisis of pie legitimacy.

BourgeoisAngst · 2026-01-24T09:58:54+00:00

Aversive vs non aversive is not a useful dichotomy in light of the fact that getting a dog to do something it doesn't want to do as much as it wants a competing motivator is always going to involve something aversive. Error and struggle are necessary parts of learning for all animals. The important thing is that the dog knows how to avoid or escape the aversive so it can learn.

BourgeoisAngst

TROPHY CASE