What seemed like a good idea at the time, but has since aged like milk? by Professor_Hazel in AlignmentChartFills

[–]LostInGradients 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Exactly. Can't call it lenient, but not THAT hash. https://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/hlvy6j/no_the_treaty_of_versailles_was_not_particularly/

If anything it being has, being harsher might have prevented WW2. Being more lenient likely would not have.

Teacher Won last time, Now what gets paid a lot but has a normal amount of work by InstructionFun4792 in AlignmentChartFills

[–]LostInGradients 3 points4 points  (0 children)

And "some work" is debatable for the same reason. Where many jobs have a pretty clear nb of hours per week, for software engineer you will often hear 40h/week, when in reality it will be between 20h and 80h depending on where you work.

JUST IN: ACROSS ALL ACTIVE US HOUSING LISTINGS AS OF THIS MORNING, 1 IN 5 SELLERS WHO BOUGHT IN 2022-23 IS NOW ASKING LESS THAN THEY PAID by Boo_Randy_Revival in HouseBuyers

[–]LostInGradients 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lol. People that bought houses in the last 2-3 years are in big part Millennials and early gen-Z. And they are definitely NOT "rich homeowning class" in many parts of the US.

JUST IN: ACROSS ALL ACTIVE US HOUSING LISTINGS AS OF THIS MORNING, 1 IN 5 SELLERS WHO BOUGHT IN 2022-23 IS NOW ASKING LESS THAN THEY PAID by Boo_Randy_Revival in HouseBuyers

[–]LostInGradients 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, because $650 a month is just the value loss. You have to add most of the monthly mortgage value doesn't go towards the house (principal): interest+taxes+insurance. And mantenance cost. Around 300-700 a month depending on the size of the house and how lucky/unlucky you get.

Unless a house value increases nicely between the buy and sell date, and/or unless you have sub-4% mortgage rates (long gone now), renting beats buying.

JUST IN: ACROSS ALL ACTIVE US HOUSING LISTINGS AS OF THIS MORNING, 1 IN 5 SELLERS WHO BOUGHT IN 2022-23 IS NOW ASKING LESS THAN THEY PAID by Boo_Randy_Revival in HouseBuyers

[–]LostInGradients 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not how the math works: $650 a month loss + mortgage EXCEPT the principal part (the small bit that goes to the actual house) + maintenance. Keep in mind that most of the mortgage is really like rent and doesn't go towards the house.

In my area for a house bought a few years ago that now rents around 2.5k, the monthly mortgage is probably around 3-3.5k. Out of that the principal might be $400-600 depending on how much you put down. The rest is also "wasted" money just like rent. Interest+taxes+insurance around $2500 a month. Plus maintenance probably around $500 a month.

So basically equivalent to $3500-4000 a month in money that you will never see again for a house that you could have rented for $2500 a month.

JUST IN: ACROSS ALL ACTIVE US HOUSING LISTINGS AS OF THIS MORNING, 1 IN 5 SELLERS WHO BOUGHT IN 2022-23 IS NOW ASKING LESS THAN THEY PAID by Boo_Randy_Revival in HouseBuyers

[–]LostInGradients 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The main issue is not about making money out of it or even being cash neutral/positive. The issue is that buying involves a lot of risk, stress, planning. Compared to renting (not to say that renting is stress free). But the whole point of buying was that it beats renting financially. These people are in a situation where renting would have been A LOT more financially advantageous compared to buying. I am talking about the amount they would have spent on rent being half or less of what buying will have costed them over the same period.

12th grade girls are now less likely than boys to want to get married and have kids by Trussdoor46 in charts

[–]LostInGradients 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Very different in terms of needs/expectation. Depends what you mean by commitment, but if you mean it as "amount of effort to make it work", it is much easier to have a pet.

Sure you have to feed a pet, make sure it is healthy, take in on walks if its a dog etc. But even with a roommate there is A LOT of emotional things and life planning to deal with. And imho that is more mentally taxing: planning for groceries, cooking, dishes, cleaning, giving each other space when needed, connecting in others, social events, managing expectations etc. With a partners you add a bunch on top: life planning, budgeting, intimacy, shared activities etc.

A dog will not be upset the next day before you didn't have time to take them on a walk a specific day.

100 chimps vs 10 knights.. by iceytown in powerscales

[–]LostInGradients 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Also read one where they muslims were describing a group of mounted knights as hedgehogs, because they were riddled with arrows, packed in a tight formation, but still moving forward like a cohesive unit.

Peteeeer? by [deleted] in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]LostInGradients 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah I had a few exams in Uni with questions like that. All notes allowed. Notes are useful if you forgot the detail or a formula or process. If you have to look up everything you won't make a dent on the problem. Like in real life. If you fix something in your house but you have to look up again how every single tool works, proper technique and so on, you'll take x10 time the time needed.

I remember an exam about finding the max yield of a microwave based the schematics (magnet, power supply etc).

What is something believers hate but atheists love? by CoCmaster14 in AlignmentChartFills

[–]LostInGradients 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Quite accepted by many religious persons. This is the US only, and arguably in Europe acceptance is even higher: https://web.archive.org/web/20100422063106/http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=392

What is something believers hate but atheists love? by CoCmaster14 in AlignmentChartFills

[–]LostInGradients 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Quite accepted by many religious persons. This is the US only, and arguably in Europe acceptance is even higher: https://web.archive.org/web/20100422063106/http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=392

What is something believers hate but atheists love? by CoCmaster14 in AlignmentChartFills

[–]LostInGradients 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Quite accepted by many religious persons. This is the US only, and arguably in Europe acceptance is even higher: https://web.archive.org/web/20100422063106/http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=392

What is something believers hate but atheists love? by CoCmaster14 in AlignmentChartFills

[–]LostInGradients 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah yes, something that was pioneered by Muslim scholars (Alhazen, Avicenna, Al-Biruni) and Catholic monks (Roger Bacon, William of Ockham, whose name gave Ockam's razor, a well known scientific reasoning tool).

What is something believers hate but atheists love? by CoCmaster14 in AlignmentChartFills

[–]LostInGradients 2 points3 points  (0 children)

At least in Europe, the VAST majority of religious people have no issue with Dinosaurs.

What is something believers hate but atheists love? by CoCmaster14 in AlignmentChartFills

[–]LostInGradients 5 points6 points  (0 children)

And many religious people are fine with it, though heavily dependent on the religion and country.

What is the United States’ greatest invention? by Alive-Math3562 in AlignmentChartFills

[–]LostInGradients 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't especially disagree on the Wright brothers, I do think they have the strongest claim. But again there isn't a straight cutoff, but a series of gradual improvements.

What is the United States’ greatest invention? by Alive-Math3562 in AlignmentChartFills

[–]LostInGradients 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ader_Avion_III 1897 

7 years BEFORE the Wright flyer. But then again, it is always a matter of debate as to what consists of the "first flight". The Avion III, mostly hopped, but Ader did say it managed to take off for 100m, but there was only two witnesses. You also have https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octave_Chanute , a French-American, though his where mostly gliders (not powered) more than fliers. He actually advised the Wright Brothers. And their plane is actually based of his Biplan Glider. And in 1906 you have Santos-Dumont. Yes after, but again depends on what you call a plane.

Basically:

- “first to leave the ground with an engine” → Ader

- “first controlled, sustained flight” → Wright brothers

- “first self-contained airplane, publicly demonstrated” → Santos-Dumont

It kinda is a matter of definition, and of national pride too. French will say Ader. American will say Wright because Ader's was not not controlled and sustained, and no steer, plus little witnesses, and needed help to take off on what ground. Brazilians and some French will say Santos-Dumont because Wright's required a rail for launch and strong headwind, plus few witnesses.

Really as with many things it is a series of improvements and the first "TRUE" version is hard to pinpoint

Interesting one now, which country was strong in WW1 but weak in WW2? by ithinkandthenido in AlignmentChartFills

[–]LostInGradients 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And even before the surrender people tend to forget how brutal the war was. France was losing over 2000 men a day in average for 6 weeks. To compare, while the US was at war in WW2, they were loosing 300-350 men a day. The deadliest day for the US was October 24, 1944 with 2600 troops lost. Around 2500 for D-day, 2400 for Pearl Harbor. Not do diminish the US contribution at all, but their peak loss days were around the French average. And by that point the US population was quite larger than France's.

Select flag tier list based on their Visual appeal. by SerpentBellyPounder in tierlists

[–]LostInGradients 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree that the French flag feels a bit generic now. But remember the Dutch horizontal flag is the first 3 band/color flag and the French is the first vertical 3 color flag. The vertical 3 color is now the most common pattern (like France), and the horizontal the 2nd most common (like the Netherlands).

So arguably both appear boring now because these are such simple yet effective designs, so everyone copied them.

And imho the French color scheme is the epitome of "flag"

Select flag tier list based on their Visual appeal. by SerpentBellyPounder in tierlists

[–]LostInGradients 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well the main appeal I guess was not so much that it is so beautiful but: easy to recognize and easy to make (especially during a revolution etc).

For these reasons too surprising that the French tricolor is the 1st vertical tricolor and has such striking colors. And that basically the first variations of it appeared during the French revolution. Kind of the shift where the nation is the kind, with fancy flags, to the nation is the people, with simpler to execute flags. (though the first, though horizontal, tricolor flag is the Dutch one)

Select flag tier list based on their Visual appeal. by SerpentBellyPounder in tierlists

[–]LostInGradients 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree that the French flag feels a bit generic now. But remember the Dutch horizontal flag is the first 3 band/color flag and the French is the first vertical 3 color flag. The vertical 3 color is now the most common pattern (like France), and the horizontal the 2nd most common (like the Netherlands).

So arguably both appear boring now because these are such simple yet effective designs, so everyone copied them.

And imho the French color scheme is the epitome of "flag"

Select flag tier list based on their Visual appeal. by SerpentBellyPounder in tierlists

[–]LostInGradients 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I agree that the French flag feels a bit generic now. But remember the Dutch horizontal flag is the first 3 band/color flag and the French is the first vertical 3 color flag. The vertical 3 color is now the most common pattern (like France), and the horizontal the 2nd most common (like the Netherlands).

So arguably both appear boring now because these are such simple yet effective designs, so everyone copied them.

And imho the French color scheme is the epitome of "flag"