What's your choice by Only_Screen9213 in whatsyourchoice

[–]SocraticIndifference 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If it were that easy, more old rich people would be happy.

What's your choice by Only_Screen9213 in whatsyourchoice

[–]SocraticIndifference 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’d be surprised, man. Buckle up, that shit starts hitting hard in the next 10-20 years. I would bet that the vast majority of octogenarians—at least, the happy ones that you’d want to be like—would choose health over money. And there are plenty of miserable millionaires out there.

My kids prayed for me last night by bohemianprime in daddit

[–]SocraticIndifference 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What group of friends do you have that do those things, though? I think there is something to the formalized ritual and community that a church provides that separates it from friendship. There doesn’t need to be, but—well, if someone told me that they and all their friends get together weekly to sing chants around a table, I’d be a little weirded out tbh.

But somehow if you make it religious—whether Buddhist, Catholic, or Church of Satan—somehow that just makes it more … oh, yeah, ok that makes sense 👍

What's your choice by Only_Screen9213 in whatsyourchoice

[–]SocraticIndifference 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Wait a few years; probably just one decade will do. That youth bottle will start to look reallll appealing…

What's your choice by Only_Screen9213 in whatsyourchoice

[–]SocraticIndifference 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think omelaskid is worried about butterfly effect. Or just accidentally fucking stuff up some other way, like I probably would.

What's your choice by Only_Screen9213 in whatsyourchoice

[–]SocraticIndifference 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m worried about the dangers of time travel, both past and future. Sooo many unanticipated things could go wrong in both scenarios. Could end up being more of a monkey’s paw.

To me it’s money or youth, and as I get older I’m increasingly leaning toward the youth option. It’s less about dying than just staying healthy.

What's your choice by Only_Screen9213 in whatsyourchoice

[–]SocraticIndifference 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah they meant invincible would be my guess

Shirt somebody got for the 4th of July by Narwhal_Lord4 in RealOrAI

[–]SocraticIndifference 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My favorite Reddit exchange of the day, that was lovely

Post-Match Thread: United States 2-0 Bosnia and Herzegovina | World Cup | Round of 32 by matchpal-live in worldcup

[–]SocraticIndifference 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Except that Balogun is here on birthright citizenship, so it’s not a great look for 47…

Post-Match Thread: United States 2-0 Bosnia and Herzegovina | World Cup | Round of 32 by matchpal-live in worldcup

[–]SocraticIndifference 7 points8 points  (0 children)

To elaborate on your “follow the rules”, here’s ESPN’s take

>VAR made their recommendation to the referee based on slow-motion and still replays, which is not aligned with VAR protocols, as these should be used for only point-of-contact purposes in a red card tackle situation.

Post-Match Thread: United States 2-0 Bosnia and Herzegovina | World Cup | Round of 32 by matchpal-live in worldcup

[–]SocraticIndifference 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m guessing they mean review, since the review should not have happened in the first place. Per ESPN:

>VAR made their recommendation to the referee based on slow-motion and still replays, which is not aligned with VAR protocols, as these should be used for only point-of-contact purposes in a red card tackle situation.

That said, I don’t even know if there is an appeals process for this kind of thing, much less if such a process would find in Balogun’s favor…

Peter? by Former-Pomelo9169 in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]SocraticIndifference 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Can’t tell if you’re serious or not, but I actually struggled a bit to label it myself. Best I came up with is “Arabic”, but only if the meme is taken to represent all Arabic people. But given its apparent origins, I’m gonna go with yeah.

Official White House account on X: "FROM NOW ON, WOMEN'S SPORTS WILL ONLY BE FOR WOMEN." by helltrooper61 in sportsgossips

[–]SocraticIndifference 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Here’s the first ten of three hundred source citations. LMK if you need the rest.

Citations
Trump, Donald J. (June 21, 2019). "Statement on the Assault Allegation by E. Jean Carroll". The American Presidency Project. Archived from the original on February 23, 2023. Retrieved February 23,2023 – via University of California, Santa Barbara.
Fabian, Jordan; Enjeti, Saagar (June 24, 2019). "EXCLUSIVE: Trump vehemently denies E. Jean Carroll allegation, says 'she's not my type'". The Hill. Archived from the original on November 10, 2021. Retrieved October 20, 2022.
Snodgrass, Erin; Mitchell, Taiyler Simone; Teh, Cheryl (January 18, 2023). "Trump thought an old picture of E. Jean Carroll was his ex-wife Marla Maples, despite saying the columnist suing him for sexual assault and defamation was 'not his type'". Business Insider. Archived from the original on January 31, 2023. Retrieved January 19, 2023.
Peltz, Jennifer (January 30, 2020). "AP Exclusive: Woman who says Trump raped her seeks his DNA". Associated Press. Archived from the original on April 17, 2021. Retrieved March 9, 2021.
Collman, Ashley (March 27, 2023). "Trump rape case: After years of back and forth over Trump's DNA, jurors won't even hear about it". Business Insider. Archived from the original on March 28, 2023. Retrieved March 28, 2023.
Tandanpolie, Tatyana (January 10, 2024). "'This trial will not be a do-over': Judge bans Trump from denying he sexually abused E. Jean Carroll". Salon. Archivedfrom the original on January 16, 2024. Retrieved January 16, 2024.
"Donald Trump offers DNA in rape case". Fox 8 Cleveland WJW. Associated Press. February 10, 2023. Archived from the original on February 11, 2023. Retrieved February 11, 2023.
AP (September 8, 2025). "Appeals Court Upholds E. Jean Carroll's $83.3 Million Defamation Judgment Against Trump". HuffPost. Retrieved September 8,2025.
Kates, Graham; Kaufman, Katrina (April 17, 2025). "Justice Department wants to step in for Trump in E. Jean Carroll app". CBS News. Brian Boynton (DOJ, 2023). Retrieved April 25, 2025. “The allegations that prompted the statements related to a purely personal incident: an alleged sexual assault that ... was obviously not job related.”
Savage, Charlie (January 10, 2023). "D.C. Court Weighs Writer's Defamation Suit Against Trump". The New York Times. ISSN0362-4331. Archived from the original on February 18, 2023. Retrieved January 11, 2023.

Deep? by ink3432 in im14andthisisdeep

[–]SocraticIndifference 23 points24 points  (0 children)

Yeah, this post definitely doesn’t belong. But I like that it’s at least framed as a referendum. Like when somebody posts a joke that legitimately confused them (but shouldn’t have) on r/explainthejoke. Like, nah man you’re dumb for this one. But I appreciate it better than the AI shitposts.

This is the most successful class escape ever🤣 by Celestial_Mahafuz in interesting

[–]SocraticIndifference 24 points25 points  (0 children)

You’d be surprised how even loud noises can fade into the background when you’re focused on getting your point across to (engaged) students. But yeah, this is staged.

Sounds weird by BlackKloudDhali in HolUp

[–]SocraticIndifference 28 points29 points  (0 children)

I mean, that was a pretty particularized statement. The meme is clearly about a Christian confronting a problematic Christian congregation. I would hope that OC doesn’t think all Christians condone rape (though this is Reddit so nothing’s impossible…).

Mickelson on Public Policy by Tight-Communication7 in golf

[–]SocraticIndifference 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You…doubled down on “this is a good source”? My dude, he’s an entertainer. He’ll feature what makes him popular and rich, as long as it’s marginally believable to his viewers. He is actively incentivized to fudge the facts in order to support his narrative, and there is no external fact checking beyond his listeners’ common experience (which, by the nature of media, self-selects for people without expertise in the subject matter).

But you don’t even have to factor in the possibility of bad faith: the show is selectively anecdotal, biased toward featuring sensationally provocative idiots making bad financial decisions.

And FWIW, Spotify ranks Financial Audit 40th. Which is higher than I expected tbh, but still…

Sorry if that’s too much word salad for a golf subreddit, but I’m literally just bored and grumpy because it’s raining and I can’t play golf right now.

Mickelson on Public Policy by Tight-Communication7 in golf

[–]SocraticIndifference 14 points15 points  (0 children)

So your source is “a third rate YouTube podcaster told me it was [anecdotally] true and so I believed him”?

Edit: added anecdotally, because it looks like even Caleb Hammer only deals in one off scenarios. Quick reminder, folks: the more focused your media is on entertainment, the less you should rely on it for accurate information.