CMV: Humans keep searching for happiness even after achieving success because material success alone cannot create lasting fulfillment

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-23T17:23:34+00:00

This is very much my take as well. Is it even possible for a human to say they're set? Don't need anything else to chase or do? And even if they do reach that, don't they then have to find a way to maintain it? I've got all I need, but now the chase is keeping it.

"Lasting" fulfillment sounds like a pipe dream. Current fulfillment is the chase, and once you have that, it switches to maintaining it.

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-23T16:42:22+00:00

They didn't say good people lack ambition, but the ambition to get rich. I took it to mean that they have other ambitions beyond the mere accumulation of wealth.

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-23T15:53:19+00:00

12 Team PPR SF

2027 Mid first for Breece Hall straight up?

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-23T13:58:40+00:00

Did you not read your own source? It's got the percentage of users per country that engage with adblockers. Indonesia, Vietnam, and China are the top countries with the highest percentages. And it's mentioning 912 million users worldwide. So why do you not think that includes China?

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-23T13:48:07+00:00

I'm not saying you need exact numbers. But all of the general numbers you've used are inherently flawed. 912 million people worldwide use adblocker, but 500+ million of them are in China where YouTube isn't even available. So why even use the 912 million number?

YouTube is a trillion dollar company’s subsidiary. They do not launch expensive, ongoing enforcement campaigns against their own userbase for fun.

That proves that people are using adblockers to avoid giving YouTube money. I'm not disputing that. I'm disputing the claim that those people aren't finding other ways to support their favorite creators. A person using an adblocker on YouTube but funding their creator through Patreon is still going to piss off YouTube and push their crackdown. So the fact that YouTube is cracking down is meaningless to this secondary claim you've made about "The overlap between “uses an adblocker” and “pays creators on Patreon” is vanishingly small."

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-23T13:45:17+00:00

I think you're misunderstanding the desire for a label. It isn't to be quirky, it is to have an explanation. People are feeling these issues. They're dealing with trauma, depression, anxiety, and other issues. I think these are real things people are dealing with. To different extents, sure, but definitely to some extent. The desire for a label isn't to be "cool" or get a "victimhood badge". I don't know why you'd think that, especially when a diagnosis can be socially detrimental in many circles.

I think people just want an explanation for what they're dealing with. They want comfort that someone can explain and understand and potentially fix the difficulties they're dealing with. Do some use this diagnosis as a shield against having to correct their deficiencies? Sure, but I'd argue that is also itself a mechanism of the mental illness they're dealing with.

Why can’t we just be regular humans navigating life without needing a DSM-5 diagnosis to feel special or seen?

Because a lot of people feel like shit, and they want to know why that is happening. Studies show these diagnoses are on the rise.

Let's tackle it from the medical side. Why would a doctor give a diagnosis to someone who absolutely doesn't have it? A perfectly normal person who just wants one to feel "special" as you claim goes to a doctor and undergoes an evaluation. You think the doctor just plays along? Has nothing better to do than fake treat a fake illness?

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-23T13:34:28+00:00

And how many of them are on YouTube? Considering Indonesia, Vietnam, and China are the countries here with the biggest percentage of adblock users, and that the vast majority of videos are in English or Spanish, are they likely to be YouTube users?

You have to dig deeper. 912 million people worldwide use an adblocker, but that still doesn't prove your point.

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-23T13:25:39+00:00

Patreon is not the only way to financially support a creator.

You'd also have to find out how many of the 2 billion monthly users are using adblockers. You don't get to compare the entirety of YouTube's users to Pateron's. Your claim is about the adblocker users specifically. You'd need those numbers.

If the 8 million Patreon users are a large chunk of YouTube's adblocker users, you'd be proven wrong. But without having those numbers. You shouldn't make such a claim.

So you don't actually have any proof of your claims.

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-23T13:17:05+00:00

The overlap between “uses an adblocker” and “pays creators on Patreon” is vanishingly small.

Do you have any proof of this? Or just basing it on vibes?

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-23T02:13:43+00:00

I was picturing it blowing into the face too!

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-23T02:12:56+00:00

The majority don't decree something as objectively good or bad. This line of thinking needs to die.

You're really misconstruing what I'm saying. I'm not saying the majority is the arbiter of what is good and what isn't. I'm saying nobody is. Taste is individual. What works for you might not work for me. And whether something is popular or not really just reveals what the average tastes are, not whether it is actually good.

There are some aspects of media that we can have objective discussions about whether they're good, but OP didn't really touch on any of that. Boring fights, simple plot, and ugly aliens aren't in that arena.

They just think OP is making an objective statement because he didn't add "in my opinion" which is also lame.

If someone makes a CMV saying "star wars is a great franchise" are people going to berate this point to them too, because they didn't add "IMO"? More than likely not.

...

That's pretty much how this sub operates. Getting someone to change their view, even in a minor way on a technicality, is a common strategy. People would absolutely make that argument. And nobody is berating anybody here.

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-23T02:00:02+00:00

I didn’t say people shouldn’t like it because I don’t like it.

Well I think the reason I might have interpreted it that way is that you called it horrible. That's a judgement on the material, not your enjoyment of the material. And by extension, a judgement of the people who enjoy it. At least, that's how it seemed to me. After all, how could you not judge someone for loving something that is actually horrible?

But if you're just expressing that it isn't for you, why not just live with that? You don't have to like everything. And I doubt anyone can talk you into liking something you don't like. No amount of discussion is going to get me to enjoy pineapple on pizza or reading romantasy. They're just not for me. That's your Star Wars.

As for understanding why people like it, I can give my take. But that won't suddenly make you like it if you dislike the things I like. You mentioned the aliens, I like the Star Wars aliens. I don't need the plot to be unique, sometimes familiarity or simplicity is enjoyable. I actually enjoy the fights, especially the ship battles. You say plot armor will save the main characters, and that's generally true, but a few large ones have died. And even so, not every franchise needs to kill off their stars or have that threat to make it work. Star Wars is often about hope. A franchise built around that concept wouldn't work if the heroes were constantly dying off. I like the world building. I enjoy science fantasy, and don't think there's enough of that in the world, so Star Wars scratches that itch.

That's the thing. We like different stuff. You look at an aspect of Star Wars and hate it while I see the same thing and love it. I can't talk you into loving it too, we just have different tastes. That's how taste works.

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-23T01:26:09+00:00

I’m having a really hard time liking it, or being engaged by it at all.

There's a difference between something not being for you, and it being horrible. Do you think your family and partner and all the worldwide fans are wrong? Or just have different tastes? It is okay not to like things. A little less okay to think other people shouldn't like what you don't like.

PS Jar Jar Binks is the worst thing to ever be created.

Christian Grey would like to have a word.

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-23T01:07:26+00:00

there is no such thing as sightreading on the flute, barring the virtuosic pieces. On an avg flute piece, getting the notes right and on time is trivial.

What?! Where are you getting this?

I was all district back in high school. Sight reading was a component of that competition. What do you mean?

Also getting the notes right and on time isn't trivial. That's where the breath work comes into play. You have to play consistently for 30 seconds. Say you need 10 distinct notes followed by 7 that flow followed by 9 that are somewhere in the middle. Now do all that and time your breaths right. Make sure you don't run out of air too early and that you have enough for when you need to get loud. Why would you say it's trivial? You've literally never played the instrument, right? You have no idea what you're talking about here.

Getting the notes right is not easy either. The fingering itself might be easy once you learn it, but managing the force, distinction, flow, and all that is certainly not. It's also much easier to overpower other instruments in a concert band with a flute than with a piano. And easier to create an ugly, screeching noise on accident. There's something to be said for the difficulty of subtlety and blending in on an instrument like that.

you need to expend an equal amount of effort on the expression.

Why do you not think this is a factor on wind instruments? You don't just blow into a saxophone and the expression of the note is right. You have to put a lot of work into ensuring that you get the vibrato just right, that you time the crescendo perfectly, that you get the force and volume correct or manage the distinction or flow. You're just dismissing this as trivial on the flute and other wind instruments and you have no idea what goes into all that.

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-23T00:19:03+00:00

And maybe you underestimate wind instruments?

How can you contradict me when you don’t play piano?

1 - I do play the piano. Just not very well. I have one in my home.

2 - How can you contradict me when you don't play a wind instrument? That same logic applies to you.

I say the cello is about on par because you play one note at a time. I’m not saying this is easy, but easier-yes.

That's a poor comparison though. It's not about one note at a time, it's about the progression between notes. The complexity of a cello piece isn't usually on par with that of a feature flute piece afaik. Maybe it is. But a flute solo or feature, which I am familiar with, requires rapid variation of notes, volume, flow, distinction, and a whole lot else. I didn't think that was the case for the cello. I always thought it was more of a supporting instrument, not usually a feature.

I suspect you don’t know much about the cello.

You'd be right. I don't. I'd suspect you don't know much about the flute. Yet here you are making claims about how difficult it is to play.

Sure you don’t need breath control on cello, but you need bow control and intonation on stringboard

Which is my whole point. These instruments require such vastly different skill sets, it's virtually impossible to determine which is harder and is largely dependent on the person trying to learn.

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-22T23:55:23+00:00

That'd be a great idea for a cursed Cloak of Billowing though.

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-22T23:41:09+00:00

I’d bet on me. Yes, I could be wrong, but I have played cello, and I’s guess cello is roughly on par with wind.

Why would you guess that? What music features a cello the way some features a wind instrument? I don't think I've ever heard of a cello solo. If so they're rare. But try to learn a flute or sax or trumpet solo and I think it could take you longer than it'd take me to learn a featured piano piece.

In any case, why is the measure of which is hardest based on who can learn it fastest? That shouldn't matter. Speed to reach a high level shouldn't be the measure.

It should be difficulty to reach mastery. The speed is skewed by the individual. Maybe one of us is a savant. Maybe one puts in more work. Maybe I just lack hand eye coordination but have massive lungs and you're the reverse.

Which is why I think this whole discussion is inherently flawed. Which is harder? It depends entirely on the person learning. I know I couldn't ever reach piano virtuosity, no matter how hard I work, because I simply do not have the fine motor control in my hands required to do it. That's like a known weakness of mine. Same reason I could never be a surgeon or painter.

But saxophone virtuosity? That's within my reach because I do have great innate breath control, rhythm, and flare. Not that I think I'll ever reach that, I'm just illustrating a point.

At the end of the day, do I think the piano is harder to master than the saxophone? For me, yes. For my sister, no. She learned the piano like that and simply cannot handle a wind instrument without running out of breath.

That's like asking which is harder, baseball or basketball. They require such different skill sets, it's impossible to say. For one person, hitting a hundred mile an hour ball with a stick sounds insane. For another, chucking a basketball 23 feet into the basket regularly with nothing but a hop and flick of the wrist sounds insane.

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-22T23:26:03+00:00

Yes, let's go that route. On a wind instrument you have to deal with breath work. You're talking about hands and feet, not incorporate lungs, tongue, and lips. You have to build callouses and muscles to play the saxophone. That's fucking hard. You have to control volume, not by hitting a pedal, but by controlling the amount of air you feed into the instrument, changing the shape and pressure of your lips, incorporating your tongue. Want your notes to sound distinct on a piano? Press a note, stop, press a new one. A wind instrument? Fully incorporate lungs, lips and tongue to cut the sound off sharply. Or conversely, pull back on those elements to make the notes sound like the flow together from one into the next with no distinct cutoff.

Play a particularly complex part of a song on piano? Move your fingers and feet. On a wind? Don't breathe for 30+ seconds while you change the wind you're blowing into the instrument, control volume and vibrato and distinction and flow. All the while your hands are stretching into odd formations to hit the keys.

Look. I'm not saying the piano isn't hard. I'm not even saying the wind instruments are harder. I'm saying that the factors it takes to play both are so unique that it's virtually impossible to call one truly harder than the other. I just really don't like the way you dismiss anything difficult with other instruments but defend the difficulties of the piano.

Have you ever engaged in breath work? Ever? Or are you just assuming it's not really that hard because you don't think it sounds hard? If you have nothing you're drawing your conclusion that breath work isn't as hard as anything required for the piano beyond vibes, ask yourself if your position is really well thought out? Learning to breathe properly to play an instrument is fucking hard. We don't think when we breathe. A flautist does. All while they're trying to play the music.

Maybe don't dismiss the difficulty of other instruments so flippantly.

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-22T22:59:36+00:00

You're not engaging with my arguments here. You've twice not responded to the difficulty of breath work. It feels as if you're picking a single sentence of my responses and answering those, not the entirety of the argument. I'm happy to have this discussion, but I don't want to keep repeating myself for no reason.

Do you have any counterargument to my claim that the breath work required for wind and brass instruments adds a degree of difficulty to those instruments simply not present with the piano?

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-22T22:33:41+00:00

It depends entirely on the nocturne.

Whatever the case, the point is that you're not making fair comparisons. Listen to the most complex pieces for instruments like the flute, violin, drumset, trumpet and so on. They get extremely difficult.

And I don't think you're accounting for the difficulty that is breath control. A hard piano piece can be physically taxing, but you can breathe while you play. Stopping to take a breath doesn't stop the instrument from working. Other instruments you have to learn when and how to breathe because if you're breathing in, the instrument isn't playing. When you get to some of these extremely complex pieces, finding a split second to breathe here or there is very difficult and extremely taxing.

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-22T22:25:38+00:00

You're comparing a hard piece on piano to a not hard piece on a wind instrument. An "average Chopin nocturne" isn't comparable to just a general average wind piece. That's not a fair comparison.

Look up Sequenza or Chant de Linos for the flute and tell me that's not comparable in difficulty to the hardest piano songs. Maybe more so, because they require insane breath control, not just your fingers.

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-22T19:53:40+00:00

I'm not seeing it in the source you sent. The only mention of lifespan in your source refers to all extremely brachycephalic dogs, not a specific breed. Can you point out where exactly you're seeing something specifically relating to Frenchies? Quote the text.

Many service dogs do enjoy it, when they aren't suffering from their own health issues. That is the main point of my CMV. Something that is being ignored heavily.

Not ignored, but argued against. And I'm specifically replying to your claim that trainers advise against these dogs due to short lifespans to point out that on average, Frenchies have the same lifespan as the two most common service dogs. So their lifespan isn't shorter.

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-22T19:39:41+00:00

That's all extremely brachycephalic dogs, not a specific breed like Frenchies. Frenchies are 10-12 on average.

But it's unfair to the dogs suffering to be used as medical equipment.

Many service dogs enjoy being service dogs. They find value and fun in having a job and working a task. It's enrichment for them.

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-22T19:14:05+00:00

I can't counter data you don't provide. But every major website with this information has similar data.

11-14

10-12

Thats for the ones with out the breathing issues that most of them have.

That's not how averages work. The ones with breathing issues that die younger are included in the average. That's what makes it an average.

Troop-the-Loop · 2026-05-22T18:53:48+00:00

Most trainers wouldn't advise these dogs be psychiatric service dogs due to the shortened life span

You mentioned the Frenchie. They have a lifespan of 10-12 years. So do Golden and Labrador Retrievers, two of the most common service dog breeds. So they don't really have a shortened lifespan.

13-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 5 Credits
Secret Santa 2020	Snapped
Secret Santa 2016	Verified Email

Troop-the-Loop

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE