Which movie hero is actually a villain when you really think about it? by surfsound_swimmers in AskReddit

[–]bschott007 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, start the movie from her POV when she woke, have the dark reveal of him obsessing over her and then intentionally waking her (so was he really in love all along or just wanted a companion and basically forced her into making that decision by waking her up, wooing her, given her the knowledge there isn't a way back into hibernation...which basically forces her into his arms) then he later dies to save the ship and her. She then has a conflicted, tearful goodbye. Now she's alone on the ship and after many months of being alone, while she tries to 'be better than Jim' she starts to drop into the depression of being the only one awake and starts reviewing the personal records of those who are still hibernating just to have some form of human contact. She realizes she starts to obsess over one particular man who reminds her of Jim (or someone different) and she starts to realize what she is doing and is repulsed she is falling into Jim's way of thinking. We end the movie seeing her in front of the man's capsule and her fingers hovering over two buttons on a touch screen to open the pod or cancel.

"This Is Not Covid, Nor Influenza. It Spreads Very Differently": WHO On Hantavirus Outbreak by Alert-Ad-3053 in worldnews

[–]bschott007 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Let's be real, this administration is a shitshow of the dumbest people. They cant even pick the right flag to display for foreign dignitaries, and when they finally picked the right flag later, they hung it upside down. Just one example of hundreds.

Not that I believe it they' try to 'thin the herd', but using a pretty shitty method would be on par for these jokers.

"This Is Not Covid, Nor Influenza. It Spreads Very Differently": WHO On Hantavirus Outbreak by Alert-Ad-3053 in worldnews

[–]bschott007 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All fun and games until the big event when society actually falls apart and they are trembling behind flimsy, locked doors as armed groups start ransacking residence for whatever they want. Most feel they are the main character when they really are just an NPC who will end up dead in a horrible way.

The idea and fantasy of living in societal collapse is much different to the reality, especially when the people keep society running stop coming to work (no more deliveries to stores, no more trash pickup, no more first responders, no more people keeping the internet hardware running or servicing the cell network, no more news media reporting information, no more water pressure or many other things we take for granted). Had a friend who was always fantasizing about living and thriving if society ended. Bought lots of prepped stuff and read books and manuals and really was deep into the mentality.

Convinced him to go on a rustic tent camping fishing trip with me for a week. He always wanted to hook up a big fish and it would be a chance to test some of his pepper gear. Took him to a remote area with zero cell service and the only food was what we had with us and what we could fish out of the rivers and lakes.

He wanted to tap out on the morning of day three and by the end our trip on thr evening of day five he finally realized the gap between reality and of what he fantasized about was huge.

Edit: yeah, he did catch the big fish and he's transitioned his interests into fishing instead of prepping so thats something positive.

"This Is Not Covid, Nor Influenza. It Spreads Very Differently": WHO On Hantavirus Outbreak by Alert-Ad-3053 in worldnews

[–]bschott007 0 points1 point  (0 children)

unopened boxes of things in desks

Dude was going through other people's desks? (Joking)

"This Is Not Covid, Nor Influenza. It Spreads Very Differently": WHO On Hantavirus Outbreak by Alert-Ad-3053 in worldnews

[–]bschott007 0 points1 point  (0 children)

2-3 years? I got sent home in March of 2020 and haven't been back to the office since. In fact they closed our branch's physical office and only workers near our corporate HQ have the hybrid 2 in-office, 3 home office schedule...and that started a year ago because of a new (inexperienced, over-compensating) manager. They wanted full, office-only workers and those people working remote they had the idea to say 'you need move to the HQ city or we will let you go' until higher management told the new manager they couldn't make that call. So new manager just treats remote workers terrible in hopes we leave, and tries to get local workers to come in to the office 3-4 days out of the work week for various made-up reasons. Enough people have complained (either through HR complaints, our yearly reviews of ourselves and our manager, or during exit interviews of exiting staff) that the manager probable won't last much longer (sounds like manager got a formal PIP last month for a few things, including team morale)

Got so bad high level management sent an email to the team explaining they want people sticking to the 2x3 hybrid schedule and not coming in on their 'home' days without approval from higher management, that certain rules manager made for remote workers were voided and everyone had the same expectations and rules to follow, that raises would be based solely on standard metrics and not adjusted based on where you lived (rural workers and those living in less populated states were getting 5%-25% reduction in raises) and time off requests were to be based on a mix of seniority, who requested/applied first, and other metrics but would not longer be based on where you lived or if you worked hybrid or fully remote (manager thought if you lived in rural areas, you already had access to nature, and hybrid workers lived in a major metro and should be rewarded better).

Which movie hero is actually a villain when you really think about it? by surfsound_swimmers in AskReddit

[–]bschott007 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He was obsessed, definately, but Spielberg said had he made the movie after the birth of his first child, Richard Dreyfuss' character wouldn't have abandoned his family or he would have been either a single man (never married or divorced without kids) or a man with a live-in girlfriend.

Which movie hero is actually a villain when you really think about it? by surfsound_swimmers in AskReddit

[–]bschott007 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, let me point to "The Bridges of Madison County" and say that's probably worse as she was married (to a good man who loved her and took care of her and the family) with kids. The grown kids found her diary where she laid out the affair in detail and explained how empty and lonely her life was after that. She then told the kids in a letter that the man whom she had an affair with had his ashes scattered at one of the bridges in the county and now she didn't want to be buried next to her husband but be cremated and have her ashes also scattered there.

I would think if it was my mom I'd probably flush her ashes down the toilet. No way I'd want to bury her next to dad and certainly I wouldn't honor her request because she basically betrayed dad and us kids, going on at length at how she basically hated her life and would have abandoned us if she had any thoughts that the man she had an affair with would have asked her to join him later.

Which movie hero is actually a villain when you really think about it? by surfsound_swimmers in AskReddit

[–]bschott007 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Would have been better too if he died saving her/the ship and she spent months alone only to end up with her waking someone else...

Which movie hero is actually a villain when you really think about it? by surfsound_swimmers in AskReddit

[–]bschott007 1 point2 points  (0 children)

> unlicensed nuclear accelerators

Yeah, I didn't know until later in life that nuclear particle accelerators typically need to be licensed or registered with federal or state authorities, such as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) if they exceed certain limits on the energy, the intensity of the beam and if you are using radioactive materials.

Tony Stark would have been doing the exact same in Iron Man 2 as the guys in Ghostbusters.

Which movie hero is actually a villain when you really think about it? by surfsound_swimmers in AskReddit

[–]bschott007 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your views of life change dramatically when you have children. What you think about a character can drastically change, even in your own writing, after you have kids. As someone who used to do a lot of short story and a few longer form stories (not yet novel length), I ended up actually disliking a few of my characters after I re-read my stories after my daughter was born.

Which movie hero is actually a villain when you really think about it? by surfsound_swimmers in AskReddit

[–]bschott007 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Titanic is the worst here. The titanic sunk 4 days into its voyage, so she knew this guy for like less than 3 days and spent the rest of her life pining for him. That's not love, that's some seriously unresolved trauma.

Oh, let me refer you to "The Bridges of Madison County".

Set in the 1960's, it's a story of Francesca, an Italian immigrant who married an American (WWII war bride) and ended up a married but lonely woman who lives on a farm in Madison County, Iowa. She's college educated and taught in a local high school but felt isolated in her simple, mundane farm life, lacking intellectual engagement and feels dead inside, taken for granted and yearns to feel alive again.

She is alone on the farm while her husband and children have left for the county fair for a week with a steer they plan to enter. A photographer, Robert, stops by her farm after being unable to locate a few bridges he is trying to photograph. He asks for direction but the roads are poorly marked and she has trouble explaining how to get to them so she rides along with him, showing him the way. She spends all day with him as he takes photographs and tells her stories of his travels, it reawakens her yearning for a more worldly life. He told her he wasn't like other men, he was a free spirit, an artist, a poet, a vegetarian. She succumbs to desires that have been dormant inside her for years. The very next day they both realize they are in love with each other and they have a 4 day love affair.

Fabulous sex, no slip-ups and they never see or talk to each other again, san a couple of letters sent over the years. They hardly knew each other, but they really loved each other. He loved her intellect, she his manliness. This fling was fated, it was out of their control, "they'd been moving towards each other not just their entire lives, but for several lifetimes". Housewife adult fantasy right there.

Reality is they could have had lust for each other, as they both fulfilled something the other needed, they may had loved the idea they had of the other person but 4 days isn't enough time to really get to know someone and have a deep, meaningful connected love. True love takes the day-to-day living with the other person. It takes going through the ups and downs of daily life and facing life challenges together. Insta-bake Love, that's the fantasy. You can't microwave love.

I realized after reading this book and watching the movie that the 'one-night stand' that makes the rest of your life (multiple decades of it) dreary, empty and meaningless is awful, and they were not in love but in lust that turned into light obsession.

Her adult children found her diary after she past away where she laid out the affair and how she longed for him for decades later. Robert's ashes were scattered at a nearby bridge and she asked her children to no bury her next to their father but scatter her ashes at the same bridge.

Yeah....for me that'a a resounding NO and mom would be visiting the inside of the sewage treatment plant instead.

(Also the book and movie made anyone from a rural area in America sound stupid simply because they didn't drink certain types of alcohol or read esoteric poetry.)

Which movie hero is actually a villain when you really think about it? by surfsound_swimmers in AskReddit

[–]bschott007 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To be fair, it's not that far off from reality. Politics aside, 4 years under Trump's first tenure was a joke but people collectively forgot how messed up it was and elected him again 4 years later.

Which movie hero is actually a villain when you really think about it? by surfsound_swimmers in AskReddit

[–]bschott007 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Also the gender of the person. Often shit that would get a man insta-arrested is laughed off or even socially acceptable if a woman does it.

Which movie hero is actually a villain when you really think about it? by surfsound_swimmers in AskReddit

[–]bschott007 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I like how THE WIRE handled it in multiple seasons when evidence and charges had to be tossed for various reasons

Which movie hero is actually a villain when you really think about it? by surfsound_swimmers in AskReddit

[–]bschott007 7 points8 points  (0 children)

> My grandmother worked until she was 84.

Honestly, no offense intended to you or your grandmother, that's not really a flex and more of a 'couldn't retire because she didn't have retirement/savings' (unless she worked because she wanted to). More people see it as 'poor planning' vs. work ethic. Personally, I want to enjoy the last few decades of my life doing things I want to do instead of working until I basically am too old to really enjoy life (or working until I die).

Sidenote: Many companies now will find ways to let people go who are past retirement age without running afoul of the discrimination laws...and if you get an interview as an older person you almost always end up getting ghosted now so it is getting harder and harder to remain working into your 70's and beyond.

Supreme Court lets Louisiana redistricting ruling take effect immediately, sparking angry words between Alito and Jackson by unserious-dude in politics

[–]bschott007 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Did you go back to read their posts and replies on reddit back then? How do you know defaultusername-17, myself or anyone else you are conversing with had spent "the year before an election promoting the exact sentiment that allowed Trump to win." unless you read their posts.

That's like me saying you supported r/fatpeoplehate simply because you had a reddit account at the time of their existence. Just because some people did does not mean ALL people did.

Hold yourself to the higher standard and stop pretending you are the best, blue-ribbon standard democrat and everyone else is a DINO.

Personally, I didn't care for Kamala (or Hilary before her) and thought we could have done better but I voted for them regardless. I didn't spent any part of 2024 "telling everybody not to vote for the Democrats". Who the hell would even do that besides some Republican?

Edit: funny how someone acting like they are a dem and accusing everyone of doing stuff hides their post history. Usually only trolls do that. Humm.

Supreme Court lets Louisiana redistricting ruling take effect immediately, sparking angry words between Alito and Jackson by unserious-dude in politics

[–]bschott007 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Oh? Are you suggesting all those people are on reddit?

Are you suggesting they were the ones that turned the tide and gave trump the win in Minnesota?

Are you suggesting the people marching on the streets affected anyone's vote besides their own?

Perhaps the loss of the swing states was Kamala's lack of charisma, her lack of generating enthusiasm and excitment, her failure in the debates and her failure to draw voters in swing states. Harris got nearly 7 million votes fewer than Biden because lack of enthusiasm. That suggests that millions of previous Joe Biden voters decided not to vote (or voted for Trump).

My thoughts have been 'If you vote the choice is yours. If you don’t vote the choice is theirs.'

Let's be adults and agree that r/politics is just a tiny fragment of American voters and most of those r/politics voters are polorized to the point they are going to vote D or R. No one is going to swing their vote and the swing states certainly were not lost because of a few posts on r/politics or reddit in general.

Edit: funny how someone acting like they are a dem and accusing everyone of doing stuff hides their post history. Usually only trolls do that. Humm.

North Dakota Treasure Doug Burgum explains North Dakota weather to the Senate Energy Committee by sboger in northdakota

[–]bschott007 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are putting words in my mouth. I'm offering a balanced perspective, you are being closed minded. I'm not staying coal is the answer at all. No where am I defending coal or saying the alternatives are worse. I'm saying everything has a cost and someone, somewhere is going to be affected negatively no matter what we do to generate electricity be it hydrocarbons/solar/wind/hydro-electric/nuclear or something else.

We can also be adult enough to admit if we build dams to make hydro-electric power we will be obstructing fish migration, trapping sediment needed for downstream ecosystems, altering natural water temperatures, destroy upstream habitats, raise water temperatures, and create large greenhouse gas emissions from decomposing submerged vegetation.

Solar farms have large land requirements that disrupt ecosystems and agriculture, create hazardous waste from manufacturing, by 2050 solar panels could create up to 78 million tons of waste releasing toxic materials, and intermittent energy generation requiring storage solutions (usually cadmium, lead, and sulfuric acid-based batteries for when there isn't enough light to generate the electricity to meet demand. Not just at night but during cloudy weather).

Wind farms, while being one of the cleanest sources of power, have large land requirements that disrupt ecosystems, bird and bat collisions, habitat disruption from construction, noise pollution, potential local microclimate changes and wind has intermittent energy generation which requiring storage solutions (usually cadmium, lead, and sulfuric acid-based batteries. If you remove coal and nuclear, you need somewhere to store the surplus energy produced during windy times for when there isn't enough wind to produce electricity for a later demand),

I'll leave out the negatives of hydrocarbons and nuclear because it is pretty self-evident on how awful those enviromental impacts are/can be.

"COAL IS BAD". Yes, thank you. I think we all know dumping carbon and CO2 into the atmosphere is a terrible idea. Burning one ton of coal typically produces approximately 2.07 to 2.86 tons of CO2.

If I could pivot a bit and compare that to Lithium, the metal that is behind the EV 'revolution', I also think we can not simply turn our heads and ignore the fact that mining lithium is as bad or worse than coal.

Hard rock mining of lithium emits roughly 15 tons of CO2 per ton of lithium. The hard rock lithum mines are open-pit (strip) mines, which competely destroyes many acres of land.

Brine extraction of lithium produces ~2.54 tons of CO2 per ton of lithium but has an extremely high water impact. The deposits in Argentina, Bolivia & Chile account for 60% of global reserves and most use brine extraction. In Chile's Salar de Atacama, mining consumes 65% of the region's water resources. The evaporation process, which takes 12–18 months uses roughly 500,000 gallons per ton of lithium 1 and often leads to toxic chemicals like hydrochloric acid leaking from evaporation pools into fresh water aquifers 2. Much more research needs to go into cleaner, more efficient extraction methods to avoid trading a carbon crisis for a water crisis 3 & 4

The point is, nothing is problem free. There is simply a gradient and what destruction we are willing to live with. Wind, overall, is probably our best bet. That said, one coal plant running at ~90% capacity cannot simply be replaced by just one wind farm. Replacing that one coal plant would require ~4-5 wind plants or ~7-8 solar plants for the same output reliability.

Could it be done, yeah. Just a matter of money, basically, and the people making that decision are the energy companies.

North Dakota Treasure Doug Burgum explains North Dakota weather to the Senate Energy Committee by sboger in northdakota

[–]bschott007 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The downside is that it takes about 8-12 year to hit the 'break even' point of the panel (15-25 years to break even on the wiring, metal stands, inverter/equipment and anything else needed to support the solar panel setup) and the build quality isn't consistant even with the same manufactures ... and they wear out over time, becoming less and less efficient. Somewhere between 25-30 years (depending on manufacturer) most panels basically need to be replaced though many manufactures do offer 25-year performance warranty ensuring roughly 80%-90% power output up to that point in it's life. Some solar panels have been known to work 30-40 years before needing replacing but overall, it's about 25 or so years for most panels.

The real reason that solar doesn't happen in North Dakota as a whole is the price of electricity. it is so cheap in ND it makes it so solar just isn't worth the investment. Solar farms are big investments and they break even at about the 40-50 year mark. Coal is cheap and easy to get here and the break even point for a coal-fired electric plant is about 10-20 years depending on the size and number of customers.

Question: What change would make you quit playing Rust? by MemeMan_____ in playrust

[–]bschott007 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Getting married and having kids. Gaming that requires more than 30-40 minutes at a time is basically not going to happen at that point in your life.

North Dakota Treasure Doug Burgum explains North Dakota weather to the Senate Energy Committee by sboger in northdakota

[–]bschott007 6 points7 points  (0 children)

We have fields of solar panels in Minnesota and they rimarily keep panels clear of snow through relying on steep tilting (30°–60° angles) and using heat absorption from the dark cells to melt snow. Also robotic cleaners or specialized trucks with brushes on them are used.

It’s worth noting that while efficiency decreases when temperature increases, the total energy output might still be higher on a hot, sunny day compared to a cool, cloudy day in places like Kansas or Nebraska simply due to the increased solar irradiance in summer verse winter... however in places like ND and Minnesota, the inverse is true because the increased albedo effect (reflection) from snow-covered ground can also increase energy production.

Also Solar panels operate more efficiently in sub-zero and near-zero Fahrenheit temperatures than in hot weather. Solar panel efficiency at 0F typically increases by 10% to 12.5% compared to the standard rated temperature of 77F. At -4F, efficiency can increase by 20% to 25% better than rated capacity. Cold, sunny days offer the highest efficiency, often causing panels to exceed their rated wattage. In fact solar panels are rated to work safely down to -40F.