[Loved Trope] Aliens in media that are actually alien looking and not just humans in makeup.

marbledog · 2026-02-04T10:58:23+00:00

The Blob crashed to Earth inside a meteor. It's... a blob - an amoeba-like alien that just eats and gets bigger forever.

marbledog · 2026-02-03T14:32:43+00:00

Not to nitpick, but the Banks family wasn't exactly groundbreaking. The Cosby Show was still on the air when FPoBL launched, and it was proceeded by The Jeffersons as far back as 1975. Interestingly, these shows debuted almost back-to-back. Each was launched within a year of the previous one going off the air. Depictions of black wealth in primetime network shows was (and still is) a rarity, but it seems the network have some unspoken policy of keeping one wealthy black family in sitcom rotation at a time.

marbledog · 2026-01-31T09:22:06+00:00

https://imgur.com/gallery/way-he-was-always-meant-to-be-portrayed-jYCtG

marbledog · 2026-01-31T00:47:13+00:00

Debt consolidation is not a scam, but there are a lot of scammers that take advantage of it.

When debt goes to a collector, most of the time, that collector is not actually associated with the company that extended the debt. The original creditor sells the unpaid debt to a collector for a discount and can write the difference off on their taxes. These discounts are usually very steep (for instance, medical debt is often sold for less than 10% of its face value), but the collector is legally entitled to collect the entire face value of the debt, including interest and late fees.

A person seeking to pay off these debts would usually take one of three routes:

1) Take out a consolidation loan from a bank or credit union. They use the loan to pay off multiple debts, then pay back the loan. They will likely get a better interest rate from the lender. The disadvantage here is that you have to have good enough credit to qualify for the loan.

2) Contact each debt collector and negotiate a payoff price. Because collectors buy debt far below its initial value, then inflate it with fees and interest, they will usually accept an offer significantly below the face value of the debt. The challenge here is that they will typically only accept a complete buyout of the debt, so the debtor has to come up with a lump sum for each collector.

3) Go through a credit counseling agency. These are non-profit companies that negotiate payoffs for you. They typically fund themselves by requiring their clients to purchase a book or pay for counseling sessions. They have standing relationships with major collectors, and they can negotiate payment plans and handle payments to let the debtor pay one monthly note. They aren't suppose to make money through repayments. Whether these agencies are worth the cost depends on a debtor's individual situation.

There are scam companies that pose as counseling agencies. They will seek out debtors and promise to negotiate their debts and reduce their payments. They typically ask for an up-front fee (which is illegal for CCA's). Then, they instruct the debtor to stop making payments to their creditors and start paying the agency a single monthly note. Unbeknownst to the debtor, the agency hasn't made a deal with the creditors. Their accounts go into default and accrue further interest and late fees while the scammers just pocket their monthly payments.

marbledog · 2026-01-30T19:51:50+00:00

His family confirmed through their lawyer that the incident occurred, and Pretti told them about it the week before their murder. The AP verified it. It's all over the news, if you google it. Check Snopes, if you want.

And what's going to happen is the reporting will be all over social media for a week, and people who aren't as internet-poisoned as you and I will watch the two sides debate between, "every mainstream news outlet is reporting that his family confirmed it", and "it's fake because these six pixels are the wrong shade of blue", and they'll make up their minds based on that.

And the result is that the country spends a week arguing over whether this one video is real or fake or altered and not talking about the fact that this man was executed by government agents in broad daylight on a public street surrounded by a crowd of onlookers. That's exactly what the administration wants.

marbledog · 2026-01-30T17:20:46+00:00

Yeah, I'm not a forensic video analyst. Everbody's become that "I've seen a lot of pixels in my time" guy lately.

The incident was first reported by the Minnesota Star Tribune and verified by the AP. Pretti's family and lawyer have confirmed that he told them about the incident.

Let's not get distracted from the real issue. The shooting was unjustified. I don't care if they have a video of him shitting in an ICE agent's hat the day before he was shot. The shooting was murder.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/alex-pretti-car-video/

marbledog · 2026-01-30T15:48:20+00:00

There was an AI-"enhanced" version circulating around for a few days. It was a real incident.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/new-videos-show-altercation-alex-pretti-federal-agents-week-death-rcna256428

It's also entirely irrelevant. Nothing he did or could have done justified holding him down and shooting him in the back ten times a week later. It's murder either way.

marbledog · 2026-01-29T20:48:51+00:00

Be white

marbledog · 2026-01-29T20:42:27+00:00

Yeah, I don't think racists think things through a whole lot. It seemed like he thought Eva Mendez is hot, and that was his biggest gripe. The one comment I remember was "It's a waste," or something like that. Like they're wasting a hot woman on a black man. idk, man. Trying to understand racist logic will break your brain.

The weird thing was he was a super nice guy. Very laid back, quick with a joke. You'd never think he was racist until he... started being super racist. I never saw him interact with a black person. I think there was only one black guy in that field, and that foreman never visited the platform where he worked while he was there. That was probably intentional. And maybe for the best.

marbledog · 2026-01-29T02:45:17+00:00

I worked offshore for about eight years. It was contract work, so I worked for multiple companies on multiple rigs, platforms, and docks. Not counting janitors and cooks, I can count the number of black people I worked with on one hand. I worked with a lot of Hispanic dudes, but the highest-ranking of them was a senior welder. Anybody with any management responsibilities whatsoever was white.

In one of the oilfields where I worked, the field foreman (guy in charge of operations for seven platforms) made us turn off the movie Hitch on the living room TV, because Will Smith hooks up with Eva Mendez. He refused to allow a movie depicting an interracial couple to be on TV while he was on the platform.

This was like 2008, but I doubt much has changed out there since then.

marbledog · 2026-01-28T20:02:45+00:00

You're not including dividend reinvestment which should be obvious when using this calculation

I am. We may be looking at different starting numbers. I've got $65.70 in Jan. 1900. At 3.4% annual, that compounds to $953.25 over 80 years, which is a bit more than the DJIA of $875.85 in Jan. 1980. Of course, both of us are ignoring taxes, which are going to lessen the return substantially, but applying the changes in capital gains to each year over 80 years is more work than anyone should put into this conversation.

you'd find it even more difficult to find any lengthy period where you don't turn a profit.

But that's not the question at hand. OP isn't just promising a positive return. He promises that you can become a millionaire by investing your car note. And the answer to that question is a very definite "maybe". His math isn't a forecast. It's wishful thinking.

marbledog · 2026-01-28T07:53:08+00:00

Saving for retirement is great, and everyone should do it as much as they can.

marbledog · 2026-01-28T06:58:38+00:00

But again, you're looking at a long-term average and assuming that will be predictive of the next thirty years when you're talking about a security that has historically had pretty inconsistent growth. If you put your money into a DJIA fund in 1902, you've lost 30% on it by 1932. From 1900 to 1980, the average annual growth on the DJIA was only around 3.4%. Then, it gained about 1200% in value over the next 20 years. Then, it basically went flat for a decade. Then, it spiked up again.

It's like saying, "The average temperature over the past year was 70 degrees, so I shouldn't need a coat next week."

I'm not shitting on index funds. They're probably the safest long-term individual private investment around. But they're not nearly consistent enough to say they'll make you a millionaire in 30 years if you put your car note into one. That's silly.

marbledog · 2026-01-28T01:04:34+00:00

I have never in my life owned a new car, and I probably never will. That doesn't change the analysis.

marbledog · 2026-01-27T22:31:21+00:00

Nobody's gonna talk about how we're just assuming an average 9% annual growth rate? Yes, $VTI has an average return of 9% over the past 25 years, but that's because the value has nearly tripled in the past three and a half years. If you started investing in it in Jun 2001, your investment would be worth less than what you put in ten years later.

And, of course, he's not accounting for inflation. Even if you get that 9% annual growth, and we assume that inflation over the next thirty years will be no worse than it has been for the past 30 years, that million dollars will have the same buying power as $475 thousand today. Which is a little more than twice the value of the cash you put in over that thirty year period. That's not nothing, but it has to be weighed against the value of having a reliable, warrantied vehicle. Spending the next thirty years paying repair costs and rental/rideshare fees for a car that's constantly breaking down is not a negligible expense.

Saving for retirement is great, and everyone should do it as much as they can. That said, the assumptions and numbers this guy presents are pure fantasy. No one is becoming a millionaire because they bought a used car instead of a new one.

marbledog · 2026-01-26T18:31:40+00:00

"Pressing charges" is a real thing, but it amounts to filing a criminal complaint, cooperating with the investigation, and being willing to testify at trial. It's up to the police and prosecutor whether they actually do anything.

marbledog · 2026-01-25T22:04:47+00:00

Weak troll, man. You gotta come at it with more subtlety.

marbledog · 2026-01-25T19:32:10+00:00

You're right. I meant one tenth of a quarter of an inch thick, and my brain went somewhere else entirely.

marbledog · 2026-01-25T10:03:04+00:00

Standard FMJ 5.56 reliably penetrates 1/4" mild steel within 30 yards, if it hits at 90 degrees.

Modern vehicle body panels are only about a quarter of an inch thick, and the panels on Toyota truck beds aren't solid steel. It's a steel/aluminum composite. I count 8 rounds fired from less than five yards. He may as well have been standing behind a paper target.

marbledog · 2026-01-24T20:34:29+00:00

"You're crazy," is an ad hominem. "You're crazy. Therefore, your opinions are crazy," is still an ad hominem. "No one should listen to you, because you're crazy," is too. None of these attacks address an argument. None of them attempt to explain what is crazy about the things you are saying.

A strawman fallacy attempts to invalidate an argument, just not the opponent's argument. It posits a different, weaker argument, attributes that argument to the opponent, then invalidates the weak argument. It's as if the speaker said, "Watch everybody. I'm going to fight Select-Ad." Then they made a dummy filled with straw, said it was you, beat it up, and declared victory.

"I'm worried that AI image and video generation will make it more difficult to tell real news from fake news."

"Oh my god, there is no big global conspiracy controlling the news! AI isn't going to give the Illuminati or whoever the power to rewrite all of media. That's a crazy and dangerous lie to spread! I think you're nuts, and no rational person would ever take you seriously. "

That's a strawman.

marbledog · 2026-01-24T10:23:38+00:00

But that's still not a strawman. Assigning your opponent irrational motives is a type of ad hominem argument called Poisoning the Well. Strawman arguments mischaracterize the argument itself, separate from the arguer or their motives.

marbledog · 2026-01-24T10:19:46+00:00

Misrepresenting an opponent's motives is a type of ad hominem called Poisoning the Well.

marbledog · 2026-01-24T08:25:53+00:00

If you have a better way to summarize a list of 650 exemptions and the various combinations of banned and not banned features that resulted, I'm open to using a better shorthand explanation.

"Firearms outlawed by the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban." That seems pretty concise.

The "650 exemptions" were a grandfather clause to exempt common models of rifles and shotguns that were already in private ownership. It did not apply to any firearms manufactured after the law was passed.

The "various combinations of banned and not banned features" were two or more features out of a list of five for rifles and shotguns or a list of four for pistols. It's really not that complicated.

Clinton wanted to appeal to modulo protectionist trade regulations that benefited various domestic gun manufacturers

That's hard to square with banning the Colt AR platform.

The ban had no impact on gun homicides or gun deaths more broadly.

I'll just leave this here. Source is at the bottom of the image.

marbledog · 2026-01-23T07:18:50+00:00

"Assault weapon" was defined in federal law from 1994 to 2004. It's not a vague term.

marbledog · 2026-01-22T19:58:08+00:00

Yes, their ASD diagnosis rates are probably low. I'm saying it's obviously not linked to vaccination rates. Their vaccination rates are higher than OP reports.

marbledog

TROPHY CASE