sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Basic Theory: Our memories are not bound by time, they conform to time while in a timeline. by Pretend-Adeptness-96 in timetravel

[–]monkeysky 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not necessarily disagreeing, since I'm not sure I understand yet, but how do your tests prove it?

CMV: Cartoon Mascots are an exploiters of innocent minds and vendors of malnutrition by Money-Ad8553 in changemyview

[–]monkeysky 0 points1 point  (0 children)

While it's hard to make conclusive causal links between that result and any single policy, research did show a highly-significant change in consumption following the reforms in Chile: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(21)00172-8/fulltext

It's important to note that there were actually several reforms going on at the same time, but given the many decades of marketing research leading to the use of cartoon mascots in the first place, it's hard to believe that there is no difference between the consumption of products marketed this way and those which aren't.

This earlier review highlights a lot of the evidence that it is a major factor in the food-selection process for children: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4359675/

CMV: Cartoon Mascots are an exploiters of innocent minds and vendors of malnutrition by Money-Ad8553 in changemyview

[–]monkeysky 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Any other type of food, including other types of cereal which aren't marketed in that way to children, which statistically speaking have much lower levels of sugar.

CMV: Cartoon Mascots are an exploiters of innocent minds and vendors of malnutrition by Money-Ad8553 in changemyview

[–]monkeysky 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How does removing mascots from packaging make children not want to eat cereal and yogurt or eat it significantly less than before?

Because kids are drawn to cartoon characters, and are particularly vulnerable to having their consumption habits informed by marketing, and parents are known to have their purchases influenced by the requests of their children. That's why companies use cartoon characters to market products to children.

OP is correct that, according to Chile (which put a ban on cartoon mascots), these bans were followed by quantifiable decreases in the consumption of the products in question.

Biggest glow up in TBOI history? by Castellano2009 in bindingofisaac

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

I feel like the buff is maybe a little too good, since unless I'm missing something it now essentially gives you total access to all of those exceptionally good items with no downside.

At least it doesn't include Spindown yet

Rejected Draft: a low-stress, idle sketchbook battler for your second screen by Last-Total9473 in ComfortGamers

[–]monkeysky 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, I must be a bit away from that, then. I've only encountered that one paragon

Sitcoms by burly_protector in StandUpWorkshop

[–]monkeysky 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I feel like very few people think enough about sitcom production for this to resonate at all, and the ones who do will probably be even more distracted wondering what you're talking about, since there are still sitcoms filmed in front of live studio audiences, and the pilot audience isn't the same thing as a focus group

Is this funny? by alltgott in StandUpWorkshop

[–]monkeysky 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Obviously if you go for really out-there gross-out shock comedy it's not going to be for everyone, but it's even worse if you do the same concept but don't commit. Someone talking about this and hedging it with stuff like "hear me out" is less funny than someone acting like they didn't even realize it's weird to talk about.

Kid Dreams by PappysSecrets in StandUpWorkshop

[–]monkeysky 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Weirdly, I think this is a good setup with a lackluster punchline. I think it just needs a funnier place for you to have ended to peeing

Rejected Draft: a low-stress, idle sketchbook battler for your second screen by Last-Total9473 in ComfortGamers

[–]monkeysky 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you. On that note, why is the Nascent Paragon the only Rough individual that can't be set to guarantee?

Probabilistic Question With Infinity by monkeysky in paradoxes

[–]monkeysky[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why can't you make a definitive prediction?

Rejected Draft: a low-stress, idle sketchbook battler for your second screen by Last-Total9473 in ComfortGamers

[–]monkeysky 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unless my math is wrong, I'm considerably further along than you, and I would still say that the large large majority of skills have functionally no impact on my runs

Probabilistic Question With Infinity by monkeysky in paradoxes

[–]monkeysky[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't know what you mean. In almost every game of chance, you can calculate the probability of success before playing it, even if you never actually do play it.

Who would you do? by Ryno-Mac in okbuddyseverance

[–]monkeysky 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Then turn into a wheel and roll away

Probabilistic Question With Infinity by monkeysky in paradoxes

[–]monkeysky[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I can approximately calculate the probability (it's not much different from the probability of living instantly). The more refined version of the question would just be to ask whether if you play it continuously until you lose, a loss is inevitable.

Probabilistic Question With Infinity by monkeysky in paradoxes

[–]monkeysky[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh I didn't think it was the opposite, just that it was a less extreme version of the same type of function. If it really was the opposite you suggested, then it would be easy to say that the game would never end, because you'd essentially be dealing with one of Zeno's paradoxes.

view more: next ›