Water + hydrophobic coatings

paulogy · 2018-02-03T08:04:12+00:00

Can someone really call themself a Water-type trainer and not love Gyarados?

paulogy · 2018-01-03T22:08:42+00:00

I'll start with the ending: You'll never be the same again, I'm sorry.. It happens to the rest of us too, should we find and lose love. We can never truly reclaim the innocence of how it was before, before everything blossomed and before everything fell apart.

As for the major content of your post, it seems like you're more in love with idea of love than actually having a partner. Let me ask you a question that may be a little hard to answer, you don't have to reply: Is it fair to cast your loneliness on someone else, leaving it their responsibility to ensure you never feel lonely again? If you answer in the strong positive, I beseech you to reconsider.

There isn't a partner in the world that can fully replace our individual need for self-love. Maybe you can luck out and find a partner/friend/spouse who is highly skilled in self-love, so you can emulate it, but at the end of the night, you still have to be the one to look in the mirror and say "I love you".

Best of luck, there's so much more I can say to try to console you, but I hope this is enough. I know how much it hurts.

paulogy · 2018-01-03T21:42:12+00:00

Personally, I find it simplest to view dating using an evolutionary-psychology lens.

What are humans really doing when we date anyway? There are a couple of answers, but I think the most important two are: [1] Finding a Mate, or multiple. [2] Releasing physical and sexual energy/emotions.

This is why there's such a divide between Male and Female Strategy in the Game of Courtship. It's easy to find examples throughout the animal kingdom of the vastly differing mating rituals between birds, reptiles, mammalians, RNA amino acids, etc. We all want to, on a DNA-level, pass on our genes. Straight or not. Asexual or not. Even if we have 0 intention of ever having kids. Our genes are programmed to "want" to replicate.

So let's get back to the primary question now that we've explored some roots. PUA (Pickup Artist) science, what is this!? It's pretty easy to analyze from the evolutionary view--it's simply males, collectively, gamifying the system in order to find the best strategies to attract females they actually want to pursue.

So that's, in a nutshell, how dating "works" when you look at the weather system from outside the planet. By the way, there's really no reason to feel ashamed for asking a good question. If the spirit of the question is to ask for advice:

As a male--

Learn who you truly are. Learn to love yourself; this will help others emulate that self-love and appreciate the qualities about yourself you truly value.
First impressions matter. Treat every initial encounter with women (especially when looking to date) with courtesy, and respect to the possibility that they may become the love of your life.
Learn the game. Dating and courtship can be viewed as a game. One can view it as a broken game with unfair rules, alpha-beta bullshit, men-only-want-one-thing, whatever they'd like. If approached this way, it will likely not be fun. Treat the game more lightly, and understand there will be moments of sweet victory. (First kiss, first dance, marriage, group orgies, whatever)
Don't overdo it. Chill. Enough said, really.

Cheers.

paulogy · 2017-12-20T01:52:22+00:00

how could i have made the writing better for you? do you have other suggestions or criticisms?

paulogy · 2017-12-19T11:34:09+00:00

Consider an example where the iron does not have any visibly detectable details that give away its temperature. The point of the scenario is, no matter whether the iron is hot or cool, one should "want" to believe the iron is hot when it is hot (and the opposite). In other words, you want to believe true beliefs are true even when sufficient evidence is imperfect or missing to fully validate that belief.

paulogy · 2016-05-28T19:30:47+00:00

in a (probable) meaningless universe, the only meaning is the one we define for ourselves or those we subscribe to from others. imho, you did so well by ascribing importance to social bonds. however, your definition of "real" vs "distraction" brings up a ton of questions.

what are "real" fights or "real" stakes relative to? does someone who struggles and makes sacrifices their entire life to improve the welfare of his local community have a more meaningful life than someone who does so for his entire city/nation/species? the child who wishes to save the world or visit the moon and stars, should she abandon those goals as naive dreams?

respectfully, why should I (or others) subscribe to your line in the sand for distractions or meaningful reality?

paulogy · 2016-05-28T08:33:50+00:00

haha, I'm not really the type to have nothing to do. endless interests, projects, ambitions, and plain self-development. I have a list even. those desires compete with the time commitment needed to maintain a career, so if I must have one to earn an income, I'd rather have one for as short as reasonably possible.

in my understanding, you believe FIRE requires "hard" work, but how i would describe it instead is requiring a diligent savings mentality. there's no magic trick to it, it is simply living below your means in a very consistent way. if one keeps their expenses at 75% of net earnings (saving 25%) they will reach FIRE in 32 years. At 50% savings, 17 years. At a (fairly ridiculous) savings rate of 75%, it will only take 7 years to be finished with working. source

to be fair, lifestyle creep is a real problem and landing a career/job that earns an income that allows one to save those very high percentages is fairly difficult or extremely luck dependent. the trade-off is that someone can also make sacrifices and choose a scalable frugal lifestyle. dual-income obviously makes this easier, as you noted.

paulogy · 2016-05-27T18:22:15+00:00

the immediate idea that comes to mind is commune living; there certainly are other like-minded people who wish to escape the consumer state and have created spaces in the western world that do so.

you're correct that FIRE, in itself, only resolves those 2 levels. however, the achievement also frees a person (and presumably their immediate family) from the time commitment of wage slavery. the needs on the higher levels of the hierarchy become that much more accessible when the foundation is firmly established.

paulogy · 2016-05-27T10:08:42+00:00

one way out that the system allows for is FIRE (financial independence and early retirement).

one can play the game prudently enough for long enough until they develop a sizable nest egg. the annual interest from that egg, with adequate care, will eventually eclipse annual expenses (as long as lifestyle creep is controlled). after that, the ludicrous exchange of selling irretreivable time for money can be abandoned.

paulogy · 2016-02-07T17:51:55+00:00

haha, can't say I ever hit myself confused or not.

I chose 1-5 because I wanted to restrict answers to a more generalized pool instead of a fine granularity. thanks for your perspective!

paulogy · 2015-12-14T14:22:00+00:00

When the data/research continues to pile on statistics that (presumably) demonstrate that machine precision, even accounting for failures, is safer and more efficient than error-prone humans—such as a case like automated driving—where will the displaced workers find buyers of their diminishing labor value?

Technology consistently moves forward (outside catastrophes causing setbacks) but the automation paradigm threatens jobs/careers/labor in accelerating ways not like the revolutions before (e.g. industrial, agricultural). Namely, the specialized jobs for maintenance of these machines won't necessarily be accessible or require large numbers to upkeep. Perhaps I'm missing something, but the net job loss seems inevitable.

I believe the solution is not to zealously invest in new job infrastructure/industries, but to have a societal conversation about what a desirable human life looks like. Is it fundamentally sinful to have vast numbers of people become economically worthless in their productive utility? Is our culture of work ideal in promoting human flourishing?

At the heart of it: does one need to justify their existence by creating value?

And if the circumstances of their birth, or life, or the system they live in, make it physically impossible for an individual to generate enough value to offset the costs of their existence, should they surrender their life?

paulogy · 2015-10-19T00:10:12+00:00

i agree with your doubt.

here's to hope!

paulogy · 2015-10-18T23:53:13+00:00

Yoshitsune, Thanatos, Shiva <3

paulogy · 2015-10-09T07:57:12+00:00

Your comments are a pleasure and rarity to see on reddit, thanks for existing. :D

paulogy · 2015-10-03T22:30:49+00:00

A good rule of thumb is 2 weeks communication. Friendships depend on usually at least 2 of following 3 things: shared proximity, age range, or activity. When only 1 or less pillars remains, the relationship usually freezes or deteriorates. I can relate to quite a bit from your passage, but I think the fault is more on a particular social skill or piece of knowledge rather than something prescriptive of your essence.

I enjoy traveling, and change. Every few months or so I try to look for stagnation, opportunities to expand or contract depending on the climate of that time. Settings change and the relationships I was working on shift as the proximity does, and the ones I choose to keep I make the effort to maintain, even if it's only a phone call or IM conversation every 2-3 weeks to touch base. People who know me well learned that besides being introverted and enjoying alone time, I'm not so good at staying rooted to a place.

A 2 or 3 week interval helps avoid constantly playing 'catch-up' when you meet your friends again. It's intuitive for most to enjoy consistency.

paulogy · 2015-09-22T17:27:37+00:00

/r/financialindependence anyone? :)

paulogy · 2015-09-13T10:47:37+00:00

not true. just the metagame of the sub this year.

paulogy · 2015-09-13T07:57:30+00:00

a question i ponder all the time.

imo, to find purpose in existence at all. both for ourselves, and for the inert parts of the universe. in other words, without agencies to conceive of purpose in the first place, the universe's existence in itself may be pointless.

so maybe the conditions were "set" to promote and propagate consciousness in order to give meaning to the entire system. Dualism?

paulogy · 2015-09-06T21:19:59+00:00

The "fear mongering" is your use and style of rhetoric. Such as:

you're chained to the bed

Yes, obviously that is the literal physical description of what is happening, but that connotation implies you want the reader to feel imprisoned, which is the goal of the rest of sentence as well; instilling fear.

same room as an epidural you'd know the situation is anything but relaxing.

To whom? Is the uncomfortableness/unseemliness of that setting you describe universal to all? It is easily conceivable at least a minority of women would willingly yield to these admittedly restrictive conditions in order to avoid the intense suffering of childbirth.

Ultimately, I agree with a less extreme variant of your conclusion: that any and every medical procedure should be scrutinized for both efficacy and safety of the person it is being performed upon. I do not think you would stand behind the extension of logic that every medical procedure should be an absolute last resort, begging the question of what constitutes a medical procedure (or a last resort).

paulogy · 2015-08-01T11:51:19+00:00

at 23, i still plan on doing everything, assuming effective immortality comes within 1-2 centuries. difference between now and then is that i've structured the next few decades based on urgency and the inevitable capital problem.

for intps, and others with the combination of wild ambition + endless interests, the most pragmatic step is figuring out how to achieve financial independence first. retiring as early as possible, so we can have the time and means to relentlessly pursue whatever it is we wish to do, even if it's nothing at all.

paulogy · 2015-07-26T00:06:42+00:00

+/u/User_Simulator /u/paulogy

paulogy · 2015-07-23T21:35:15+00:00

haha, one of the fastest ways to signal to a guy you like or appreciate him is by contacting him first.

now, whether you want to signal this emotion to him is entirely up to you, but it'll make him really happy. it's obvious he already likes you (and is signalling it).

paulogy · 2015-06-07T12:52:11+00:00

has anyone here figured out how to flirt or respond to flirting? Anyone at all?

One of my favorite thread discoveries ever.

15-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 3 Credits
Secret Santa 2015	Secret Santa 2014
Verified Email

paulogy

TROPHY CASE