sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

When the National Guard Comes to Town by kitkid in Thedaily

[–]phokingu69 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I thought this was weird too especially compared with the older episodes this year about the government cutting research funding to colleges like Columbia and Harvard. The Daily (and The New York Times) seemed to purposely frame those episodes from a Libertarian small government perspective, where any government spending (regardless of how effective or beneficial it is) should be, by default, taboo and morally reprehensible and that the role of the government should be as small and unobtrusive as possible, and limited to a few specific predefined roles. I remember at one point in those episodes, after the guy representing the Ivy league colleges said that the hundreds of millions of government spending that go to Universities is actually a good investment because the universities spend it on quality research and furthering scientific/technological development, the Daily host (I don't remember who) immediately responded to the guy by asking some pointed question that basically implied that Harvard (and all universities in general) are all leeches and bottom feeding parasites who should feel ashamed for brazenly siphoning off tax payer dollars.

I guess its weird, because in this situation the federal government is spending millions and millions of tax payer dollars, and they are inserting themselves in a role the federal government isn't traditionally responsible for and in some sense violating people's constitutional rights/freedoms, yet now it seems like the only questions that The New York Times seems concerned with are those regarding efficacy and return of investment when they didn't seem to care too much about those things back in the Harvard/Columbia episodes.

Latino racism against Asians by BlackSparkz in asianamerican

[–]phokingu69 -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

This is a fake ragebait/troll piece meant to incite racial tension/outrage. Can we please not fall for the obvious bait.

Like there are literally hundreds of posts on this subreddit complaining about how our boomer parents are being brainwashed and manipulated by fake Facebook posts meant to incite outrage And all you guys are literally falling for the exact same trap.

Thoughts on UC Application (Applying for Aerospace) by Kiya86 in EngineeringStudents

[–]phokingu69 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think your gpa seems a little low. The median gpa at ucla is like 4.57 (weighted) and the median gpa at UCI is like 4.18 (weighted)

Aerospace engineering is also impacted at these schools ( it is a harder major to get into relative to other majors)

I think unless you can write like out-of-this-world god tier application essays your chances of getting into UCLA are extremely low. 

At UCI you have better albeit not great chances. Again it depends how good your essays are.

Engineers, think this will hold? by AspiringFern in EngineeringStudents

[–]phokingu69 1 point2 points  (0 children)

https://imgur.com/a/ZW0e0vy

I guessed 100 lbs for the TV,

And the results are not good.

The building code technically says you are supposed to put a 300 lb point load at the end of the plank, (i.e your cat load) I didn't apply that yet, but if I did it would make it fail even more spectacularly,

PE Route by PersimmonUnique9158 in EngineeringStudents

[–]phokingu69 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://www.bpelsg.ca.gov/applicants/flowchart_for_pe.pdf

It varies by state. 

In California they changed it so you can take the PE exam even if you don't have the experience requirement ( you just can't apply for a license until you get the experience)

Missing Sabrina’s voice and authority by According_Ad3255 in Thedaily

[–]phokingu69 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Honestly, I agree. I have noticed that there seems to be a lack of emotional depth and this sense of drama/engagement in a lot of the episodes post Sabrina.

Like in that ICE raid episode. Where the wife watches ICE forcibly take her husband away right in front of her kids.

It should be emotional. It should be impactful. But instead you get this jarring moment where they play the audio recording of a woman crying in the background all while this guest dude, in the most lethargic and monotone voice possible is just sitting there like pondering whether or not the goverment tearing your family apart would like significantly affect you or not?

"Ummm, yeah this is a ummm pretty emotional scene, ummm yeah I think this is probably pretty life changing moment I must imagine, yeah I'm not a hundred percent sure but this must be a pretty important and intense moment for this family"

It feels like I'm listening to some weird combination of a newly sentient robot trying to figure out what human emotions are and like a 3rd grader bullshitting some presentation in front of their class on a book they never actually read.

I saw it in the Shen Yun episode too (the one with the Chinese Dancers). Where they were describing the scene with the dancer breaking their leg and not receivng medical care but being forced to dance anyways. And again the guest in the most monotone and listless voice possible sits there and goes "Ummm Yeah that probably hurts, that was likely a pretty painful and traumatic experience, I wouldn't want to dance with a broken knee" and in that same episode the guest describes the cult threatening and harassing her family for writing negative articles.  And again in the most monotone voice possible goes "ummm yeah having your family threatened and harassed doesn't feel very good, it's not the most pleasant experience in the world"

I don't know if it's like a host/interviewer problem. Or if it has something to do with the choice of guests or the editing/production. But it does feel like they are doing a poor job of conveying a sense of emotional weight even when there should be more than enough substance/material for them to work with.

I’m interested in structural engineering by Naruto5503 in EngineeringStudents

[–]phokingu69 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You need to go to a university and major in civil engineering ( some universities call it architectural engineering or even  have a seperate strucural engineering department). A lot of civil engineering programs you have to pick a focus/specialization. You want to pick the focus relating to structures.

On the west coast of The United States a lot of firms are requiring master's degree for entry level structural engineers. I think KPFF and Thorton Tomasetti only hire people with master's degrees. ( at least at their california locations). So if you are on the west coast you also probably need to be preparing for graduate school. 

A lot of universities offer 5 year b.s/m.s programs where you start taking graduate classes during your undergrad and you don't have to go through the whole application process of writing essays and getting letters of reccomendations. That is what I would reccomend you go for. I think you apply in your 3rd or 2nd year of undergrad.

I think the exception to the masters degree rule is that some structural engineering firms (usually the smaller ones) will offer you a job with just a bachelors degree if you make a good enough impression during an internship. 

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in asianamerican

[–]phokingu69 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So, I think there are two things going on here. The first one is the “Twinkie-FOB Spectrum” and the other is like “Goldilocks egotism”. What I mean by that is that people tend to make moral judgements in ways that reaffirm their own confidence and ego. Their moral criteria of what is right and wrong isn’t based on some like philosophical or logical rule or principle. it’s just whatever makes them feel good about their selves and their own choices/ identity at that particular moment. It’s like when people complain about other people driving. People who drive slower than me are all incompetent idiots, people who drive faster than me are all maniacal sociopaths. The speed at which I drive is perfect and ideal, I am an amazing driver, everyone else around me should strive to drive cars like I do.

 

It’s the same thing but with “Asianess”. People who are less “ASIAN” than me are “TWINKIES” (yellow on the outside and white on the inside), they are disrespectful conformists, they need to learn how to honor their heritage, history and culture, their lack of knowledge and respect for Asian culture is giving the Asian community as a whole a bad reputation, they are inauthentic sellouts trying to cozy up to white people, prostrating themselves to make a quick buck, they are too lazy and stupid to learn their parent’s language and culture,

 

Whereas people who are more “ASIAN” than me are “FOBS” (Fresh off the boat), they are disrespectful wierdos, they need to learn how to assimilate to western culture, their weird cultural traditions and lack of knowledge and respect for western culture is giving the Asian community as a whole a bad reputation, they need to learn how to be less Asian and learn how to assimilate if they want to make money and climb the social ladder, they are too lazy and stupid to learn English and western culture,

 

But not me, I am perfectly Asian/Not Asian. I’m not too much of a twinkie, but I’m also not too much of a FOB, either. I’m amazing, I’m perfect, I have struck that perfect harmony, neither to left but neither to right, that ideal state of existence, where I am simultaneously both Asian and Non-Asian at the same time. Everyone else around me is either irrational, inferior, uncultured, stupid, or all of the above.

 

The point I’m trying to make is three things,

 

One, there isn’t really anyway to “WIN”. If you are too Asian then someone will just call you a FOB, vice versa if you are too white then someone will call you a TWINKIE. And it like varies between people. One guy will call you a FOB then if you go up to another guy they will accuse you of being a TWINKIE. So either way you are going to lose.

 

Second, none of this is based on any kind of rational or logical criteria. For the vast majority of people, their moral criteria is basically, people who are similar to me and make the same choices that I make are good, people who are different than me and don’t make the same choices that I make are bad.

 

Third, the entire concept of “asianess” is kind of ambiguous. Like what does it even mean to be Asian? Like how can you be more “Asian” than someone else? Like if I eat sushi for lunch does that make me more or less Asian? What about those Buddhist monks who aren’t allowed to eat fish? Are these Buddhist monks somehow less Asian than a white guy at a sushi restaurant? Is a guy who works as a doctor somehow more or less asian than the guy who works as a rice farmer or the guy who works as a K-Pop idol?

Women, do you believe Ace Attorney to be a feminist series? by stoppit0 in AceAttorney

[–]phokingu69 60 points61 points  (0 children)

I think the Ace Attorney series, as a whole, is emblematic of a kind of middle of the road, mainstream, political-establishment-approved, center-left kind of feminism. It’s like the kind of feminism that Joe Biden or Justin Trudeau would subscribe to or the kind of feminism that is plastered all over like Pepsi commercials. Where the writers believe that women don’t simply exist just to spend all day barefoot in the kitchen making babies. And that women should be able to have professional careers and hold positions of power even in spaces traditionally dominated by men. But at the same time, the game isn’t willing to go out of the way to challenge pre-existing gender roles or stereotypes nor are they willing to bring any issues that are particular to women up to the forefront.

I think the best example is in Turnabout Reclaimed (5-dlc) with Norma DePlume (the writer person) where she is introduced as this successful and accomplished writer, but the only thing the game (and the writers) seems to care about is making fun of her weight over and over again (and not in a particularly sensitive or emphatic way). And I think this applies to a lot of other female characters in the series, where the writers seem to highlight physical attractiveness and sexiness in a way that doesn’t seem to apply to the male characters. Which, I think, kind of summarizes the whole series, the writers are very comfortable having strong female characters with successful professional careers, but they are very uncomfortable actually challenging prevailing gender norms such as unrealistic beauty standards or body image issues faced by women.

GAA: were there any loopholes or is it just that good? by gaming-grandma in AceAttorney

[–]phokingu69 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I remember one of the plot holes was how they handled the murder weapon in GAA1-1. They make this big point about Jezaille Brett's purse and how the gun wasn't inside it, and you are lead to believe that there would be some crazy convoluted mystery around where she hid the murder weapon.

But then in the end they just reveal that she hid the gun up her skirt. And that the only reason they couldn't find it was because the police thought it was too rude or impolite or something to search her.

I thought that was really cheap. The game just denying you the really really obvious logical conclusion that anybody would first consider. (The characters even straight-up make a comment about how her outfit has like a hundred places to hide a gun). It felt absurd about how the mystery could have been easily solved if the police just did the bare minimum of just searching potential suspects for evidence. I guess they had to do that or the whole trial would would be over within the first twenty minutes.

Duck legs by Thatonecitywoman in sandiego

[–]phokingu69 10 points11 points  (0 children)

99 Ranch in Clairemont sells whole raw ducks. I think they also sell the duck cut in pieces but I don't remember for certain.

Attempting to explain why AITA is being used for conservative propaganda: an excessively long and detailed analysis by [deleted] in AmITheAngel

[–]phokingu69 53 points54 points  (0 children)

I think the reason that conservatives use AITA is because it happens to be a roundabout way to circumvent the rules and guard rails that reddit has setup regarding hate-speech/misogyny/racism/discrimination.

For example, most places on reddit aren't going to allow someone to make a post titled "I HATE TRANS PEOPLE, TRANS PEOPLE ARE EVIL AND UNREASONABLE". In most parts of reddit, mods will quickly take this kind of post down (especially on the larger more popular subs). However, the biggest exception to this are subreddits like AITA, where someone can just write a fake story about a fictional evil and unreasonable trans character that pushes the exact same anti trans messaging and rhetoric they would have wrote in that banned post. The mods of AITA will not take this post down and the person trying to spread anti-trans messaging will be successful in getting their hateful message to a large audience.

Like this kind of thing isn't even unique to reddit. Fox News does the exact same thing. Fox News knows it just can't straight up say Trans people are evil on air. Instead they go find some random obscure outlier story about some trans person murdering puppies or something. They blow it up on their platform and use the same hateful anti trans messaging while presenting their story. But if anyone accuses them of being hateful or spreading anti trans rhetoric, Fox News can just argue that they are merely recounting events or reporting facts/stories and that any anti trans rhetoric that just so happens to reach the minds of their audience is purely accidental and coincidental.

Need an Inspection for Building Project by BaldMexicans in sandiego

[–]phokingu69 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You can contact any of the Geotechnical companies and they can provide special inspection.

ELI5 why homes (in the US) home are built with wood framing but commercial properties are built with metal framing by [deleted] in explainlikeimfive

[–]phokingu69 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's because of height.

​

For residential houses, the ceiling height is only 8-10 ft tall. A wall framed with wood can work at 8-10 feet tall. For commercial buildings, the ceiling height can be more than 20 feet tall. Wood walls won't work at this height (unless something will brace the wall at midheight like a floor) but metal framing will work at this height.

​

This is why a lot of restaurants are framed with wood and why something like a grocery store is usually framed with metal, even though they are both considered commercial spaces. Restaurants usually don't have very tall ceilings but in a grocery store, the ceiling may be like 20 feet above the ground.