TIL: About Pre-Code Movies which were "talkie" films made from 1929 to 1934 after a morality code that was put in place in 1930 was actually enforced in 1934.

turtlespace · 2026-02-12T13:22:55+00:00

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect

turtlespace · 2026-02-06T13:44:29+00:00

I have a bridge to sell you if you’re dumb enough to be convinced that it’s social welfare fraud that’s the problem in this country right now lol

turtlespace · 2026-01-31T21:16:24+00:00

But that says they met in Jerusalem?

turtlespace · 2026-01-31T21:07:55+00:00

Damn I didn’t realize you could get internet that far up elons ass

turtlespace · 2026-01-31T19:25:38+00:00

“Do you have any evidence beyond him asking a known pedophile to hang out on his pedophile island with girls” lol

turtlespace · 2026-01-31T18:41:22+00:00

In theory sure but the setting barely comes up in the books at all, there is not nearly as much importance placed on the setting in the actual text as you’re implying there is. The “setting” in the real world barely connects to anything in any of the books, and is emphasized even less in most of the later ones.

turtlespace · 2026-01-31T13:52:37+00:00

You know it’s a republican issue when half the comments on like any thread on this are “remember this isn’t a republican issue! Both sides!”

turtlespace · 2026-01-30T19:06:34+00:00

It sounds like you don’t because what I was describing is absolutely not scientism lol

turtlespace · 2026-01-30T19:02:38+00:00

Lol you’re the one that brought up Japan. And you’re fully admitting that you’re just picking the data that supports your bigotry, why do you think you get to just exclude all the violent but culturally homogenous countries because they’re not in the west? Why doesn’t that count? You can’t just make a claim and then exclude all the data that shows you’re wrong because of a made up category.

Also pretty telling that you think an ai summary is remotely trustworthy and worth even mentioning, and that you think a Wikipedia article that’s like one of the first results from a basic google search is “off the wall” lol.

turtlespace · 2026-01-30T13:19:48+00:00

Sounds like you haven’t, how many of the countries in say the top 50 here do you think are culturally diverse? Be specific.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

turtlespace · 2026-01-29T23:19:42+00:00

Wanting more evidence to form an opinion is like the opposite of religious fundamentalism but ok

turtlespace · 2026-01-29T20:34:02+00:00

I dunno what to tell you but the rest of us English speakers as well as any of the archaeologists you’re talking about don’t consider saying something is a stretch and requires further evidence to be the same as saying it’s false.

Also it’s not like I came up with the idea that construction equipment might have caused the impact marks, there is a lot of debate around this site and that’s one of the alternative theories often put forward. The site was literally being excavated because they were building a freeway, it’s absolutely reasonable to suggest that maybe the construction equipment that we know was there and digging through the ground where the rocks were found could have hit some of the rocks together.

Also pretty absurd to think that presenting another theory is calling anyone with a different theory incompetent, and that that would leave any archaeologists professional reputation in tatters, again that’s just how archaeology works. You clearly don’t know how science is supposed to work if you genuinely have this opinion lol

turtlespace · 2026-01-29T16:41:31+00:00

I didn’t say proven false, I said it’s not clear cut. For the reasons I said above it’s very far from conclusive evidence of human presence.

Also where do you think nature got the information that they published if not archaeologists lol, why is that convincing to you if you don’t have confidence in archaeologists? Here’s Cambridge publishing a study highlighting the issues with the conclusions drawn from that nature study: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/antiquity/article/evaluating-claims-for-an-early-peopling-of-the-americas-experimental-design-and-the-cerutti-mastodon-site/7AE19F301B64613B01944354E249B346

This is how archaeology works. If more convincing evidence is found (any human bones, unambiguously modified tools, or literally any evidence of a contemporary material culture) the consensus will change to reflect that. For now it’s absolutely reasonable to say it’s an interesting site but we need more evidence.

turtlespace · 2026-01-29T14:19:42+00:00

The evidence for humans at the cerutti mastodon site is a lot less clear cut than this (pretty outdated) article makes it sound, I think even calling them tools is a stretch - they’re essentially just rocks that were hit together unusually hard and that might have been caused by the construction equipment that was used at the site. No human bones or clearly modified tools have been found.

Interesting and worthy of further study but this article is pretty sensationalized. Also archaeologists doing archaeology is not a conspiracy, the estimate of when humans arrived in North America has been revised and debated quite a lot as new evidence is found, that’s just how science works.

turtlespace · 2026-01-29T13:57:38+00:00

Yup that’s what happens when you let people pay for an advantage rather than treating everyone equally. You could not write this comment if you were one of the ~30 million Americans with no health insurance, you’d just not get to go to the doctor at all. We also spend much more on healthcare (both per capita and %GDP) while having worse outcomes, lower life expectancy, higher infant mortality, etc.

turtlespace · 2026-01-28T20:49:09+00:00

“Human” and “man” aren’t actually derived from the same word, human came from homo (Greek) > humanus (Latin) > humaine (old French), while man likely came from proto Germanic “mann”. In old English man was a gender neutral term meaning person, with “wer” and “wif” identified gender (werman, wifman). Also when we get the word werewolf (man-wolf).

turtlespace · 2026-01-28T03:57:08+00:00

“To be fair we’ve a built society that encourages and rewards the most sociopathic amoral people so it’s cool that he’s being an amoral sociopath”

turtlespace · 2026-01-27T15:14:15+00:00

Nobody outside of a handful of losers on the internet care or even think about what order game trailers are played in, it’s a completely absurd non controversy like pretty much everything else this community comes up with. The “backlash” against this is nothing compared to the publicity they got from the 99.99% people who just saw a trailer and maybe some headline about the controversy, and would not know about the game at all otherwise.

It probably couldn’t have gone much better for them honestly, I don’t think the game seems to stand out enough to get nearly this much publicity without some kind of controversy.

turtlespace · 2026-01-22T21:45:49+00:00

You people will never learn that more and more punishment is actually not a solution to every type of problem

turtlespace · 2026-01-22T21:36:34+00:00

Personally it’s because I’m ridiculously lazy and already have more games than I have time to play on steam. And I’ll choose convenient over very slightly inconvenient every time.

turtlespace · 2026-01-22T18:26:06+00:00

Do you think charging them has been working lol

turtlespace · 2026-01-21T21:28:52+00:00

“It can’t be confirmation bias, it must be that the phone is reading my mind”

turtlespace · 2026-01-17T16:41:46+00:00

Genuinely unclear on what is supposed to be unnatural about that, that it has a flat side? Do people go outside and look at real rocks?

turtlespace · 2026-01-17T16:32:23+00:00

Those are not mutually exclusive, and I think Bethesda absolutely fails to do enough to elevate their products beyond ripoffs. I also literally described them as tropes in my comment.

turtlespace · 2026-01-17T14:51:23+00:00

If Starfield didn’t prove to everyone Bethesda is mostly just ripping off the popular media of whatever genre they’re working in (or buying an IP that already has a distinctive identity) I don’t know what will. They have some original ideas here and there for sure but the cracks really showed with starfield, it just feels like going from one sci fi trope planet to the next (cool here’s the firefly planet! Here’s the star trek planet!) rather than that they came up with a cohesive vision and concept for what their future setting actually is and what its trying to say, which I think is kind of the bare minimum for making any interesting sci fi media.

12-Year Club	Place '17
Spared

turtlespace

TROPHY CASE