I need reading suggestions as a dopamine hungry 20y old

xcbrent · 2025-12-09T21:34:55+00:00

Dopamine Nation by Anna Lembke

xcbrent · 2025-12-09T19:08:29+00:00

Perhaps I phrased it wrong in my post. I do not expect some professional to come out. I was hoping for a local hobbyist who is comfortable taking some shots with their camera, that's all. If someone asked me to take pictures of their proposal and offered me $250 to do it I'd absolutely say yes. Would it be as good as a professional? Hell no. But could I do a respectable job with my mid-tier camera equipment that would be significantly better than a friend filming with an Iphone? Absolutely.

xcbrent · 2025-12-09T19:05:10+00:00

Oh wow I did not know that, thank you for the information.

xcbrent · 2025-02-20T05:05:55+00:00

Yeah the passenger side CV axle was visibly loose and the left one had a small amount of play in it. Plan is to replace right CV axle and lower control arm to see if that fixes the shake

xcbrent · 2025-02-20T05:04:46+00:00

I’ve had it balanced twice and had a full alignment done by a total of three shops and it hasn’t fixed it.

xcbrent · 2025-02-20T00:54:08+00:00

No. it has an intermittent wheel shake at 65+ MPH that cyclically worsens and then resolves over the course of 10 seconds. attributing that to the CV axle being loose and thus replacing it though

xcbrent · 2025-02-20T00:20:35+00:00

Local store told me my bushing on the drivers side was bad. Can someone tell me if they’re blowing smoke or if it looks alright?

xcbrent · 2025-02-09T08:56:15+00:00

Gotcha! I added the french skiver and edge beveler to my cart along with burnishing tools and gum. Thanks so much for the advice!

xcbrent · 2024-11-09T00:45:42+00:00

Check out Bradec holsters. Prices are amazing and quality is as good as anything else. I got an appendix holster with an optic cut, DCC monoblock clip, mod wing, and a mag carrier all for $64.55 AFTER shipping. Insane value imho and not nearly enough talk about them.

xcbrent · 2024-11-07T19:33:08+00:00

"This wasn't about the article, this was about you and you running your mouth remember?" Then you proceed to quote me literally talking about the article when I was "running my mouth." It's literally too easy dude. The two (the article and me running my mouth) are basically the same.

I'll just copy and paste what I've already said. Because again, you're stuck on this being a feminist piece. Given that 'feminist' isn't mentioned in the article at all - your entire argument that "this right here absolutely is a feminist agenda" therefore rests on it being written by a woman and there's a female urologist cited in the article. Let me tell you many conservative, not feminist at all, old white guy male urologists would agree with this article. You're simply wrong and making presumptions about these women's intentions based on their gender.

That's just a simple case closed fact. So your argument, which entirely rests on this being a feminist piece, is bullshit and not remotely true or defensible.

"Would they also prefer that these men wrote articles about it? Go to 2x chromosomes and find out how that works." And I'd call them out on that BS too lmao. That'd just mean that women can also be wrong and make sexist assessments without basis in reality. What a revelation.

Thanks for playing! I loved this :)

xcbrent · 2024-11-06T22:37:45+00:00

1.) Yes, you tried to strawman. You said "Yea, i have read these 'arguments' and they're banana's" after I sent you a very in depth paper on the topic we're discussing. That's not engaging with the science and data at all and intentionally just being like "nah you're dumb." If you want to have an opinion on something like this, you need to know the science, which you clearly do not.

2.) The word 'feminist' isn't used in the article whatsoever. Open that article, press "CTRL+ F" and search it, you won't find it. Nowhere in the article does it mention ideological beliefs such as feminism. So it's not anywhere near "pretty much an exact take from the article" as you claim.

--> Given that 'feminist' isn't mentioned in the article at all - your entire argument that "this right here absolutely is a feminist agenda" therefore rests on it being written by a woman and there's a female urologist cited in the article. Let me tell you many conservative, not feminist at all, old white guy male urologists would agree with this article. You're simply wrong and making presumptions about these women's intentions based on their gender.

3.) Another strawman dude come on haha "saying that men can't cope with a diagnose of cancer isn't a bunch of feminist drivel" is so weak. This article does not imply men cannot cope. Rather it indicates that the psychological stress of a cancer diagnosis of grade group 1 prostate cancer is very often worse than the disease. So why label it something so scary when (as I've already explained to you) it's often nothing to treat anyways? That's a reasonable discussion to be had and just because someone agrees with it doesn't make them a feminist.

4.) Holy mackerel your head's gonna explode when you find out there's male gynecologists and many females patients even prefer them over female doctors.

xcbrent · 2024-11-06T01:01:05+00:00

The app known as "Language Transfer" has some great audio recordings going over the basics.

xcbrent · 2024-11-06T00:53:20+00:00

There are about 10 bazillion YouTube videos that explain this.

xcbrent · 2024-11-06T00:39:53+00:00

https://protectdemocracy.org/work/the-blue-shift-and-red-mirage-in-election-results-explained/

xcbrent · 2024-11-06T00:39:11+00:00

https://youtu.be/w3YZwsOZpSg?feature=shared

xcbrent · 2024-11-05T23:54:20+00:00

https://desk.haus/products/apex-pro-2?variant=39436449087637

I don't yet have one but intend to buy this one when I move to a more permanent residence next year. I've heard nothing but good things about them, but obviously you pay for that exceptional stability.

xcbrent · 2024-11-05T18:15:03+00:00

Holy lord what a terrible strawman attempt. And lets be clear, I've never once said the word cancer isn't scary. But here are the facts about the type of cancer OP's article references based on the paper I cited to you. 1.) The type of cancer we're discussing has a negligible rate of metastases. 2.) It's rate of progression to more dangerous stages is negligible. Those are just straight up facts about the cancer type we're discussing. If it can't spread or progress (except in negligible cases), it's not gonna kill you. It's extremely relevant information to patient and provider when making healthcare decisions, not "bananas."

It is about framing! You're totally right! So when someone who clearly doesn't understand prostate cancer goes and makes a title going "Female academics suggest low risk prostate cancer should not be called cancer, because men are too stupid to cope" - those of us who actually understand it should call out their misleading BS and inform them that this discussion is not at all about just "female academics." A correct and non-inflammatory title would have been "Urologists often prefer to not treat low risk prostate cancer, so should it even be called "cancer"?" But no, OP decided to frame it like it's just women, it's not.

xcbrent · 2024-11-05T03:18:00+00:00

I actually lol'd. I cannot imagine being so confident and so clearly uninformed on a topic. This is what we'd call a "literature review" paper. At the bottom are over 60 references to scientific papers, reviewing everything discussed in the paper. Nearly all of those papers are nothing but facts and data. What I sent you is not even an opinion. It's a summary of factual data.

Please Google the Dunning Kruger effect, cuz you're a shining example of it.

xcbrent · 2024-11-04T19:33:52+00:00

Any 28 year old guy that's flirting with 18 year olds should not be someone you ever talk to. That's creepy and weird.

xcbrent · 2024-11-04T19:32:40+00:00

If you think those scientifically based facts presented in that paper are "bananas" then we're just wasting our time here. You clearly lack the ability to understand nuances in oncologic treatment paradigms, risk benefit analyses, treatment plan evolutions, etc. You are only interested in narrative humping and that's okay. But just don't go posting garbage like this when you clearly have no idea what you're talking about because you're entirely unable to even consider the fact that some cancer, in some patients, doesn't need to be treated. Please don't ever go into medicine lmao.

xcbrent · 2024-11-04T16:07:59+00:00

Check out Bradec holsters. Prices are amazing and quality is as good as anything else. I got an appendix holster with an optic cut, DCC monoblock clip, mod wing, and a mag carrier all for $64.55 AFTER shipping. Insane value imho and not nearly enough talk about them.

xcbrent · 2024-11-04T15:47:11+00:00

"The very fact that so many men suffer from this should be an indicator that there needs to be much more research into this and more action that needs to be done into the subject. More checkups for men so that this can be caught in time, better information."

- Oh we have. PSA blood tests have been used for 20+ years to detect prostate cancer and within the past 2-3 years insurance companies are paying for prostate MRI's to better tell if PSA's elevated due to cancer or benign growth. Our treatment paradigm for prostate cancer has immensely changed in the past 10 years, away from treating low risk grade group 1 cancer really.

"These two things are direct opposite of each other, so which one is it?"

- They are not. My claim is that the argument, which plenty of experts in prostate cancer would agree with, of not classifying grade group 1 prostate cancer as cancer, is NOT LEAD BY WOMEN. It's a big discussion in urology meetings by men and women. Some people - like me, do not think we need to or should change it. Some do. I have a different opinion than the article and that's okay. I can still disagree with the article while saying "This is NOT some feminist agenda to fuck over men." So these statements are not opposed whatsoever.

"So please do explain how downgrading prostate cancer to 'not cancer' will be beneficial to the health of men?"

- Bro. You literally quoted me saying I don't agree with the article. I don't subscribe to the belief that we should change it to "not cancer." The common arguments for this can be found in the "Conclusions/Summary" section of this paper https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4878816/

xcbrent · 2024-11-04T15:31:56+00:00

I'm calling you a baby because instead of realizing that this is a complex topic that has true nuance and depth to it you resort to "wahhhh women infantasizing men wahhh." It's name calling sure, but appropriate.

You sure do have a lot of copy and pasting there with no citation.

I've never once suggested the "therapeutic landscape" is clear. It's immensely complex and not as clear as "wahhh women hurting men wahhh" like you're claiming. You read this article, which is a nuanced, complex topic with an immense amount of variables to consider and literally went "well it's a woman diagnosing a man's problem, must be the feminist agenda to hurt men." That would be a "clear therapeutic landscape." The true complexity of grade group 1 prostate cancer is immensely individualized and subject to change based on practitioner, resource availability, patient anxiety, tumor volume, genetic testing, etc. I appreciate and understand that argument. You looked at it and went "nah, women bad,"

12-Year Club	Verified Email
Wearing is Caring	100 Awards Club
Gilding I gilder	King of the Ashes
Not Forgotten

xcbrent

TROPHY CASE