MeepsTheBard

There are no friends in Mario Kart, only those I have yet to betray.

Treat the rest as a dedicated, specifically-timed “thing to do” instead of just “time I need to kill until I pick this weight up again.”

Timers are helpful, as people mentioned, but stretching, evaluating how that last set went/ how next set needs to go, changing weights, and walking around to catch your breath are great ways to stay mostly on track.

And if you check Twitter after switching songs or something? That’s fine. Working out slowly > not working out, so unless you’re annoying other gymgoers with 20-min squat-rack scroll sessions , I wouldn’t sweat a mental lapse.

EDIT: Ope, I think I misread your comment to mean “between sets” and not just “going to the gym,” my b.

It HAS to be a habit. Go to the gym because it’s novel and you want to try it out, then try your damnedest to make it a routine. Make it feel weird to not work out. If you fall off the wagon, try again.

If neurotypicals fail to be consistent (see every New Year’s resolution), you can give yourself enough grace to stumble, too.

It’s common in states that have a lower population center, geographically. I’m in Minnesota, and our Twin Cities are in the southern third of the state.

“Going up north (to the cabin)” is our spin on “upstate”, because (for most people) there isn’t much of a reason to go much more north than we already do.

The people making the big decisions aren’t the ones working. They’re the ones put in charge to make money for investors, who want monthly returns. Not “here’s what will get us 1XX% growth in 6-8 years,” but now.

And you’d think this would only be the case with public companies, but private equity is gobbling up quality companies and milking them dry by cutting costs and abusing their brand’s good name. People want returns on their investments QUICK these days.

You sound really sure about your understanding of statistics and probability, and I don’t think anything I can say can impact that. I’m going to defer to the experts, but you do you I guess.

The thing about long-term predictions (at least ones that get publicity) is that usually the goal is to change them, so few have been “proven”. No one is printing stories about how an isolated set of rocks is going to be decayed by X% due to weather, because no one cares.

Except birth rates aren’t physics that will progress if left alone, they’re dominated by cultural choices that are impacted by economics and governmental policy.

Exactly. Those are the factors that are being considered when making these predictions. If economic factors and policies are making it harder to have kids, then birth rates drop, which is what we’re seeing now. What else is going to have as much of an effect?

These predictions don’t exist to take bets on. They’re not scrying into the future. They’re just binoculars that point to where we’re going.

No, they just need to be kept in that context. We trusted science on chlorofluorocarbons impacting the ozone layer, and chose to fix it rather than let it keep going. Was the projection “wrong” because CFCs were regulated, or did we just interact with it in a practical way?

The same applies here. There’s a population issue that (as you mentioned in another comment) without other factors, will come into effect. China can fix it, or let things play out and see if the “unknowns” can fix it for them.

“AI isn’t good enough to replace workers yet, but it’s good enough to convince CEOs it can.”

You’re correct, and I agree. It does shift dems to the right slightly. But again, it’s hyperbole to say dems are now “radical” on the border, which is what I was responding to.

Feel that. The hivemind on Lemmy can be brutal (coming from Reddit), since it’s a smaller community.

So now the dems endorse the radical rights position on the border. You don’t see how that’s an issue?

Equating “letting the opposition party fuck themselves as they try to pass a bill THEY don’t even want” to actively endorsing extreme policy is hyperbole.

At a very surface level you’re correct, but using that to state that the entire democratic party has abandoned their morals is absurd.

I think they were commenting on how people seem to be zealots for Firefox on Lemmy, despite having some (reasonable) flaws. Despite this news, I’d bet a lot of them will continue. Not a pro-Chrome stance by any means.

(I had to block the Firefox and Linux subs day 1 because of how much anti-Chrome/ anti-Windows I saw).

Tru

2001 + 19 = 2020. Typos can be overcome using context clues.

Kaiju stand user?

B U L L S O N P A R A D E

Gonna wait for performance info at launch, and grab if it runs well. There’s basically no point waiting for professional reviews, since it’s such a love-it-or-hate-it gameplay loop. I really liked the first one (doing a replay now), so unless it comes to light that it’s now a MG:Survive clone or something, I should be alright 🤷

I already have tech tips, thanks tho

Just had to open a link in Teams and it ignored that Chrome was my default to launch Edge, then tried to set itself as the default for anything clicked in Teams.

I can easily see Microsoft doing something comparably shitty for people opening links in Word or PowerPoint. If not for Apple’s even more egregious ecosystem practices (among other things) I’d be very tempted to switch.

It’s environmental geopolitics 🤷 seeing widespread adoption of a policy that the US (Reagan) ignored get traction in Ireland helps highlight how shortsighted that view was. Considering the US has had a small hand in building the world’s energy supply, it seems at least tangential to remind people why such policies have existed.

Lots of tech companies saw huge growth during covid thanks to everyone having extra money to spend (see crypto and NFTs if you want clear examples that we just had too much laying around).

Many of these companies then saw their revenue and userbase increase month-after-month and thought the growth was going to continue forever (or, more cynically, they knew it was going to crash but acted like it was going to continue). This led to a bunch of hires to “drive growth.”

But obviously, pandemic spending habits have mostly stopped, and the money faucet is being turned off. Companies can’t afford all the workers they hired, so they’re “let go due to market downturns.”

TL;DR Companies either thought they were going to have unrealistic growth and made dumb hiring decisions, or knew the growth was going to end and thus made cruel hiring decisions.