Uhh, okay. Plenty of people I know can point out attractive people without it turning into a fight. This is toxic.

Not really? As lightnsfw said, even if you’re monogamous you should be able to notice attractive people without it turning into a fight.

I’m in an open marriage with a slightly bi woman, and these boomer-tier memes are always so funny to me. We look at women together, and when she asks if I want to sleep with them it feels more like coaxing than a trap.

I feel like it would be difficult to translate the footnotes and layers to the story.

This reminds me that I need to finish House of Leaves.

Worrying about it won’t prevent it from happening, it’s just going to make you feel bummed out about something you can’t change.

Focus on enjoying your life, so that in your final moments your last thoughts are “Bummer, ah well, I had a good run”.

30 something male, average is 1-2 times a day. Some days it’s none, some days I get those demons in me. Down from 3-4 per day when I was younger, and some of those were deliberately prolonged sessions. Still do that now and then, but I’ve got shit to do most of the time.

I am married, but her libido only really spikes once or twice a week so that doesn’t affect much. When I had multiple partners I almost never masturbated, but I was having sex multiple times per day, so.

For me, I’ve got a million interests. I could change and learn this one thing, but that would take time away from learning about other, more personally interesting things.

I can think of several use-cases: subtitles for the hearing impaired, translation, AR overlays for technical work, etc. Not saying they’re a good value, but it seems weird to say there’s no use-case.

And I genuinely don’t understand the pervert angle. What do they do for perverts that can’t be done with much cheaper button/pen cameras, or even a phone in your breast pocket?

Like sure, there are problems with surveillance and ads and other nasty tech bro shit, that much is obvious. But I sincerely do not understand why they’re being called pervert glasses. Am I missing something?

I like the idea of Fair Witnesses: people who were trained to impartially observe in order to give reliable testimony.

Riven is great, probably my favorite in the series. You should definitely play it as soon as you get the chance.

But I think you’re a bit off the mark with descriptive books. It’s not VR, it’s a teleporter. When you write an Age in a book, you’re not creating it, you’re describing it. When the book is detailed enough, it opens a portal to an existing world that matches your description.

It’s pretty explicitly based on the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, with infinite worlds lying on The Great Tree of Possibilities.

This is reinforced by a few details:

• You can’t write contradictions into an Age. The book will try to link to a world that matches your description, but that world is going to be extremely unstable if it works at all.

• Altering a descriptive book is very risky. You can write changes after you’ve been to an Age assuming you’ve never observed anything that would contradict the change(the idea being that the waveform of possibility is still a bit in flux concerning details not previously mentioned), but it’s very difficult to pull off and you need to be really really good at writing books to not break something.

• It’s generally a bad idea to try to write technology into an Age. Yeah infinite worlds, but artificial features are so specific you have difficulty finding a good match

Yo I made this exact joke 8 hours ago. Do we know each other?

Construction is a factor, but outside of my relatively short commute, I always use GPS, even when I know how to get there, to minimize traffic.

Like sure, I can get there without it, but if I use it I can be pretty sure I’m on the route that’s fastest *right now".

From what I’ve replayed in recent years, yeah not great. But it certainly inspired me to question narratives, which has actually been quite beneficial.

If you really want to get your money’s worth it should always end in 8

It’s not even really 5° increments, it’s typically 25°. Ovens can’t really hold temp much more precisely than that, and even if they could you wouldn’t notice much of a difference. 342° is gonna behave basically the same as 359°.

For a lot of those sorts of products, the expiration date is for the container. The salt will be fine for thousands of years, but the plastic might start leeching into it much sooner. That’s why bottled water has a Use By date.

I want a job that pays my bills and gives me a bit of savings and spending money. Beyond that, I’m hesitant to take on more responsibility, difficulty, and headaches unless the pay bump is substantial. If my pay is below a comfortable level, I’d rather have a raise. If the pay is decent but the job is currently stressful, I’d rather have less difficulty for the same pay.

Granted, that assumes that the job doesn’t frequently experience scope creep. If the stress reduction is nominal before reverting back to pre-adjusted levels or higher, more money is better than temporary relief.

Sure, I can only go off what I’ve read. Would you like to recommend a textbook which goes into making predictions when playing a game with irrational players?

What? Players acting rationally is one of the core assumptions of game theory. Sure there are some models that attempt to account for irrationality, but the conclusions are obviously much less definitive.

It can’t really be any other way, perfectly rational actors are predictable in a mathematical way. Irrational actors are irrational in many different ways. One irrational actor might betray a fellow prisoner purely out of spite, another might refuse to speak purely out of a sense of loyalty. Another might make a decision compulsively without any strategy at all.

Irrational players cannot be analyzed mathematically. You cannot find a dominant strategy playing against irrational players, at least not a non-trivial one. Sure you can try to analyze them, but then you’ve left math behind and have wandered into psychology or sociology.

The problem with game theory is that it assumes everyone involved is perfectly rational.