GodzlIIa t1_jebm9lc wrote

Would this be considered an ULPT?

EDIT: I mean I assume that the seller is the one who sets the discount price for subscription, and I bet they did that based off of what they would benefit for further purchases. Not everyone selling on Amazon IS amazon.

That being said I have no idea how it works. Its possible that amazon reimburses the discount amount to the seller if the customer cancels like OP is doing, but I doubt it.

Also I think OP blocked me, so I can't reply to anyone in this thread.

Edit for ShadeBaron Cause OP blocked me: Unethical does not mean prohibited or illegal. Many things can be unethical without being illegal or prohibited, and likewise something can be ethical despite actually being illegal.

Also I want to point out that I was not suggesting that it is for sure unethical, just was opening it up for discussion. For instance using a trial with 1 month free and cancelling after the first month, I do not see that to be unethical, and I can see how this can be a similar idea. And I do not think there is a situation where they would ever discount it so much so that they are losing money, considering the discount is applied to every order they would never make money off of you.


GodzlIIa t1_jdlogl3 wrote

Yea I guess I did not mean to downplay it. Saying its the biggest discovery in human history probably would be true. I just don't think people would kill themselves over it. We don't really think we are special in the universe in any way as it is, so I don't see how being in a simulation would make that much different.


GodzlIIa t1_jdln68s wrote

>I don’t think AI will ever be able to completely replicate human emotions

I mean thats a crazy statement to say it can NEVER get there. But saying it wont get their in our lifetimes or our grandchildrens lifetimes, or even in humanity's lifetime if you think we are gonna kill ourselves soon, might be reasonable.


GodzlIIa t1_j8qh5zj wrote

Reply to comment by VapidActions in Tortoise vs Hare by toonhole

Yes so up would mean radially outward. And yea I usually just hear it referred to as the Coriolis effect instead of force.

I'm familiar with doing calculations for an object south/north bound but I don't recall with one travelling vertically upward.

So if I think about it since the angular velocity is constant as you travel vertically but the tangential velocity is not, that would mean a bullet fired up would eventually be travelling slower then the air around it with its East/west component of tangential velocity. Which would push it, but then on the way down I can't help but feel it would have the opposite effect and kind of cancel out.

SO in the northern hemisphere if I shoot a bullet up (radially outward) which direction would it land? Perhaps I'm not understanding it.


GodzlIIa t1_j8p2s54 wrote

Reply to comment by alxwx in Tortoise vs Hare by toonhole

Bullets fired straight up reach terminal velocity on their way down due to air resistance, so this would only happen if there wasn't air resistance. i.e in a vacuum.

(not to undermine lots of people being hurt my stray bullets fired into the air, but they aren't fired straight up)


GodzlIIa t1_j62zxeh wrote

I cant think of a solution that would be faster then filling the holes individually. If you roll joint compound I imagine you are still going to need to smooth it out, and unless you are good at that it would probably be a pain.

What kind of nail holes, are they small? One idea I can think of is just get a texture hopper and spray the compound on instead. Id do a light/fine texture pattern but just spray it on heavy till the holes are covered lol. Would still probably be longer then filling them individually as you would have to do the whole wall to make it even.


GodzlIIa t1_j570lr5 wrote

Reply to comment by rba22 in Will Pluto ever be a planet? by twurbster

Thats the difference between "would it ever be recognized as a planet again" vs "will it ever be a planet again". It was NEVER a planet based on current definitions, but it was called a planet in the past.

Is OP asking if definitions might change calling it a planet, or is op asking will it somehow fit current definitions in the future.


GodzlIIa t1_iyaa2cp wrote

I imagine the answer to op's question would be whether or not its healthy like you stated.

>At the other end of the spectrum I’ve read about someone who died of starvation while still obese.

Was this person in a trial where they were getting the necessary vitamins/electrolytes or were they just fasting on their own? And how long? I am curious but there doesn't seem to be a lot of studies like with Angus.

>The problem is that there is no protein coming in

I am pretty sure some of the supplements Angus was taking included amino acids.