hiricinee

hiricinee t1_j4oua3u wrote

If you're doing casual hookups that's going to be collateral damage a lot of the time. Just don't do repeats with guys like that and you're pretty guilt free. In the scope of guys sleeping around, you being just one of the guys that gets with him is not going to be the thing that breaks things.

4

hiricinee t1_j2ee9u4 wrote

For the record op her name is Brunhilde, not to be confused with the long running comic strip "broom hilda" of a similar name likely an allusion to the same opera character.

On that note, he's likely an abolitionist but that's not the focus of the story at all, even if it has parallels. There's certainly plenty of animus from the main cast for how the slave owners terribly treat their slaves, but while that might be related to abolitionism it's not exactly the same thing.

1

hiricinee t1_j25a0w8 wrote

You thought the ghost of Steve Jobs was going to put up with this bullshit? He didn't design the IPhone so that some 17 year old living down the street could fix it for 60 bucks.

29

hiricinee t1_j1wf7bx wrote

My favorite thing about the novel is that it generally doesn't attempt to paint the totalitarian government worse than it has to. It even gives a measured case for freedom- if you really want out from the prescribed lifestyle, you're going to have to face pain and a lot of unpleasant things.

Also does a great job of having the Sci fi - fantasy bridge, which is generally better in my opinion when a work is Sci fi first then fantasy second (think about the Force in Star Wars.) You have the perfectly explained technological and science based universe- and then the wizards show up and no one knows what to do with them.

2

hiricinee t1_j0yk0xx wrote

Rare Earth+ Fermi Paradox. Life exists only on Earth as far as we know so far, anything else is speculation. I like it as the "Very lucky gambler" phenomenon-- a guy buys a lottery ticket 15 times and wins 10 million dollars 15 times. He then assumes that other people can win the lottery just like he did.

4

hiricinee t1_iy2rgm2 wrote

IT is NOT the over saturation of O2. Theres a relative plateau you reach as you hyperventilate in terms of how much O2 you can accumulate (and its pretty close to what you live at normally) but your body is able to blow off a tremendous amount of CO2, which is an acidic compound. As you blow it off your blood becomes more alkaline, which causes some temporary problems-- dizziness, weakness, more anxiety, and carpopedal spasms. If you ever see someone in a BAD panic attack they will sometimes feel cramping in the feet and hands, or even contract the muscles in their feet and hands. It tends to make them panic more and slowing down their breathing is pretty much the only way to turn it around.

Divers actually take advantage of this sometimes, they hyperventilate before a dive to suppress their respiratory drive by blowing off CO2, but it can be kind of a risky technique because your oxygen level doesnt really rise that much.

O2 toxicity tends to only happen with overdelivery of oxygen, on room air its pretty difficult to accomplish.

6

hiricinee t1_iy0dbvw wrote

It's not hard to imagine, going as far back as you can, a highly successful hunter/gatherer tribe where a kid indulged on berries and meat until they got big enough to start puberty early. It'd be a lot harder without calorie dense foods, but the idea that a body can overweight itself into early puberty was still a real thing.

9

hiricinee t1_ixzzrfn wrote

That's just it. The body is essentially made to survive, reproduce, and take care of offspring until they can do the same. Obesity from an evolutionary standpoint is a sign of success, or at least a sign that there's enough resources to go ahead reproducing. The biggest concern to the body reproducing until the last 120 years was not having enough calories to survive (or calorie proxies.)

72

hiricinee t1_ixz25so wrote

It depends on your definition of modifiable. There's plenty of people who are obese that would insist its not modifiable, and plenty of people who changed their behavior and were able to fix their depression or at least reduce it.

Tbh, if there is literature that exists suggesting you can correct something with changes in behavior, it's at least I'm part modifiable, and that literature DOES exist regarding depression.

8

hiricinee t1_iwymxv3 wrote

Right but now it gets INCREDIBLY subjective. Not that the aesthetic events aren't subjective at all, but usually its a series of moves that are scored based on execution and landing. You're going to score a guy based on how nuts he can make the crowd go?

Itd be pointless anyways. They already have the subjective scoring system, its the ratings for their programming. Is the IOC going to have a panel for scoring pro wrestling promos?

By the way, I'm a MASSIVE pro wrestling fan, but olympic pro would have to be so watered down it would be boring as hell. How long can the matches be? What moves are legal? Whats the degree of difficulty on the moves? Often the most technically difficult wrestling moves aren't the most impressive. Is every match going to boil down to a 110 lb guy doing a shooting star press?

9

hiricinee t1_iwyii0k wrote

I like it, the problem with Jericho's premise is that all of the aesthetic sports can usually be simplified into a few "moves" that get scored. As much fun as it is seeing a perfectly executed dropkick, powerbomb, clothesline, etc, theres waaaaay too much variety for it to get in there.

Also consider this-- it is about as rare to be a WWE champ as it is to be an olympic gold medalist. With a few exceptions the title is given to exceptional performers who are highly competitive to work their way up the rankings, and even the exceptions tend to be highly talented in their own right.

16

hiricinee t1_iwgooeq wrote

1