Explained it the best. I hate what he did. I hate what a lot of people do. But I’m always sad to lose someone who had a chance to change.
It’s what the internet is worst at, forgiving. This person said awful things and did awful things, but if he hadn’t taken his life and had instead worked through this, I honestly believe that he would be someone alive and worth forgiving.
This doesn’t ever excuse the damage people do. I think that’s what people forget. You can forgive people without excusing their harm. But it’s always important that those who seek forgiveness both receive it AND receive it as they work to undo the harm if possible. Sometimes that won’t be possible.
It’s entirely possible that democrats will try to hold together what’s left of the Republican Party after 2024. Let me state some points first: -Trump is a massive populist, he has created new issues for voters and completely skewed the stance of the party -Trump also has demanded loyalty from congress. He has people in power who are far far far more dedicated to him than the party -It is unlikely that whatever happens in 2024 will be uneventful. Be it jail, re-election, whatever.
That all being said, Bush was incompetent and this road is long but yes the republicans have been losing for awhile now. They are unpopular and have arguably lost the majority of the vote for 30 years. Their issues are failing them. Their leader is morally bankrupt.
Another big reason is demographics. Their demographics have been aged older and older with time. But instead of fluctuations or slow decline, we’re seeing massive unpopularity with younger crowds.
This makes it very hard to pivot. They don’t have many ways to appeal to young voters without losing their older base. They lost themselves entirely over trump in 2016 and in 2020. Senators who didn’t support trump lost their support. So it’s clear that a lot of the future of the party hinges on trump winning 2024. And I view that as unlikely.
To your point about the US slide into fascism, thats why I think that this election is very very very important. Imagine what a post-second-term Trump presidential race would look like for a second. Trump is winning as the strong man. You think Dems would counter with someone reasonable? No. Both parties are putting up new people. And guess what? Neither are good and both are populists and both are young and hungry for power. I don’t need to tell everyone that someone like DeSantis would be absolutely insane, but I will. That’s the up and coming from republicans. That’s who sits behind trump next.
I have good news though. The house of cards that republicans are playing is obvious. It can and I’d say probably will crash if trump loses. If he loses, there is zero reason to pay him attention. Literally ignore him, doesn’t matter. Don’t have to follow his orders.
And trump is a fascist that will actually kill the platform itself in my view. I think he could topple the whole tower back down to where republicans can’t agree with each other. He also has the power to split the party.
Basically, the longer that the republicans fail or split, that’s when you’ll get to know the democrats better.
I don’t feel like a GED is even close to a good standard. Setting the GED as the bar is like setting the bar low enough to be in the hell they’re teaching kids about. But I guess it’s at least something.
Like we are comparing a GED here to people who have masters degrees and sometimes relevant training or degrees in what they teach. It’s like saying “hey if you want to perform an at home DIY surgery on your family, that’s fine, but please play this game of Operation first.”
Yes except the general population in the US does not care. We’ve proven that a significant portion of the population would rather do nothing than save the lives of thousands of people per day.
Isn’t it a civil trial tho and not a criminal trial? Meaning that the bar for evidence is just “more than likely” and not “beyond a reasonable doubt” right? I mean it’s still very damning but he has not (yet) been found guilty of the crime, just liable.
The sense that I got from Redfall was slightly different. Was some of the project mismanaged? Yes but that’s typical of almost any project. In fact, a lot of what Bethesda does that is successful also has mismanagement.
However, I believe that a big problem with Redfall was just that their ideas didn’t work. It spent awhile undergoing rewrites and redesigns trying desperately to find something that works. In the end, it got pushed out because they needed to be done with it and move on. They knew it wouldn’t make much money but they needed it to no longer be in production anymore.
This happens all the time. If you ever wonder why games get released and say “surely they knew this was broken before launch right?” The answer is almost certainly yes. They push it out because it’s stuck in development hell or it’s costing too much or can make some money back before dying internally.
So that’s what Redfall is. It’s a failure of a game that the studio pushed out to recoup whatever meager funds they could from development.
What’s more sad is that people won’t give those people a way out. I would rather go in a moment of peace and surrounded by family. Not wasting away and forgetting the world.
I guess I’ve become the 12hr clock simp here (I’m not tho, use whatever) so here I go.
Forget the minute hand. If I have a 24hr clock, the hours will be more crowded. Meaning that the per-hour angle of each number is halved. I’d imagine this somewhat limits clock design or runs the danger of being harder to tell which hour you’re actually on with a short hour hand. The numbers must be smaller and the hour hand must be longer for the same accuracy.
And yes you are losing technical accuracy with a 12hr clock. But a few things about this. Again it’s more about that humans actually experience time in smaller segments than 24 hours. You don’t experience a full 24hr day. You usually experience a smaller segment like 12-16 hours. This is especially true if you divide your time into day/night or work/leisure.
Now the obvious downside like you mentioned is the am/pm thing. However, that usually isn’t a problem and I don’t get how people would reference 24hr clocks in conversation. Do they say “yeah sure, we can grab drinks at eighteen hundred” or “eighteenth hour” or do they just say eighteen? (American problems).
It’s usually not a problem because context goes a very long way. If I ask you to grab lunch at 2, obviously it’s 2pm. If I ask to grab drinks at 8:30, it’s pm. Most social events come with a time context and most social events are in the afternoon. There’s surprisingly little overlap between events that would be early morning/late evening.
And yes I know digital clocks the formats matter less. It’s a preference thing, no one should care much.
As for the reason for 12 being the changeover time, it’s all for analog clocks. Looking at an analog clock, when determining the hour you draw a line out from the hour hand. Whatever is the nearest number counter-clockwise, that’s what hour it is. So the 12th hour exists. Otherwise you’d have it go from 11:59 to 0. And zero o’clock makes no sense, especially at noon. Again, no clue how anyone would reference this in 24hr. Half passed midnight maybe? But again if you can say pick me up from the party at 12:30am, you don’t have to reference midnight but people still do sometimes.
As for 12am vs pm, it’s simply because the clock transitions at its apex. If it didn’t, it’d be confusing. Also 11:59 is midnight in either system, so it’s the middle of the night. And it creates an obvious transition for midday to exist.
I hope that clears up why the system exists and why I personally prefer it. Again, use whatever works, but I promise the system works pretty well for everyone that uses it. The more disruptive thing is daylight savings time, not the system itself.
I mean it’s a minor difference and you get used to both systems, but like I said, by cutting the scale in half from 24 to 12 you’re magnifying the difference in time. For instance, 3 to 6pm on 12 hour clocks is 25% of the scale whereas it’s actually 12.5% of the overall day on 24hr scale. But you don’t experience the overall day, you sleep for a big chunk of it. In other words, the 12hr clock is more appropriately representing that time to you as a portion of your waking day.
Consider this: if I told you the time in an accurate but larger quantity, how would it look to you? Like if I told you that my clock is 48 hours and resets every two days to go from 0 to 48, wouldn’t it change your perception of time? It creates dissonance that a 3 hour meeting would feel very long and yet it is such a small portion of your two day clock. That’s kind of how Americans feel about 24hr clocks.
I have no strong opinion but I’ll give some reasons that people don’t often consider.
Analog clocks are often easier to understand visually for people. A typical person will be awake for 16ish hours of the day. Which means that when looking at an analog 12 hour clock, you can easily see where you’re at in your day. That is both harder to do on an analog 24 hour clock and it also doesn’t make sense because you won’t really ever see 1/3rd of the clock get used. Military is forced to use it because the time is all digits which makes confusion less possible and displaying it easier.
When talking about the digital version, again, it reflects how humans experience time easier. Again consider using a clock in which you will not typically see or use a third of the numbers for anything. Why do that?
I think a lot of what bugs us about these two systems is the zero points. If I could redo it, I’d put 12am to line up and make 6am noon. Then 6pm is now evening/night.
I suggest that because the current 12hr systems are set up to benefit capitalism. It’s meant to make you forget how long you’re working in the US. And telling people that waking up at 5am to do stuff is morning is also stupid. It’s still night time at that time and our clocks don’t reflect that at all.