Ugh - that’s fucking gross of people, and I’m sorry to hear that.

My argument was more when considering ‘most people’ - most people is a lot of people. An individual doesn’t really interact with most people. But that said, you can certainly interact with ‘enough people’ that an expectation of shoddy treatment is pretty reasonable (if a pretty bullshit set of circumstances individuals shouldn’t have to suffer).

Pedantry on my part, I guess, along with likely blindspots I have as a cis male. Fuck transphobia…such meaninglessly hurtful bullshit.

Fair enough - everyone has a different reaction. I probably also should have mentioned the hash and beer that usually follow this, always end up ready for bed by 0200ish myself.

Hooray for legal poly drug abuse! (?)

You’re missing out. A coffee at 1900 or 2000 with just enough whiskey for taste is my jam on a Friday night.

First, I’d challenge the ‘most people’ part. In my experience most people really, truly do not care one way or the other if someone is trans. But to be fair, this may vary between countries, societies, etc.

Edit: I wrote a bunch of other stuff here, but wasn’t happy reading it back. Someone else here said religion and bad science, which is close enough to the point I was trying to make that I’ll just say that.

Excel is a dev environment for us folks who aren’t 100% sure what a dev environment actually is.

I’ve at least evolved to the point that I know better options exist, and higher ups should talk to the people who know what those options are and how they can leveraged. Those people are busy, though, so the cycle continues…

Theres a couple clues that suggest it’s a Canadian cannabis dispensary. Which is interesting as many use the same web app for menus and online orders (Dutchie), though some don’t.

You should totally question the validity, but I’d pause before dismissing it entirely. It’s supposedly based on an opinion survey of psychiatrists and a group of ‘independent experts’ (footnote incoming) published in the Lancet in 2007. Edit: I said things that weren’t true about the Wikimedia image that I have removed - it’s based on the table near the bottom of the article.

DOI is 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60464-4

You should ask our friend ANNA if she’S heard people talk about this during her time in the ARCHIVEs.

It’s not a completely objective harm/dependence measure, for sure, but the opinions of experts aren’t meaningless - it’s worth reading the article and judging the authors’ claims rather than this image. Though I will say the number of participants seems really low.

On LSD,

1. the opinion thing should be underlined and considered heavily (particularly in the UK, where rave culture is/was more top of mind than other places and LSD is/was in the mix, albeit I don’t think to the same degree as MDMA and other compounds), but also

2. as crazy as it may sound, dependency can develop in some users. I’d argue it looks VERY different than dependence to other substances (frequency is obviously much lower, given rapid tolerance, and some people may not call once a week or every two weeks dependency*), but it still exists. Given that this is basically an expert opinion poll it’s actually placed more or less where I’d expect to see it.

*Though in online discussion groups for folks interested in such compounds, those folks often do call that level of frequency a sign of dependency. Should note I’m talking specifically about macrodoses, not microdosing.

(Footnote) from page 1049: “These experts had experience in one of the many areas of addiction, ranging from chemistry, pharmacology, and forensic science, through psychiatry and other medical specialties, including epidemiology, as well as the legal and police services.”

I’d say legalization is actually better in this case, as you can provide licenses to pharmaceutical manufacturers subject to QA regulations, lab accreditations, etc. Decriminalization just means that guy with 1:1 cocaine:fentanyl is probably getting a ticket rather than arrested.

[Was going to put a ‘doesn’t help when the guy overdoses’ comment here, but thinking about it now people do overdose (and die) on just cocaine too. One of the factors that make this a different conversation than cannabis. Don’t know the thresholds for overdose re: just coke, though]

This was my thinking as well, plus addressing the ‘solution for those without IT experience’ bit. Search for video/article on removing wireless connectivity hardware, grab your screwdriver and get to work.

Still takes some work, obviously, and a lot of people are scared to void warranties/open up consumer electronics, but from the outside it sounds more straight-forward than futzing about with network settings. IMO worth it if concerned about the connectivity bits, willing to do it and the price is right for the TV as a dumb TV.

Alternatively, use used dumb TVs for as long as you can.

Serious question: How much of a brick risk is opening up one of these smart tvs and ripping out the wifi card? Can’t connect to the internet if you don’t have the hardware to do so.

(Obviously pretty high if legit caveman-style ripping out. Could also be really hard, I have no idea).

Aaand Mill Street is now boycotted.

Illegal in Canada too - if it’s not 20 +/- 0.5 oz, you can’t call it a pint.

Can’t say I see the word ‘pint’ at pubs very often anymore, though.

What about patronising as in ‘patronising this business’? A little archaic, but I do hear it from time to time, usually with the ‘pay’ pronounciation.

Then again, if someone is accusing me of being patronising (which happens a lot for reasons I don’t quite understand, but I digress), it’s split odds whether I’m “pah-trun-ising” or “pay-trun-ising”.

English is weird (perhaps this is its wyrd?)

Something I haven’t thought about in a while: In the early 2000s games where you made a direct connection to the other player without an intervening, third-party server were still a thing. You still see it in things like netplay functionality in emulators.

Is this still a thing at all in 2023? Imagine it would be very niche, but this comment made me curious.

My literal first thought when seeing the title was “Certainly they’re referring to character actress Margot Robbie”

I wonder…

Suppose you had a company that, at it’s core, was closer a vps provider than anything else. People who want to host videos on the service pay a fee. The hosts can solicit money via the usual means (patreon, personally working with advertisers, merch, whatever), but part of the service agreement is that the hosting service itself cannot place their own ads. You also have some backup system in place where after x amount of time, videos get archived to some outside service (Internet Archive, some peer-to-peer mechanism - no idea what the options are). This is to at least try to mitigate storage limitations and other problems with retaining a large back catalogue.

All of this is said from a position of deep ignorance - but could something like this work? My stumbling block is anyone running a company is eventually going to need/want an additional revenue stream and ads are an obvious first stop. For this to exist it would pretty much take an activist owner not budging and ruling with an iron fist. That, and would such a service be able to offer hobbyist hosts a fair price, given this is where a lot of people start?

3 and 5 are the best, if you ever find yourself held captive. 7 inches can get you out of a cell, also cuffs if your clothes don’t teleport too. You can manipulate the toaster as a distraction or to start a fire.

100% my choice.

deleted by creator

Problem is, many otherwise good doctors are not very knowledgeable about illicit drugs, particularly those that are comparatively rare/aren’t a public health crisis (LSD, while popular, is kinda niche compared to meth and opioids).

A big chunk of the time you’re just going to get “Don’t use drugs”, simply because they don’t have much else to say about it, and don’t want you taking risks based on something they’ve said. Doesn’t mean don’t ask*, but know you may not get useful harm reduction information from Dr. F. Practitioner.

*That said there IS a risk that such a question can paint you as a potential drug seeker, and so create barriers to care if someone decides to add that to your chart when you were just trying to minimize risk.

Big brain move: Tell your students about this neat loophole, gets them started on actual research.

(Ideally - I’d be lying if I said I’ve never used a quote from Wikipedia citing the stated source without actually reading it [usually at 5 am for papers due in two hours], but more often than not Wikipedia was the signpost for the rabbit hole)