Not really technically. One is a physical attribute, and the other is a measure of wealth. Those aren’t even remotely close to being hobbies. You just brought them up because you think women are shallow, which is probably the real reason they don’t like you.

https://www.exploratoriumstore.com/products/general-relativity-for-babies-by-chris-ferrie

I showed a bunch of children how to pirate geometry dash on their android tablets and they thought I was a wizard or something

I don’t support either one because in many ways I think they are effectively the same. My views are certainly more in line with liberals and I think they are much less directly harmful than conservatives, but the parties themselves are more or less the same to me.

Neither of them effectively push the policy I want, and both purposely create an unnecessary divide between each other. They both need the other to be the antagonist to continue creating this strange dramatic version of politics.

Parts of my family refuses to speak to one another purely because of this. Their views aren’t even that far off from each other, but neither of them actually understand each other’s views. All they understand is the manufactured hate between each other.

Again, I think conservatives usually cause the most problems, but the other party can’t exist in its current form without someone to be angry at. There is no actual motive to stop the problems from being caused, so they are only amplified and worsened.

Both are actively creating a worse place to live in, and I wouldn’t support either one regardless of whatever views they claim to have.

I’ve been called a centrist for simply not supporting either party, so I was under the impression that was a common way of thinking about it.

Using that definition of centrism, I don’t actually disagree with anything that was said here.

I understand the dislike for people that take no position whatsoever, but the hate for centrism I’ve seen extends beyond that. I’ve been called an enlightened centrist for simply not supporting either party, but I guess that might just mean those people were mistaken.

I’m not sure why centrism is so hated here. As long as you acknowledge one side is more damaging I don’t see a problem with it. The other side might have less problematic views but they both subsist off of each other and thrive by creating vitriol between each other. It shouldn’t be taboo to not support either one. This meme doesn’t even really seem like its attempting to make that point anyway, although I understand how you could see it that way.

It isn’t supposed to be used in densely populated areas because its extremely dangerous. Even if it wasn’t intentionally used as a weapon (which it very obviously was), then its still not excusable because it still causes a lot of harm to civilians.

Anyone who has any decency or feeling of inner justice will support innocent civilians regardless of their country of origin, and will condemn terrorist acts and war crimes regardless of who commited them.

I guess its more prevelant than I thought, or at least it used to be. Its very confusing to me how people could fall for that. How little do you have to know about music to think a specific type of it will literally increase your intelligence.

I had a history teacher in (US) high school who was not afraid at all to tell his students the whole truth about stuff like this. Its too bad he was the only one not allowed to teach government classes.

There’s a good chance when you were younger, you heard classical music in the classroom to try and make you smarter. However, this is a myth - there is no such link between music and intelligence (or that we can measure intelligence for another matter!)

I’ve never heard anyone claim classical music makes you smarter. I have heard people say it makes you focus better, which is true to some extent. This was one of the first things my therapist recommended I try after being diagnosed with adhd. I can’t imagine it isn’t applicable to people without adhd, although probably to varying degrees depending on the person.

The only thing I take issue with is the specification of classical music. Some people have told me this is because classical music doesn’t have words in it, which would distract you instead of help you focus. Not only can classical music have lyrics, but every other genre of music is perfectly capable of not having lyrics. I’m not sure if its even true that the lyrics would distract you in the first place.

Its pretty clear to me that the only reason people play classical music specifically for this purpose is because it makes them feel smart. You could argue that feeling smart might actually help you get things done, but I dislike the perception of classical music as smart people music in general. It’s just a style of music, like every other. There’s nothing that makes it superior or more sophisticated, its just what Europeans liked a few centuries ago.

If this were a thing, I would have wasted years of my life learning musical instruments and foreign languages. The reason those skills are rewarding to have is because you have to work for them. My skill levels in these things are a reflection of how I spend my time and who I am as a person. If that was just erased, and everyone could be good at everything, then I wouldn’t be anyone anymore.

Unreal is open source, although it isn’t free. I would certainly prefer it to unity though.

How is this racist? I don’t doubt that you’re right but I’m not understanding what makes that racist. Are black people significantly more likely to have crack than cocaine or something? At first glance it seems logical to me that cocaine has less of a punishment than crack, but that’s based off of a somewhat limited understanding of the effects of the two drugs.

The downside of being concerned about privacy is that it can be very inconvenient. I don’t think its so awful to try to minimize that, making it more accessible to people that wouldn’t otherwise bother.

I just created an account without even adding an email address. I assumed that’s what most people did

I interpreted the “stricter” definition as just being more intense. Like its only used to describe someone who reads constantly, and knows nearly everything about literature. Or someone who is almost obsessively studying math, or chess theory. Or someone who is very interested in numerous “nerdy” things.

Maybe that’s not what they meant, I’m not sure. You’re right, their wording is kind of ambiguous.

I don’t think they mean it to be negative. I assumed they mean its used more loosely now and has lost some of the meaning it used to have as a result. They can’t find a more fitting word for what they want to say, so they just specify they mean the stricter definition of the word nerd.

It doesn’t even say that those things are socialism. In fact to me it looks like its specifically opposing people who think handouts are socialism. Its just pointing out a double standard.

edit: unless you mean the title I guess but that seems like a pretty minor detail to be so concerned about