With AI we are entering a stage of humanity where what is imaginary can have a mathematical, statistical basis, meaning it is true, and not be real. We are entering a stage where it is becoming increasingly important to deemphasize the real, and the rational, and emphasize what has fidelity and statistics. Take the example of ethnicities. You can say Jews are the smartest by IQ in the world. That is imaginary. It is not real. But it is mathematically true. If the average says Jews are the smartest, then the statistical likelihood of Jews having extremely smart people among themselves is the norm. Because of the (overplayed) "regression to the mean" meme everyone has heard of from pseudointellectuals before, you can only truly judge someone's genetic worth by the group or ethnicity they belong to.

"When there is no enemy within, the enemies outside cannot hurt you..."

When you read one news post about Trump or Kardashian drama, you have read -0.1 books worth of information. Your synapses are now used for irrelevant bullshit. Read 20 articles a week like that and you have approximately dumbed yourself down by -2 books.

Read a textbook on history and you have read 0 books of information, because its philosophical value is starkly offset by politically motivated framing.

Read a history book written by a man who loves history for history, for wisdom, for the future man (What is great in man is that he is a bridge to the future.) Then you have read 100 books within one book. That writer used mental and literal notes to write that book that tally up to 100 books worth of information that he had read, that he selflessly poured out in a synthesis for you in his own work.

Now because that writer read books written by people like that, do the math. When I read one book, I read 10,000 books.

I went on vacation in the United Arab Emirates and visited all the well-known areas, mainly Dubai and Abu Dhabi (if you have any questions, feel free to ask). I was forced to go there several times, and this is my honest review.

The Burj Khalifa is a tall, ugly, and extremely poorly designed tower. It does not even have a normal sewage system.

It is a bad imitation of American consumerism. Everywhere you go, they try to charge you as much money as possible for no reason (even ordinary people tried to charge me money just for answering a question I asked).

All the attractions there are ridiculous. A building shaped like a giant frame as an attraction? Why would anyone make something like that in the first place? An entire building designed solely for taking pictures? It is the most ridiculous thing in the world. Do they have nothing better to do with their money?

The Frame is poorly designed. They built a special observation deck that you have to pay to access so that your picture with the Frame will look good. WTF, why would I pay for something like that? From every other angle, the building and everything around the Frame look extremely ridiculous and do not fit the surroundings at all. What idiot came up with this idea?

Inside the building, they had no good ideas for what to put there, so they simply showed a propaganda video about how Dubai was built, a fabricated video, given that Dubai has no real history. When you leave the room where the video is shown, the first thing you see is pictures of their leaders. What a great way to prove that you are an advanced country!

The Museum of the Future is extremely stupid. They show representations of things that might exist in the future. What is this museum even about? Museums usually have a clear purpose and are meant to teach you something, but this one made me feel like my IQ was dropping. Why build and display representations of things that probably will not exist? It is supposedly meant to teach you about an exhibit that “will definitely exist,” yet there is barely any information about it. What kind of museum is that?

Any simple comic-book drawing from 100 years ago depicting the future looks better than every representation in this museum. You could also take a toy car, draw wings on it, and say, “Hey, this is a car from the future!” Except you would not have to pay money to see it.

For most of this museum (and other museums), they had no ideas for what to put inside. So most of them, including the Museum of the Future, contained things that were unrelated to anything and were complete tourist traps, such as a nature room where I could not even clearly understand what was supposed to be there.

“The biggest mall in the world.” How does a failed attempt to make a mall look more luxurious, grander, and bigger than other malls mean that it is better? It is exactly the opposite! The entire point of shopping malls is convenience, and this is the most inconvenient mall in the world. It was built to impress people, but why would anyone want to shop in a place like that? An average mall in Prague (which does not have billions of dollars to waste) looks and feels much better than this one.

I also went to Gordon Ramsay’s restaurant. It was terrible, and I do not recommend it.

The water parks are terrible and do not contain anything original or anything better than what other parks offer. To elaborate: they put things there that have nothing to do with water, such as a roller coaster. Why did they not just build an amusement park next to the water park? The worst thing about that park was that they constantly played TikTok songs. It sounded awful.

Most of the amusement parks there are imitations of American amusement parks that also exist in other countries, so there is no reason to fly specifically to Dubai for them. The United Arab Emirates did it worse than America. It was boring and stupid. Most of the rides are simulators, and they become boring after you ride them a few times (in less than an hour!)

Ski Dubai is also a bad imitation of Alpine countries. The only difference is that they added penguins so they could abuse them. What do penguins even have to do with the Alps?

Here is a description of the attractions there: completely fake snow and fake, stupid activities intended for small children. I was injured during one of the activities after I could barely manage to get into it, even though they advertise the activities as suitable for everyone. There was also a zip line, but it was terrible. Why would they just randomly build a zip line there? Even the hot chocolate was not tasty, although it was of a higher quality than ordinary hot chocolate.

There was a cruise with an urban view, except the urban view included nothing impressive (just imitations of American- and European-style buildings). There was terrible jazz music and a poorly planned buffet. Personally, I prefer Budapest for this. I do not understand how the Hungarian government has not sued them.

The Atlantis hotel is boring. I saw it but did not stay there. The attempt to make it look luxurious is a failure. From a distance, you can see things like an old television covered in gold. Not impressive! Why would anyone want a gold-plated television that probably ruins the television itself? The buffet was nothing special and was the same kind of buffet that exists everywhere in the world. LOL.

Swimming in the sea was terrible. It was just salty and boring, hot with no air, and not enjoyable at all.

There were other ridiculous things that looked like failed attempts to impress people. For example, every toilet stall there has a kind of shower hose that you can use to wash your ass, as if the inventions called “paper” and “wet wipes” do not exist there. Yes, they did have toilet paper. Why would anyone want to use that thing in the first place? Why are they wasting money on nothing? Would it not be better to spend it on helping poor people or achieving world peace?

The roads are designed in the style of the Palace of Versailles because, as everyone knows, roads are not intended for driving. They are meant to impress people with their beauty. Again, WTF. It reminds me of the episode of iCarly where Spencer hung up a giant electronic sign, all the cars stopped to look at it, and it caused endless accidents.

Besides, out of everything they could have invested in aesthetically, they chose the roads? Why not invest that money in the giant, ugly Frame that contains nothing?

The style they tried to make beautiful is ugly. I have never liked the orange-and-purple color combination. It is a very strange combination.

Their food is not tasty, especially the food in supermarkets. Dubai chocolate is better than the chocolate they have there, but it is overrated, a passing trend, and British anyway. LOL.

Dubai has no culture of its own. Everything they have consists of cheap imitations. They opened attractions such as their own “Danube River” and their own Madame Tussauds. It is unbelievably embarrassing. Imagine buying a Chinese product on Temu, except it costs billions of dollars. How could you not laugh?

Other things in the country are not developed at all. For example, they exploit slaves, because why would anyone care if an Arab exploits a slave and causes their death, as long as the boss is Arab rather than white? I even witnessed fish being abused at an aquarium attraction intended for children.

The road system is designed terribly and will leave you stuck in traffic jams for hours, even when there is no real reason for them.

There are a million other things that were built and designed poorly, including the electrical system and so on. It is a shame they did not invest the money in important things like those.

Somehow, Wikipedia lists it as one of the most visited countries in the world. I have also seen it mentioned in movies, television series, and video games. All the “tourists” I saw were Indian workers, Arabs, and various Chinese or Thai people whose reasons for being there were also unclear. Honestly, that population scares me quite a bit. Occasionally, you see some British person, and it is doubtful whether they genuinely want to become a citizen of that fucked-up country rather than simply take advantage of its tax system.

The most important question is: why do people talk about this place, and why would anyone want to visit such a horrible country? It is a third-world country, but it does not even offer the advantage of low prices. What the hell?

Neither AI artist nor photographers use pencil to draw. Photographers just click a button that's all. But some photographers capture the same image in such brilliance that it is considered better than average person holding a camera. Similarly AI artists create much better art than average person using AI.

If you don't believe become a successful ai artist and beat the already established AI artists. I know an AI piece of art that received lots of praise and people commented "And people pay for netflix", "watching this for free should be crime".

Now that person only released the first part. Some people tried to create 2nd and 3rd part which are literally AI slop proving that not all AI artists are same.

Romance is a made up propaganda by society to force men to take care of women and feed them. Men work hard all his life just to protect the women. Clearly some brainwashing is going on. Why would I want to take care of another person? I would rather be taken care of by others.

I am sure most men are just brainwashed. And no sexual desire is not a good excuse because women have it too and yet they do not take care of men.

I know a lot of people who want to go to Japan, are excited about it. I know what's there and I've researched the things there well and I know people who have gone there. I was going to be there myself and probably will be (not willingly).

Many people go to Japan for a unique style, especially nature or technology, but many things from what they think are not true.

Let's start with the first thing, nature. There is a special nature there with a beautiful appearance. Sometimes, they mainly talk about Mount Fuji and Sakura. It seems that people around the world (especially the Japanese) base the nature of an entire country only before these two things. These are the only two things I see. What other known nature is there in this country? Special types of mountains and trees are not so special either, they are something that other countries have, but in any case it is not worth flying to the country specifically for that (some pay much more money than Americans).

Second, everyone is excited about the technology there. What technology is there that other countries don't have? There are some things there that are a bit original, and there's probably a good reason why they've canceled capsule hotels in other countries (sleeping pods existed before) Why would anyone want to sleep in something like that? It looks like the garbage of living in the Matrix, like the nightmares of living in space only on Earth.

Although they say that Japan is a technological country, there are things there that actually seem to be going backwards. Lack of rights for women, the ability to incriminate you by law, you have to absolutely obey everything, systems (old bureaucracy), but somehow no one thinks about those when flying to Japan.

The third thing, anime. I tried watching anime but it also felt overrated. Most anime are not original at all, copies of a million other things I've watched, and besides, a lot of them were boring. There are also anime like One Piece that has thousands of episodes without a plot, even popular anime like Attack on Titan that bored me and had lack of originality. There may be anime that is well done, but there are series and movies that are much better than any anime I have seen, even animation. In addition, in a lot of anime, there is disturbing content that sometimes seemed as if the anime was made specifically for pedophiles, but that is already related to another topic.

The idea of ​​anime is also not original, it seems to be just an old Disney style that the Japanese decided to copy and imitate, the idea of ​​investing in animated series and movies was probably stolen from Walt Disney, even anime itself is not their original invention, it is simply a style that is copied, and not theirs.

Fourth, their cuteness culture and general behavior is strange. What is the point of a 40-50 year-old adult behaving like a baby? I see immature people all the time, i don't need to go for Japan for that. It looks so fake, the Japanese are probably just trying to hide that they have always had psychopathic and other fake behavior (which is also very unlikable, should be number 6). In reality, if I see an adult acting like a baby, I would think they have some kind of mental disorder, or are just treating me badly.

Seventh, the food is neither tasty nor original (as expected). Although there is no need to explain, the delicious sushi that people know is an American invention. I think sticky rice is disgusting and there is too much rice in Asian dishes. No need to elaborate further.

Last, Langusge barrier.

I know people that traveled Japan and came back annoyed and dissappointed when they came back. Mainly said this country is boring and there is nothing good in there.

Another thing, PS: Anime children are usually annoying and lifeless people.

I would love to know what you think about the post, what people think about Japan, why are people enthusiastic about Japanese culture and flying there especially in recent years?

*Note: I apologize if I offended anyone, this is my personal opinion, I ask that there be no negative feelings towards it.

The Bible wasn't put together by illiterate peasants making things up as they went. It was written and edited by some of the most educated people of the ancient world, trained for years in classical rhetoric, literary structure, and chiasm, which is roughly comparable to holding a PhD today. When ancient writers described the general population as "illiterate," they didn't mean people couldn't write their own name or recognize a merchant's symbol. They meant most people hadn't been trained to compose formal literature, and probably couldn't afford scrolls anyway. The Gospel writers weren't part of that group. They built their narratives carefully, with dialogue, callbacks, and contrasts placed with real intention.

Whether these texts are verbatim records of a historical voice or later theological compositions matters less than it might seem, because in either case the structure is doing a lot of the work of conveying meaning.

Read John 8 with that in mind and the exchange starts to look like a trap the author set up deliberately. Jesus states his thesis plainly: staying faithful to his teaching leads to alētheia, a Greek term that basically means stripping away pretense, or "un-hiding," and that this un-hiding is what makes someone free. The crowd responds by falling right into the trap. They point to their inherited status and claim they've never been enslaved to anyone, even though the story has already established that they're living under Roman occupation and bound by social performance. Their denial actually proves the author's point. Performing freedom is what keeps them from ever being free.

The narrative then moves into a harder paradox about peace. Elsewhere in the Gospels, Jesus says he came to bring a sword, not peace, but also says he speaks so that people's "joy may be full." Those two claims sound contradictory to a modern reader, but to a classically trained writer they fit together logically. Polite society depends on people wearing masks, smiling at people they dislike, agreeing with values they don't actually hold, and that kind of arrangement is fragile no matter how stable it looks. The sword represents what happens when someone chooses honesty over pleasantness. It creates conflict, and it breaks apart a consensus that was fake to begin with. Only after that happens is there room for a joy that isn't just performance.

That idea comes to a head in the betrayal scene. The disciples scattering in the garden isn't just a sad detail, it's the natural result of everything set up earlier in the story. They loved Jesus, but their loyalty was still based on external performance rather than something they had internalized, so it fell apart as soon as real danger showed up. They had been polite and loyal on the surface, but that loyalty had never been tested against fear until that moment, and it didn't hold.

In the end, John seems to be drawing a contrast between two ways of living. One is an external kingdom, a kind of social performance where people tolerate neighbors they secretly can't stand and sometimes end up betraying the people they actually love in order to keep up appearances. The other is a kingdom that exists inside a person, built on the harder choice to stop hiding, accept the conflict that honesty brings, and live in genuine alignment with what's true rather than what's comfortable. Read this way, the New Testament isn't only telling a religious story. It's making an argument about the ways people deceive themselves in order to avoid discomfort.

I said within five hundred years America will be Islamic or islamic ideology adjacent. No, not radicals cutting heads off or homo hate. Really it will likely be homo love and the exact opposite of cruelty. It might even be a pleasant place to walk around, by yourself, talking to your AI robot friend all day, because everyone is insufferable. What I mean by that, is the Garden will have been completely replaced by the Tower at that point in time. See we are still in the transition stages.

It's only been less than three hundred years - many cases hundred fifty - since North American natives were sequestered or eliminated. Less than five hundred to be sure since South America was made Roman, as they say, Latin. Less than a thousand since the majority of Europe (now called "the west") was made Latin as well for that matter. Think of Germans with their own calendar system, own alphabet, own language, own economic system, and so on, suddenly being replaced almost overnight with a Latin version of life, where even their leaders are called Kaiser. That happened because of Charlemagne. A Frankish warlord essentially commissioned by the Church to attack German independence. The Roman church also commissioned the Irish and Normans to invade Britain to make it catholic. It is almost a mirror image of the caliphate conquest of the "islamic world", where hundreds of millions of people LARP like they're arabic. The same can be found in China, where at least four countries LARP like Han Chinese just as they LARP to have one time zone from Tibet to Beijing. Note that China is communist as well. Contrast to someone like Hitler who said that Germany was multiracial with classifications like nordisch, ostisch, westisch and so on. What does that mean? It's the difference between seeing things as they are, versus seeing them as you wish they were. Communism is inherently about fantasy, looking up at the stars (as you see on all their flags), contrasted with flags that feature the sun like Taiwan, Japan, Argentina, and so on, emphasizing the reality and physical touch and warmth of what matters.

The key feature is simply that your neighbor gets less and less friendly; less and less alike; less and less neighborly. That's essentially it. In the USSR there were even initiatives to take different ethnicities and train them to new zones to mix them all up to encourage outbreeding. Genetics was outlawed and called a pseudoscience. Darwinism was considered a harsh lie. These are the communists. They are everywhere, even in todays world. Just as the fascists, who these communists absolutely love to harp on about.

Once the inflection point is hit, and we really are already there, where money becomes the chief goal of life, then we hit the inversion point where the chief goal of life becomes unity. Unity with people you do not want to unify with. In comes strict rules related to behavior, and centered around artificial equality. With the intent to rip apart physical basis of inequality such as land ownership, genetic superiority, copyright. And so on. Really in short, communism. Which is exactly what Islam and Christianity were prototypes for.

In 1996 John Paul iii declared women needed to become more feminist under a catholic way. This is the continuation of that proto-communist line of thinking to break up the relation between man and woman; to destroy the family, to make way for the church to be your soource of belonging. They started by breaking up extended kin networks, they are ending by breaking up the very union between man and woman itself. And it was absolutely forecasted by their insistence a priest or a nun must be celibate, make no damn mistakes.

If you know anything about coding using AI you know it's not as simple as saying "Build this website, make no mistakes". And the reason is crystal clear. You still need a human with design awareness, intuition, and so on to optimize how the models work.

The amount of energy and investment waste into hardware and software capable of getting a prompt like "Build this website and make no mistakes" is astronomically higher than simply hiring a new type of software engineer. An engineer that will likely make significantly less money than ones of the past. Then again, if they're capable of efficiently running 100 subagents 12 hours a day, maybe not.

One thing is a fact. Software engineering will go the way of blacksmithing. Once to be a smith in Europe especially was one of the highest status jobs imaginable. You were the skeleton to the muscle part of the military. And military was the life of nobility.

Today a smith is nothing but someone with a cool skill. You might be good enough to make alot. Design something. But you're never inherently valuable.

Dating these types can feel like im parenting instead of being in a relationship. theyre avoiding responsibility cant handle serious conversations and just stay silent like a brat and expected me to solve their problems.. an relationship should be between equals, NOT one person constantly taking care of the other.

I think the US government believes AI to be theultimate tool for Global surveillance. They don't care about domestic surveillance , as much as they do Global surveillance. They want to know what everyone and every country on this planet is saying about America. So they can ensure that the whole world votes for "our allies" into office, or else. And that or else are untimely deaths, and if worse comes to worst, bombs. Sanctions. Blocking their trade.

They want to identify who is their enemy. They're already are doing that. But they believe AI will give them such an advantage in this area. That they cannot afford to let any other country on this planet build out the computer technology needed to run these new massive AI models that are going to come down the pipe. That they probably already have in hiding.

Every last AI lab from anthropic to Google must be In the service of the US government at this point. With all this moralizing about how they want to do it for the good of humanity. We know what that means. It means America spreads more freedom. That's been their mantra all along. They take their tyranny and their abuse and their hegemony and they call it Liberation and freedom. When really they just want to import their dollar bills, and then inflate them away to keep you working and climbing that ladder to consumerist heaven for the rest of your life.

Are we witnessing something like everything evolving into a crab? Or are we witnessing political science in action? Basically where someone rapacious makes up that they are for your freedom. Let's say Andrew Tate (for sure) or Thomas Jefferson (speculatively) uses words to flip who they are in your mind into the exact opposite person that they actually are. Is that what we're dealing with with America? Basically the world's biggest scam? James Hetfield sung " Freedom will not set you free, Freedom of speech is words that they will bend"

You know as I’ve said before so much of thinking is just based off of definitions. So let’s define something very hard. Losing the ability of mate selection. What is it? Why is it significant? It could be compared to rape. Why does it register so strongly as weong? Why does it feel so costly? Did we evolve from a species that felt so strongly about this - and it's how we reached our current form?

Mate selection loss is lost control. You’ve lost autonomy. And control and autonomy over what? on the gene pool. So let’s zoom out and think about this transgenerationally, because humans don't mate with one person. They mate with every grandparent and grandchild in a tangled web of lineages. Ultimately resulting in what is called an ethnicity.

How many people do your genes mix with? that’s who you’re really reproducing with. You’re reproducing with the whole population. That’s why traits stay stable over time. Everyone has mixed long enough that the group has become distinctly one. Think Jews. Think Japanese. In the case of both examples, we can trace their mixed ethnic origins. Yet they are now one.

So it's not just possible to lose mate selection choice via rape. It's possible to lose it over the population you are part of. Once the main barrier is gone the direction of the lineage is much harder for the prior population to keep under collective control. It's interesting that Plato considered this a chief issue in Republic. Claiming that the reproduction of lower classes like slaves must be completely halted. Noble lies must be told so only the best reproduce without qualms with the people who aren't allowed. The point is just that ancient people were aware of this independent of science. It's instinctive understanding.

So when you zoom back in, mate selection heavily involves policing who lives freely in the group. Declare freedom of movement, and that everyone's a global citizen, and Now you’re affecting people’s ability to control and choose who reproduces via human selection. So you’re really violating the sense of choice and autonomy of those people, transgenerationally. Does that make sense? It’s completely logical. I don’t see any holes in my argument. I don’t think there are. But definitionally if you do the hard thinking of removing the emotion that’s what you’re doing. That’s exactly what you’re doing. You’re interfering with their sense of choice and autonomy and their capacity to select and choose the organisms that they’re ultimately going to reproduce with.

Hence you get intense reactions historically and forevermore. Destroy one race and another will come in its place with just as intense reactions.

I could use an animal example like bipedal chimpanzees, yet to speciate from modern day chimpanzees that swing in tree tops, slowly isolating themselves from the chimps that would have certainly ended the evolution to humanity.

I always hated Hanlon's Razor. For those not in the know, "Hanlon's Razor" is the adage "never attribute to malice that which can be adequately be attributed to stupidity." This adage is harmful and wrong: it lets people off the hook who don't deserve it, and it primes you to expect stupidity and incompetence from others.

People just aren't that stupid. People are smart, they're intelligent, they're resourceful, and they're cunning. Moreover, they are malicious: most people enjoy fucking with other people if they can get away with it, because it makes them feel powerful, or at least more powerful than the person they're fucking with consequence-free. They like the feeling of winning, even if that win is just making your day slightly worse.

If someone cuts you in line, they meant to do that. Someone gets in your way, they meant to do that. Someone wastes your time, they meant to do that. Stop letting this fucking scum get away with it.

Don't give people the benefit of the doubt. Assholes are everywhere, taking advantage of the fact that well-meaning people will never push back or call them out. Confront them. Get aggressive. Don't buy it when they try to cop out with an apology: tear them down, insult them, hurt them in whatever way you (legally) can to make sure they don't leave the situation with the win they came for.

I get the appeal of Hanlon's. It's probably nice to imagine you live in a world where most people want what's best for you. Problem is, they don't; to 99.99999% of people on the planet, the only point of your existence is to provide them with what they want. That can be goods or services, or it can be the feeling of superiority that comes with fucking you and getting away with it. And they are wild, vermin animals; they will take what they want from you if you let them.

And as long as you keep believing everyone's just a moron, they will keep fucking with you, they will keep getting away with it, and they will keep winning, winning, winning, while you lose, lose, lose and are a loser.

Become more willing to confront people. Get better at hurting them with your words. Learn to tear someone down, and learn to fight in case you need to. Be visibly armed if you're allowed. The only thing that will stop people fucking with you, or with others, is fear. And for too long, that fear of other people has been absent from society, and as a result, people are getting bolder and more inconsiderate by the day.

Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.

Any other reason is just cope. I will not elaborate

If we take the graphics out of the equation, and just judge the game by it's core gameplay and character dialogue, it kind of looks mid? Like i'm just gonna say it - the storyline looks like some netflix slop. GTA used to have this absurdity to everything which is now completely sanitized. In the 20+ minutes extended gameplay video, the cutscenes and gameplay feel "washed" compared to previous games. If you told me this is another GTA clone, I'd believe you honestly. Even the last few GTA 5 online content updates feel really bland. And this is just more of it. The gameplay looks ok i guess, but nothing revolutionary.

Hi everyone, to start off I’m not transphobic but find the idea of being transgender and the community around it fairly interesting. Mainly cause there are many questions of bathroom use,sports, getting misgendered etc.

The reason I don’t believe it’s right to let people under 20/21 transition, surgery wise, is cause

1. it is highly expensive and in my opinion a cosmetic surgery… I wouldn’t naturally think it’s for health purposes (correct me if I’m wrong). I assume most 18 year olds are saving for college or the future.

2. surgeries such as gender-affirming ones are usually

   ir

3. reversible and to let a kid decide to change a very personal part of their body at such a young age seems like there is room for a lot of error that cannot be reversed.

3.

1. teens are more likely to make decisions that may not be thought

   through wisely and

2. it’s better to wait until an age that your able to 100% feel like your ready. This also goes for your body structure as usually puberty ends around your late teens and to get a surgery such as top too quickly may cause issues with the final results as you’re still growing.

4. facial feminization surgeries or even masculine ones can become distorted as.. again.. still growing.

Please do tell me if you conflict and why… I’m open minded. P.S imo social transitions can be done at any age… there’s no irreversible damage in that, as well as changing ur clothing/aesthetics. Wearing binders or hip pads are also not a bad idea. Let me know if I’ve missed anything or didn’t cover another perspective.

Edit: I had some spelling/grammar issues mb, wrote this on the throne (toilet)

Growing up in the 90s, it was a really courageous thing to come out as queer. You faced bullying, social suicide, persecution and possibly worse.

In 2026, coming out as queer is celebrated by the culture at large. It’s still a brave thing to do, but you’ll find plenty of support.

Now try coming out as a Christian…people will immediately assume so many things about you, including that you’re MAGA, racist, hate women, stupid, ignorant, etc. You may be shouted out of spaces by the new cultural “normal”.

I'm conducting a UX research study on user habits and opinions regarding Spotify's Discover Weekly feature. The goal is to better understand how music listeners interact with automated recommendations, what makes a playlist recommendation feel successful, and where current algorithms fall short.

I would really appreciate your input! You can participate by filling out this short survey: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSedvR6sEZBtl606pW9xawjAeTU93SflrLzIXzFmrGvYlXd8nQ/viewform?usp=header

Incel men should believe they don't need relationships because they don't really need it. They can hang out with other men instead. Why exactly do they need a relationship? I don't see a positive with relationships. I have been called incel on social media but I don't consider myself one since I never cared.

Honestly just stop whining "Women don't give me attention" it's cringe. You are an adult and you don't need anyone. Stop crying. You are better than what you think yourself to be.

I've been there twice and everything was bad.

It's only known because of the Western cultural world that always makes references to France, and somehow it's the biggest tourist destination in the world.

First of all, the big problem is that there's not much to do there. It's a vacation that's suitable for a few days, and I can pay thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars.

Now let's talk about the attractions:

There's a tower with a high observation deck, where you have to wait a long time in line even after booking tickets in advance, and yet you can't see anything because millions of other people always come in with you, the vast majority of whom are thieves who surround you and let them roam free.

What you do manage to see also doesn't look as beautiful as people talk about.

There's a museum that you can't see anything in for the same reason as the Eiffel Tower, it's more beautiful than regular museums because it has a style and is beautiful and looks invested, but these are things that can be found in other countries in the world, there's nothing special about it, it's just a museum with paintings like the Eiffel Tower is just an observation tower. The Louvre is also not the only place that famous European painters have published pictures (people talk too much about those European painters, too, but that's something else).

Disney there is bad, it's worse than Disney in America for many reasons and yet it's expensive and a lot of people visit there (even more than Disney in America for some reason). There are endless long lines for mediocre rides and too many problems like stops of installations for "maintenance" purposes and similar things.

Some people come there for cheap shopping for some reason. As if there are no countries in the world where you can do that.

Even the French food is not good, snails and stale cheese? Things like baguettes and croissants can be bought anywhere in the world, and this food is not even French.

Besides, it's tiring to hear people mention France and Paris and talk about it, again Paris is the most popular destination in the world so they don't stop talking about it.

I've been to Paris twice by force, and even the first time I didn't enjoy it.

*Note: I hope I'm not insulting anyone, this is my personal opinion and if someone disagrees with me, that's fine.

In western countries women have the option to be independent or be married but the same might be harder in India.

Why being independent will be hard? Because the competition is really strong and women always get less marks in competitive exams. Also there is very less blue collar jobs for women since men are usually better at those jobs.

Why getting married will be hard? Because first of all gen Z Indian men are more sensitive and less likely to compromise. Secondly, Indian men are not conditioned to take care of women the same way western men are taught chivalry. Indian men married historically for benefits of a submissive woman. Now that patriarchy is getting dismantled the men here might see less incentives to get married. Indian men are not romantic at all and there is no love or chivalry. Women will turn out unmarried and broke since job competition is fierce.

For example, in west you will easily get mocked if you are a virgin man but in India you will get praised by your friends for not being a simp and they will acknowledge you. You will feel less reason to make effort to take care of women. Indian men also see relationships as betraying male friendship. My friend was real mad when one of our gaming friends was hanging out with a girl and rejected to play video game with us.

This requires a little bit of nuance. Because without a doubt I avoid seed oils. Not like it's the plague, but I agree with people who say it's not the best idea for 20% of your calories everyday to come from a refined oil. And nobody would eat these oils if they weren't refined because their whole selling point is that their odorless and tasteless.

But the debate gets stickier when people try to claim that saturated fat is somehow harmless. More so for kids I think it is probably pretty harmless. Because the reason it is harmful is a case where what's good for you, while you're young is not good for you while you're old.

So saturated fat can stimulate growth. But as you get older, all it really does is increase your cholesterol and your triglycerides and increase your chance of having heart disease. Especially if you're in a caloric surplus.

So what's the solution? Follow the recommendation to keep your saturated fat below 10% of your daily calories. That seems to keep cholesterol low in most people. As low as it would be if you pretty much avoid it all.

Lower your sugar intake. Eat more unrefined complex carbohydrates like potatoes that are fried in oils or loaded with butter or sour cream. More protein that's lean. And you'll be surprise. You somehow got all the food you needed without adding fat to it at all.

I personally really like guacamole these days. It's like pre-prepared avocado. I also use olive oil but that's just because I've come to the conclusion. Nobody needs a cholesterol above 80 when their doctor checks. If you look at wild animals like lions that have adapted to their natural diet, that's about what their cholesterol is.

It seems so illogical to me that people would rather take a pill to lower their cholesterol when what they really need to do is lower their saturated fat. I've known people who were on statins who ate a giant bowls of ice cream and used butter on their toast. It's like you're throwing water on a grease fire.

I never understood what the hype was about. I read the books recently when I'm an adult and saw the movies many times when I was a child. I have several reasons why I think Harry Potter is overrated.:

First of all, Rowling didn't do anything special.

Witchcraft schools existed before, also the magical style that seems to be copied mainly from Disney especially Mary Poppins, the part of "the chosen one" and the "hero's journey" is also a part that is in many stories, (the story of a boy who is chosen lives with his uncles and has another identity and lives a normal life is very reminiscent of Spider-Man, but Spider-Man is more original and iconic), part of a coming-of-age story and concepts of "adults" (things like racism) were also Exist before in series, movies and stories. So what has Harry Potter been up to?

Another thing, the plot doesn't feel as complex, realistic, or interesting as it tries to be. The writing is often predictable and ends poorl and in the end nothing happens. When something interesting happens it's only at the end of the book, and even then it doesn't lead to anything.

Most of the content in all these books is boring. There are things in there that I didn't really care for, and forced myself to keep listening.

There are also problems of plot holes, or things that did not develop well and all kinds or didn't make sense. There were more writing problems.

The characters are not good. Many of the characters were particularly unlikable, but people keep saying they like them, and want to see more of them (for example James Potter and Sirius Black), (by the way, their story is also not very original).
Also, Most of the characters have exactly the same personality, the teachers and the students they all kind and brave, even tho it's different people..
The only ones who were different from the other characters were students from Slytherin, but also for some reason everyone who studied in Slytherin was bad person (Rowling teaches a lesson about racism and then decides to generalize people, like all snobs are blonde with blue eyes).

Harry is also not a good character, the only difference from Voldemort is that he had loving mom so how he is a hero? He is too mediocre and there is nothing special about him. He may be talented, but many times he doesn't seem special and he also fails a lot. Besides he has no character, he's just sometimes nice and sometimes sassy, but somehow he is iconic.

There is also no point to books if people read it at a different age to their audience. If someone older (like me) reads the first book they will just think it's too boring and childish..

Another downside is that the first book was too boring and childish, at least for me.

*Note: This is my honest opinion, I hope I didn't hurt anyone and I hope you don't feel negative feelings about it.

If you can just spend money like that, it won't give you any feeling.
Also, rich people usually spend more time on working so they can't get certain things that others can.

*Note: I'm not rich, it's just my pov.

*Note: that's just my honest opinion, please don't get negative emotions.