Krusty

0.67 percent the speed of light would be enough. That’s mach 5800, or 2000 km/s. A 50g hot dog would have around 10^11 J kinetic energy.

If you accelerated a 50g hot dog to 10 percent light speed you’d probably have enough energy there to destroy civilization.

Not much. Alan Watts had interesting talks on this. Myths are just stories. The Bible is just a collection of stories. Religion goes beyond the written stories, sure, but it’s still nothing without them (spoken and written) and everyone has their own personal mythology.

Like many self-described Christians these days think Jesus is weak/woke and what other people(definitely not themselves) really need is tough love not ‘sissy/pussy Jesus love’(choice words I’ve heard at services from the pastor at the podium, along with rantings on how lgbtq will burn in hell and the whole congregation is cheering, crying, and/or talking in tongues… It’s fucking creepy.)

This is especially common in pentecostal and Evangelical sects. Quite rare in mainstream protestantism or Catholicism (though you may get guilt-tripped. My mom said her Sunday school teachers said paying tithings was fire insurance - it keeps you from burning in hell. What a great lesson for children!) Sadly, modern Christianity practice includes things I think would absolutely appall Jesus, canonically. But that’s the great thing about religion, the scriptures are often vague and people genuinely don’t really care about what the Bible actually says unless it’s something they like (Cherry picking, selection/confirmation bias, etc.), like the beatitudes sound great but practicing them is harder than preaching.

Don’t argue. No is a complete sentence. Talk to your boss about it if your coworkers have a problem with “no.” Perhaps express mild interest with appropriate additional compensation?

If you don’t enforce your boundaries, then no one will.

Exponents are typically highest exponent first.

10^10^10 implies 10^(10^10) not (10^10)^10 which is astronomically different.  

PEMDAS

Parentheses, exponents, multiplication, division, addition, and subtraction.

That’s a common reaction to things too difficult to rationalize otherwise: apathy.

If you want to feign sympathy because you think it’ll make you look good, go for it.

Dale Carnegie might encourage you to accept the worst possible outcome -really accept it- then try to improve upon it. And keep trying to improve upon it.

This goes hand in hand with ACT - acceptance and commitment therapy - which is a common method used to help people deal with grief and getting unstuck (overcoming anxiety, fears, etc.), and acceptance is the critical first step. Once you really accept things, that gives you the foundation for commitments to improve the situation.

And they don’t necessarily have to be related. You could accept that your partner has dumped you and your commitment might be moving onward with your life by taking/investing time for yourself.

Or you could accept that a war on the other side of the world is not it really influenced much (or at all) by your decisions so you instead you might go for a bicycle ride or go fishing. Something you would rather do than interact with content that you ‘don’t give a fuck about.’

Your classic zombie is undead. The virus, as it’s often defined in the more sci-fi horror genre, takes over after death and reboots the lower brain and spinal cord and much of the CNS up to the lizard brain(higher brain functions not so much.) The virus somehow maintains some basic active transport without a heart as a pump. Which is often why they’re slow, and typically cold blooded. Sometimes the reanimation doesn’t even need a brain. Severed limbs can sometimes remain animated for a while. And usually in this type you get eventual starvation where they will die without fresh flesh/brains/blood. And they tend to rot actively, falling apart over time.

Zombies tend to be short (un)lived.

So many snowflakes here. Especially the lemmy admins. Piefed FTW.

“Most toxic” depends on who’s annoyed this week, but there are a few recurring mental habits that reliably rot discourse without even trying.

My biggest pet peeve is probably moral absolutism, often disguised as clarity. That’s the mindset where everything gets forced into clean categories of pure good vs pure evil, with zero tolerance for the rainbow of nuance.

Next up is identity-as-proof. If someone is in Group X, then they must believe Y, and any counterexample is treated as an anomaly or betrayal. It saves effort because you don’t have to think, just sort people into bins and react accordingly.

Then there’s algorithmic certainty syndrome, which is more modern and a bit more subtle. People get used to feeds that reinforce their priors so efficiently that disagreement starts to feel like statistical noise. So instead of updating beliefs, they just escalate confidence. Nothing says “epistemic humility” like being completely wrong with confidence.

Another one is transactional morality: “If I’m right, I’m allowed to be as harsh as I want.” Which turns every disagreement into a license for cruelty, as if correctness automatically comes with behavioral immunity.

And underneath a lot of it is something simpler and more disconcerting: comfort with not understanding things before judging them. People are so eager to tell others what they are by labeling them and defining them rather than simply talking about themselves (you… vs. I…)

That looks like aluminum…

Don’t smoke out of aluminum.

Many embrace being a “trad wife,” short for traditional wife. There’s also TERFs.

Just go to your nearest Pentecostal and/or Evangelical Church and you’re going to find a congregation full of such women (and men.) These people make up about a third to maybe a half of Trump’s base. Warning: they mostly all openly hate lgbtq, and they’ll do it from the podium to a cheering congregation. If you’re any sort of ‘out of the closet’ I do not suggest going.

There’s also this company called Barna research. They’re the biggest religious research institution in the world. And they also own a ton of companies (subsidiaries). Some of which produce these weekly planners for churches of all sorts of denominations. They are remarkably similar in their talking points over every Sunday in the year - all 52 of them.

It’s almost prophetic how relevant they can be (probably due to the prevalence)… Very conservative/traditional messaging. Very doom and gloom - that the end is coming, and the world’s going to shit. Very anti-progressive/anti-socialism even anti-Jesus’ teachings! And it’s the same core messaging and talking points whether it’s a Lutheran Church or Catholic Church or whatever…