you still didn’t answer my question about all the people who lived before the Quran. Were they all immoral? Was slavery morally allowed before the Quran was written? Or were they immoral but ignorant of their immorality only because nobody had told them yet?
I’m primarily a subs person, despite the fact that I prefer dubs if they’re actually good enough.
Cowboy Bebop and Fullmetal Alchemist are phenomenal dubs. I’ve watched both subbed and dubbed and think they are equally good, and thus prefer the dub so I can pay more attention to the animation and action.
The only recent dub I’ve thought was okay was ReZero. I don’t love it, and prefer the sub, but it is one of the better ones I’ve heard. Maybe there are other great ones but I stopped even trying to find them after a while 😂
So then everyone before the Quran was immoral? literally not a single human being existed before the Quran was written who was moral? Or were they immoral without knowing it because nobody had told them “slavery is wrong” yet? That seems profoundly unjust.
It’s also important to note that according to Surah Al-An’am 6:112, any human who rebels against God and dedicated themselves to leading others astray is classified as a demon.
So I guess enslaving an atheist activist like Richard Dawkins is morally acceptable according to you? Since he is, according to the Quran, a demon?
I don’t think we understand sentience yet. I think it is possible, if not likely, that there are sentient things which we believe are not.
i also don’t think a heart is relevant at all to sentience, as it plays no role in perception which I believe is the core of sentience. The heart is just a pump that moves resources through the body.
I don’t think a nervous system is necessary either, unless you define “nervous system” very broadly. I think any sufficiently complex sensory input system would be enough to provide the elements of perception required to foster sentience.
As for the brain… I’m not convinced it has to look like a brain as we know it. The brain provides several primary functions, but only a few of them are related to perception (many are instead related to automation of bodily functions).
I think any system that can receive input, store a memory (and I don’t mean cognitive recall, I just mean historical record in the loosest sense), and perform complex conditional responses based on the input and memory, could produce something we would call sentience.
Good dubs have always been a rare gem.
IMO the key to a good dub is two things:
Actors and direction that prioritizes caricature without becoming “campy”. This is something JP VO is ridiculously good at. They identify a character’s personality, crank it up to 11, but still make the emotional delivery feel genuine, even if extreme
Direction that understands the characters as intended by the author. This is where a lot of dubs fall horribly short. They do not consult with the original content creator, and wind up with voices and characterizations that may seem to work on the surface but are lacking the depth of understanding for a character needed for the performance to make sense over time as we learn more about them.
Just my 2c, but IMO this is where most of the problems with dubs come from, and why they wind up sounding either generic or campy.
at what point do you distinguish a thing from the components it’s made of?
You say neurons have qualia, but its parts certainly don’t. Proteins don’t. Lipids don’t. Molecules don’t. But when you put them together in a specific configuration you say they do?
How is this different from silica? Why can’t a thing composed of silica have qualia even if the parts individually don’t?
so do you believe everyone was immoral until 150 years ago (participation in and tolerance for slavery) or do you believe we are immoral today for denying the right to own slaves (as allowed by religious texts)?
Addition asks “What do you get when you combine these two numbers?”
Subtraction asks “What do you need to combine with this number to get this result?”
Multiplication asks “What do you get if you add this number to itself this many times?”
Division asks “How many times do you need to add this number to itself to get this result?”
In many ways, all of these operations are syntactic flavor for addition. Subtraction is addition in reverse. Multiplication is repetitive addition. Division is repetitive addition in reverse. Exponents are recursive repetition of repetitive addition. And so on.
Look into the axiomatic proof of 1+1=2. It will shed some light on how mathematics is just complex notation for very, very simple concepts at scale.
This is the correct answer and it drives me crazy how often this comes up.
As another user commented, division and subtraction are just syntactic flavor for multiplication and addition, respectively. Division is a specific type of multiplication. Subtraction is a specific type of addition.
And so there is a reason mathematicians do not use the division symbol (➗): it is ambiguous as to which of the following terms are in the divisor and which are part of the next non-divisor term.
In other words, the equation as written is a lossy representation of whatever actual equation is being described.
tl;dr: the equation as written provides insufficient information to determine the correct order of operations. It is ambiguous notation and should not be used.
Marriage is a state-sanctioned merger of assets and rights. It provides a legal authorization for decision making related to your spouse, shared property ownership rights, rights regarding power of attorney in an emergency, and tax benefits.
Everything else is religious/social ceremony and can be achieved without the need for marriage certification.
I know several people who didn’t “believe in marriage” until their SO was in the hospital and they weren’t allowed to visit or make decisions for them. Pretty horrible watching the estranged parent or second cousin making decisions about the health of your 10+ year partner, against your wishes, with no recourse.
Yes. Please list things that a sitting federal politician can do when both chambers of Congress and the presidency are in opposition party control, which are not purely performative nonsense
“Never trust a tech worker” they said, using a device designed by a tech worker, running software designed by a tech worker, accessing servers maintained by a tech worker, on a hosting service implemented and managed by tech workers, through an internet service provider employing tech workers galore.
I’m going to try to give you an actual answer to your question as I believe you intend it …
First: Let’s agree that the question being asked is NOT “did chickens or eggs exist first?” but rather “If chickens lay chicken eggs, and chickens are born from chicken eggs, and any egg not in this category is not a chicken egg, then is this not a paradox? If there was no chicken, how could a chicken egg be laid? And if there was no chicken egg, how could a chicken be born?”
The “real” answer: What this question actually demonstrates is a weakness in language. It is an ambiguity in the term “chicken egg”. It leaves open for interpretation by the listener what a “chicken egg” actually is, what makes it a “chicken egg”. On the one hand it could be “eggs produced by chickens”. It could be “eggs from which chickens hatch”. It cannot actually be both; they are different, though in practice only slightly. So the answer changes based on how you define “chicken egg”.
My “best effort” answer: If I want to try to answer the question literally, I define “chicken egg” as “An egg which, if allowed to hatch, reach maturity, and breed, will likely produce another of itself (i.e. another chicken egg).” In which case the answer is clear: the chicken egg came first. There was a proto-chicken, something very much like a chicken but not quite a chicken. It laid an egg with the genetic mutation that made it a “chicken egg” instead of a “proto-chicken egg”. And thus began chickens.
but who would ever frown while wearing a ball gag? 🤔
CPBGP
Constant positive ball gag pressure
But that might cause confusion with internet routing standards and US presidents where CPBGP stands for “Child Predator Border Gateway Protocol”
I apologize for this incredibly specific and terrible nerd slash dark humor joke
it is 100% a CPAP mask. you can see the other strap mark arching toward the top of the nose, and the mask mark across the bridge of the nose.
but yes, I too hope I’m wrong because ball gag would be way better funnier
source: am CPAP wearer, have strap marks, don’t own ball gag
Answering YOUR question:
This is common with disposables and low-quality cartridges.
What’s happening: some of the “oil” (which is really more like wax) is getting pulled/dripping into the airflow channel, and when it dries between uses becomes too solid to be cleared easily, blocking airflow
To prevent it next time: don’t “chain vape”. Take one, maybe two hits tops and let it cool fully before using again
What to do with this one: You can’t really fix it unfortunately. So when you experience this, do quick, short, hard pulls repeatedly until it clears. You’re trying to activate the coil so it heats up the oil/wax until it’s soft enough that air pressure can clear the blockage temporarily. To save your cheeks, you can also suck on it hard, creating negative pressure, then, without letting go, block the hole with your tongue. This will create suction inside, and if you leave it like that for 10-15 seconds it should clear the clog temporarily.
DISCLAIMER: I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice.
This is a nearly impossible to prove in court, unless she was appointed as his caretaker due to being unable to care for himself.
The major issue is that proving intent is impossible in your scenario and lying isn’t illegal. Nor is failing to set appointments or provide over-the-counter medicine if you haven’t been granted some form of guardianship.
You need to explain what prevented the husband from seeking his own medical care. If he was capable of seeking care and didn’t, even if she lied about the availability of the care, it will be very hard to prove that her intent was his death. You would need to prove that a) she told HIM that she had set up appointments etc or that they weren’t available, b) she knew that blocking him from getting treatment would likely lead to his death, and c) she actively interfered with his own attempts to seek care
The best you could hope for would be something like involuntary manslaughter, negligence, reckless disregard, or something like that
Your shitpostid is in the format of a North American phone number, with an area code in Quebec.
Nothing implied by that, just couldn’t help but notice.
Vic Mignogna’s Ed scream is really good. It’s just a shame he’s a really shitty human and has been (justifiably) driven out of the voice acting business.