With this specific example, if McGillis had spent as much time and money and effort on appearing young and attractive as Tom Cruise has, maybe she would have been back in her role as well.
Oh, agreed! But it seems that men can remain "viable love interests" as long as they keep their rugged good looks (yes, with cosmetic help, of course), but in women this takes a stronger requirement of looking youthful.
> completely uninterested in the author’s “job pitch”
It's central to the arc of the narrative though. She begins with the idealistic possibilities for Facebook; and now, in a real-life epilogue, is concluding by pulling back the curtain on how horrible these people are. And by extension this company.
Looks like they got their hands on a dataset of every restaurant that is licensed to serve alcohol -- or at least a decent subset of such restaurants, filtered by menu or whatever.
I checked a few dots near where I live and they're all fried chicken joints. Yeah, we do love chimaek around here. :)
As someone married to a Korean, I am not surprised in the least. Every single one I have met (males at least) drinks like a fish. It is impossible to describe to a westerner just how ingrained the drinking culture is over there.
The entire US and North America is massively more empty relative to almost anywhere else, even most perceptually sparse countries. Many of European countries are 5-10x denser than US.
They are such an urban phenomenon. A largely empty rural state, with the legacy of prohibition, where you have to drive? That's going to have way fewer drinking locations. A culture of hanging out and drinking requires walkable urbanism. Many of the UK pubs pre-date the invention of the car; "peak pub" appears to have been the late 1800s with over 100,000.
I'm impressed that Korea has more than the UK, but this is definitely going to be a matter of size and the tiny Korean bars.
> A culture of hanging out and drinking requires walkable urbanism.
I don't think that's really true. In the UK, villages had pubs. Gradually some of the villages were joined together into larger cities, and the pubs remained. It wasn't planned as walkable urbanism.
You didn't have to plan to get walkable urbanism before cars. It just happened because everyone needed a pub, store, school, etc. within walking distance.
82k places in Korea include any restaurant or joint or karaoke with a license to serve alcohol. Personally I would not care to call 80% of them "bar".
So in Ohio probably everything with class C and D license. How many is not public but probably many times more than 4k.
Many actual street level bona fide bars in Seoul (which has half of all the people of the entire country and the most bars by far) are tiny rooms that fit a few people each. But you always have a "bar street" with 50 of those next to each other.
Codes like these are the secret sauce of America's asphalt deserts, in which you'll find - by international standards - comparatively large restaurants and stores. Walkable cities tend to gravitate towards smaller equivalents, and more of them.
A minimum amount of parking spots per patron capacity. So a bar with 60 people capacity must have 15 parking spaces. [0]
Usually parking minimums are WAY too high in required parking spaces to make sense in most cases. Which leads to stuff like a arena having 5x the land area be parking than what is taken up by the arena itself. [1]
The idea of a bar (ie a place people go to get drunk) with a dedicated parking lot strikes me as particularly bad for road safety. I'm baffled that this is not only encouraged, but mandated.
How do people do this in practice? Just drink and drive and hope they don't crash / get fined? Or does everybody bring 1 friend who sips colas the whole night?
Parking lots are not mandated for bars in the US, at least not everywhere. I helped my girlfriend's dad open a bar in Long Beach 20 years ago. The city required us to pay for the maintenance of three streetside parking spaces, but that was it. Pay the city. We didn't have to build anything that didn't already exist.
>Parking lots are not mandated for bars in the US, at least not everywhere.
This, they are making the mistake that all the people on /r/askamerican do over on reddit. Laws like this mostly aren't nationwide or even statewide, they are decided on a very local level.
Yeah but I mean, if everybody goes to the pub by car, does it mean everybody brings a designated driver? Or is this one of those things where everybody drives drunk but pretends nobody does?
Mostly the latter IMO. The most popular bar where I grew up is on a busy highway with no housing within walking distance. Parking lot reliably fills up every weekend night, mostly with single occupancy vehicles. You can do the math.
It's pretty common for people drive to the bar, get drunk, taxi/Uber/Lyft/DD home, and then return the following day to get their vehicle. I don't think it makes sense personally, but I also don't drink at all so I'm not a great judge here.
>Usually parking minimums are WAY too high in required parking spaces to make sense in most cases.
That hasn't been my experience. Anytime I've wanted to go somewhere halfway popular the lot is usually full or nearly full. On the flipside, the lots are often empty during times when the business is closed, but reducing the size of the lot would exacerbate the issue of not being able to park nearby when the business is open. You aren't going to stop the US from being car centric, so you either have to dictate that businesses maintain a reasonable amount of parking or you have to have the municipality maintain several large parking structures throughout the city. Most cities would rather have the businesses that need the parking pay for the parking and most people would rather park near the businesses that they frequent.
> You aren't going to stop the US from being car centric
I think this isn't true. The same way suburbia spread out from cities, I think walkability can spread outwards too in baby steps.
For example, SF is relatively walkable/has public transit. The next step would be slowly removing parking minimums and making the areas surrounding SF more walkable. And then over time as people in those surrounding areas start using their cars less (not getting rid of them but at least trying to do short journeys on foot/bike/transit).
Over time that spreads outwards because half the community served by an area no longer needs a car for their daily travel and the envelope of walkability spreads further.
Sure you can slowly, over a long time, convert already dense areas into being less car centric, but you aren't going to make the rest of the country that way. Parking minimums, when they exist, are set by super local governments, they already don't exist or are set very low in areas of high density. The solution is to increase density, but again you aren't going to do that in the rest of the country. Random bars in Ohio are still going to have large parking lots, because land is cheap and given the choice, most people prefer less density.
This is also upper-bounded by the law; Ohio only issues one class D-5 liquor license (license to sell beer, wine, and spirits) per 2000 residents, which roughly maxes it out at ~5950 bars (in practice this looks to be rounded up on a per-town basis, making this an underestimate). An Ohio with the population of South Korea would only be allowed ~25000 bars.
What's really cool is if you go to a site like [0] that shows the "true" size of countries etc. (i.e. not distorted by a projection), Indiana is probably the most analogous state to South Korea, in terms of size and shape. But South Korea has 7x the population of Indiana!
Really puts into perspective a movie like "Train to Busan", which would be like taking a train from Gary to Madison!
Many countries have much more used “public” spaces, and people spend much more time in them, together.
The idea of driving home to the suburbs and locking yourself into your private home is very North American.
I just got back from10 months across Europe. The number of people in public places eating, chatting and just spending time (no simply going somewhere) makes LA or Chicago look like a ghost town.
After living there for about four years, my mind goes immediately to soju. Not sure if there is a connection, but that’s something I might deep dive with an LLM today.
"Bar" doesn't mean the same thing in every country. In Spain although a bar serves alcohol of all kinds it is also where one eats breakfast and lunch and gets a coffee. They are indispensable social centers and even a tiny town of 150 has one.
I wish I couldve excluded everything past basic algebra and hopped right to statistics at a young age - I *loved* everything about the practicality of it, how it explained tangible relationships and illuminated the world. Algebra and calculus were so un-engaging I had those teachers calling me everything but a stupid child.
Curious to see support for the TRT statement - I myself have been on test cyp and anastrazole for the better part of two years with not one side effect. Been in and around steroid users in the strength sport realm for 15. The people with "nasty" side effects are almost always abusers that blast/cruise too often with no AI or PCT e.g dumbasses. Its been a life changing experience for me (going from low 200 ng/dl free T to 800-900 at 32)
General marker is x4-6 weekly dose for free test, so I'd wager you're taking somewhere between 150-200mg?
I found that contrary to popular advice, I felt much better without taking an aromatase inhibitor and letting my estradiol float at the higher end of the reference range.
There's some science backing the idea that Test/E2 are meant to exist in terms of a relative ratio to each other, rather than concrete numbers.
IE, if your free test is 1,000ng/dL, you'd want more E2 than if you were sitting at 300ng/dL.
I only take the guidance of my doc as recommendations for AI's have always been all over the place and ive been with him forever - I started at 2x/2weeks and now its once every other week. On top of that my estrogen numbers have always been high so it makes sense. Its been an experiment - I did tank it once and uhh, the side effects were interesting
Fair enough. You likely know this, but my E2 levels are highly sensitive to my bodyfat as well, what with adipose tissue contributing to aromatization.
Could be that at some bodyfat percentages you don't need an AI at all, while at higher levels you do.
This is neat. I left cloud infra work before everyone wanted k8s knowledge and Ive always assumed im 50% of the way there having docker and nomad experience
I never left cloud infra, though I never came across a scale that required k8s anything close to that scale would just go on serverless functions anyway. However, I will agree with you that I've always assumed that I'm too 50% of the way there with docker and misc experience.
I noticed the other day I almost never ask my teammates brainstorming or collaborative questions anymore while I can do the same thing with an LLM. Its maybe too early to tell but Im a heck of a lot less frustrated because one conversation doesnt take four hours.
On the contrary - I maybe think my learning is more targeted. Ive learned a tremendous amount of C#/.net over the last few months and can converse better with developers (I do not work on a dedicated team of devs)
That, and it's better in most functional and polish regards than LastPass. I haven't used 1Password, so I can't compare those two directly, but I'd strongly recommend BitWarden over LastPass as far as those two are considered.
I have my own beef with 1Password, but having used both Bitwarden and 1Password, I still find 1Password to be the better UX and more secure solution. Bitwarden is also worse at filling with their browser extension, rather significantly. That said, 1Password's Safari support with multiple profiles is... frustrating... at best.
I’d strongly prefer an open source and selfhostable option, but each time I’ve evaluated Bitwarden in the past, it was a big enough downgrade from 1Password that I didn’t think switching was a good option.
If the experience ever becomes as seamless, I’ll be switching.
That is particularly true for anything dealing with security. I evaluated both BitWarden and 1Password when we wanted to migrate away from LastPass. My recommendation was to eventually go with BW. Its open-source nature was a factor, but for a corporate use the UX factors were even more prominent.
Over a course of a month, I ran into several subtle footguns with 1P. Search included only some of the fields. Password reset/rotation flow was easy to mess up (thanks to the confusing + inconsistent "copy field" functionality) and get into a situation where the generated password that was stored in the vault was different from the one that was set: in my tests there was 50/50 chance of accidentally regenerating the password before the vault storage step after submitting the new one for a remote service.
There were a whole load of "features" that didn't make any sense. The UI for 1P was a real mess. The feeling I got from it was that their product had been captured by Product Managers[tm] desperate to justify their own existence by shipping ever more Features[tm] without considering the impact on the core functionality.
BW's UI is by no means perfect, and their entry editing flow is far from ideal. But at least most of the actual usability snags in their browser extension have a common workaround: pop the BW overlay out from the browser, into a separate window. Their open-source nature and availability of independent implementations mean that there will be alternatives, should BW go down the same features-features-and-more-antifeatures hellhole in their race to eventually appease their VC backers.
Sounds like our experience with it could not be more different.
> The UI for 1P was a real mess.
In what way? You described how you feel about the UI, but I’m curious about actual specifics.
It’s entirely possible that I’m just too accustomed to it because I’ve been using it for many years, but what you’re describing is how I felt about Bitwarden.
I can completely see choosing BW in a corporate setting for a host of other reasons. But for me personally, the priority is a tool that gets out of my way and just works.
The tool that has done that is 1P.
> Less is more.
That really depends. If less means that the password manager doesn’t get used, then less is less.
I check BW every so often but it always feels less polished UI wise. For all the complaints people had about 1P moving to electron, it’s UX is still the best out there.
I'm confused why some companies (including Amazon and Steam) insist on family features. The mental model behind this is more prescriptive than descriptive - it doesn't match to how users and their families function; rather, it insists on some activities to a) exist in family, and b) be not allowed outside of family.
Or simply: how many people have actual family listed in their Steam / Amazon "family sharing"?
What do you mean about prescribing and insisting? I’m not sure I understand your questions about family sharing and the mental model.
I use family sharing with actual family for my Steam account and all video streaming services. Am I weird? The reason is because streaming services allow sharing under a single paid account, and my wife & kids don’t want to pay for separate accounts, and don’t want to have to authenticate separately on shared devices (TVs, game consoles, iPads, etc). Steam family sharing works across different Steam accounts, and sharing a single account doesn’t work, so Steam isn’t particularly relevant to the discussion of family sharing of passwords. Steaming accounts, on the other hand, all assume they’re being used by a whole family, and the main reason is because of shared devices; the family TV itself logged in. So, they all offer profiles under a single account. Netflix clarifies that family sharing means the people in a single household, maybe others are similar.
We use password family sharing as well. My wife and I share bank and credit card accounts. My wife needs my accounts sometimes to do certain things — you might be surprised how many banks do not offer joint accounts and still treat wives as second class citizens. We share the Netflix & Amazon accounts with the kids so they can use them. I pay for a 1Password family account and share it with my aging father who’s been losing passwords. These things are all pretty useful for me.
I guess you’re making me wonder why someone wouldn’t make a family sharing feature, when it solves real problems and users are asking for it?
I don’t have amazon or steam so don’t know how any of that works. But for a password manager, family sharing is extremely useful.
Bitwarden doesn’t have families per se, it’s got “organisations”. You can setup unlimited number of organisations and users can get invited and join them. Which is very handy for example my wife and I can login and order our groceries from the supermarket using the same account. Or that we can both login and use our electricity company’s web portal which only allows one account per household. All without needing to send each other passwords and updated passwords back and forth.
I have nothing against sharing per se. My issue is with the family nomenclature. In your case it might align perfectly, but for myself and most people I know, it's not the case. That is, the set of people to share a Netflix subscription with, share Steam library with, share Kindle library with, share passwords to various web services, including utility companies, are only partially overlapping, and do not align perfectly with the idea of "family" or "household".
This seems pedantic. I am trying to wrap my head around why "family sharing" is an issue here. You want to share with someone, use family sharing I don't see what the issue is.
Their comment made me laugh, agreed, open source is really is that big of a perk. IMO especially for something security-related (though 0day is always possible)
I think the assumption something is open source being a perk is naïve - in the end I still have to trust so many elements that actually bring me the platform that BW’s openness doesnt matter.
I loved season one. I'm struggling with this season. [Minor mid-season spoiler ahead] Since they entered the goat room I just feel like I don't want to continue. Ever since Lost finished I have become extremely skeptical of shows that raise more questions than they answer, especially when they are really, really weird questions.
When it was screened to critics it was shown as the full season. I get why now; the latest episodes show so much while conjuring up more questions. The most recent one especially; the cinematography stands on its own. It's very rewarding to continue watching!
I was going to make a parallel to Lost as well, but you beat me to it! I am considering dropping off this show too because it seems like they are just presenting us with mysterious gibberish teases instead of actual plot.
I feel like it really depends on how you introduce the questions. Lost made a big thing out of some of them in a way, which can be annoying. On the other hand, twin peaks made some things just a part of the world. What are owls? I don't know, but the fact they're something else is interesting and that's fine.
I am glad I am not the only one. I feel they are making it as "mysterious" and plodding as possible to pad out the narrative. I am guessing the writers do not really have any idea what direction to take the show. Been burned by too many shows that promise some big reveal to all the mysteries described, but then never deliver. I suspect this will happen with this show as well.
I have exactly the opposite. I found it very difficult to get through the first half of season 1, but actually after that I found it more and more interesting.
