southsamurai

That's why I have a chicken.

Even my chicken knows that crinkles = treats, and no way is any bald monkey going to lie to her otherwise.

Gods, the first time heard Elba get suggested as a possible Bond, I flipped out. Then it eventually reached a point where it was definitely not going to happen, and it made me really not want to see any more Bond movies at all. There's some actors born to play a role, and if they don't, it's kinda horrible. Like, if Pierce Brosnan had never had a chance to be Bond, it would have been a miscarriage of cinematic justice, no matter how the movie actually turned out (I enjoyed his turn personally).

The fact that it's essentially impossible to have Elba do even a single bond film now ruins the franchise for me

Eh, there's no single magic bullet. You stay honest, but past that, you gotta tailor it to the individual kid. Some of them will want a more "scientific" explanation (as in the big brush strokes of reproduction), some will zone out if you say anything past the "that's what animals do" level of response.

The closest to a general rule you can get is to answer what they actually asked, not what you think they're asking. Kids tend to ask things in a very immediate wat, exactly like your example "mommy, what's that?" So you answer what that is in the simplest terms you can and let follow up questions shape the conversation.

You also tend to want to stick to their vocabulary range, rather than trying to expand it at the same time as answering them. To a five year old, having you try to explain what the word masturbation means would be way, way more problematic than the fact that the animal is masturbating, if you see what I mean. You'd just say that's how the lizard wants to play. They just don't have the vocabulary to understand the full explanation yet. So stay simple. If they're ten, you can expand more because they'll have the language map to understand what you're saying if you say "oh, it's trying to mate with the object"

But, you still have to shape that you the individual. Not every kid handles information the same way. Some kids might grasp the concepts of reproduction really easy, others might not, so you gotta stay flexible.

Heck yeah!

A very good friend gifted me one when he upgraded to the oled model, and it totally brought back my love of gaming. I hadn't really been able to because of health issues, what with not being able to stay at my desk very long.

But this sucker? It's running everything I've thrown at it so far. Baldur's gate 3, and 2. Genshin. Stuff like stardew valley.

The worst one to get set up was genshin because they insist on having their own launcher. Makes updates a pain in the ass. Luckily, I don't play it often, so I don't care much lol.

I can be in bed, on the couch, even in the john if I want to, and enjoy the hell out of the experience. Worst case, I might have to fiddle with settings if the game doesn't have native controller support, or piddle with stuff like heroic or lutris if a game is pissy installing.

Amen!

The first rule of project mayhem...

Well, you absolutely have control over splatters once you understand the way they happen. A liquid at a given viscosity moving at a given speed will have predictable, but minutely variable, outcomes.

In other words, every raindrop hits in a predictable way, and the only reason you can't predict exactly how the resulting splash will look is a lack of ability to make the same predictions on a molecular level. But, if you could see and hold in the human brain, the outcome is absolutely predictable even at that level; we just can't pull it off without outside assistance.

Look at airbrushing. It's tightly controlled spatter. You're using air to make the drops so small that we can predict and control the outcome so that it can be used to give a range of end products. But if you get in really tight to what's going on, it's high speed splattering.

I would also disagree that a happy accident can't have depth visually. But I think you likely misread how I was emphasizing, so it isn't really useful to say more than that.

However, Judge for yourself if he was bullshiting about his degree of intent in his efforts. It isn't like there aren't other interviews and information about what he did, on both technical and analytical levels. Him saying he has intent doesn't mean he's speaking truth, nor would it being truth change whether or not one agrees with his intent, or how successful one feels he was in achieving it.

But he at least came up with an explanation of intent, and his movements when working are controlled enough to indicate he at least thought he was working with intent, and isn't that the same thing as intent on a practical level?

Eh, short term it's no big deal. Teeth are durable as hell and won't get fucked up by anything that minor if it's a rare thing. But, the more you do it, the more damage accumulates over time. A few times a year over decades? Never gonna notice it.

A few times a month, and it'll be a decade or two before it would be a problem.

A few times a week, and you'd better have dental coverage and/or good income, because you're looking at a few years before it starts showing up as carries. Less if circumstances are bad, or you didn't start out with very good teeth.

There's also the fact that keeping in the habit of brushing after eating stays a habit better if you don't deviate from it without an important reason. In my mind, if you're awake enough to eat, you're awake enough to brush afterward. If you aren't awake enough to brush, then you probably shouldn't be eating either. Fucks with digestion and metabolism. It's better to just stay on track and skip the snack, if you dig me.

But nah, if it's a rare thing, you'll take more damage from a soda than a single night skipping brushing after a midnight nosh. It's all about the acids.

Now, if you can't be bothered to at least swish out with some water, I'd say you've got worse things to worry about because you can do that on your way back to bed, swallow it and take zero extra effort beyond the mouthful of water. If your energy is that low, or there's some other impediment involved, focus on that.

Pollock hits harder in person tbh.

Prints and photos don't really work; it ends up looking flat and empty. But in person, there's more "depth" in both a literal and figurative sense. You can see more of the intent put into the methodology.

Mind you, I agree with the idea that he's over hyped. He wasn't exactly breaking new ground, and there's plenty of other artists that explored abstract painting with more satisfying and effective results.

But I don't think it's accurate to call it shit either. As much as people love to say it, no a kindergartener couldn't do it. Even high schoolers have trouble making something that looks similar enough to carry the same visual effect. Some art students at a collegiate level can't.

Turns out you do have to have some degree of development in your techniques at the very least to get the same results, no matter how much raw talent you have.

Now, don't ask me if I really like his stuff. I mean, I'm going to say it anyway, but still. My take on his body of work is that he fully explored the "drip" technique way before he quit doing it, and likely could have stopped after the first one because the only real differences between them amount to nothing more than the difference between most hotel and doctors' office wall hangings. You see one, you've seen them all.

Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt that he got something more than money out of the process. I make bland and basic art myself, and IDGAF about the results as much as the enjoyment of making. Every art student I've ever known gets super into the process of creating and that's a wonderful thing; dissecting what they're doing as they do it.

But that value isn't something that carries on beyond the process itself.

How immersed?

Tye sphincter can and will resist pressure, but only so much. You won't run into that kind of pressure freediving, or even anywhere you could use a wet suit afaik, but you get deep enough and it would become an issue.

Or, if you're immersed somewhere with water moving heavily, you could get breaches in your breeches I suppose.

Ummmmmm.....