Not_mikey

joined 11 months ago
[–] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

How long it lasted?

Between '94 and '98, after they mandated the background checks but before they had the infrastructure to do instant background checks.

[–] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

How's the BSW voting on this? I know they're sort of hopping on the immigrants bashing bandwagon but hope they have the sense not to align with the fascists.

[–] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 5 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

Background checks started in '68, they didn't become instant until like '93 because internet but they still existed

They may have existed and some states imposed them but they weren't required federally until the Brady bill in '93 .

there's never been national waiting periods.

There was a 5 day waiting period required nationally between when the Brady bill was first enacted in '93 and when the national instant criminal background check system came online in '98

[–] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 6 points 3 weeks ago

Maybe in the mainstream, but the open source, socialist and anarchist communities that populate lemmy tend to be very critical of ideas like intellectual property and copy right.

[–] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

it's between North America and South America

You're thinking of the Caribbean sea, the gulf of Mexico is bounded by the united states to the north, Florida and Cuba to the east and Mexico to the south and west.

It being called the gulf of Mexico or gulf of America isn't really going to change anything

It will literally require changing every map and GIS database in the country. Think of all the work NOAA will have to do deal with this BS. Even besides the annoyance and cost of updating all of those it will cause confusion with the rest of the world who will still call it the gulf of Mexico.

[–] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 5 points 3 weeks ago

Not all athletes have the same needs though. I don't doubt a marathon runner would need to drink a lot of water , though I doubt even they'd need 2.5 gallons, but does a professional golfer?

I'd argue a quarter back is more similar to the golfer. They aren't training for speed or stamina, they're training their fine motor skills and some strength to be able to throw far and throw accurately. If you look at the quarter back on the side line they usually aren't dripping with sweat like a lot of the other positions are.

[–] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 17 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Odds are he doesn't actually drink that much. At the time he was selling electrolytes and if he can convince people to drink more water then they'll buy more electrolytes to put in that water.

[–] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 24 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

Idk, one of the articles references two high school football players who died from over hydration. Didn't say how much they drank but it does go to show that you can over hydrate even with a lot of exercise.

Also he's the quarter back, does he actually do that much strenuous exercise? Yeah he probably has to do some sprints to remain agile but he doesn't need to run that fast or for that long, he just needs to make quick decisions under pressure and throw well. He's not a marathon runner or anything like that.

[–] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 6 points 3 weeks ago

It's definitely censorship, you can see it on there app as it's still buggy and will generate a response then halfway through it will delete it and say "sorry that's beyond my current scope"

It did actually give a good multi paragraph response to "what is a tankie" before it realized that it was a no-no topic.

[–] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 14 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

It's even worse / funnier in the app, it will generate the response, then once it realizes its about Taiwan it will delete the whole response and say sorry I can't do that.

If you ask it "what is the republic of china" it will generate a couple paragraphs of the history of China, then it'll get a couple sentences in about the retreat to Taiwan and then stop and delete the response.

[–] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 3 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

More like the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

[–] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 3 points 4 weeks ago

What? This isn't ancient history blaming Clinton or Carter for this. It's only been 6 months since Biden shit the bed on the debate stage and less than a year since he could've seen the many polls that said generic democrat was doing far better then him, dropped out and let the party have a primary.

Are you guys allergic to blaming anyone in the democratic establishment for the shit situation were in?

 
 
 
39
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by Not_mikey@slrpnk.net to c/unpopularopinion@lemmy.world
 

First of all this isn't an anti-weed post, I use weed regularly and enjoy it. What I'm arguing against is occasional use, once a month or less, at that level your tolerance usually resets between uses. The thing they don't tell you in health class is tolerance goes both ways, you become tolerant to both the positives and negatives of use. For weed the negative im referring to is anxiety, though short term memory loss also goes down with more regular use. Whenever I take a break and then start doing weed again I get way too in my head and anxious which usually goes away after a couple sessions. This has also become worse with modern legal strains that have become way too concentrated. Dispensary edibles are a bit better since you can dose them easier but even then the longer the time in between uses the more likely you'll forget what's a good dosage. I see this a lot with friends who don't regularly do weed and they smoke with me, get way too high, have a bad time and then won't do it again for a while and repeat the cycle. So for those type of people I'd recommend not doing weed at all or doing it more regularly so you can keep your tolerance up. No shame in picking either but the middle ground kinda sucks.

EDIT: a lot of people are saying get lower percentage strains or higher CBD ones, to that I'd say I wish I could. I always try and get the lowest percentage stuff I can find at the dispensary and that stuffs still usually in the high teens percent THC with less then a percent CBD here in SF. So I guess part of this is just a rant on how stupidly concentrated modern weed is and how it leaves little margin for error.

view more: next ›