southsamurai

@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Scope⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago⁩:

  Alas, it’s always strange how someone can be so vehement about something and still be vehement about the thing they care about doing what they think is being done.

  I get the urge for jewish people to support each other, and the one country in the world that’s “theirs”. Totally understandable.

  But when that country does the very things the people fear being done to them again, there’s that lack of sense to see the hypocrisy of it.

  It’s sad

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Only boomers can use this bench. Meanwhile, they're trying to get rid of their own property taxes.⁩ ⁨⁨23⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago⁩:

  Handicapped citizens is a term used to be neutral in most places, nor exclusionary for non citizens

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Scope⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago⁩:

  What did draiman do?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Only boomers can use this bench. Meanwhile, they're trying to get rid of their own property taxes.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago⁩:

  Wait, so we’re supposed to have walkable cities and towns to minimize vehicle use, but we can’t also have the equivalent of handicapped parking for the folks that need it most?

  I’m not sure what’s infuriating about this. It’s exactly the same principle as handicapped parking, and there should be more of these.

  Yeah, ideally you’d have enough benches around so that everyone can cop a squat as needed/wanted. But let’s be fucking real here, a healthy, able bodied person in their twenties or thirties isn’t going to need a seat as often.

  Also, fuck that boomer stupidity. We’re supposed to make a world that allows our elderly to have freedom of access and personal mobility. Idgaf what empty headed shit you have against actually baby boomers, we are all going to get old, die, or die before getting old. It’s about fucking supporting each other when we’re in need. Today’s boomers? Well, you’ll be them in fifty years and looking back at this and think “holy fuck, I wish I had a place to sit before trying this next block” this shit helps you, your mother, your uncle, and eventually your kids.

  Gtfo with your ablist, ageist shit

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  Damn, that’s plenty of time to tell you to bugger off, if that was the goal

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  How long did you wait between asking a mod whatever it was before multi-posting?

  This is lemmy. Mods don’t really need to check things ten times a day, so most don’t. Gotta stay laid back broham

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨How do I have casual sex with wheelchair users?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Yo run into trouble in two ways. First, not everyone in a chair is in it for the same reason. Second, you end up largely limited in how casual it can be by virtue of some people needing to have specialty gear to get into and out of chairs. This often means that in extreme cases, you’ll more or less be limited to going back to their place. That’s a big ask for a one night stand when someone is in a difficult situation.

  That being said, or depends on three main factors: flexibility, mobility, and sensation.

  There’s dozens of things that can have a person in a chair. Could be something like bad joints at the least restrictive end, up to something like quadriplegia at the most restrictive.

  Now, disclaimer here, most of my patients that were in chairs are their main form of mobility were men. The female patients I had in that category weren’t exactly sharing their sex lives with me, beyond a couple of attempts to involve me directly (though a couple of men offered that too).

  So, a lot of what I can offer is second hand at best, if you’re a man wanting to have sex with women in chairs.

  With that in mind, what exactly are you wanting to know?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Perfect Rating ⭐/5⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Pfft, I have both of them, and they have cuddle parties

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Do pedophile/ephebophile s have a tendency to seek out friendships or romantic relationships with young adults as well as with minors?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Well, you’re using accurate terminology when asking a question that pertains to the distinctions of how the age related paraphilias work, so I’d actually call that a good thing. There is a difference clinically, and it does factor in to what you’re asking, though not to a great degree.

  Pedophiles, as opposed to ephebophiles and also as opposed to hebephiles, have more trouble developing and maintaining adult relationships. I haven’t ever run across any studies on differentiating hebe and ephebe differences in this regard.

  There’s a lot of unknowns though, and there’s a lot of issues in the existing data because it relies on either people that have offended, and/or those admitting it and willing to participate in research. That’s a really narrow band of participants.

  That being said, because of what pedophilia is, there tends to be a greater degree of exclusivity than in other categories. Meaning that, when one is attracted to undeveloped bodies and/or minds, a person is much less likely to be able to experience attraction to fully developed bodies. So seeking relationships (romantic, sexual, or friendship) with young adults isn’t going to satisfy them. It’s a fairly hard line where once puberty begins causing changes, pedophiles lose interest, or even become outright repulsed.

  Since hebephilia and ephebophilia are delineations that include more developed bodies and faces, the “edges” are blurrier for them. And, while people sometimes refuse to believe it, the actual age of the individual is not a primary factor in any of the chronophilias. Well, it can be, but it’s way less common. What is a primary factor is how closely the object of attraction cleaves to the chronophile’s inner “map”.

  For an ephebophile, that inner set of criteria includes well developed secondary sexual characteristics. So, they have less trouble interacting with legal adults on a sexual level. Hebephiles are murkier because while their range of physical development is definitely not at adult ranges, the last I read anything (pre covid) had them being almost as capable of functioning as ephebophiles.

  Which brings us back to your question more precisely. Pedophiles do sometimes seek out less obviously sketchy relationships. But it wouldn’t be something common. Whereas an ephebophile, by nature, does seek out romantic and/or sexual relationships with young adults and older teens. They (again, I’m pulling from old info here) can bypass some of the social issues as long as they pay attention to ages of consent, so have less reason to avoid seeking out their preferred level of development.

  Again, hebephiles are the murkier category in that. It really isn’t as well studied, or wasn’t last time I was bored enough to go digging for an online question like this. I suspect that’s at least in part due to lower numbers. It seemed to me when looking at stuff that there’s less of them.

  See, when it comes right down to it, ephebophiles aren’t the same kind of chronophilia as pedophiles are. The kind of development they respond to is near adult. Hell, in terms of the secondary sexual development alone, it’s not inherently different from attraction to adults, because by the approximate age ranges used to classify ephebophilia casually, many of those bodies are at adult development. It’s often other signs of youth that make the key difference. That attraction isn’t a malfunction, but a social issue.

  Hebephiles? They’re classified as a disorder, iirc, but in day to day existence, are more likely to be able to find their attractions in legal outlets because some full adults lack the normative level of secondary sexual development.

  Anyway, the short answer is yes, but there’s difference in how and why.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Does it matter who it's about? Just sub in any rich asshole who is incapable of joy and wonder.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  In fairness, backyard growing is challenging. And tomatoes are sometimes finicky bastards.

  But! When things go right, and you can harvest at peak ripeness AND actually know how to tell when that is, you don’t get better tomatos, for fresh eating or canning

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨How come in the trucking industry they are very against carrying a gun? Some area's my sister went into in new york I would have carried an AK-47. No offense NY.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  I think the answer has already been given. That the combination of liability to the trucking company and the difficulties of transporting firearms across state lines while following all laws is prohibitive.

  As an example, me as a private citizen, I can transport a firearm anywhere in the country, if I am A: carrying it unloaded and secured, and B: crossing through the state.

  A means that a trucker would have to keep it somewhere they can’t even reach out in case of trouble while traveling, unless the specific state allows for some other form of carry.

  B means that any time you stop in state, you’re obligated to either completely follow their carry laws, or keep it locked away.

  Can you actually quote off carry laws for NY state, since that’s the example you used? I can’t, and I own firearms, and have carried them on trips. But I very carefully made sure to be able to quote those laws from memory when doing so, and abiding by them.

  So, think about being a company doing shipping all over. Do you want employees or contractors toting any type of firearms while representing you? Nah. And, while fuck capitalism, that would be a public relations nightmare at best. No company wants that heat.

  Besides, why the fuck would you carry a long gun for defense in that situation? Long guns are definitely a better weapons choice overall, but they’re pretty damn shitty at being convenient to keep ready while doing other things. Is the hypothetical driver carrying it via sling all the time they’re out of their truck?

  Nah, if you’re expecting trouble, you bring a rifle, but this scenario would call for something more compact and easy to both keep at ready but not be highly visible. At least then, in states where you can legally carry randomly, you’ll have something at hand. Guns are like cameras. The best one is the one with you. An AK just isn’t a realistic edc choice

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Should I just abandon this online identity and start over?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  If you can’t moderately well ensilo your online identity, then definitely nuke them regularly.

  I’m lucky with this name that I’m not the only person using it across the entire internet. It obfuscates me more than it might otherwise. But you gotta protect yo neck. If you’re gong to us the same name a lot, don’t provide identifying info.

  Be vague, or outright lie about things that would place your location and real identity. Otherwise, burn it

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What does "Woke" mean to you?⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Originally, it was all about the awareness of systemic injustice, particularly surrounding African Americans.

  Eventually, it shifted to an awareness of systemic flaws in general, and social imbalances and injustice, outside of purely governmental bounds.

  Now? It’s turned into a clear and easy way to tell someone is a moron because nobody else uses it any more, so it’s always someone saying that woke is bad without eve. Understanding what it is

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I have a rather intimate relationship with death. I did a lot of end of life care, so facing mortality happened early in my life, before I was even old enough to vote.

  I don’t fear death because it isn’t scary. Dying can be scary, as in all the bullshit that takes you from healthy and alive to not. If it’s sudden and fast, you won’t know it’s there. If it’s slow, well, death becomes a visitor you long to see.

  No matter what you do, you will die. That can bring peace. Accept the fact of it. Know that, some day, everything comes to its natural end. It’s certain, reliable, the one true constant we can count on. No matter what else the universe throws at our tailless monkey asses, death awaits with its open arms to embrace us all. I call that comfort.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨How often is normal to masturbate?⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Well, if you mean normal as a synonym for typical or common, then a couple of times a week is where most adult, premenopausal women sit. Or, those that were willing to take part in surveys, which could skew things.

  If you mean normal as a synonym for healthy, then normal is whatever frequency meets your sexual needs without interfering with the rest of your life.

  Women tend to masturbate more as an enhancement of their sex life, supposedly (I didn’t do the studies, so I can only say so much). Which means that you might masturbate more often when having a satisfying sex life with partners. Men tend to have an upper limit to ejaculation frequency that tops out with a couple of times a day for most men before they can’t get an erection; the body just says nope and takes a rest. Three, maybe four ejaculations is where the average guy can crank some out, and most can’t sustain that every day.

  Mind you, men can orgasm without ejaculation! But it ain’t easy to learn.

  Women tend to be limited more by sensitivity and friction. The tissues of vulvae, vaginas, and clitorises gets abraded at some point, and with the elevated sensitivity brought on by orgasm, the typical woman is going to hit a similar limit as men in terms of sessions, but a higher number of orgasms may be involved per session. But! Those tissues recover quickly, so women are usually able to sustain their preferred frequency no matter how many a day it is, as the next day will have things back to typical conditions (again, on average).

  So, if you’re an every day kinda gal, don’t worry. You’re within known boundaries of frequency. As long as it isn’t messing with the rest of your life, have fun and let the other people think what they will.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Before Wolverine got his adamantium body, could he grow back his bone claws do to his healing factor? Or is it just for skin muscile and organs?⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I do believe you called the origin of the single cell power. Iirc, they reused parts of the story in the comics later, and that’s where it crept in to 616

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Could Archie Bunker or Sanford and Son be made today?⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Sanford and son, absolutely. Well, no, because Redd Foxx is dead, and nobody else could play the role under the Sanford name and make it work. But a sitcom around a junk man, his son, and their hijinks while working from base of racial inequality? Sure, that would be easy to make work.

  All in the Family though? Harder ask. See, the kind of gentle and approachable bigot that Archie was never existed. But people wanted to believe they did. Nobody would ever have credible suspension of disbelief with a the same premise now. And, worse, you couldn’t do it without addressing the elephant in the room. >!The GOP use the elephant as a symbol, and thus the maga segment of that party do as well. I hate that this explanation was remotely necessary!<.

  The show wouldn’t be a humorous and often poignant dissection of American culture and values. It would be a shitshow of epic proportions.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨James Bond should stay white and male, says casting chief⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I’m all for staying with the essence of a character, and there’s definitely arguments to be made that a cishet white male is fundamental to the original Bond from the books. Because that is true; a spy in that setting that isn’t a white male that can at least pretend to be hetero is going to be so unusual in the locations Bond typically works in that he’d never be able to be covert.

  That being said, it has been a very minor portion of the movies that sticks with any kind of realism. The Daniel Craig movies did to a degree, and the earliest ones were fairly close to the books.

  But they keep him in modern times, and have for decades now. In this world, trying to argue that Bond has to be exactly like the books, or even like any given era of the movies is silly. There’s absolutely no reason Bond couldn’t be other than white. It would change aspects of what stories can be told (can’t send a black Bond into a Russian military base undercover and expect it to be believable, as an example), but the real defining aspect of Bond isn’t race, or gender. It’s nationality.

  Bond is British. Change that and you fuck the story up. That’s about the only thing you can’t change without breaking the scenario. You can even change his Eton going background, what military branch he served in, any of the secondary character building points and still have him be Bond, as long as he’s still British.

  That goes for making him her, as well. It would come with its own set of difficulties to build a story for; but a female Bond, a female British spy is well within bounds of the concept. It would change the character more, but not so far as to insult the spirit of the history of the character.

  Again, nothing wrong with sticking to the spirit of a character, which includes social factors like race, gender, religion, sexual orientation is fine. But you can’t pretend that Bond in specific has always stayed true to that spirit over the decades of movies.

  I will add that it’s really about casting more than anything else. Most fans would have been on board with Ildris Elba because the man is a fantastic actor and would have been perfect for the role when his name was first circulating. So if they wanted to have a non traditional Bond, they have to find the right actor. Hell, it isn’t easy to cast Bond at all

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Non-stick pans?⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I meant more that the work is up front, with seasoning properly. Poorly phrased on my part.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Non-stick pans?⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Okay, medium deep dive into cooking surfaces. No caveats or disclaimers because fuck that.

  The only thing that’s truly “non stick” is Teflon. Anything else is just low stick. This includes the beloved cast iron.

  But! Sticking isn’t an inherently bad thing, so unless you’re cooking eggs or making candy, chances are that cast iron, carbon steel, or stainless steel will get the job done anyway.

  Out of all the options, cast iron requires the most work to stay as low stick as it can get, and nothing else reaches that degree of easy cleaning after use. Carbon steel is just a skosh behind cast iron, but it’s lighter by a significant factor, so it may be worth considering.

  So, how the fuck to keep cast iron low stick? You gotta start with a good layer of plastic and then maintain it. Seasoning is essentially plastic. For seasoning to stick, and stay useful, you gotta be a little gentle with it over time. Use only standard dish soap, no heavy scrubbing, and watch how hot you get the pan without something in it. All those people saying the get your pan “ripping” or “screaming” hot? That’s bad advice for a pan you want to keep low stick. So you have two pans, or just accept that once you get that layer of polymerized hydrocarbons past about 450, it’s going to start having trouble.

  And, being fucking real, you don’t need a pan that hot for anything except maybe a rare or blue steak. You’ll get better Maillard reaction at slightly lower temps that won’t stress a pan. Or, just fucking use a thick stainless steel pan, it’ll work fine if you want shit to carbonize. Invest in a fucking infrared thermometer and learn how to use it, you’ll get better results from knowing what temps give a specific result than from cranking the heat all to hell and hoping.

  But if you want maximum non stick cast iron, it starts with the surface. You gotta have a smooth surface, or you gotta spend the time building up layers of polymers to fill in all the little bumps and schwiggles. Overall, the slickest surfaces will come from finely sanded, then vinegar treated, then polymerized. Just be aware that slick and low stick is a tradeoff, since some sticking is going to be what develops a nice fond from our friend Maillard.

  You can get close to that with carbon steel though! Same process. You get the bare metal smooth as fuck all, then give it a nice warm vinegar soak, then season as usual.

  But, again, you gotta be ready to accept tradeoffs. There’s no perfect material. And over time, if you don’t pay attention, a seasoned pan is going to develop uneven spots as fats polymerize during cooking. If you do pay attention, I’ll happen way slower, enough so that I’ll take decades, by which time chances are good that the layers will be thick enough that it isn’t a problem. That uneven buildup happens when the fats aren’t deep enough to stay even as you cook, and/or when things do temporarily stick during cooking (which is a good thing, not a bad one for meats).

  Me? I accepted long ago that some cooking is going to result in pans that need a long soak before trying to really clean them. Hell, even Teflon can have stuff build up on the edges, so it isn’t immune to that. Your best bet is to leave the damn thing on the range, pour in some water, heat it up to boiling, then let it sit until it cools enough to handle. It reduces sink time a lot.

  If you want Teflon, go top end. Don’t waste time or money going cheap. Opinions vary, but hexclad has a reputation for being the most durable Teflon stuff. Won’t last forever in terms of the surface, but no Teflon will. Just don’t fuck around with generic shit.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Before Wolverine got his adamantium body, could he grow back his bone claws do to his healing factor? Or is it just for skin muscile and organs?⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  As already covered, he has bone claws after magneto pulled the adamantium from him.

  During the comics afterwards, his claws got stomped (iirc by sabertooth), and broken in half.

  They regrew fairly quickly, but were deformed for a while. Lost track of that run, but they eventually got put back to his normal.

  Overall, Wolvie can regrow anything except the adamantium, and even that isn’t off the table since if he had a source for it, his power could conceivably use it to reproduce what was there.

  Fwiw, he’s been blown up to the point he was nothing but the adamantium and some random bits, then recovered (iirc it was in the MAX days during a crossover with punisher, and daredevil . Might have been someone else involved too, can’t recall.

  Last I read anything, his healing factor was essentially able to start from a single cell. As long as there’s something left, he’ll heal. Not quite lobo level where a cell isn’t necessary, but I expect something will happen where it gets turned into that at least temporarily. Deadpool is more or less at that level as well; he came back from being burnt to ashes by a lightning strike. So there’s precedent for healing factors the go beyond cellular activity alone

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What is the hate against Pit Bulls? Everyone I've met are super friendly like my BC. Or are they the new Doberman for this cycle?⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Generally, it comes down to which statistics a “hater” believes. I’ll refer to twain here about lies, damn lies and statistics, since numbers always seem so certain, but can be cooked.

  It doesn’t help that “pit bull” isn’t a breed, it’s a “type”, which is vague as fuck all. There’s something like a dozen breeds that get called pit bull, each with their own range of traits. What they have in common is an origin as fighting dogs, including those bred to fight bigger animals.

  But if a dog just looks similar to any of those breeds, it’s a pit bull, including mutts with no known ancestry in fighting breeds.

  So, folks see a scary looking dog and that’s that, they hate scary looking dogs.

  Is the hate justified? IDGAF tbh. Assuming any of the statistics are accurate and applicable, I can understand wanting to limit breeding more, as well as the strict side of enforced euthanasia once a dog turns aggro. But with the vagueness of what gets counted as a pit bull in those stats, and the cherry picking that goes on in such debates, I can’t work up any emotional response to the subject.

  But that’s why the hate. They’re scary looking dogs, and when a dog that looks like they tend to look attacks, it’ll fuck its target up worse than something like a Chihuahua or poodle. That much is fact, a big muscular dog with strong jaws can fuck shit up.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Why is Nickleback so hated? I think they made the perfect song for America after 9/11 with Hero.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I dig. They aren’t AC/DC with that built up history of bangers. Nor did they have the time to grow organically before they got huge.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Why is Nickleback so hated? I think they made the perfect song for America after 9/11 with Hero.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Chocolate Chip Cookies (Levain Style) ★★★★★ Cookies, Dessert Prep Time: 15 minutes | Cook Time: 13 hours | Servings: Eight 6-ounce cookies

  Ingredients:

  4 ounces unsalted American butter (about 1/2 cup; 113g), softened to about 65°F (18°C) 4 ounces light brown sugar (about 1/2 cup, firmly packed; 113g) 3 1/2 ounces white sugar, preferably well toasted (about 1/2 cup; 100g) 1/2 ounce vanilla extract (about 1 tablespoon; 15g) 2 teaspoons (8g) Diamond Crystal kosher salt; for table salt, use about half as much by volume or the same weight (plus more for sprinkling, if desired) 1 3/4 teaspoons baking powder 1 teaspoon baking soda Pinch of grated nutmeg 2 large eggs (about 3 1/2 ounces; 100g), straight from the fridge 10 ounces all-purpose flour (about 2 1/4 cups, spooned; 283g), such as Gold Medal 15 ounces assorted chocolate chips (about 2 1/2 cups; 425g), not chopped chocolate; see note 8 1/2 ounces raw walnut pieces or lightly toasted pecan pieces (shy 1 3/4 cups; 240g)

  Directions:

  1. To Prepare the Dough: Combine butter, light brown sugar, white sugar, vanilla extract, salt, baking powder, baking soda, and nutmeg in the bowl of a stand mixer fitted with a paddle attachment.
  2. Mix on low to moisten, then increase speed to medium and beat until soft, fluffy, and pale, about 8 minutes; halfway through, pause to scrape bowl and beater with a flexible spatula. With mixer running, add eggs one at a time, letting each incorporate fully before adding the next. Reduce speed to low, then add the flour all at once. When flour is incorporated, add chocolate chips and nuts and keep mixing until dough is homogeneous.
  3. Divide dough into 8 equal portions (about 6 ounces/170g each) and round each into a smooth ball. Wrap in plastic and refrigerate at least 12 hours before baking; if well protected from air, the dough can be kept in the fridge up to 1 week.
  4. To Bake: Adjust oven rack to middle position and preheat to 350°F (180°C). Line an aluminum half-sheet pan with parchment paper. When the oven comes to temperature, arrange up to 4 portions of cold dough on prepared pan, leaving ample space between them to account for spread. If you like, sprinkle with additional salt to taste.
  5. Bake until cookies are puffed and lightly brown, about 22 minutes or to an internal temperature of between 175 and 185°F (79 and 85°C). The ideal temperature will vary from person to person; future rounds can be baked more or less to achieve desired consistency.
  6. Cool cookies directly on baking sheet until no warmer than 100°F (38°C) before serving. Enjoy warm, or within 12 hours; these cookies taste best when freshly baked (see Make-Ahead and Storage).

  Source: seriouseats.com/…/super-thick-chocolate-chip-cook…

  Notes: go a full day in the fridge.

  Can reduce individual cookie size, but not much before they start coming out wrong. Recipe says to divide into 8 portions. Ten works, twelve is almost the same, but you’ll notice a different texture.

  Don’t cheap out on the chocolate. If you wouldn’t eat it by itself, it isn’t going to work in this recipe. Guitard and Ghirardelli make chips, and they are better than anything else you’ll find in a grocery store. If you ignore their recommendation of using chips, no chunks, get great chocolate, whatever you’re able to afford. Cheap chocolate will make this recipe pointless.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Why is Nickleback so hated? I think they made the perfect song for America after 9/11 with Hero.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Legit, it’s the radio play.

  They made easily accessible hard rock. It’s mostly formulaic. That means their stuff got played to death. Anything of theirs that got popular was driven into the ground.

  The hate just spread from there. Yeah, you’ll see people bitch about whatever retroreasoning they’ve applied to it, but without the level of unavoidability involved during their prime, it wouldn’t be hate, just a came that some people don’t like.

  Truth? It’s damn near impossible to tell one album from another. The riffs are pretty generic. There’s no highly technical skill required to cover their songs. They aren’t “fancy”

  But that’s not bad things, unless you’re the sort looking for anything to hate, and want to hate something popular in particular.

  Another truth? Some of the most loved bands out there are no different. AC/DC? Simple hard rock with a formula. Aerosmith? A little less hard, but VERY formulaic since their post run-DMC resurgence. Amon Amarth? C’mon. Okay, AA isn’t at that scale of popularity, but I like them, so they’re in.

  Point being that there’s no complaint anyone makes about Nickelback that can’t be applied to any popular band to some degree. Even my complaint that they have far too many songs that are misogynistic in the lyrics could apply to dozens of other acts.

  The hate? They got over played. Without that, they’d just be another band that some people like and others don’t

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Anon gets lost⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Very much so, statistically

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Anon gets lost⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  You know, while there are places you don’t want to get lost in if you’re white, they aren’t as common as the racists make it out to be. Now, I’ve worked in a couple of those neighborhoods, but even then once the folks literally coming out of bushes knew I was there to provide care to someone, that was the end of it.

  Being real, my cracker ass grew up in a black neighborhood. You know how many times I got jumped by black folks? Zero. Wanna guess how many times I did by white folks? Well, only three, twice by the same assholes, but that’s still telling, aint it?

  My personal experience? Only time you’ll run into trouble for being a cracker is if its a heavy drug area and you ain’t buying. But those folks will be just as harsh to anyone, so I dunno if that counts or not.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What do you think of the posting of easily searched questions here?⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Pfft, I’m gloving up and going in fist first

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨God danget bobby⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  The meat¹, not the heat

  1>!The meat falling off your bones as you munch yourself!<

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What do you think of the posting of easily searched questions here?⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Easily searched? My hairy asshole.

  Even the good search options aren’t as good as they used to be. And Google has turned to utter shit.

  Nah, let people ask what they want.