Contramuffin

@Contramuffin@lemmy.world

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨How long does it take for someone to reach a high level of drawing?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago⁩:

  Depends on how much you like drawing. If it’s something fun for you, then it’s not time wasted and it’s definitely worth the effort.

  I will say that while constant practice is definitely important, it’s also important to have structured practice. Practice without structure will just lock in bad habits.

  By far the fastest and easiest way to improve quickly is to practice blocking. This is a technique where you simplify an object or a scene into simple geometric shapes - cubes, spheres, rectangles, etc. You draw out those shapes onto the page. Then, you add in the details. This forces you to map out where the objects are in your composition before you start drawing. Not only does it help with spatial awareness, it also lets you notice if the positioning of objects doesn’t look quite right and requires fixing, before you’ve spent a lot of time on drawing that object

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨in case of emergencies, light it.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Ok but that one at least has a reasonable explanation. The temp control on the edges aren’t as good as in the center, so it’s more prone to messing up.

  Have you ever tried using a qPCR machine? That shit is actual black magic and you just have to hope that the spirits are feeling merciful that day

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  I’m on board with spending federal funds on crypto. Cryptosporidium parvum that is

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Clothes company cannot "cancel" an order that hasn't shipped, must ship it and do a return.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Technical debt applies not just to coding! (though it’s most often talked about in that context) It’s the general idea that whenever you rush a project by taking shortcuts, you have to spend more time later to sort it out (and let’s be honest, it’s never actually going to get sorted out)

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Perhaps not necessarily wrong, but people sometimes don’t like hearing the truth. I don’t agree with the other comments that you should support him - to me, that sounds like bad parenting to not at minimum set up a backup plan when things start to fall apart.

  My take on this situation is that you may have to tell him in a more subtle manner. Fortunately, professional athletes are known for being notoriously competitive, where even talented people can lose out on an opportunity simply out of bad luck. This could give you a way to voice your concerns in a way that doesn’t directly imply that he’s not cut out for the job, ie “you still need to be very lucky to go pro. I was very fortunate, but we shouldn’t be counting on luck for your living. You can still try for it, but I really think you should also have some backup options if things don’t work out”

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Protein printer⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  On the flip side:

  nooo you can’t just wash your hands I have to spread to other hosts otherwise I’ll die

  haha water goes brrr

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Caption this.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  A Russian peasant peeps through a hole in his walls and sees a coin, before transforming into a beast

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Unstable⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  In organic chemistry, there’s a concept called delocalized pi orbitals. The exact reason why it works is complicated and outside the scope of organic chemistry, so I’m not sure if I can really explain it anyways. But the takeaway is that when you see a double bond, single bond, double bond pattern, that generally indicates that the bonds are actually being shared across the entire motif. ie, it’s not really a double bond, it’s more like… a 1.5-bond.

  Having the bonds be shared across multiple atoms gives that region of the molecule special properties, the primary of which is that it tends to be really stable. The reason for that is that any disruption toward that region (eg, adding an electron) gets distributed across the motif, so that each atom is only minorly disturbed.

  And the bigger the motif is, the more stable the region is because it’s able to distribute disturbances better.

  Benzene (the hexagon motif circled) is made exclusively of this double bond, single bond, double bond motif. And as a result, it’s well known for being extremely difficult to modify or destroy. You really have to jump through hoops to do any sort of organic chemistry with benzenes. The motif circled in testosterone still has delocalized pi orbitals, but it’s not as extensive as a benzene, and so it’s less stable

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨testtomcels⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  To summarize: paper got published last year that had this as a figure. It got widely ridiculed because there’s no way that this figure passed peer review. Turns out the reviewers did point it out but the editor ignored it

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨get good, little kitty⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  It’s very simple:

  1. Learn about primer design
  2. Forget primer design
  3. Use a primer designer online
  4. ???
  5. Profit Primer fails
  6. Cry
• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Acetone: A Thread⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Acetone evaporates quickly. You just let it sit for a minute and it’ll dispose of itself

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Why is Jury Nullification a Thing, But You Can’t Talk About It in Court?⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  So I can pitch in here. I was a juror on a trial where jury nullification was talked about. Multiple potential jurors did bring up jury nullification and the final jury contained some members who openly stated that they believed in jury nullification.

  The judge and the prosector actually didn’t really care that much - the judge just asked the juror something along the lines of “ok, but do you think you can stay impartial for this trial?”, and if the juror said yes, they were on the jury. And the prosecutor didn’t dismiss anyone.

  My understanding is that both the prosecutor and the defense get 10 freebie dismissals - they can dismiss up to 10 potential jurors for any reason. If the prosecutor wants to maximize the chances of getting a guilty verdict, they may potentially try to use those freebie dismissals to get rid of jurors who know about jury nullification. But it seems like, at least in my case, knowing about it (or even openly stating that you believe in it) doesn’t automatically disqualify you.

  The defense started talking jury nullification halfway through the trial (it was a wild trial), and that was where the judge drew the line. His reasoning was that the it was the judge’s role to instruct the jury on their job and role, so the defense cannot instruct the jury on their own about what to do. So it seems like you can talk about jury nullification, just not if you’re the defendant.

  As for why jury nullification isn’t commonplace, the prosecutor will try to convince the jury that the defendant deserves punishment. It doesn’t matter if you believe in jury nullification if you also believe that the defendant deserves to be in jail. If the prosecutor doesn’t make a convincing argument, then you’d just vote innocent and that’s not really jury nullification. So there’s really quite a long criteria for jury nullification to occur:

  1. The jury knows about and believes in jury nullification
  2. The jury disagrees with a particular law or case but also isn’t emotionally charged enough about it so as to remain impartial
  3. The jury believes that the law was broken, but is also unconvinced that the defendant deserves punishment
• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨For every 30 minutes theres a 50% chance my right shoe lace will come undone⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Left over right, then right over left. This creates a proper shoelace knot (aka double slipped square knot). You need to alternate. The alternation creates a self-tightening knot. If you do left over left, left over left (or the other way), then you’ve just done a granny knot, which will fall apart

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨would getting back with an ex be a bad idea?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Change isn’t necessarily impossible, but it’s really difficult and requires a huge amount of self discipline - if someone changes, they will be a standout exception rather then the norm. I urge you to consider that someone who ghosts you likely does not value you enough to be willing or able to put in the effort to change. Ghosting is deeply rude to do to anyone, and especially toward your significant other.

  Take my interpretation with a mountain of salt, because I don’t know the full story. But, from what you said, it seems more likely that he reached out to you because you were a convenient backup

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Further study is needed⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Your body is made of proteins. In the broadest sense, there are structural proteins and proteins that make important things. Some of the proteins that make things (called enzymes) require additional special molecules in order to function properly. These special molecules are called vitamins. Our bodies can make several vitamins but can’t make several other ones. The ones we can’t make has to be eaten, otherwise the enzyme won’t be able to function properly, and depending on what the enzyme does, you’ll either get sick or die or both. Vitamin C has to be eaten. Vitamin D, our bodies can produce. But the process to make it requires sunlight in order to function.

  TL;DR: our bodies have evolved to force you to touch grass

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Anon wants to watch an anime⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I don’t personally think Anon knew exactly what he was trying to prove (otherwise he would have published the proof already), but it is definitely true that the problem was posted on a forum that specifically catered to people with the kinds of skillsets that would be capable of solving these problems. Most likely Anon probably just saw this as a simple math challenge without any deeper meaning

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Does me having autism increase your chances of finding a significant other?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  What?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  1. Not really, no. Love and attraction are different things. You don’t need to be attracted to someone you love.

  2. Unless you find your partner unattractive, I don’t see how sex could meaningfully change

  3. People are good at picking up social cues. That’s probably what you’re referring to. Humans are social creatures, after all. Also, people are trash at picking up social cues, so you’re probably also missing a lot of cues.

  4. That sounds like a really bad idea. Your sense of how common those relationships issues occur is warped. People don’t generally go into relationships trying to exploit someone. You’re going to cause issues (moral, logistical, and practical) with your plan, all because of a concern that’s not likely to happen.

  5. That’s the vast majority of humans. We are a monogamous species, after all. When you see “alpha males” on the internet, just be aware that they’re grifters that want your money. And the best way to make sure you keep giving them money is to make sure that you stay single and unhappy.

  6. Can’t help you there. I can at least tell you that enacting your plan in question 4 is going to lower your chances of finding a wife to 0.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨fuck this asshole⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  The constitution also didn’t say “the president shall give a shit about the law”

  Rookie mistake, IMO

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨mass⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  If a donut were to have a center of mass, would the center of mass be like this or like this?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Anon is a gamer⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  1000-2000 hours in several games. It’s a mix of several reasons:

  1. Some games are more replayable than others. My high-playtime games tend to be roguelikes, played over multiple years

  2. The more you play something, the more of a comfort game it gets. It becomes easier to just play it mindlessly if you just want to turn off your brain

  3. Some games have inconvenient save systems, intentional or otherwise (especially true for roguelikes). This incentivizes you to just leave the game running overnight instead of saving and quitting

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What's easier to shoot, a bow or a firearm?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  People say assuming with bows is easier? What kind of world do they live in?

  I’ve shot a decent amount of bows and guns, and guns are far easier to shoot. The difference is that because guns are easier to shoot, there’s a greater expectation of accuracy. Shooting a bow at 30 meters and hitting your target is considered accurate, shooting a gun at 30 meters is considered nothing.

  That being said, I still like archery more. There’s just something very personal about the experience of pulling the bowstring and manually making the arrow fly

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What are the exact ramifications and consequences of the recent meeting with Zelenskyy and Trump/JD?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Even before Trump and Vance lashed out, it was a shitshow. Every time Zelenskyy brought up security, Trump dismissed it because the the minerals were “more important.”

  European leaders were certainly watching, and their main takeaway was certainly that Trump can and will sacrifice the security of American allies for money.

  Europe and many of the US’s allies had lower military spending and did not to pursue nuclear programs because there was the expectation that the US would help protect these countries. This was exactly the promise that the US gave to Ukraine that got them to give up their nuclear research.

  Now that it’s become clear that the US cannot be relied upon for security, many of the US’s allies are certain to start reconsidering their stance on the military and nuclear weapons. As US soft power crumbles, I expect that new, smaller factions will arise to fill the void, and I expect that China will likely try to expand its influence as well.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨are "brush" and "blush" really pronounced differently? i pronounce them the same.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  In most native English accents, R is pronounced by curling the tongue very significantly (more than most languages that I’m familiar with). People who aren’t used to this (often people who speak English as a second language) won’t curl their tongues enough, and the partially curled tongue will end up touching the roof of their mouths. This happens to be how you pronounce L, so in these accents, R and L will end up sounding the same.

  Try getting into the habit of curling your tongue more when you pronounce R, and you’ll end up hearing a difference

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Psychology⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Here, let me fill it out:

  low IQ: psychologists don’t know anything

  average IQ: psychologists don’t know anything

  high IQ: psychologists don’t know anything

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Is thinly-veiled political whinging really a question just because you used a question mark?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Thanks for calling this out. I keep seeing political posts where the intent is clearly not to obtain answers but to obtain agreement. It makes me think that these people are attempting to karma farm.

  Back on reddit, wasn’t there a rule that questions had to be genuine? ie, rhetorical posts (like we see now) are not allowed? Perhaps it would make sense to start enforcing such a rule

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Entropy? Never heard of it.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  I think the intention is that the switch is not going to be immediate, and so there will be a stretch of time where some places use renewable sources of energy and some places still use non-renewables. There’s nothing you can do if your neighbor doesn’t switch, other than to try to capture their carbon output

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨brain blowing orgasms⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  There’s a specific life history strategy called semelparity, which is what you’re describing (breeding once then dying). To my understanding, this is incentivized if the chances of getting a second attempt to breed are too low, and so it becomes more evolutionarily advantageous to simply go all out on the first attempt

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What determines whether something is small enough to regrow on a mammal?⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  That depends on what you’re referring to. Quick caveat, I’m not an expert in regenerative biology, but I have studied it somewhat.

  The trick is that the healing that you’re referring to, it’s not really healing in the way that you’re imagining it. The skin doesn’t really quite grow back in the same way. Instead, there’s more collagen than there normally would be (we would then call that scar tissue). In essence, we’re not really healing, our bodies are just doing a patchwork fix. The presumed reason is that our bodies figure that it’s not going to cause any problems before we die from other causes. This is really quite true of other tissues as well. The liver is known to be able to grow back, but if you look at the microstructures, the regrown stuff is missing a lot of the nuances that the original had. Our bodies expect us to live 70-ish years, and so they don’t care about anything that could happen after that.

  In order to truly, really regenerate, you’ll need stem cells. Some animals are remarkably good at keeping around stem cells and regenerating, but somewhere along the evolutionary line, mammals lost the ability to use stem cells. It’s still an ongoing area of research about why this happened and whether we can generate stem cells in the lab and whether we can manipulate stem cells to our benefit. It should also be pointed out though that, by its intrinsic nature, stem cells divide and don’t specialize into any roles, so it’s very easy for them to go cancerous. In the few spots where mammals do keep stem cells around, their division is very tightly controlled, and even then they are the source of the most common cancers in humans