thebestaquaman
@thebestaquaman@lemmy.world
- Comment on doctors 2 days ago:
When you look at how strongly obesity correlates with everything from back- and knee pains to weakened immune response to sleep issues and cardiovascular disease…
When a severely obese person has any of the above, it’s reasonable, scientifically backed diagnosis/prescription to say “these issues will probably go away by themselves if you lose weight”. This is about treating the cause and not the symptoms: When severely obese people are heavily over-represented among those with a certain disease or problem, you can try treating the symptoms, but should expect that they return rather quickly.
Of course, there are cases where the issues come from something else, but no matter who goes to the doctor with health issues, their first response will be to try to treat the post probable cause.
- Comment on Anon is a fighter 1 week ago:
I think a lot of the violence aspect is due to modern culture. We humans are taught our entire lives to not be violent, and it takes time to break down that barrier. Just like a well trained dog can be abused repeatedly without starting to fight back or even bark, because they’ve been trained to never bark or bite.
I don’t think there’s any reason to believe a human in a survival situation has any less capacity for violence than any other mammal, we’re just too similar to them, and violence is so ingrained in our reptilian brain. I just think most people are never pushed to the point where they behave like a cornered cat fighting back.
- Comment on Anon is a fighter 1 week ago:
Exactly, I guess that was what I was getting at. A cat will mess you up, but only as long as you tolerate it. (I love cats btw. would never dream of hurting one)
- Comment on Anon is a fighter 1 week ago:
I’m commented this elsewhere as well, but the strength of chimps is commonly overblown. An average chimp is about 1.35-1.5x stronger than a human of the same mass. Male chimps weigh in at 40-70kg, which means that a large, strong chimp is about as strong as an average 105kg man.
The bites are terrifying though.
- Comment on Anon is a fighter 1 week ago:
Only to a point though. They can break your skin, but they’re so small that you can literally throw them across the room. There’s no way a cat survives a human trying to kill them short of running away.
- Comment on Anon is a fighter 1 week ago:
IIRC the chimp thing is a bit overblown. I seem to remember that chimps are something like 1.3-1.5x stronger than humans per body mass. However male chimps weigh in at only around 40-70kg.
These are average numbers, so assuming a top ranked fighter is significantly stronger per mass than the average human (my amateur experience suggests that a well trained man is around 1.3x as stronger than average per mass). Matching a top ranked heavyweight fighter (≈110 kg) to a higher-end chimp means the human is probably around (1.3 x 110 / 1.5 x 70) = 1.35 times stronger than the chimp.
The top ranked fighter has a reach advantage, and while chimps are robust, I would almost call it absurd to suggest that a well landed kick from a top-ranked 110kg fighter would not injure a 70kg mammal.
The chimp has the advantage of biting, but even in a ground-brawl, I have a hard time seeing a chimp with the strength of an average 105kg man standing much of a chance against a heavyweight MMA fighter, just by knowing how completely one-sided that fight would be between humans. I don’t think the bites of the chimp can overcome the large strength difference and massive technical difference (chimps are similar enough to humans that ordinary BJJ techniques can probably still be used). All this is assuming that the chimp is able to get within reach without catching a crippling strike first.
Note that the above takes a higher end chimp vs. a top ranked fighter. Taking an average chimp and I definitely cannot see the chimp standing a chance. That would be like betting on an 85kg guy without fighting experience beating an MMA heavyweight. Even if the guy has a knife, he’ll probably be knocked out before even touching the fighter.
- Comment on Anon watches Game of Thrones 1 week ago:
I think you’re talking past each other. What they’re saying is that we have a biologically based aversion to mating with those we have been raised with, and that this aversion has arisen due to evolutionary pressure to avoid incest.
Of course, our body has no way of telling whether someone is a close relative or not, and evolution doesn’t “care” why we change our behaviour, as long as the new behaviour gives a higher chance of propagating our genes. Because of the historically high overlap of “people you grew up with” and “people you share a lot of genes with”, creating a biological aversion towards mating with those you grew up with serves as a good proxy for creating an aversion to incest (which is pretty much impossible to recognise without gene testing).
Their point is that it’s not “taught” behaviour in the sense of being culturally dependent, like we are taught that “everyone should have equal rights”, and “being naked in public is not ok”. Both of those are cases where there is a massive variation between cultures and through history, indicating that they are things we are taught, rather than being biologically ingrained.
- Comment on Anon watches Game of Thrones 1 week ago:
You’re talking past each other: Chicken is saying that we have a biologically ingrained aversion to mating with those we lived closely with up to the age of 6, and is suggesting that this is a result of evolutionary pressure making it preferable to avoid having kids with your nearest relatives.
Their point is that this is not “taught” behaviour in the sense that it is imprinted from culture (such as “what hairstyle is attractive” or “what music is pleasant”), but appears to be biologically grounded.
- Comment on Anon has his way 1 week ago:
I think this is really a just communication thing: I’m with someone that says “do what you want”, and I’d say it myself too, but we’ve been together long enough that there’s an implicit understanding of what that phrase means.
The point is that it’s a turn on to feel desired, even more so when you can just “give up control” and they’ll still do something you like. My experience is that the whole “do what you want” thing isn’t something you say to turn on your partner so much as yourself. Specifically, when I say it, it’s a way of communicating what I want (because of the mutual understanding of what it means) while keeping the pretense that I’m giving up all control (which turns me on). Likewise, when my partner says it, I know what she wants me to do, but keeping the pretense that I’m in complete control is a turn on.
Of course, this kind of mutual understanding has been built up over time, and I wouldn’t recommend communicating like this in a fresh relationship or one night stand.
- Comment on Relatable 2 weeks ago:
Thanks :) the seas will soon be safe again!
- Comment on Relatable 2 weeks ago:
Made it off the floor and over to the sofa (with help). The doctor told me the issue was likely muscular (not directly caused by a prolapse in my back that I’m getting look ed at for). He gave me a bunch of painkillers and basically told me to munch those and move as much as possible, and it should hopefully loosen up In a couple of days.
- Comment on What is the likelihood I see trump shoot someone on 5th Ave? It's gotta be non 0, right? 2 weeks ago:
This is actually a good question. For pretty’s much any previous president, the chance that they will be shot heavily outweighs the chance that they will shoot someone while in office. With trump, I think it’s more of an open bet.
- Comment on Relatable 2 weeks ago:
I’m out of my element, on dry land. Once the doctor gets here I’ll just have them waterboard me for a couple minutes and I should be ok
- Comment on Relatable 2 weeks ago:
I am currently lying down, not because I prefer the floor, my because I lay down to stretch a bit, and my back has now completely locked up. I’m not joking: I physically cannot get up, and a doctor is on the way. I’m not even 30 yet…
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
Loudly cheer them on and clap when they finish.
- Comment on Should naming your children stupid names be illegal? 3 weeks ago:
Who dictates what’s stupid? Where does the sanity end and crazy name start?
Sanity ends when the name has an objectively high likelihood of causing the child harm, or otherwise severely hindering them in life. For example, naming your child “Hitler”, or “<insert slur of choice>” is objectively likely to be harmful to them. Likewise, naming them “Helicopter” or “Rollercoaster” is very likely to set them back in life through childhood bullying.
Who dictates this? In all countries I’m aware of that have laws around this: A government body of some kind.
- Comment on Should naming your children stupid names be illegal? 3 weeks ago:
Plenty of countries have this. Examples of forbidden names are “Hitler”, “Asshole”, “<Insert demeaning word here>”, and “Quisling” (name of a Nazi collaborator, commonly used as a synonym for “traitor” in daily speech).
The point is that “stupid” is defined as a name that is objectively likely to severely negatively impact the child. It’s not based on “I think X sounds stupid” but on whether “X” carries significant cultural baggage like being the name of a famous Nazi, a slur of some kind, etc.
- Comment on I'm a 6'1" man with size 3 feet which means every they measure my feet at a shoe store, the Brannock device gatekeeps my gender 3 weeks ago:
To be fair, I don’t think it’s “ridiculous” to sort e.g. jeans into the broad categories of “typically wider or slipper hips/thighs compared to length” or t-shirts into “typically broader back vs. typically larger chest”.
The mens/women’s categories are probably the coarsest categories that makes sense, since the average man’s and women’s body are so different in so many ways.
- Comment on I'm a 6'1" man with size 3 feet which means every they measure my feet at a shoe store, the Brannock device gatekeeps my gender 3 weeks ago:
I recently learned that there’s a size rating for width. It goes from A to E, and says something about the length/width ratio of the shoe. Made my previous shoes a lot easier to buy (I also struggle to find wide enough shoes).
- Comment on I'm a 6'1" man with size 3 feet which means every they measure my feet at a shoe store, the Brannock device gatekeeps my gender 3 weeks ago:
I never buy clothes online, exactly because I always try them on to check the fit before buying them. I haven’t measured my feet since I was around 15. I know my foot size, so I know that shoes in the range 42-43 are a good fit, depending on the shoe model. I don’t need to measure my feet when I buy shoes to confirm that they’re still around size 42.5.
- Comment on Its like a little prayer 1 month ago:
You know architect was an god you thought now
- Comment on Since militaries are authoritarian, even in democratic countries; What would a military of a stateless/anarchist society look like? 1 month ago:
Isn’t the idea of having an authority at all contrary to the anarchist ideology? Sounds to me like they were more “representative democratic brigades” than anarchistic brigades, since they elected officials that had full control until the next election.
- Comment on [deleted] 1 month ago:
That’s an interesting take, to me it’s always been either porn or not porn, and the idea of “porn but censored so I fill in the gaps myself” hasn’t ever had any appeal. I don’t know if this is related to what I’ve been more exposed to (probably is), but anytime I come across porn that shows everything except a tiny pixelated part (as in, only pixelating part of the junk) kind of funny.
- Comment on The consequences (of my actions) have been extreme 1 month ago:
To be fair, I didn’t expect you to respond at all, and really just wanted to point out that calling a stranger you know nothing about a “dweeb” in response to something they wrote is a prime example of “just being a cunt to someone”. You didn’t need to respond, but you chose to do so by being a cunt.
Regardless, I think you missed some of the sarcasm in what I was writing (which, in hindsight, isn’t very clear). My point isn’t that shitposting is some form of high art. It’s that it’s a form of humor that amounts to more than saying provocative stuff or being a cunt. At it’s best, a shitpost can even contain some social commentary in the same way as caricatures can. Of course, as with all other humor, there are plenty of bad shitposts out there too, which are often just trolls trying to stir up shit.
- Comment on The consequences (of my actions) have been extreme 1 month ago:
- fig 2 just being a cunt to someone
- Comment on The consequences (of my actions) have been extreme 1 month ago:
I’ll defend shitposting here, because I think you’re simplifying it a bit too much.
Shitposting is so much more than “saying dumb stuff for shits n’ giggles”. First of all, as with anything else, there are good and bad shitposts. A good shitpost usually contains a solid undertone of irony or sarcasm. An important part of the humour is not just in “being dumb” it’s about using a statement that is dumb in a very specific way in combination with a specific context in order to create something funny.
Furthermore, a good shitpost uses exaggeration in a good way. The reader should preferably be “lured into” the post, not realising it’s a shitpost, before the notch is turned to 11 revealing that it was a shitpost. This adds an extra layer of humor and social commentary: The fact that the post at first seems believable forces you to recon with what kind of things you would actually believe someone could write. It also makes the target of the humor clear.
Shitposting may not be high art, but calling it “just being a cunt to someone” is missing the mark. “Just being a cunt to someone” is exactly that, and it’s not shitposting.
- Comment on The consequences (of my actions) have been extreme 1 month ago:
This is a terrible take. Obviously, I can say something offensive to a friend that they would find funny exactly because they know I don’t mean it seriously.
Saying that is some kind of “reflection of my true self” is honestly just dumb. I’m saying the offensive thing because I find it offensive myself, and because I would never say it to someone I don’t trust to understand that.
- Comment on Fucking hell 1 month ago:
You also use halv tres (50) and halv firs (70) don’t you?
- Comment on Fucking hell 1 month ago:
Little fun-fact: We still have a trace of this left in Norwegian, where the most common way to say “1.5” is not “en og en halv” (“one and a half”) but “halvannen” which roughly translates to “half second”.
We abandoned the “half third”, “half fourth” etc. very long ago (if we ever used them), but “halvannen” just rolls nicely off the tongue.
- Comment on at the plasma donation place, one of the screening questions is "have you had a condition with scab formation?" - like, a superficial cut, or a mosquito bite? 2 months ago:
This makes sense to me, I was thinking of the situation where I’m from, where you don’t get much more than a pat on the back and the good feels of helping out when you donate blood.
It’s honestly kind of insane to me that there is a system in place to get desperate people to literally sell their blood for money… No one should ever be made that desperate :(