Girly quotes and saying

Chapter 3
Location: Somewhere outside of Tiste lands the northernmost Jaghut keep
POV: Korya Delath
Korya Delath is hostage to Haut, a Jaghut. Korya is of the lesser house Delack in the tiste settlement Abara. From the aerie in the keep she can see the contested lands, which have nothing to contest about them. Haut keeps her isolated and forbids her from leaving the keep. He does not quite understand the idea of hostages and took it upon himself to educate Korya. He is harsh. Korya spent a lot of time in the Aerie pretending to be a goddess to her dolls. Now those dolls are kept in boxes.
She is alarmed by a group of Jheleck approaching the keep defying the prohibitions for crossing into Jaghut territory, even though they no longer claim any territory. The Jheleck are said to be kin to the Jheck of the far south, but much larger. They were the size of warhorses and possessed a sorcery she knew only as Soletaken. Although she doesn't know what that means. She sees Haut open the gate in his full armor. She had no idea he had any martial proclivities. The Jheleck blur and in their place stand several warriors. Haut yells up at her that they have guests.
Haut has no one in his household but him and Korya. He is capable of conjuring food and drink through sorcery, but prefers not to. Korya learned how to make food, chop wood, and mend clothes in the absence of servants. She thinks that he dislikes the company of people and that is why they are alone. Although she does not understand why he agreed to take her as hostage if that is the case. Jaghut used to live in cities until they came upon the realization that civilization is "economic suicide". Resources are not infinite, but a civilization can try to be. "There was nothing so deadly as success."- Haut. The Lord of Hate is the one who exposed this truth to the Jaghut and because of it they live solitary lives and no longer try to build up their civilization.
The Jheleck brought freshly killed meat with them and in Haut's main hall ate it raw. Haut joins in. Korya is put off balance by this, but studies the scene to attempt to make sense of the gathering. The Jheleck speak the Jaghut language, as does Korya. They call Haut Captain and Haut warns them not to anger Korya. He has never seen her angry, but continues to try to bring it out of her by being harsh. After several jokes about her, Korya asks to be excused and is surprised to hear that it's not possible as the Jheleck are here for her. Korya is very confused.
The Jheleck call Haut Captain, but hostages aren't given to soldiers only noble families. The Jheleck bring up that Haut has no army or houseblades. This is somewhat of a threat. Haut responds by saying that he needs no armies. The Jaghut just destroy their enemies. When Jheleck would raid Jaghut lands, the Jaghut would kill some of them and drive them off, however if they came in greater numbers then the Jaghut would then stop playing nice. They want to return Korya to her home. In their defeat the Jheleck signed a treaty that demands hostages from the Jheleck to the Tiste. They are trying to return Korya to fulfill that treaty. Haut says it does not work that way. Sagral gets angry and demands that Korya leave with them. She doesn't want to and says, "Does this one need a leash?" The joke diffuses the situation.
The tiste have asked for 50 Jheleck hostages. The Jheleck are worried due to the rumors of civil war. Haut tells them that hostages are sacrosanct in war. The Jheleck sense that Korya is empty and is not a child of Mother Dark. Haut confirms this and says he has fashioned a mahybe. "A vessel. Protected, sealed and, as you say, empty. What remains to be done? Why, its filling, of course" Haut dismisses the Jheleck and says if they don't leave he may just kill them all. They, shaken by this and depart.
Location: House of Delack
POV: Lady Nerys Drukorlat
Lady Nerys Drukorlat looks upon her grandson Orfantal as he plays in the dirt. She wishes to end his childhood as soon as possible so he can learn to be the heir of the failing house of Delack and return it to glory. Orfantal is a bastard. Lady Nerys knows that isn't his fault. She recalls a quote from Gallan's latest work, "The wounded will wound / and every hurt is remembered." She looks at his work as revealing unpleasant truths about the Tiste. Others do not. When Orfantal plays at being in war, his play always ends with an unseen betrayer killing him from behind. She blames soldiers returning from war. "Veterans returned home with all illusions scoured from their eyes, their minds. They looked out from a different place, but there was nothing healthy in that, nothing worthy." Lady Nerys's husband was one such soldier. Who upon a heroic return confessed the above to his wife before killing himself and leaving his house in shame.
Another soldier who lost his arm from a horse bite had found Sandalath Drukorlat, Lady Nerys's daughter, and seduced her resulting in the birth of Orfantal. Once Lady Nerys had discovered this, she paid him to never see his son or Sandalath ever again. He accepted. Sandalath though older and having already been a hostage, is now to be a hostage again to her dismay. Her mother will not allow her to say goodbye to her son. Her first stint as a hostage was with House Purake, this time it will be with House Dracons. Orfantal is to go to Kharkanas and be in the retinue of the House of Purake. Not a hostage. Ivis has arrived at House Delack to retrieve Sandalath. She enters the carriage and they depart.
POV: Orfantal
Orfantal watched his mother's carriage leave. He doesn't like to see people cry and tries to prevent it from happening. He understands that, "There were wars and that’s all there was, and every day he died, taken by that knife that followed him across the whole world, just as it had done to his grandfather."
POV: Sandalath
Sandalath thought she saw Orfantal by the stables as her carriage moved away, but she is not confident in what her mind sees so is uncertain. It's very hot in the carriage, but because her mother has instilled in her the virtue of not causing a scene she does not ask the driver to open a window. She fondly recalls her time as hostage in the citadel with the Purake brothers. Always feeling safe with them and loving them each in turn. Well maybe not Silchas. The war took the brothers and their father away and when the father returned broken she began to fear that the brothers would die. House Drukorlas had been devastated by the war and was now in poverty.
Galdan was the one-armed soldier who spoke of a romantic and adventurous war and Sandalath had relayed these stories to her son. Lady Nerys had told her daughter that she had exiled Galdan to Jaghut lands and he had died. Sandalath told her son that Galdan died from a betrayal while he defended his wounded lord. As the carriage trundled through the village, Sandalath thought she saw Galdan, but attributed it to the heat in the carriage. She passed out from the heat and the carriage stopped.
POV: Ivis
Ivis enters the carriage and pulls an unconscious Sandalath out. If Sandalath dies in House Dracons care, other families would use it as an excuse to gain advantage over Draconus. Ivis pays the carriage driver to take off and threatens him with death if this story gets out. Ivis's men get Sandalath's strongbox open. Not sure why maybe to see if she has lighter clothes, but discover that it is filled with jars of river stones from the Dorssan Ryl. It was a way to avow love for another person. Give them a stone from the Dorssan Ryl.
Sandalath wakes up and notices that many layers of her clothing have been removed and that Ivis has the key to her strongbox that is usually around her neck. Ivis lies and says it was constricting her neck and that no one looked in the strongbox although it is very heavy. He says he has a daughter and that he knows young women have a lot of toiletries.
POV: Galdan
"Proper men had two arms for good reason. One to reach for things, the other to keep things away. Galdan had lost the arm that kept things away" This applied to the drink and to Sandalath. After she had been taken away from him he began leaving stones for her in their secret places. He assumed she threw them away.
Location: Outskirts of Hust Forge
POV: Galar Baras
Galar Baras contemplating the Forulkan reveals that their priests were called Assail. "Peace did not serve order; order served peace" The Forulkan worshipped order and confused it for peace and justice. Order became a prison and those who sought freedom became the enemy. The south borderswords were the first to fight the Forulkan and they became the Hust legion. Hust swords had a fearful heartline that was reinforced by the forgemasters. This heartline gives the blades their voice. Galar Baras is obsessed with Hust swords and believes they are an expression of a unique sorcery. After the borderswords had defended the Hust forge from a Forulkan assault, Hust Henarald had rewarded them with Hust blades.
Galar Baras is riding with the commander of the Purake houseblades, Kellaras. When Nimander returned from war and Mother Dark had blessed him and his house for its service, House Purake turned over it's lands to Mother dark and became her vassals. They now took the name Andii, Children of Night. Anomander and house Purake were the first to relieve the borderswords in the battle of the forge and Anomander bestowed great honor upon them by going to their commander Toras Redone and clasping her forearm. From that day the borderswords consider themselves Andiian, sons and daughters of night. This sent a fracture between Urusander's legion and the Hust legion.
In a drunken comment Toras Redone had told Galar Baras that "Peace had become a disaster". Galar is unable to drink alcohol. That night they became lovers. The next day they were not brave enough to continue. Soon after she had sent Galar to Kharkanas to be the Hust legion's representative in the city. Toras is married to Calat Hustain, the man who had given Galar his hust sword. Calat had accepted the command of the wardens and was now far away from his wife. After a miserably lengthy time within the citadel, Galar was now returning to Hust forge both anticipating and dreading seeing the woman he loved.
POV: Kellaras
Kellaras and Galar Baras do not talk much and Kellaras has been told by the members of Urusander's legion in the citadel that Hust swords poison their owners. He's starting to believe it. Galar Baras was not liked in the Citadel. He did not mix with others and remained a mystery to most of them. Kellaras had been given a message to take to Hust Henarald by Anomander. Galar Baras insisted on escorting him to the Hust Legion. Kellaras took this as an insult. He required no escort. Out of the blue Galar Baras asks him a question about the urgency of the message. Kellaras takes it as an opportunity to ask why he insisted on the escort. Galar Baras confides in him that he just wanted to get out of the citadel and felt crushed by it. Kellaras takes this to heart and orders him to continue to escort him so he will not have to return to the citadel. Kellaras now confides in Galar Baras that Anomander intends to commission a sword from Henarald Hust.

Preface: I do not mean to start an argument with this post, but I am trying to offer my perspective, even if it is controversial.
I see a lot of attempts from people on this subreddit, and other places around the internet, to try and draw definitive distinctions between social anxiety disorder and avoidant personality disorder. I have many gripes with these propositions. Let’s start.

• “SAD and AvPD are entirely separate disorders and should not be said to be inherently related.”

This is false. The DSM itself states they have a spectrum relationship. “Some personality disorders may have a ‘spectrum’ relationship to other mental disorders (e.g., schizotypal personality disorder with schizophrenia; avoidant personality disorder with social anxiety disorder)…”

• "SAD is limited to specific situations whereas AvPD is more broad.”

Once again, blatantly false. The generalized form of SAD involves pervasive avoidance and anxiety that can often resemble a personality disorder. “Given its frequent onset in childhood and its persistence into and through adulthood, social anxiety disorder may resemble a personality disorder. The most apparent overlap is with avoidant personality disorder.”—this alone obviously refutes the argument that AvPD is inherently more severe or that the pattern of anxiety and/or avoidance is broader.

• “AvPD is more related to fears of intimacy whereas SAD is a fear of social situations.”

What exactly are “intimate situations” if not just closer social situations? Not only this, but SAD is associated with significant impairment in interpersonal relations. “Social anxiety disorder is also associated with being single, unmarried, or divorced and with not having children…Social anxiety disorder is also negatively associated with friendship quality, such that individuals with social anxiety disorder report having friendships that are less close and less supportive than persons without the disorder. “—once again, this is quoted directly from the DSM.

• “AvPD involves low self-esteem, SAD does not.”

While this is definitely true in some cases, I would still like to push the idea that social unease and interpersonal anxiety is often rooted in low self-esteem and negative self-image by default. I would be surprised if most individuals with severe generalized SAD don’t have low self-esteem. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that if someone is self-conscious, awkward, and afraid of judgments in interpersonal situations, that person very likely struggles with low self-esteem. Also, if you look into the lived experiences of those with SAD alone, you’ll find extremely high rates of significantly low self-esteem and co-morbid depressive symptoms, making poor self-esteem a mutual factor between AvPD and SAD, not a differentiating one.

• “People with AvPD are comfortable in casual social interaction, but become more anxious and avoidant the closer someone gets to them.”

This can be true, however it is not true for all cases of AvPD, therefore it isn’t a definitive distinction. Once again quoted directly from the DSM: “Doubts concerning social competence and personal appeal may be most intense for some individuals in settings involving interactions with strangers.”—Along with this is that it’s common for individuals with AvPD to become comfortable with others when shown proof that they will not be judged, rejected, etc, therefore making connecting with others possible as long as the individual with AvPD is given some sort of sign or guarantee that they will not be faced with negative evaluation.

• “AvPD is characterized by pervasive social inhibition and fear of negative evaluation, whereas SAD is a fear of social situations.”

This is the same thing, just reworded. Individuals with SAD are interpersonally inhibited and fear social situations because of potential negative evaluation, same as AvPD.

• “People with SAD might get nervous at a party but still have the courage to interact, compared to someone with AvPD who won’t interact at all.”

Sorry, but you’re talking about normal shyness, not social anxiety DISORDER. If someone is nervous in certain situations but still overall functional, that is not SAD. Individuals with SAD are just as likely as those with AvPD to completely withdraw, or avoid social situations entirely, leading to functional impairment.

The most qualitative distinctions I can think of between the two disorders are: Heightened risk avoidance in AvPD, as well as less significant anxiety in AvPD, but more significant avoidance due to expecting rejection. However, not everyone diagnosed with AvPD is going to meet every criterion, so there may be individuals out there diagnosed with AvPD who don't have heightened risk avoidance, and many individuals with AvPD do experience intense anxiety, so these aren't hard rules.
Overall, I have made this post because I think one thing needs to be made straight: There are no true definitive distinctions between the disorders. I think many people on this sub, and many who have been diagnosed with AvPD in general, get caught up in the idea that they have it worse than those diagnosed with SAD alone when this is not the case. The DSM itself even has trouble making a qualitative distinction between the two disorders. “There appears to be a great deal of overlap between avoidant personality disorder and social anxiety disorder. It has been suggested that they may represent different manifestations of similar underlying problems, or avoidant personality disorder may be a more severe form of social anxiety disorder.”—these are two conditions characterized by social withdrawal and timidity due to fears of negative evaluation. By definition they are interrelated, and there isn’t any actual consensus on the true differences between the two. This is why everyone—including doctors—have varying answers and opinions on the matter.
I see so many people on this sub get caught up in what the differences between the two disorders are, but truthfully there is no answer. And to this I say that we need to stop relying on psychiatric labels. They are unhelpful, especially in situations like this where two conditions exist that mimic each other to such a significant degree. Stop wondering whether or not you have AvPD or SAD, and stop assuming incorrectly that SAD is less severe or less valid than AvPD when many individuals diagnosed with generalized SAD alone experience just as much impairment and may even have the same exact experiences as someone diagnosed with AvPD.

hello guys i currently live on my own and i’m figuring out what adulthood is. December of last year, i was in an accident (not at fault) i suffered from injuries and from doctors orders missed a huge chunk of time. That caused me to get strained big time financial. I was able to start working again about a month or so, and present day i have a huge choice i need to make. I currently drove for uber and make money from youtube, with uber i can make as much money as i want (that’s what it feels like lol), i’m letting you guys know this bc my car went into the shop yesterday, and i was quoted 1300-1900, and i don’t have that just laying around. what i want to do is just say screw it and get a nicer used car from around 2012-2013, something reliable so that i can still work for uber. my current car is a 2011 nissan altima, 173000+ miles and the back end is smashed in, i personally don’t think it’s worth the repairs under the hood. with used car market i probably won’t have enough to buy off the lot, and id have to get a payment plan. should i repair the vehicle or get a newer (used) one?

This is not an ad, nor a piece to sway you to use AI LLMs (fancy abbreviation for Large Language Models) to do your reading for you...
I'd like you to view this post as a portal to what's coming. More and more people will use the tools in question to summarise lenghty and complex topics to ease their daily struggles. Not everyone has the time to follow the subject thoroughly, on a daily, or even a weekly basis.
Personally, after following "The Subject" for quite a while, and being quite impartial myself, I've ran into the mentioned episode of the GTS...I'm a readewatcher myself, and been playing with AIs recently.
Made me wonder: is current tech, especially LLMs like 4o, capable of being unbiased and as close to the available material as possible? Are there any lines in the sand for those? Any limitations? Forced replies, maybe? Controlled speech?...
I'll leave that up to you to decide in the comments.
Please let me know if you'd like me to run more of these tests, as this is important for future users of this tech, imo. It's coming sooner than we all think and it's paramount that we all keep up with it. Sounds ominous to some extent, but that's the truth.
Btw, 4o advised me to revise this post's format for more karma...bloody thing 😆 Worst part is that it's most probably true 😋 Didn't do it, thought. It's all me. For now, at least...
If you've red so far, here's the conversation I've had. I've used the new voice recognition and reply functionality, so it was an organic experience to me. No edits were made afterwards, except for below transcript. I have an OCD...
It's quite lengthy, though.
"Reddit UFOs Summary
16 May 2024
OP: Could you go online and make a summary of the most interesting posts on Reddit, particularly subreddit UFOs from the past 24 hours?
ChatGPT: It seems I'm unable to access the Reddit pages directly. However, you can easily check the latest posts on the UFOs subreddit by visiting UFOs. This subreddit typically features user-submitted content including videos, photos, personal sightings, and discussions about recent UFO news and theories.
OP: What seems to be the issue for you accessing Reddit?
ChatGPT: The issue likely stems from the browsing tool's current limitations in accessing and interacting with certain sites, including Reddit. This can be due to various reasons, such as changes in the website's structure or access restrictions.
For real-time browsing and detailed subreddit content, visiting the UFOs subreddit directly will provide you with the most accurate and up-to-date posts.
OP: With access to YouTube, can you summarize YouTube videos?
ChatGPT: Yes, I can summarize YouTube videos. Please provide the link to the video you want summarized, and I'll give you an overview of its content.
OP: Try to access the Good Troubles Show regarding Lou Elizondo and summarize it for me.
Searched 5 sources
ChatGPT: The Good Trouble Show, hosted by Matt Ford, recently featured Lou Elizondo, a former director of the Pentagon's Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), known for his insights into UFOs and UAPs (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena). Here are some key points from the show and related content:
Insight into UAPs:
Lou Elizondo provided a detailed Q&A session discussing the nature of UAPs, the challenges in identifying them, and their potential implications for national security. He emphasized the importance of understanding the advanced technologies that UAPs might represent and the need for continued investigation and transparency in this area​ (YouTube).
Collaboration with Experts:
In another segment, Elizondo had a conversation with NASA astronaut Terry Virts. They discussed their experiences and perspectives on UAP sightings, particularly focusing on incidents involving military personnel and the potential scientific explanations for these phenomena​ (YouTube)​.
Public and Governmental Reactions:
The show also explored the broader reactions to the increasing reports of UAP sightings, including the responses from the public, media, and government agencies. Elizondo highlighted the evolving perception of UAPs, moving from fringe interest to a topic of serious governmental and scientific inquiry. For a comprehensive understanding, you can watch the full episodes of The Good Trouble Show here and explore more content on their official YouTube channel here​ (YouTube)​​ (YouTube)​.
OP: Thank you. Good job.
ChatGPT: You're welcome! If you have any other questions or need further assistance, feel free to ask.
OP: One more thing you could do for me on the web is to check the name Ross Coldheart. He's an Australian journalist. I would like to know specifically if he's a credible person based on his work. Can you run that for me?
Searched 5 sources
ChatGPT: Ross Coulthart is a highly credible and well-respected Australian investigative journalist with over three decades of experience. He has won multiple prestigious awards, including five Walkley Awards, which are the highest honors in Australian journalism, as well as the Gold Walkley. His investigative work spans various media outlets, including the Sydney Morning Herald, ABC TV's Four Corners, Nine Network's Sunday program, and 60 Minutes. Coulthart's journalism has uncovered significant stories, such as the Butcher of Bega medical scandal and the complicity in violence in East Timor, both of which earned him international acclaim​ (Wikipedia)​​ (ICIJ)​​ (Ross Coulthart)​.
Coulthart has also authored several best-selling books, such as "Dead Man Running" and "In Plain Sight," which delve into organized crime and UFO phenomena respectively. His rigorous investigative approach and compelling storytelling have established him as a reliable and influential figure in journalism​ (Coast to Coast AM)​.
OP: Could you elaborate more on the book you wrote, the one called In Plain Sight? Could you give me a summary of that book, or some sort of an insight to it?
Searched 2 sources
ChatGPT: Ross Coulthart's book, "In Plain Sight: An Investigation into UFOs and Impossible Science," delves into the phenomenon of UFOs, or Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAPs). The book examines the history and recent developments surrounding UFO sightings, including admissions by the US Department of Defense acknowledging the reality and potential threat of these phenomena. Coulthart investigates by interviewing various experts, witnesses, and officials, uncovering information that suggests possible technological advancements and cultural implications. The book challenges the traditional dismissal of UFOs as mere conspiracy theories and calls for serious inquiry into the subject​ (In Plain Sight Book)​.
OP: Give me a couple of quotes from the book that are the most significant ones.
ChatGPT: Here are two significant quotes from Ross Coulthart's "In Plain Sight":
"I believe in evidence. I believe in observation, measurement, and reasoning, confirmed by independent observers. I’ll believe anything, no matter how wild and ridiculous, if there is evidence for it. The wilder and more ridiculous something is, however, the firmer and more solid the evidence will have to be."
"In 2020, however, after decades of denial, the US Department of Defense made the astonishing admission that strange aerial and underwater objects frequently reported and videoed by pilots and tracked by sensors are real, unexplained, and pose a genuine national security concern."
These quotes highlight Coulthart's commitment to evidence-based investigation and underscore the gravity of the recent official admissions regarding UAPs​ (In Plain Sight Book)​ .
OP: Would you say that the first quote, I believe in evidence, and so on, would be a paraphrasing of Carl Sagan, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?
ChatGPT: Yes, the quote from Ross Coulthart does indeed reflect a similar sentiment to Carl Sagan's famous assertion that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Both emphasize the importance of rigorous evidence and independent verification, especially when dealing with unusual or extraordinary claims. This alignment with Sagan's principle underscores Coulthart's commitment to a scientific and skeptical approach to the investigation of UFOs and other phenomena.
OP: What are your thoughts on the recent UAP-UFO congressional hearings and all the evidence that has come to light, including the recent Lou Elizondo's claims that there's been threats to his well-being or his family's well-being? What do you think about that?
ChatGPT: The recent UAP-UFO congressional hearings and the increasing transparency from military and government officials mark a significant shift in how these phenomena are addressed. Here's a summary of key points and my perspective on them:
Congressional Hearings and Government Admissions Increased Transparency:
The U.S. government's decision to hold public hearings on UAPs and to admit that these phenomena are real and pose potential national security concerns represents a major change in policy. This shift suggests a growing recognition of the need for serious scientific and security-oriented investigations.
Credible Witnesses:
The hearings have included testimonies from credible witnesses, such as military pilots and intelligence officials, who have observed or analyzed UAPs. Their accounts provide valuable firsthand information and lend credibility to the phenomena being more than just myths or misidentifications.
Lou Elizondo's Claims Threats to Well-Being:
Lou Elizondo, a key figure in bringing UAP issues to public attention, has claimed that there have been threats to his and his family's well-being. If true, these threats could indicate attempts to silence or discredit individuals who push for transparency. This raises concerns about the potential implications for whistleblowers and the culture within military and intelligence communities.
Significance of His Role:
As a former director of the Pentagon's AATIP, Elizondo's insights and experiences are invaluable. His claims suggest that there may be deeper layers of information and potentially classified details that have not yet been disclosed to the public.
Personal Perspective Scientific Inquiry:
The move towards greater transparency and scientific inquiry is crucial. Investigating UAPs with a rigorous, evidence-based approach will help differentiate between natural phenomena, advanced technology from other nations, and genuinely unexplained incidents.
Cultural Shift:
The hearings and increased openness reflect a cultural shift in how we approach unknown phenomena. Moving away from ridicule and towards serious investigation can foster a more informed and rational public discourse.
Security and Ethics:
The claims of threats to individuals advocating for transparency are troubling and highlight the need for protections for whistleblowers. Ensuring their safety is essential for maintaining the integrity of the investigation and encouraging others to come forward with credible information.
In conclusion, the recent developments in UAP investigations, including congressional hearings and testimonies from credible witnesses, signify a positive step towards understanding these phenomena. However, the alleged threats to individuals like Lou Elizondo indicate the complexities and potential resistance within certain circles, underscoring the need for ongoing support and protection for those involved in bringing these issues to light.
OP: Could you draw some parallels between this particular topic and the Watergate scandal?
ChatGPT: Drawing parallels between the current UAP-UFO investigations and the Watergate scandal can help highlight the dynamics of governmental transparency, accountability, and the role of whistleblowers. Here are some key similarities and differences:
Similarities
Government Secrecy and Lack of Transparency:
Watergate:
The Watergate scandal involved a series of illegal activities orchestrated by the Nixon administration, including the break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters and subsequent cover-up efforts. The administration's secrecy and lack of transparency were central issues.
UAP-UFO Investigations:
For decades, the U.S. government maintained secrecy regarding UAPs, often dismissing or downplaying their significance. Recent admissions and hearings suggest a move towards greater transparency, but past secrecy still looms large.
Role of Whistleblowers:
Watergate:
The scandal unraveled largely due to the efforts of whistleblowers like Mark Felt (Deep Throat), who provided critical information to journalists Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein.
UAP-UFO Investigations:
Figures like Lou Elizondo and other insiders have played a similar role, coming forward with information about UAPs and pushing for transparency. Their disclosures have been instrumental in bringing the issue into the public and governmental spotlight.
Media Involvement:
Watergate:
The investigative journalism by The Washington Post was crucial in exposing the scandal, demonstrating the power of the media in holding the government accountable.
UAP-UFO Investigations:
Media coverage has been significant in the UAP-UFO discourse, with outlets like The New York Times publishing detailed reports on the Pentagon's investigations and whistleblowers' claims. Documentaries and news programs have also played a key role in informing the public. Public and Congressional Scrutiny:
Watergate:
The scandal led to extensive congressional hearings and investigations, ultimately resulting in President Nixon's resignation.
UAP-UFO Investigations:
Congressional hearings on UAPs have been conducted to understand the phenomena better and assess their implications for national security. This scrutiny is a step towards greater governmental accountability.
Differences
Nature of the Issues:
Watergate:
Involved clear illegal activities, including burglary, wiretapping, and obstruction of justice, committed by government officials.
UAP-UFO Investigations:
Focus on understanding unidentified phenomena and potential national security threats. The issue is less about illegal activities and more about the need for transparency and scientific investigation.
Immediate Impact:
Watergate:
Had immediate and direct political consequences, including legal actions and the resignation of a sitting president.
UAP-UFO Investigations:
The impact is more gradual, involving shifts in public perception, policy changes, and potentially new scientific discoveries. The immediate political consequences are less direct.
Public Perception and Stigma:
Watergate:
Initially met with disbelief but quickly gained credibility as evidence mounted.
UAP-UFO Investigations:
Long associated with stigma and ridicule, making it harder for the topic to gain serious consideration. Recent shifts in official stance are beginning to change this.
Conclusion
Both the Watergate scandal and the UAP-UFO investigations underscore the importance of transparency, the crucial role of whistleblowers, and the impact of media and public scrutiny in holding governments accountable. While the contexts and nature of the issues differ, the underlying themes of secrecy, the quest for truth, and the demand for governmental accountability resonate in both cases. The evolution of the UAP-UFO investigations may continue to parallel Watergate in promoting greater transparency and accountability, potentially leading to significant changes in public policy and perception."
Original link below. ttyshttps://chat.openai.com/share/443f509c-fd2f-4608-b94b-36b0992fd446

Posting here cause so little people check up on DFV!
Between war, genocide, today’s housing market, the social security you’ve paid your entire career that you may never see, political corruption at its finest. How about everything happening with Baby Reindeer, Met Gala, the list goes on.. Even McKamey Manor is still operating despite mountains of evidence law enforcement ignores (do you remember? they ‘legally’ torture people with the promise of an extreme haunted house experience and winning $20k that you have no chance of winning? allegedly.)
Reckless Ben - I shut down McKamey Manor https://youtu.be/ckX-RuoEles?si=YzatLiL8Ylrz0tqO
It took a few reckless YouTubers who banned together with a just a pure passion for a situation where they really saw potential in their odds to level what many people have been silenced about in their aspirations to bring justice to an obviously broken system.
And for $GME ?
Sony Pictures - Dumb Money available on ad free Netflix https://youtu.be/bmr8YmwnZ3w?si=IKemq9bTnEZc92Ix
Netflix - Eat The Rich: The GameStop Saga https://youtu.be/P8jtdao1zkE?si=WR-ELXnT2Yd71nSt
The banks seem to be bailed every. single. crisis.
The housing crisis https://youtu.be/IjZ-ke1kJrA?si=i6JbUkmWenOYvJQ5
https://youtu.be/vgqG3ITMv1Q?si=S7NLjBcjOhUP3MCE
The March 2023 bank failures https://youtu.be/YDwDMF_f5rM?si=rS0ShhpoyKFN3QH5
https://youtu.be/z8B9K145uTg?si=eC8uKhfun5g7cR96
The ongoing issue with social security https://youtu.be/j1Bfxxhdn6g?si=cCMFq2zgJ6_7ESY1
The controversy around voting rights https://youtu.be/yn36tY7rNUM?si=3V1f2xrBXlm5d8-F
Citizens United https://youtu.be/k5kHACjrdEY?si=QUn9yhl7UfOMHWqL
Where are you left in this?
CNBC - How much do Americans need to be comfortable? https://youtu.be/TgVtXT5Mqj0?si=Oq96lGY4LHxm8H-_
Don’t mistake this post for financial advice. Personally I just… https://youtu.be/Hp_bGdp_yhc?si=wl2IVCqZ65-eFtE3
I believe the people should make informed decisions if they so choose to participate in this market as you can so quickly be in financial ruin. If you so choose to research the recent uproar, please don’t let the following links be your only source of information. Do your own due diligence.
$GME has a seemingly healthy debt to equity ratio lowering their long term debt obligations by 11 million last quarter. Despite their decrease in revenue, they’ve lowered their operating lossed from 311.6 million to just 34.5 mil! Please understand this is unaudited as mentioned in the quarterly report. Take a look for yourself.
GameStop - GameStop Reports Fourth Quarter and Fiscal Year 2023 Results https://investor.gamestop.com/news-releases/news-release-details/gamestop-reports-fourth-quarter-and-fiscal-year-2023-results
Financial Visualizations - $GME https://finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=GME&ty=c&ta=1&p=d
Talk about GameStop’s future is a hot topic and has a new investment plan embracing video game giants future plans.
Bernard Zambonin - GameStop will likely report a profitable year for the first time since 2018 https://www.thestreet.com/memestocks/gme/gamestop-will-likely-report-a-profitable-year-for-the-first-time-since-2018#:~:text=However%2C%20the%20tide%20turned%20when,ahead%20of%20the%20previous%20projections.
Bernard Zambonin - Is Ryan Cohen steering GameStop toward a Berkshire Hathaway or Icahn Enterprises Transformation https://www.thestreet.com/memestocks/gme/is-ryan-cohen-steering-gamestop-toward-a-berkshire-hathaway-or-icahn-enterprises-transformation-
Forbes - Yes, a digital-only gaming future is coming, and we can’t stop it https://www.forbes.com/sites/mitchwallace/2023/10/13/yes-a-digital-only-gaming-future-is-coming-and-we-cant-stop-it/?sh=7b82b7673bd7
Rebekah Valentine - Phil Spencer says Xbox is ‘supportive’ of physical media amid rumors of shift to digital business https://www.ign.com/articles/phil-spencer-says-xbox-is-supportive-of-physical-media-amid-rumors-of-shift-to-digital-business
I wish you all the best of luck. https://youtu.be/Hp_bGdp_yhc?si=JVr6CQcddjDfWm_6

Whenever I ask tattoo artists for a quote and it’s over my budget, I always apologise for being an inconvenience and thank them for their time but say it is out of my budget and I cannot afford it. Sometimes they reply and say it’s perfectly fine but most of the time I just get ignored and I feel guilty? Is there a better way to go about it?

Mark 1:3 and the prophecy from Isaiah
The very beginning of Mark already shows how Jesus is God, by applying a prophecy about Yahweh to Jesus. This passage is talking about John the Baptist preaching in the desert and preparing the way for Jesus, and in the verse 3 it reads: "The voice of one calling out in the wilderness, Prepare the way of the Lord, make His paths straight!", this verse is a quote from Isaiah 40:3, and in the original Isaiah verse instead of just saying Lord it actually read Yahweh, meaning that by applying this verse to John and Jesus Mark was identifying Jesus as Yahweh.
Mark 2:28 and the Lord of the Sabbath
The Sabbath is God's day (Exodus 20:10), and when the Pharisees saw the disciples picking grain in the Sabbath and asked Jesus why was that, he said, among other things, that the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath, which is a title reserved for God only (Mark 2:28).
Mark 3:11 and 5:6 and Jesus accepting worship
Worship is something that is only for God (Exodus 20:2-3, 34:14, Deuteronomy 6:13), and in Mark 5 it talks about a man with a demon who fell down before (Mark 5:6), something that is normally considered a sign of worship (Acts 10:25), meaning that he would be either God or a blasphemer, this is also described in Mark 3:11.
Mark 4 and 6 and Jesus' power over the sea
In Mark 6:45-52 Jesus walks on water and Peter cries out for help, similar to Psalm 77 which talks about crying out to God when you are troubled and also mentions God walking on the waters.
In Mark 4:35-40 Jesus also calms the storm just by commanding, something that only God does (Job 9:8).
Mark 7:18-19 and the Old Testament Law
Here it says that Jesus declared all foods clean, he himself, who else by himself can declare something in relation to the Law?, God only.
Mark 13:31 and Jesus' divine authority
Normally when Old Testament prophets spoke they said what they were saying were "the words of the Lord", but when Jesus spoke he normally said that those were his words, and also says that his words will never pass away, something true only to God (Mark 13:31, Isaiah 40:8).

Continuing my series where I discuss one episode from each season.
Season #1: "Five Votes Down" Season #2: "Somebodys Going to Emergency Somebodys Going to Jail" Season #3: "Dead Irish Writers"
It is the weekend before the 1st Monday in October 2002 (we can date it because the episode culminates in the Red Mass) and both Josh (and Amy) are both worried that Senator Stackhouse will push POTUS too far to the left. Toby and C.J. are worried that Ritchie will "exceed expectations" and thus gain a political win from the upcoming debates. Charlie bonds with his "little brother" Anthony. Sam gets some news from California, Donna goes to a self-help guru, POTUS writes a speech, and Leo deals with a hostage crisis and wins an award.
Wow. Lotta stuff going on.

1. While the show is an ensemble and is multi-plotted, there is usually a "featured character" in each episode. I honestly, can't decide who has the "A" story here. I think it is probably Stackhouse. His speech at the end is great (the music in the background fits perfectly with it) and I love how it ties in with the story he told Josh.
   
2. I've been to a Red Mass and there is NO WAY a sitting President would be allowed to give a speech. In fact, the only time I have ever seen non-clergy give a speech in a Catholic church is at funerals (eulogies.)
   
3. I would be interested in hearing the speech though. The "80/20" rule, also called the "Pareto Principle," has always fascinated me. It essentially means 80% of the outcomes come from 20% of the consequences aka "the vital few." My father, who ran a small business, said that he followed the principle by trying to spend 80% of his time on (what he considered) his top 20% customers. When I was in the military, I was told that I would spend 80% of my time on what's nominally 20% of my job. Here is the Wikipedia article. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle
   
4. In the beginning of the episode, Josh is temporarily distracted by the Mets blowing a game because their pitchers messed around and didn't "throw strikes." It isn't the same thing as the Mets, but I played in Little League games where we blew a lead because the pitcher tried to get fancy and didn't throw strikes.
   
5. Speaking of throwing strikes, I think that was the underlying theme of the episode. POTUS needs to stop being fancy and just throw it down the middle. He does this by putting it all on the line in one debate and taking questions on needle exchange.
   
6. It isn't explicit, but I think that part of "throwing strikes" would be to not make a big deal about Teddy Tomba. I honestly don't see how attacking someone like that would be good politics. As Donna says, Tomba is harmless and, since he doesn't appear to be political, attacking him would do more harm than good. I would imagine Democrats and independents like him and wouldn't appreciate being told they are stupid for liking him.
   
7. This is kind of the key episode for the season. Sam first hears about the election in Orange County, Leo gets an inkling that Qumar knows the U.S. was behind the assassination, POTUS implements his strategy to win the election, and Amy makes peace with Josh and POTUS (before later coming to work there.)
   
8. A few great quotes:
   

"I said I'd do it, Buckminster!"
Such a Wisconsin thing to say. My mother is from the Badger State and I can see her saying that.
"(Leo) is the most Jewish man any of us have ever met" "A thousand relatives in Scotland just rolled over in their graves."
Very charming back and forth.
"I'm not unsympathetic, but that is the problem right there. They're not his votes."
Dead-on Amy. That is why you're my West Wing crush. No politician is owed a single vote.
Thank you for taking the time to read my thoughts.
What did you think of "The Red Mass?"

I finally muster the courage to finally resigned from my work. I thought I'd regret it, but I'm honestly feeling so relieved and at peace with my decision. Nakahinga ako ng maluwag. I've always been a firm believer na if your work costs you your mental sanity, then it's not worth it.
Skl, I was working with a Customer Service Manager from an e-commerce merchandise provider in the US. I was with them for a year, and all throughout my stay, I never felt connected to the team. There were initially three of us, but one left recently kasi nag abroad. Yung goal ko lang naman sa work is simple — pumasok, magtrabaho, hit my daily goals, and end my shift in peace. However, throughout my stay, I noticed that my client treats me differently than two of my co-workers. She treats them as part of the team, and ako spare tire lang. She always acknowledges them and shower them appreciation, tapos ako breadcrumbs lang. Whenever the two commits major mistakes, wala kang maririnig sa kanya. Pag ako, which is rare tapos minor lang, she loves to make an example out of me sa team. Nage-expect akong she would slide me a DM to inform me about my mistake and what should I do better next time pero hindi ganun. Pagalit always yung tono and she loves being shady about it. Whenever I attempt to reach out and open up about how I've been feeling, most of the time seenzoned ako or busy daw siya. Yet, ang ironic kasi she always says to us na "if you ever have problems, feel free to reach out to me."
For one year, tiniis ko yan. I didn't mind it even to a point na yung mga tasks nila e ako pinapagawa. Kahit I've noticed na hindi equal distribution yung workload, e tumahimik na lang ako. But I've had enough.
The past few month has been really hectic. Nagresign yung isang kasama namin and the client doesn't want to hire a replacement. So yung workload e mas dumami and sobrang busy na. Ang unfair lang na if I get to compare my daily tasks dun sa kasama ko, I have too much na di ko alam paano pagkakasyahin in a day. To quote what the client says, "isn't your workload too much for one person?" Alas, akala ko ibibigay niya sa kasama ko yung ibang tasks pero wala. Hanggang commentary na may pa additional pang "please try to complete your tasks within the day. manage your time wisely." Naknamputa. Ako busy pero yung kasama ko sitting pretty. Lately, she started to micromanage us. Pinapasend niya kami ng daily accomplisments in a day para alam niya if we're being productive and if may room pa daw for us for additional tasks. Loaded na nga ako, and guess what, dinagdagan pa ako and yung kasama ko nada. At one point, the client reached out to my manager from the agency side and pinapatanong bakit may days ako that week na di umabot sa daily goal of 50 Closed Tickets a day. On those days, I only closed 49 and 48 tickets. Pero wala silang say na on the rest of the days, umaabot ako ng 100+ closed tickets a day. So ayun, pinapa explain ako kung bakit di ko na hit yung goal and what steps should I take to ensure I hit my daily goal moving forward. Pero ang unfair lang na wala silang say dun sa kasama kong tenured na on bihira lang maka hit ng 50 Closed Tickets a day. Yung tipping point talaga is how the client loves to make a big deal out of my responses. Ang defensive ko daw if nag aapologize ako, pag nagfi feedback daw siya madami akong salit, etc. I love feedback, but it should come in a nice tone. Hindi yung nagbigay ka ng feedback tapos ang mafi feel ng tao is demoralized. I opened this up to my agency manager, but as always, ako yung mali.
To cut the story short, I resigned and surely the best decision I made this year. Deserve ko to work with a client who values my hardwork and input sa team. Ang funny lang kasi since I still have access my Slack, nagpa bonus si client dun sa kasama ko ng $250 at pinost pa yung screenshot sa channel namin tatlo. Ang laman ng email is "Please give XXX a $250 on her next cutoff for she's been working hard for us the whole month." Para naman may ginagawa si ate talaga e ako nga lahat gumagawa ng workload sa team tsaka bago lang ako umalis sa team lol.
My next move after this is to upskill and focus on myself. Nakaipon ipon naman so I'll go back to the gym, eat well, sleeep sleeep sleeeeeeeep, and enjoy the things I love. Hopefully, I'll land to a job where I can excel, grow, and feel valued. Ekis na sa akin mga VA agency.

Good afternoon Longs,
Great shareholder letter from Dr. JL today! But, I gotta chuckle regarding the CRC study being the number one priority. It reminded me of when Scott Kelly suddenly announced on some CC: "We are going be an Oncology company". Shareholders that heard the comment (including myself) were baffled. We have not seen any clinical trial animal or human that would have suggested anything of the sort. However, we were aware of some mice studies that were being conducted at MD Anderson (MDA). That study was a combo trial with LL/Keytruda, and somehow u/MGK2 or somebody found out or figured out the trial on mice was a CRC study. Sorry can't remember the details, but here we are again with Oncology being the front-runner for CytoDyn's priorities.
I am pleased with today's letter because it was obvious that Dr. JL is working with potential partners to further our clinical trial objectives. However, instead of a summer start for HIV Chronic Inflammation trial; we were told 2 phase II clinical trials would start before the end of the calendar year. The priority is the CRC trial and second is the HIV Chronic Inflammation trial.
I gotta ask: Why the a delay in starting any of the trials? There could be several reasons but IMO the partnerships being alluded to in the letter are the main reason for the delays. Dr. JL knows well and good that it is conventional wisdom to partner with BP to move forward on any trials. It is not the only way but most developmental drug companies (like CYDY) choose the conventional route and partner with BP to accomplish clinical trials.
According to the letter interest from 3rd party partners went up after the clinical hold was removed. But the MD Anderson CRC study was way long ago. It was during that time when Scott Kelly was able to state: "We are going to be an Oncology company". Keytruda is from Merck and we never heard the results of the trial at MDA. Just silence, and I am sure that we will not hear the Mice trial results for GBM that used a Merck drug either for some time. IMO, Merck has been here for some time and is not new to CYDY, or Leronlimab or the Long Acting LL.
Dr. JL moved the date out for initiating the trials to the end of 2024. Why? My impression of Dr. JL is he wants to get Leronlimab into patients in need ASAP. That would mean let us get the trials going ASAP, but we have no money to do it on our own. So why can't Merck just run the trials ASAP? They could! We just have to have a straightforward partnership agreement that would allow them to run the trials in return for potential revenue down the road. But is that intriguing?
From the letter: Research and development partnership opportunities are important to the Company as we search for cost-effective ways to further build out our product development portfolio. We have identified several such opportunities that we believe are intriguing, and anticipate finalizing agreements with these partners in the very near future. Such potential partnerships include an investigator-initiated pilot study of leronlimab in patients with Alzheimer’s Disease, and a project that will evaluate the use of leronlimab in patients living with HIV who are undergoing stem cell transplantation in a proof of cure study. Following lifting of the clinical hold, we have observed a significant increase in third parties that are interested in partnering with the Company. We will continue to review opportunities as they arise, given the potential for significant value return at little or no cost to the Company.
Look the investigator-initiated studies are "intriguing" and that will not cost CYDY much money at all. Just supplying the product. IMO pushing the beginning of the trial dates back from summer to end of 2024 is all about allowing for the intriguing negotiations to further develop. During that time several things will take place: Hopefully, we get the Alzheimer mice trial results done, which is more data on our ever-expanding indications that we have evidence on, not just a theory. The combo Stem-cell/LL study is a great way to create competition. Stem-cell companies like ATHX and MESO are non-drug companies and our direct competitors to any drug company. the stem cells that are devoid of the CCR5 molecule are very rare and stem-cell companies would have a hard time harvesting enough to build an adequate supply around. It's not sustainable. But a stem-cell supply pre-treated with LL is a different animal.
Essentially, Dr. JL wants to get LL in the hands of treating physicians ASAP, but he needs a little bit more time to expand the evidence that LL will work in multiple indications. in theory, we already know it has 90+ potential indications from ohm20's list. Plus, Dr. JL needs a little bit more time to show the true value of the Long Acting LL. Or Long Acting goes to LIVIMMUNE and CYDY/LL is part of a BO.
We know a BO announcement is not solid on just a list of theories. It works better when you list that positive clinical signals have been shown for MASH, CRC, mTNBC, PASC, HIV and a boatload of CCR5 published articles that implicate a slew of other indications. If Long Acting is included in the CYDY BO, then Dr. JL has to show some similar amount of evidence (Monkey data) and that would be accretive to the overall value of CYDY.
Merck quote at JP Morgan Healthcare conference in San Francisco: Merck CEO Rob Davis said at the 42nd Annual J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference in San Francisco on January 8, 2024, that the company is open to deals of any size, but is not interested in large-scale acquisitions that would require combining workforces. Davis made these comments after the company's $680 million acquisition of Harpoon Therapeutics earlier in the day.
Fiercepharam interview with Merck CEO: https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/merck-still-market-deals-1b-15b-range-ceo-says
In the above link, Merck CEO says: “It’s gonna be a range of deals, but if you look in that $1 [billion] to $15 billion [range], that continues to be what we’ll look for,” Davis said. “We’ve also shown that not only are we very open to acquisition, we see collaboration as an important tool as well.”
If Merck is involved, then Dr. JL, Mitch, and Cyrus are going to do all they can to show evidence on multiple indications that will increase CYDY's valuation to $15 Billion or so. Basically, with CYDY's outstanding share count at or very near 1 billion shares that equates to $15 per share. The only reason we partner now is because the partner wants more evidence of clinical efficacy, but that partner is going to realize pretty quickly that if they wait too long the bidding war is going to cost them more than $15 Billion.
Good speed to the LONGS!

La llarona
Known as Maltinzin in her original nomenclature, today, the lore of La Llorona is well known in Mexico and the southwestern United States.
The earliest documentation of La Llorona is traced back to 1550 in Mexico City. But there are theories about her story being connected to specific Aztec mythological creation stories. "The Hungry Woman" includes a wailing woman constantly crying for food, which has been compared to La Llorona's signature nocturnal wailing for her children. The motherly nature of La Llorona's tragedy has been compared to Chihuacoatl, an Aztec goddess deity of motherhood. Her seeking of children to keep for herself is significantly compared to Coatlicue, known as "Our Lady Mother" or Tonantsi (who's also comparable to the Virgen de Guadalupe, another significant mother figure in Mexican-culture), also a monster that devours filth or sin.
The legend of La Llorona is traditionally told throughout Mexico, Central America and northern South America. La Llorona is sometimes conflated with La Malinche, the Nahua woman who served as Hernán Cortés' interpreter and also bore his son. La Malinche is considered both the mother of the modern Mexican people and a symbol of national treachery for her role in aiding the Spanish.
Stories of weeping female phantoms are common in the folklore of both Iberian and Amerindian cultures. Scholars have pointed out similarities between La Llorona and the Cihuacōātl of Aztec mythology,as well as Eve and Lilith of Hebrew mythology. Author Ben Radford's investigation into the legend of La Llorona, published in Mysterious New Mexico, found common elements of the story in the German folktale "Die Weisse Frau" dating from 1486.La Llorona also bears a resemblance to the ancient Greek tale of the demigoddess Lamia, in which Hera, Zeus' wife, learned of his affair with Lamia and killed all the children Lamia had with Zeus. Out of jealousy over the loss of her own children, Lamia kills other women's children.
The Florentine Codex is an important text that originated in late Mexico in 1519, a quote from which is, "The sixth omen was that many times a woman would be heard going along weeping and shouting. She cried out loudly at night, saying, "Oh my children, we are about to go forever." Sometimes she said, "Oh my children, where am I to take you?"
While the roots of the La Llorona legend appear to be pre-Hispanic, the earliest published reference to the legend is a 19th-century sonnet by Mexican poet Manuel Carpio.The poem makes no reference to infanticide, rather La Llorona is identified as the ghost of a woman named Rosalia who was murdered by her husband

So long story short, I have a very embarrassing nearly 10 year old blog that I have lost access to. I've been trying to get it taken down to no avail for the last year. I understand that tumblr can't just delete whatever blog I tell them to, however this blog's email has been deleted due to inactivity by AOL so even if I could remember the password it's physically impossible to access the email.
Tumblr's email support mentioned being able to have the account "suspended". Here's a direct quote..,
"Although we cannot delete the account for you, we respect your right to privacy. If you would like the account and its contents hidden from public view, our support team can suspend the account instead. If you choose to proceed with this option, the blog's URL won’t be released, but the blog and posts will no longer be available on Tumblr.
Please note that we will also contact the registered email address regarding the suspension. Should we receive a reply stating the suspension is not valid, we will restore the account.
If you would like to complete the suspension process, please confirm your permission in your next reply."
I have now confirmed permission twice but get the same automatic response from a different fake name each time, here's another direct quote.
"Thanks for writing back. The security of Tumblr users is a top priority to us, and upon further consideration, we cannot give out the login info for this account, send password reset links to an email address other than the one on file, change the registered email address for the account, or delete the account for you. As much as we sympathize, we have to honor the existing email address."
Is there anyway I can speak to an actual human being and get the account suspended?? or is this just bullshit to get my hopes up :/ My face is even in the profile picture and I can provide ID to prove it's my old account.
tldr: Tumblr Support says they can suspend my inaccessible, inactive account yet haven't done it despite me giving them permission to twice.

According to this article there are 30 associations in Canada most likely fed up with bullying from Loblaw. Do we have allies in there? Does anyone know an insider? Have connections? Looking for information and strategies
https://www.thestar.com/business/a-grocery-code-of-conduct-could-finally-be-on-the-horizon-industry-associations-say/article_e80d2c05-f88a-542d-aa2e-bb0648afe6f7.html
Quote:
For one, they’re seeing more political interest in the issue, likely thanks to the pandemic. As well, more and more industry associations — producers, suppliers and independent grocers — are signing on in support, said Gary Sands, senior vice-president of the Canadian Federation of Independent Grocers (CFIG).
He pointed to an October report supported by more than 30 grocer, producer and supplier associations across Canada, including the CFIG, that surveyed Canadians about the food supply chain and called for a code of conduct.
“When you have this many associations all aligned from different sectors in the industry and saying, this has to happen … the momentum here is growing,” said Sands.
“This is the most progress I’ve ever seen on this issue. Ever.”

Hi folks, I hope everyone is doing well! Personally, I'm going through your average mid-week crisis of faith - not to sound dramatic or anything :) A bit of an introduction, I'm quite new to Christianity, despite being baptised as an infant (I wasn't raised in a religious household despite this - it was a Catholic baptism). I attend an Anglican church, but I've done most of my learning and study through online resources, and I started listening to a bible study podcast that really resonated with me and helped me grow in my faith. That is until the host of the podcast put forward his belief that infant baptism is not biblical, and therefore, those who have been baptised only as an infant are not saved.
I'd never considered this before, and the prospect absolutely devasted me. It has sent me into a bit of a spiral, and I think I need some help in understanding why we baptise infants. I'm afraid that my baptism was not what Jesus commanded of us (it was not preceded by repentance, acceptance of Him as my saviour, followed by immersion), therefore I have not actually "accepted" his sacrifice on the cross, and as a result, the Holy Spirit does not dwell in me. I'm going to go ahead and list out some reasons I'm struggling to accept it as a valid baptism:
1. What 'Baptise' actually means...
When the verb 'baptise' is used in the Gospels, it means to immerse in water. This is what Jesus commands of us, and it is what he did himself. So right off the bat, I don't think my infant baptism is what Jesus commanded of us to do - it was a 'sprinkling' of water, not an immersion.
2. Accepting the gift of salvation as an infant...
Obviously, as an infant, I was not able to comprehend what was happening. Nor could I accept Jesus as my saviour and repent of my sins (talking about original sin here, pretty sure I didn't break any commandments as a baby). I believe this isn't necessarily a problem, because we have seen in Matthew 9: 1 - 7 that Jesus forgives the sins of a paralysed man because of the faith shown by those with him. So I think it's fair to say that although a baby cannot accept the gift of salvation, their parents can accept it on behalf of them. Great! But in my case, my parents did not actually believe in God despite having me baptised. So their reasoning for the baptism was not biblical. I guess I can hope the priest who performed the sacrament believed and that this was enough, but who knows!
3. Biblical examples of the 'household' being baptised...
Another verse often quoted to support infant baptism is Acts 16:15 'And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, saying, If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there. And she constrained us.' I suppose it is fair to assume there may have been infants in the household. But there may not have been. I'm worried about basing my salvation on an assumption.
4. Jesus warns the disciples of turning away children from Him...
Again, another verse to support infant baptism is Matthew 19:14 'But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.' Again I feel that this is a fair assumption, but perhaps taken out of context? Jesus isn't talking specifically about baptism here.
And those are pretty much the reasons why I'm struggling to accept my baptism was valid and that I have been saved. I understand it's the done thing in Anglican churches, and that it's probably something I should speak to a clergy member about. I'm working on gathering the courage to do that. Am I being an idiot and completely misunderstanding the biblical teaching on this? I'm really struggling with this one, so I'd appreciate any help or words of encouragement. I'm terrified I've been walking around thinking I've been saved, while all this time it was just a delusion.
I'm sure that God is not beholden to baptism, e.g. if it is His will to save someone who is not baptised then He will do it. But then I see a verse like John 3:5 'Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.' and it fills me with anxiety. I used to love reading the bible, but now that this doubt is in my head, I can't help but feeling dread. Do I need to toughen up and have more faith?

So i got my DWI a couple months ago and fast forward to this week. My attorney said that the arresting officer didnt show up for the ALR hearing so I get to keep my license for the time being,, Thats a good thing I guess but now my attorney is saying I need to pay him $160 for him to send a subpoena to the arresting officer.. What for since the officer never showed up the ALR hearing? Also he quoted me that it was going to be around $90 a while back and I just got the invoice for $160. What gives hes charging me another 50 for no reason. Do I need to subpoena the officer?? please help.

I've recently been reflecting on my efforts at being more productive and started writing some longer form content to help structure my thoughts.
I wrote up the below in the past few days and wanted to share. Perhaps some of you have also found yourself hindered by an ongoing search for the ideal life path vs. just enjoy the journey.
Hope you find this helpful!
Despite your inflated sense of yourself, you are not, amongst all other humans, impervious to being brainwashed. This is a hardwired feature of your mind and a circuit that is operating at all times, if you allow it to do so. You aren’t being brainwashed in the cartoonish mode of being made to act like a chicken or empty your wallet. However, you are being brainwashed nonetheless.
Replace the word “brainwashed” with “influenced” and you may start to see my point. If you read me, you are not a fan of the influencers for stupid people (a la Andrew Tate) but perhaps you have more refined taste (Huberman, Attia, Ferriss, Jocko, Peterson, Newport). If there are any such personalities you are a fan of, I assure you that in your efforts to live a more productive, successful, disciplined life… you have been brainwashed.
I want to focus on how quickly the messages that you hear from these sources transition into “shoulds” that run in the background of your daily self-talk. These sources are an unending stream of great ideas for how you should wake up, how you should work, how you should eat, how you should exercise, how you should have sex, how you should meditate, how you should partake in leisure and so on. Notice that they don’t always come in the form of a statement that says “you should do x.” They may come in the form of “my typical daily routine looks like y”. Either way, your mind is primed and ready to sponge it all up.
If you were but a simple peasant farming in Ye Olde England six hundred years ago, your life was governed by a very rigid set of “shoulds”. There was the Bible, there were social norms, the rules of the king, and so. However, these were still a relatively manageable list of rules that one could live by, and it was not unreasonable to assume that you could mostly stay on the Righteous Path. Fast forward to the algo-influencer age and all bets are off. Open up any platform and within minutes, you’ll be bombarded with more “shoulds” than you can possibly keep in mind at once. This observation comes with no value judgment on the quality of what we are being told, I am only commenting on the volume.
You are wrong if you tell me that you are effective at curating the good stuff that will improve your life from the algo-influencer-Youtube-podcast-x regime. I know you think you are because, as we noted, you are a fan of the high class, refined content. The good stuff. The science backed stuff. Here’s the thing, once a source of information finds some sort of “resonance” with your subconscious, you are going to suck it all right up. All the great stuff you hear will immediately seep into your subconscious and become a constant quiet voice in the back of your mind berating you with a litany of “shoulds.”
Alas, you object - it’s all good stuff. Huberman has me locked onto managing my dopamine levels, Attia has me optimizing my diet, Dr. Zoidberg has me keeping limber, and Cal Newport is showing me how to live a deep life. I want to point out three problems with what is going on here.
Problem #1 - Your mind is not actually asking what end purpose is being served by adopting the idea that you “should” be doing a given thing.
Let’s cue Jocko Willink on this one. I am someone who, for many years, felt it was important to wake up at 4:30am because of… discipline. Why? Well, I must get up early to be up before the enemy and for freedom. I note that discipline is the ultimate meta-”should”. Discipline means getting yourself to do all the “shoulds” on your list. Can anyone tell me what outcome I’m missing out on by not partaking in a daily cold plunge, heat plunge, ice bath, or looking at the sun within 15 minutes of waking up?
Problem #2 - Even if you have a desired end goal, your mind is not doing a rigorous job of assessing whether or not a given “should” will get you there.
Most of us would like more control of our daily schedule in order to have more freedom and flexibility. The grindset types on Youtube, or on X have a common solution for us. I am not likely taking a huge leap in that one “should” you have picked up is something to do with entrepreneurship. Ok, have you really considered whether starting your own business will give you more freedom? Maybe it will… I just suspect you picked up this idea without really looking at the pros and cons.
Problem #3 - Even if you’ve been bequeathed a fantastic, grade A, “should” from someone… you’ve got more than you can handle already.
If a “should” that you heard on Youtube or read in a book resonates for some reason, your mind will take it up and start beaming you subconscious messages to do that thing. Your mind will also happily send you 10 of these at once. Are they contradictory? Who cares? I “should” wake up at 4:30, and I should sleep at least 8 hours with no alarm clock. I should also consider being a night owl creative type, and stay up late to grind if life demands it. Some “shoulds” probably aren’t even really defined to any precision. I should be more driven, more mindful, more dynamic. I genuinely feel all those impulses and can’t even begin to tell you what it would like to actually do them. Mr. Brain has no problem with cognitive dissonance, and will dutifully tell me to live up to all of these.
Let’s now talk about Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden (as an aside, yes I also feel a “should” to be more religious, spiritual, and penitent). Well, really I want to talk about The Promised Land. I know you… you are the hard driving, disciplined type. You like to punish yourself for not living up to your expectations. Alas, you are on the verge of getting there. If you could just get a few days in a row where you nail all your “shoulds,” it will all fall into place. One perfect day will lead to the next and the next. Then, I’ll have made it. I’ll be in the land of enlightenment (and oh so productive). Fellow pilgrim, I’m right there with you on the Righteous Path.
Wait a second, something feels off. Did I say above that our mind will happily adopt any set of “shoulds” no matter how contradictory or ill-defined they may be? And, did I also say that I’m striving to get to The Promised Land by doing “All the Shoulds”? If The Righteous Path is the road that leads to The Promised Land, I’ve got some bad news for you. You are permanently off The Righteous Path. This, my friend, is why you constantly feel like you are not living up to your expectations. They are impossible - you never had a chance. It’s ok though - Jesus died for your sins and there is still a path to salvation.
Oh, but, I’m not ready for salvation, I want to rock on. Here’s what we’d all prefer to do when faced with that sensation of being off the Path. It’s time to hunker down, and go to war, and GRIND. Don’t tell me I can’t do it all. When fate whispers, “You cannot Withstand The Storm,” the Warrior Whispers, “I am the Storm.” I’m feeling chills (no really, it’s a great quote). That’s how we roll. We man up and get that shit done. Well, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but if that worked you wouldn’t still be in the market for motivational content. You are still lost… no Youtube video is going to get out of the bottomless deep of the “should.”
Back to Jesus (gasp - you didn’t warn me this would be a borderline sacrilegious article). It’s okay, Jesus is fair game in the algo-world. This is that obnoxious pause point in a self help book where there’s a worksheet page and you are asked to write stuff down. Take 10 minutes and make yourself a list of all the “shoulds” that you are feeling at this point about your life. I’ll help you get going with some prompts: businesses to start, podcasts to create, books to read, daily rituals to adopt, food to eat/not eat, workout routine to start, races to run, people to call, projects to do. You get the idea.
More work for you. Now imagine your perfect day. I mean a day that checks all the boxes. I despise rap, but seek inspiration in imagining the productivity version of the Ice Cube hit, “It was a Good Day.” How would you spend your time? Think about it hour by hour, minute by minute. When do you wake up? What do you do after waking up? How much time do you spend working? What sort of work? What else do you do? Map it all out. Imagine this as a day where you fully control your schedule.
Are you still with me? Probably not. This is too many words for the internet and I’m asking too much of your lazy ass. You should be less lazy. See what I did there? Ok, next step. Map your perfect day onto reality. Take any of the days from the past week where you had real life commitments such as work meetings, errands, childcare and ask yourself how you would map this perfect day onto that reality. Where would the three hours of Cal Newport Deep Work fit? How would you wake up at 4:30am after being up late because your kid was sick or your friend from out of town was visiting?
My point is, of course, obvious. However, don’t underestimate what I am saying. I am not saying that you can’t always have your perfect day. I am saying you can never have the perfect day. You are imposing unrealistic expectations upon reality. This conflict has always existed and you had two choices: 1) Dig deeper and muscle through because you are failing as a person to be sufficiently disciplined, or 2) Accept that your “shoulds” were always impossible to fully satisfy, and try something different.
Here’s the last thing I want you to do for now. Go back to your “should” list from the first step and take a critical eye. I give you permission to cross out as many as you’d like. If you are unsure before you cross it out, ask yourself: Where did this idea come from? Does it help me lead a happier life? Do I even agree with the premise? When in doubt, cross it out and feel the freedom.
I’ll leave you with one last message - you are probably doing just fine. Are there improvements you can make in your life? Sure, we all can. However, you aren’t failing, you aren’t straying from The Righteous Path, and there is no Promised Land. There’s just the lower case p path, and that is alright.

This might be long but..
Two weeks ago my boyfriend was in a pretty bag accident, totaled his car, pretty bad whiplash and was out of work for 7 days.
He was at a 4 way stop except east-west did not have a stop sign. He was going straight and stopped, he saw no one coming either way and drove ahead. When looking to the right there is a ton of trees as well as the road is curved and supposed to be 30 mph. When he went straight, a huge Escalade came crashing into him. Car spun out and airbags deployed, anti freeze leaking everywhere. The witness behind him told him he saw him stop and he was good it was the other person.
He's in the ambulance and now the cop is writing him a citation on site, for violation of a stop sign, without speaking to him and only talking to the other people who hit him and the witness, apparently the witness told him something separate.
Couple days go by, insurance quoted his car, he's tried to get an attorney but they won't let him because the officer says it's his fault. He's very direct on the part that he yielded and stopped, and there was not anyone there.The other family now has gotten an attorney and coming for him and his insurance. At this point, he's fed up, he feels like he shouldn't be getting a citation since he did stop, the witness there is NO info on this said person. The cop even gave him the wrong case number when giving him the info because the same situation happened about an hour prior. The cop stated this is a really bad intersection and this situation wreck happens all the time, the department has complained as well as the people who live near it.
We are looking for anyway he can fight this. I'm aware and he is too that he could be partially at fault but he still wants to fight this as he knows there was no one there and the way the road is he had NO way of knowing.
All attorneys are saying they can't help because he's "at fault". what can we do? who do we call? I need actual advice please.

Hi all! I have the Hydrawise Pro HC 12.
Trying to start using it again after the winter (when it all worked fine), and now I have two zones that don't respond to the app.
It says they're being watered, but they are not.
I am able to manually turn them on and they work, but obviously I can't schedule them on or off, which is a pain.
Any thoughts or advice before I call someone out?
Also, the one quote I got said $160/hr with a 1 hour minimum. Seems high to me, but idk. Seattle area if that's of importance.

Let me start by saying this is definitely something that is controversial, but I do see both sides and would like to rationalize two perspectives. I'm sure everybody knows the quote about the education system, "I want a nation of workers, not a nation of thinkers", and yeah, I agree, the education system sucks, but it's better than nothing.
Everybody's heard the motivational stories: "Guy that fails all his classes later goes on to be really smart and a millionaire" or something. As the world grows to be less traditional, where college degrees are not as useful anymore, and these stories are more widespread, it can be comforting to know you don't have to be an amazing student to be successful. That's good.
HOWEVER, I believe this widespread notion that grades do not matter and your GPA will get you nowhere is harmful and reaching the wrong people. In the modern world, "Grades do not determine your intelligence!" is used as a rallying call for the lazy kids in school that were, quite frankly, not the smartest.
While it's true that people have different strong suits and everybody's different, extremely low grades (WAYYYY below failing) will more often than not tell you what you need to know about somebody. I suppose it's more about work ethic? Intelligence can sort of go hand in hand there as well... (?)
Am I wrong about this? I do see both sides, and I just would like to hear what people think.
TL;DR: I believe that the American school system is far from perfect and many are disadvantaged. While having A's on your report card does not immediately deem you intelligent, if you have a 0.6 GPA and make a 32 average in your classes, you're probably doing something wrong.