How can we stop going around in circles with these corrupted nihilists? (basically an extreme religious-nut but in reverse; no meaning, no value, no good/bad, nothing matters) I've compiled some of my thoughts/comments.

But first If you are not caught up yet:
1 Re: Vegan Gains ...The Militant Vegan Raffaela Interview - (May 12, 2024)
2 Vegan Gains is a sub-Jerkivest [5/11/24]
3 Moral Realism Debate w/ Inmendham - (May 16, 2024)
4 WTF #899: The vegan gains debate ... Value realism - (May 19, 2024)
5 Vegan Gains ...Denialism is the only nihilism [5/19/24]
also saw this Controversial Topics with Vegan Gains (Horse Riding, Bivalves, Depression, and much more!) - (May 11, 2024) ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ (he thinks in terms of some dogmatic religious brain-rot morality source of right/wrong, but a kind of reversed/opposite conclusion of it's absence, nihilism)
the very reason religion was invented in the first place was because humans by nature had a value-engine driving them & NEED for meaning, that's the irony. value gave rise to religion, religion never needed to grant value. The fact people can't grasp this. 🤦 ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎

Now onto the various arguments, sorry how long and out of order it is But the idea is to provoke you coming up with better ideas/arguments, and if you can critic and strenghen my and ultimately inmendham's arguments. The GOAL should be to Create a formal argument AKA a syllogism, modus ponens. Something clear and concise that can't be taken out of context or misinterpreted, as happened with the debate...

On the subject of Efilism, tread lightly, the philosophy and argument extends beyond merely focusing on suffering; it also includes the critical issue of consent violation. Its proponent and creator, Inmendham, argues for value realism, which contrasts starkly with the notion of subjective morality which I find illogical. While objective morality is full of baggage... often linked to outdated religious doctrine so on face value it's not fun or easy subject to broach... many contemporary non-religious ethicists ground it in realism. Personally me, inmendham and others see no use for the term "morality" as it's tainted. value-realism is the subject. Is it a value-laden universe or not?
it is not necessary to call TRUE/REAL right or wrong Objective, because if objective is defined as mind-independent than without minds there's nothing right/wrong to happen to, therefore THE discussion should be just regarding what is TRUE or NOT, subjective doesn't necessarily mean mere contrived opinion or preference but can be logical conclusion, e.g. you can conclude 2 + 2 = 4 as we understand these concepts of numbers to model reality but can you call it objective or mind-independent 2 + 2 = 4, or that math exists? Not really. As you require a modeler to model reality, an observer to make the observation, a mind to come to such accurate conclusions. To me, claiming there is no real right or wrong is akin to asserting that moral standards and ultimately the subject of Ethics is as fictitious as religion or Santa Claus, you just believe it cause you want to or have preference to. Why maintain this pretense if it's all a mere fabrication / contrivance?
Regarding subjective judgments such as determining "What's the tastiest potato chip or the most beautiful painting?", these are not factual assessments about the things themselves, The question itself is misleading, because the thing itself has none of those qualities objectively, Instead, such qualities are OUTPUTs generated by the interaction of our bodies and minds with these INPUT items, the input is quite arbitrary/irrelevant, unlike the highly meaningful & distinct output generated of positive or negative experiences. You might get off more on certain female body part than another, it doesn't matter, the output positives & negatives is more or less same among individuals and that's what's relevant... not what specific fun or hobby gets you or them off or pushes their buttons.
It can be TRUE that a certain food item is the tastiest to that personal individual, or gross to another, and we can talk about intersubjective truths with averages overall. But one's experience of what is tastiest for them doesn't contradict another's, they can both be true for them individually, as you are likely not even sharing the same exact experiences to judge differently. And one's very perception or framing of the experience changes the experience itself, no way around this truth. Some people find bricks tasty or edible, just how their brain is wired.
It's important to recognize that differing opinions of personal taste do not inherently conflict in the way ethical contradictions do. With ethical matters, asserting that two diametrically opposed views are equally valid is problematic, either one is right and the other wrong, or both might be based on flawed reasoning. Pretending 2 opposing ethical views can be both equally right/true/correct is utter contradictory mush, either one of them must be right / wrong, or both are contrived meaningless nothing opinions, just made up. you wouldn't say whether one believes in god or not IS mere personal opinion/preference and such 2 opposing views can be equally right at same time, that's utter contradictory nonsense, by saying 2 opinions that gRAPE is both good & bad at same time are equally right opinons, right loses all meaning and you might as well say neither is right and both are wrong, they each have their own contrived fairytale delusion.
Now with Ethics of right / wrong, it does not depend on one single individual's preference or opinion, but taken as the whole, if you violate one without consent you still have to account for that since you are seemingly putting the weight on the preference otherwise preferences are utterly meaningless and irrelevant.
ALSO, Do you call whatever you prefer what's right, or do you prefer to try to do what is right?
Do you prefer to seek out what is the right most accurate conclusion given all the facts of reality, or contrive right to be what's in your preference/interest or personal gain?
I don't think VG or most these talking heads understand value-realism (problematic events within subjectivity/a non-physical but REAL reality of the mind). Obviously there's no objective divine or otherwise prime-directive moral-rules we must follow. Unfortunately Religion has poisened the conversation so much with archaic ideas and mushy terms like 'Morality'. Understand there is no 'moral truth', let alone an objective one, ofc if you pigeon-hole me or all realists into defending such nonsense it's easy to refute them. What I'm interested in is subject of Ethics, and to start whether or not value/problematic events exist or do not exist.
Here's a silly question by nihilists: "why is suffering bad?"
Response: How do you identify suffering? Based on the fact that it feels bad. (Yes subjectively) Just as we can subjectively understand 2+2 = 4
Or this: "prove suffering bad, objectively"
Also question-begging, obviously it is subjective. If such badness cannot exist mind-independently by definition.
"Prove suffering is bad, objectively"
is begging the question, because...
It strawmans / assumes the badness must be bad mind-independently, it isn't therefore, it isn't bad.
Answer this, evolutionarily do animals PERCEIVE being tortured skinned alive nail in the eye as BAD, or does it impose torture which we RECOGNIZE and define as Bad by definition?
If true PAIN/torture isn't bad then why does it exist evolutionarily? Answer: (problem -> solution) mechanism which functions as ability to learn & improved survival, this mechanism was reinforced over time as it worked.
inmendham & realists like myself argue: it is the case Descriptively, Objectively evolution IMPOSED Prescriptive-value-judgements onto animals which function as a learning/problem solving mechanism. Fact is, the invention of 'PROBLEM' is something I/we/animals had nothing to do with... (no-free-will-choice) but are simply byproduct in observation of this fact.
If real PROBLEM(s) didn't truly exist then Arguably the word and conceptual understanding it points 👉 to wouldn't exist either. As if beings could be truly blind never seeing colors/vision yet pulling the idea out of thin air and conceiving of such a thing, how preposterous, that'd be giving human creativity/imagination way too much credit. The only nihilist argument then is that by evolution we & all feeling organisms are somehow ultimately deluded or have illusion of problem where there is none, which I find deeply implausible. Run the torture study/experiment a million times putting people's arm in the fire "yep still bad". Filtering out people who lack ability to feel pain of course.
As evolutionary biologists even states pain is a message to the animal "don't do that again". Can't get descriptively prescriptive more than that.
Are You Getting It?
The Ought is literally baked in as an IS. The is-ought gap to be bridged is a complete Red-Herring, yes you can't derive an Ought from an IS, because if you oughtn't do something, then it can never be BAD... problematic/BAD/torture can't mean anything if it doesn't scream OUGHT-not.
All you have to agree to is due to evolution it created torture which is decidedly negative/ inherently BAD, by definition. Otherwise it wouldn't feel bad or be torturous at all... THEN ask yourself, how can something be BAD yet it's not BAD to create that BAD?
This is Checkmate. These are irrefutable Facts & Logical deductions.
So much for it all being false-perception, the very fact placebo patients perceive an otherwise harmless laser as BAD/painful makes it so. It's the TRUE reality in their mind and you can't deny that fact. It's also a fact believing a pain isn't really all that bad can make it so, but this doesn't make these value-laden experiences NOT real/true.
As per evolution, your body/brain's mechanisms must generate & impose a prescriptive-value-judgement / problematic event within your mind,
It's nagging, complaining, telling you keeping your hand on the hot stove is a mistake/problematic/bad. (not in itself but as a consequence)
I believe this brain making me write all this... is making an accurate assessment when it observe certain events to be problematic/bad where it's happening which is within subjectivity, where's your evidence my perceptions are fooling me or I'm somehow deluded? I witnessed the crime take place and you were nowhere near the crime scene yet you have the authority to claim otherwise as fact? (You are not simply agnostic to my problem suffering but a De-nihilist)
Once one accepts this evolutionary fact we can move on to more complicated questions regarding ethics, like how do weigh the good & the bad, conflicting preferences, etc. Otherwise, it's all pointless & futile, like arguing bivalves or wild-suffering with a non-vegan. They're just not on that level yet and it's a waste of time.
revised version of my other comment: I believe that many discussions around morality miss a crucial point about value-realism, which acknowledges problematic events within subjectivity, a non-physical but real reality of the mind. It is evident that there are no objective, divine, or prime-directive moral rules we must follow. Unfortunately, religion has muddied the conversation with archaic ideas and terms like 'morality'.
There is no 'moral truth,' especially not an objective one. If critics pigeonhole realists into defending such notions, it becomes easy to refute them. My interest lies in ethics and whether value/problematic events exist.
Consider this question by nihilists: "Why is suffering bad?"
Response: Suffering is identified because it feels bad, subjectively. Just as we subjectively understand 2+2=4, we can recognize suffering through its unpleasant experience.
When asked to "prove suffering is bad, objectively," this is question-begging, as the question assumes that the badness must exist independently of minds, which it does not by definition. This question straw-mans the issue by requiring mind-independent badness, ignoring the subjective nature of suffering. As if the quality of it being BAD must be granted by something outside the experience itself.
Evolutionary Perspective: Animals perceive and react to torture (e.g., being skinned alive) as bad because evolution has imposed mechanisms that signal harm. Pain serves as a problem-solving mechanism, reinforcing behaviors that enhance survival. If pain and suffering weren't inherently problematic, they wouldn’t exist in the form they do.
Realists like myself argue that evolution has objectively imposed prescriptive-value judgments on animals. The concept of 'problem' or 'bad' arises from these evolutionary mechanisms, not from free will. The existence of these concepts indicates the reality of these problematic experiences.
If real problems didn’t exist, neither would the concepts describing them. This is akin to how beings blind from birth wouldn’t conceive of color. Suggesting that evolutionary processes have universally deluded all feeling organisms into perceiving problems where there are none is implausible.
As evolutionary biologists state, pain signals to the animal, "don't do that again," which is descriptively prescriptive. The 'ought' is embedded within the 'is.' Thus, the is-ought gap is a red herring because prescriptive judgments are evolutionarily ingrained.
Again, How do you identify suffering? Based on the fact that it feels bad. (Yes subjectively) Just as we can subjectively understand 2+2 = 4
All you have to agree to is due to evolution it created torture which is decidedly negative/ inherently BAD, by definition. Otherwise it wouldn't feel bad or be torturous at all... THEN ask yourself, how can something be BAD yet it's not BAD to create that BAD?
Conclusion: By acknowledging that evolution created inherently negative experiences like torture, we accept that these experiences are bad by definition. Denying the badness of creating bad experiences is contradictory. Therefore, once recognizing the true reality of subjective experiences, only then we can move on to complex ethical questions about weighing good and bad and addressing conflicting preferences.
playing devil's advocate let's try Steelman their position and then arrive at the logical conclusions of it and then perhaps refute it. If they say: "veganism = right" realize there is no contradiction IF by 'right' they just mean it's literally nothing but their preference...
There's no goal to prefer to know/do what's right, RATHER what's right is whatever matches our personal preferences, so unlike flat earther vs round earth beliefs/CLAIMs which can contradict/conflict with each other since either 1 is right or both are wrong. Individual tastes don't.
Whereas if VG says 9 people gRAPE the 1 kid for fun is WRONG because he's a threshold-deontologist but Also RIGHT to a hedonistic utilitarian, Those views only contradict/conflict if they are making VALUE-claims or recognizing a problematic event take place. However, with VG apparently he would have to say he's not claiming or labelling anything as TRULY problematic at all but merely describing his preferences like flavor of ice cream...
Now, of course, as the realist, I find such a view more deplorable/worse than if they were merely agnostic on right/wrong. Cause it's one thing to say there's a right answer to questions of Ethics but we have no objective scientific basis to determine it yet or lack knowledge VS saying they have knowledge there is absolutely no right or wrong.
Under Anti-realism nihilism, what they mean by wrong/right, is just their preference, if I understand correctly (which I'm quite sure) Anti-realism nihilism reduces the Subject of Ethics down to nothing but you or someone else pontificating/opining (i.e "me no like torture") . It defends some sort of expressivism, emotivism, normative, prescriptive reduction of Ethics. Which I find lubricious and has to be a mistake,
I don't see anyone playing any different game even the nihilists invest their money and plan ahead for self-interest, no one truly signs up for torture for fun like it's no problem, and runs away from pleasure happiness as bad. Further, it stands to reason... since we can recognize objectively evolution created a punishment mechanism to enforce learning and survival, BAD/PROBLEM as a concept is something I/WE/Animals had nothing to do with. We didn't invent it, we recognize it and respond accordingly. Even evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins stated that pain is a message to the organism 'don't do that again!'
We must address further the flawed logic of VG and other nihilists reducing Ethics down to mere arbitrary preferences like potato chip flavor, or how much salt you prefer in the soup. As it is completely disanalogous & dishonest upon reflection. QUOTE: "There's no arguing against Efilism, it's just personal opinion. Like arguing what tastes better... ice-cream or potato chips?"
Say if you believe that the mona-lisa is beautiful, and I personally find it ugly, this conflicts/contradicts nothing because it claims nothing in terms about that object or reality outside of our own minds.
such qualities are OUTPUTs generated by body/mind from these INPUTs, the input is quite arbitrary/irrelevant, unlike the highly meaningful & distinct output generated of positive or negative experiences.
it doesn't matter what specific fun or hobby gets them off or pushes their buttons in order for it MATTER, those differences don't make it any less real OR all mere subjective opinion. the output positives & negatives is more or less same among individuals and that's what's relevant...
It can be TRUE that a certain food item is the tastiest to some personal individual, or gross to another, one's experience of what is tastiest for them doesn't contradict another's, they can both be true for them individually because it is the reality in their mind, Some people find bricks tasty or edible, just how their brain is wired.
while one person may find a certain food delicious, another may find it repulsive, without invalidating each other's experiences because they are true for them individually. both experiences are valid/correct.
However, actions that disregard another's negative experience invalidate their reality. if you find being boiled alive problematic and I do it anyway believing it's ok, I am invalidating your experience as either not real, relevant, doesn't matter, or my preferences are more important (carry more weight) than yours. Or simply believe it's ALL equal or arbitrary and I just prefer to exploit you so I do that.
Positive or negative experiences are largely consistent among people, making them relevant, regardless of the specific stimuli. Individual truths about taste or preference coexist without contradiction, reflecting each person's value-generated reality.
This cannot honestly be applied to one's mere opinion it's fine to boil kids alive, as you are invalidating the fact that it matters to those victims. You saying it doesn't matter or your gain of pleasure outweighs their loss of pain, is a claim about the reality of events going on in their mind, so there is room for conflict/contradiction. They can't both be right/wrong at the exact same time.
A strong non-intuition argument/claim & facts presented render value-nihilism implausible:
It is Descriptively the case, that Evolution IMPOSED Prescriptive-ought statements... of 'PROBLEMATIC sensation/event' on organisms which functioned as a learning mechanism and improved survival.
Therefore, BAD/PROBLEM isn't mere subjective opinion but something I/we/animals had nothing to do with and are mere by-product reacting to an observation.
This is pretty much the only base-axiom needed to ground my own torture as mattering as the original actual value-currency at stake. That paired with the fact I sampled consciousness and know it matters to me whether or not I am tortured, the fact that I personally observe it as problematic makes it the true reality for my own mind...
...AND it's not mere opinion/proclamation / or idea humans creatively invented out of thin air... as if like everyone could be truly blind yet conceptualizing colovision, makes no sense. plus that's giving humanity way too much credit of imagination.
Can't really have thoughts about information that you don't have. The concept of bad/problem arguably wouldn't even exist if it never was so.
Yes, I agree very semantics. I am attempting to shed clarity on this topic. Looking at the word "BAD" purely in a descriptive sense (e.g., that which can be categorically applied to extreme suffering) it loses all meaning if it's not truly consequential (i.e., it matters whether one experiences bad or not). If it doesn't actually matter ("no problemo") then it can't be bad, only an illusion/delusion of it, yet it's an effective one evolution imposed on organisms as a learning/problem-solving mechanism. The value-realists like myself have every reason to believe evolution created the real thing, not some contrived pseudo-problem organisms feel compelled/obligated to solve.
One only requires the axiom of a Descriptive Bad to ground Ethics. Why? Because it can be argued that a descriptive statement of BAD/problem is prescriptive by it's very nature in the meaning the of word/language.(otherwise its psuedo-bad/fake langauge, redefines bad as aversion/mere preference against) Otherwise, it can't mean anything to be bad, torturously obnoxious, unwanted experiential events couldn't mean anything. Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins even state pain is a punishment signal/message to the animal: "Don't do that again!" If those aren't prescriptions imposed, then I don't know what is. The animal doesn't simply decide/prefer to avoid the event and finds it bad, it's told/finds it bad and so prefers to avoid the event/problem. If god or there were some logically or physically possible way it were to be invented how else would it exist?, or what you think evolution's reward & punishment mechanism accomplished? If it didn't synthesize problematic sensations to force organisms to solve?
Evolution prescribes Needs/wants, at the same time imposes a PAIN/PROBLEM of starvation/hunger which by it's very nature is a prescription for solution (i.e. sustenance/relief/comfort.)
By the very nature of "PROBLEM" it prescribes -> "SOLUTION" not merely a contrived or trivial-like on paper math problem, but the origin of why the word even exists: the problem of pain, a true whip/punishment mechanism, real currency to play with, real loss. Idk how you can describe something categorically as a PROBLEM in the true sense of the word if it doesn't come with it a necessary prescription for its solution. Because if there is no NEED for a solution, then it turns into no longer a problem again...
I don't see how it could be any other way because if there's no real game to be playing with value baked into it, then money would be worthless/not even exist, animals wouldn't bother evade standing in the fire, etc.
Saying It is Descriptively the case, that Evolution IMPOSED Prescriptive-ought statements... of 'PROBLEMATIC sensation/event' on organisms which functioned as a learning mechanism and improved survival.
Is the same as saying Evolution IMPOSED torture/BAD, as that's what torture/bad is... a prescribed need for solution to a problem which is some form of relief/comfort.
The prescription arises as a result of accepting step 1. (which nihilists reject/deny) problem solution. The latter does not follow/exist without the former. basic 2+2 = 4 logic. There's no point figuring out the answer to the math equation, if we don't agree first and foremost a problem exists. Nor how to solve a disease, if we don't first and foremost recognize a disease exists. And so, Any debate with nihilists on step 2: of determining what is the most likely solution / right answer becomes irrelevent and a waste of time. Arguing about whether x or y IS the right answer to fixing/preventing diabetes is pointless when they don't even agree the really disease exists. They don't believe an actual real BAD / Problem exists.
VG reduces it down to mere preferences, his reasonings that even if universally sentience prefers not suffebe tortured... Well, just because it is the case descriptively we prefer to avoid suffering doesn't mean we ought/should prevent suffering. He hasn't bridged the IS-OUGHT gap. But he got it backwards,
the claim/argument... ISN'T that because descriptively, sentience universally has a preference to avoid suffering, it is therefore bad,
the claim/argument... IS that it's descriptively bad/problematic, therefore universally there's a deductively logically assigned preference to avoid it,
Again you can't classify/label something as a problem if it's inconsequential whether it is solved or not. The word loses all meaning. If something NEEDs solving/fixing it means there's a problem, if there's a problem it means there's something NEED solving/fixing. Evolution manufactures these needy problems in organisms to manipulate and control them.
Merely what our preferences are IS NOT relevant, preference "frustration" arguably IS. (if preferences couldn't be frustrated "i.e., no value" than it wouldn't matter which way things turned out)
You can have a preference for some art style over another, if we were just programmed non-feeling robots that preferred to avoid standing in the fire, but there was no real kernel of value/bad, then it wouldn't matter.
Let's imagine something was Objectively PROBLEMATIC, an IS statement. What would a real problem look like? something in NEED of a solution. Again, why? because If it doesn't matter whether or not it exists or is Solved or not, it could never be a problem in the first place. So either this problem exists or it doesn't. (NOTE: it doesn't need to be an objective problem to be REAL, "i.e mind-independent")
Next, if ASI or sentient beings were to sample this "problem", would it not be the case they would logically deduce it's in need of a solution? And assign their preferences accordingly to solving it? Cause again otherwise then you just see it as "no-problemo" again.
"If Inmendham's argument is that sentient beings create value, and that the universe has no value without the presence of a sentient being generating it, would it not follow that the ought is inherently built into sensation?" yes but the way VG unfairly reframes it is that we subjectively place value on it, THAT it's entirely subjective, like you prefer salty or sweet, or certain ice cream flavor. emphasizing that it's entirely subjective opinion. Take a look at his unfair silly example: "we can't say pineapple on pizza is objectively tasty or not..." this shows a complete ineptitude in grasping the subject and misrepresenting the argument like crazy, no one is arguing whether Mona Lisa is objectively beautiful or some such thing.
What is being argued: the positive or negative mind-dependent event produced in response to the sensual or perceptual stimuli, the input (object) is irrelevant, only the output (experience) matters and what the value-engine (BRAIN) produced. What pushes your buttons so to speak, blue jelly beans or green jelly beans, could differ between 2 individuals but the shared experience is the same more or less. Whether you wired to find pineapple on pizza tasty or gross is irrelevant, some people find bricks edible.
Main issue is they talking past each other: what inmendham is arguing for was either not expressed as best it could be, and/or VG does not quite comprehend what is being argued... inmendham claims/argues evolution created the real bad/PROBLEM and we respond in recognition of this fact/truth with preferences that follow accordingly, Logic cannot be escaped, once you know 2+2 = 4, you can't will or believe it to be 79. If you know the right answer "torture be Bad M'kay?" obviously you won't act or behave otherwise and say you love it. What could it mean to have a preference against experiencing torture... does such a statement even make any sense? All that is required is a real BAD to exist... and then the preference to avoid it logically follows, an inescapable truth. Unless he thinks I also choose or prefer to believe 2+2 = 4 ?
Essentially VG keeps counter-arguing that: "yes we want to avoid torture, but that's just your preference... just cause universally sentience has a preference against torture (a Descriptive / IS statement) doesn't logically follow some Normative/Prescriptive claim/statement. That just because something IS the case it doesn't follow that we OUGHT / should do X, like help others, prevent suffering, etc. That's a non-sequitur he says. Ultimately it's just a preference." sure but...
His argument only applies/counters a strawman position in his head: Because of this I and other realists can account for / side-step it completely, we aren't attempting to derive an OUGHT from an IS. e.g strawman: "we ALL have preference against torture, Therefore it's BAD." Or "we ALL have preference against torture, Therefore we OUGHT prevent it"
The actual argument is that it's Truly Bad/Problematic by the very nature of the word, Therefore first-hand observation follows universally a deductively logically assigned preference to avoid it. Not the other way around.
"If the only thing that can have meaning in the universe is the experience of a sentient being, ought we not maximize its value just by nature of its experience being the only thing that can matter?" yes the ought is a further logical extension of recognizing it to be a problem, which denotes/demands a solution, otherwise if it doesn't matter to solve it or not then you've turned it into a non-problem again. So it can only be categorically one or the other.
Issue of semantics, different terminology and definitions: as long as VG defines objective as "mind-independent" and sets the goal-post to the realist to find a mind-independent "wrong/bad" as if somehow we need some divine-command or absolute rule in the universe that declares it so... then there is no fruit to the discussion. suffering/bad takes place in the mind/experience, so of course it's unfair to ask one to present a mind-independent suffering/bad in the universe, it is begging the question. To be fair inmendham uses the term objective and could have done better job with defining/pushing his terms "e.g. objective as truth/real/fact" and not let VG impose in his own. However, I don't ascribe a requirement to demonstrate an Objective BAD to ground a BAD as real, valid, and true; it can be entirely based on Subjectivist grounds/axiomatic foundations.
Just because the BAD takes place within subjectivity doesn't make it any less real (non-physical/immaterial sure... but not unreal). VG and nihilists can't understand this. 2+2 = 4 is subjective as is all science ultimately as a root axiomatic-fact... as an observation requires an observer. This doesn't mean realism can't be proven/grounded, it can just like we can know 2+2=4 and the moon exists. If anti-realism is gonna deny subjective truths because it's subjective, then one can't know much of anything and reduces to solipsism. I am more certain I exist and the reality of "perceived" BAD I experience is actually a real BAD... THAN that the moon even exists or any other scientific empirical claim.
PROBLEM is something I/we/animals had Nothing to do with, we didn't invent it.
If Anti-realism nihilism was True and Real "PROBLEMS" didn't exist the word wouldn't exist. It is like being born never knowing or seeing or experiencing vision & color, it's impossible to contrive or imagine it. Some knowledge & information is only accessible through experience.
Even Richard Dawkins stated, "pain is a message to the animal Don't do that again!"
If the ought exists within subjectivity, as preferences, why would them being Subjective vs Objective determine whether or not their violation matters? If one experiences disgust looking at something AND another finds beauty... both are true realities for them, they don't conflict or contradict like empirical or fact claims, but instead both are correct and relevant, not one or the other, BECAUSE when someone says the mona Lisa is beautiful they are just saying it arises in them a sense of beauty, the thing/input is irrelevant whereas the output in mind is what is relevant and true for their reality.
Subjective =/= not true, I don't understand the dichotomy between objective vs subjective ethics, as if there isn't facts to glean about subjectivity.
There's also definition or semantic problems:
objective (mind-independent) vs subjective (mind-dependent)
Under such definition does it make sense to say Objectively evolution created feeling experiencing organisms having sense of taste, smell, sound, hunger, pain, to survive. So can we apply word objective to mind-dependent experiences or not?
And of course under such definition there is no objective mind-independent ethics as without minds there is no feeling subject of concern to even talk about in first place. So how silly...
Yet they take objective to mean True & Subjective made up or mere contrived opinion.
For me these are semantic word games that distract, I just care about what's fact/true. What many don't get is Even science, math is subjective invention, byproduct of subjective tool of language, doesn't mean we can't create an accurate model and picture of reality.
I believe the Is-Ought gap is a red-herring, sure it's true you can't contrive an Ought from just what IS, but with evolution the OUGHT statement is built-in, it's descriptively a prescriptive value statement imposed on me, I/we/animals literally have nothing to do with it, I'm just by-product an observer. This is key understanding.
There exists no objective or divine commandment "you OUGHT do X" written into the fabric of reality, and therefore if you don't that's Bad, No. That's nonsense/impossible logically.
Rather an Descriptive IS statement of X is a real bad/PROBLEM, denotes/demands a solution by it's very nature of the word, otherwise if it doesn't need solving then it becomes into a non-problem again, so either x categorically IS a PROBLEM or it's not.
The claim/argument... Is that it's Descriptively BAD/Problematic, therefore universally there's a deductively logically assigned preference to avoid it. Not the other way around. Our personal preference against torture forever doesn't make it therefore bad. The prescription is built in, forced onto us.
It's like "STOP!" & "GO" What do you say to a dog? "BAD dog!" This is saying it should or shouldn't do something. basically = "No!" "Stop!" That's a prescriptive statement/signal/conveyed message.
Or simply, alls required is Descriptively diagnose Torture as Problematic. Which implies Problem Solution Without necessity of solution there is no problem at all, likewise without problem solution means nothing.
​So you essentially boiled my position down to: "Evolution programmed preference to avoid torture." or "we evolved preference to avoid torture" Does that sound incoherent or what... as if I would make such a silly claim. Keep straw-manning.
Do you think animals have PREFERENCE by default to avoid being tortured burned alive and have sex, or logically preferences are born out of observing problematic negative / positive assigned accordingly through punishment & reward mechanisms aka prescriptions, think long and hard about this one...
This is why value or ethical nihilism is incoherent to me. IF torture be bad, how can it be NOT-bad/neutral to create BAD?
It either is truly BAD or it isn't. It's either real or it's an illusion/delusion and false perception.
Their position must reduce to there is no MEANINGFUL difference between Torture & Bliss. And evolution didn't create any problematic sensation or true punishment whatsoever. Instead, were somehow deluded to view being boiling alive as problematic sensation/BAD, and relief as good, we can't tell the difference or label which is which...
Vegan Gains or any anti-realist needs to substantiate these anti-realist nihilist claims & concede if he agrees with the statements below:
"The value-laden problematic BAD experience of being tortured boiled alive in a vat of acid indefinitely... isn't really bad, evolution didn't successfully impose a real negative punishment mechanism on animals, torture isn't something I/we/animals had nothing to do with and are just byproduct observing the imposition, NO! Instead our opinion has everything to do with it... what's problematic torture, one is merely subjectively interpreting/inventing/proclaiming it to be so! Evolution failed!"
"Animals run from fire cause they irrationally unreasonably subjectively interpret it to be bad/problematic sensation or experience, not cause DNA molecule made it so objectively for evolutionary reasons"
"It is all subjective preference like flavor of potato chips, problematic torturous experience isn't bad you just think it's bad or have preference against it."
"You don't logically recognize intrinsic problematic torturous experience then logically assign solution to problem which is preference to avoid that experience, No, you merely have subjective delusional preference against a nail in your eye and there is no logic to it"
"Good is Bad, and Bad is Good depending on opinion, no right or wrong, all subjective tho"
value anti-realism nihilism. INSANE! WORSE than a flat-earth theory!

I've had two successful interviews in the CS followed by two unsuccessful ones for G7. I got 4s last time on all behaviours and need to do better next time. The feedback I got came weeks after the interview and was vague/brief.
People (at G6/7) had told me I should practice reading out my examples, etc. and I went in with some detailed examples plus a couple of backups having spent many hours reading sample questions, advice, watching videos, etc.
Problem is, as always seems to be the case, the question I got just didn't fit with the examples I had spent time on. My example for one behaviour ended up better suited to a different one leaving me with a bit of a stretch later on.
With four interviews done, I'm less sure than ever about how to prepare. What do you good people recommend/do in terms of specificity of examples and time spent? Do you practice your examples because I can't see how it could be useful.
I feel like I should prepare less next time - just have some very fluid examples and treat the behaviour words as bit of checklist - something don't like the idea of as it just seems unnatural and contrived.

Warning, very long and confusing post ahead:
On 4/20 I found out im pregnant with my second, after taking a test at home. (first is now 8, almost 9). Without all the details, I am not in the same place mentally, emotionally, etc that I was while pregnant with my first. I was younger and not in a healthy relationship, but I did have more help from friends and family, and financially I was in a better place. I was scared then too, but no where near as unprepared and scared as I was finding out this time. Of course I’d hoped I would be in a better position in life and stronger and better and all the things.. if I ever had another child, but to put it lightly, life throws curveballs, and all that… and the last two years especially, taught me that life is not a linear, continually uphill path. There will be some tumbling back down and starting over… so to speak. So without going on and on, I ended up deciding to seek help with figuring out what I wanted to do because I was very unsure.
my periods have been irregular for well over a year, I had attributed it to stress. I only took a test because I had some symptoms, I’m not on birth control, so I knew it was a possibility. (please refrain from judging/ lecturing. The how and why is very complicated, and this story is going to be long enough.. and I’m doing what I need to, to address it all) but I wasn’t doing a great job of tracking anything and I’m embarrassed to say I wasn’t and am still not exactly sure how far along I might be. I had routine care while I was pregnant with my first, but found out early, because my period was like clockwork then, so 2 days late I had tested positive. I went to one of the only places available in my area at the time, and I didn’t have a great experience, but I also didn’t really question whether I was going to go through with the pregnancy, and just went straight to prenatal care. I had blood testing done finding out I was 3-4 weeks initially, and then a normal ultrasound at 8 weeks, and regularly from then on.
So this was my first experience with abortion/ family planning clinics and my first time being unsure of when I actually got pregnant, which left me both nervous and driving myself insane with scenarios. And the other stress in my life is just amplifying it.
The day of my appointment (4/29) I was running late and so I called to let them know. I quickly googled the number of the place, when I realized I couldn’t find it in my phone, from scheduling it the week before. A woman answered, she was friendly but told me I wasn’t in their system or scheduled for that day. I quickly realized I called the wrong number, and started to apologize. The two clinics are on the same street. She was still being very nice and started telling me they could see me anyway, that day, and even started saying they could do an ultrasound if I wanted, I didn’t even need to worry about having insurance. I said no thank you. I was suspicious, but not fully aware yet of who I had even accidentally called. I told her no thank you and-hurried and called the correct office, that I had initially booked an appt with. they were overbooked that day as it was, and apologized, but they couldn’t push my appt any later and had to reschedule for a couple days later.
My anxiety, and desperation to get some answers, coupled with pressure on myself and stress, led me to call the other clinic, back.
They were happy to get me in, and I showed up. I started putting pieces together on the way over, and confirmed my suspicions when I walked in and saw the Bible verses on the walls. I started to change my mind and was preparing myself to leave but started convincing myself maybe these clinics weren’t as corrupt as I had heard, and that maybe the horror stories were just that. Maybe I was being dramatic, I was just stressed, these women were nice, etc blah blah
They asked for a urine sample and the woman who introduced herself as a nurse and another woman, appeared, but didn’t introduce herself, and had me sit in a room, them across from me, like an interview. They had notepads and internally I start freaking out at this point and I am about to get up and leave because everything now feels incredibly off, but the woman asks if I took a home test, I say yes. She looks at me , smiling “How did you feel, when you saw that positive test.?” I was already visibly nervous and upset at that point and so when she asked that it felt very invasive. I started to explain that I wasn’t oblivious to what they were doing and said I’d like them to stop. They backed off some and started back tracking, asking if I wanted to just get the ultrasound done, for my peace of mind. I definitely should have left, but like I said, my headspace was STRESSED and extremely anxious and I just WANTED to KNOW something. It didn’t even occur to me they might lie about what was on the ultrasound, or anything. I don’t know why it didn’t, but I know I wasn’t thinking clearly at all, and while I had started accepting that they would pressure me into keeping the pregnancy, I started trying to rationalize that I didnt think it was legal for them to do an ultrasound, a medical exam, if they weren’t qualified to do so?…. I still have so many questions and didn’t realize how little I knew about my own rights, and the legal aspects surrounding these things, until now.
I was showed a screen, (not the one the nurse used, she kept that turned to get the entire time) and showed me a normal enough seeming ultrasound. She did one on my stomach and one internally. I didn’t see a noticeable baby, just a sac… I did think I saw flickering, like when I saw my firsts heartbeat, at one point, but she moved the wand away and didn’t speak almost the entire time, never pointing anything out. I know this sounds so stupid but I assumed it was another organ? Or glitching maybe I don’t know…she apologized for being quiet, said she “had to concentrate.” She finally tells me what feels like 5 years later, I look to be 5 weeks 0 days. I take her word for it. I’m pretty overwhelmed. The other woman, (counselor, nurse, stranger????) was in the room the entire time, sitting behind me. Again I’m realizing how absurd this is now that I’m replaying it, and I’m mortified, but it happened and now here I am. Looking back they were uncomfortably quiet, and offered no reassurance really. But then as I’m preparing to leave, while I’m just going through the motions and lost in my thoughts, they tell me they want to try to hear the heartbeat next week, they’re sure they’ll be able to then. They’re almost like, giddy, lose any air of “professionalism” and hand me a box wrapped in a pink bow, that I opened at home and found out had a newborn onesie inside, that said “best gift ever.”
I’m still reeling. This was 2 Weeks ago. I’m upset. I feel stupid. I’m confused and feel like I was taken advantage of, in a way. And worst of all, I am now second guessing everything I thought I “found out.” The ultrasound picture they gave me, was cut off at the top. There is no date, time, name or gestational weeks.. I didn’t go to the follow up appointment, and instead scheduled an appointment with the office I went to for my first pregnancy. But I didn’t tell them what happened or that i had an ultrasound done already, I just told them the date of the positive test, and last suspected period. (Even though, with suspicious clinic saying 5 Weeks- that would mean I had a “period” after I was already pregnant- which is what led me to wonder if I was further along) couldn’t get me in until next week, when, if I go off of the ultrasound, would make me 9 weeks. Normal timing to be seen but I have been on a mental rollercoaster.
I feel like I’ve “popped” this past week, I have a noticeable bump, and everything just feels very off. I have been so depressed and confused I haven’t tried to get any help sooner because I’m just ashamed. But it is worrying me to death that maybe they lied, and my ultrasound was a fake, and I’ve now waited too long to have a choice. I think I decided I want to go through with this anyway, but I now wonder how much of my decision is being influenced by what happened? Pregnancy hormones are already difficult, my life has been chaos and while I think I’m making the decision based on my own choice, I’m not sure I can even trust myself and my decision making anymore after all this confusion… I really need any advice, guidance, support I don’t know. Am I being paranoid? Am I losing it? Is it unlikely a pro life clinic would really go that far?… I’m under too much stress to know what may just be me overreacting, and what is genuinely a concern, and what to do about it all either way. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you

~Asia-Pacific hydraulic equipment market~ is estimated to grow at a CAGR of nearly 5.2% during the forecast period. This Asia-Pacific Hydraulic Equipment Market research report focuses more on a number of distinctive as well as foremost market sectors. It further focuses market segmentation. Industry-specific interviews are carried out with market players to foresee future business growth. Various facets of the industry are also depicted here under each industry sector. Future development visions and a wide range of subjects are covered in this Asia-Pacific Hydraulic Equipment Market study report. All this crucial data greatly assists key players to establish their presence in the competitive market. It verifies and revalidates the knowledge provided in this global Market report. It also allows several organizations to learn more about a range of opportunities already available in the market and makes aware to firms about upcoming opportunities too. It ensures several firms to attain a long-standing business success by capturing all of the latest updates about market growth. Most important participants are able to employ such report as a great resource to attain a competitive advantage over the cut-throat market.
Get Free Sample link @ https://www.omrglobal.com/request-sample/asia-pacific-hydraulic-equipment-market
Some key players in the market include Bosch Rexroth AG, Danfoss A/S, Linde Hydraulics GmbH & Co. KG, Daikin Industries, Ltd., and Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Ltd. The market players are using some key strategies to increase their market share. For instance, in February 2019, Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Ltd. declared that a new plant had been completed at Wipro Kawasaki Precision Machinery Pvt Ltd., which produces, sells, and offers after-sales services for hydraulic equipment for the construction industry in India. Owing to the emerging demand for hydraulic excavators in India, the company decided to build this plant in Bengaluru, along with a current plant in the same city. The strategy reflects the company’s commitment to fulfil the demand for hydraulic equipment utilized by local construction machinery manufacturers, and to generate new demand.
full report of Asia-Pacific Hydraulic Equipment Market available @ https://www.omrglobal.com/industry-reports/asia-pacific-hydraulic-equipment-market
· Market Coverage
· Market number available for – 2024-2031
· Base year- 2024
· Forecast period- 2024-2031
· Segment Covered- By Source, By Product Type, By Applications
· Competitive Landscape- Archer Daniels Midland Co., Ingredion Inc., Kerry Group Plc, Cargill
· Inc., and others
Asia-Pacific Hydraulic Equipment Market-Segmentation
By Type

• Mobile Hydraulics
• Industrial Hydraulics

By Product

• Motors and Pumps
• Valves
• Cylinders
• Others

By End-User Industry

• Construction and Mining
• Agriculture
• Oil and Gas
• Automotive
• Aerospace and Defense
• Others

Asia-Pacific Hydraulic Equipment Market– Segment by Country

• China
• India
• Japan
• Rest of Asia-Pacific

The Report Covers

• Comprehensive research methodology of the Asia-Pacific hydraulic equipment market.
• This report also includes a detailed and extensive market overview with key analyst insights.
• An exhaustive analysis of macro and micro factors influencing the market guided by key recommendations.
• Analysis of regional regulations and other government policies impacting the Asia-Pacific hydraulic equipment market.
• Insights about market determinants which are stimulating the Asia-Pacific hydraulic equipment market.
• Detailed and extensive market segments with regional distribution of forecasted revenues.
• Extensive profiles and recent developments of market players.

For More Customized Data, Request for Report Customization @ https://www.omrglobal.com/report-customization/asia-pacific-hydraulic-equipment-market
About Orion Market Research Orion Market Research (OMR) is a market research and consulting company known for its crisp and concise reports. The company is equipped with an experienced team of analysts and consultants. OMR offers quality syndicated research reports, customized research reports, consulting and other research-based services. The company also offer Digital Marketing services through its subsidiary OMR Digital and Software development and Consulting Services through another subsidiary Encanto Technologies.
Media Contact:
Company Name: Orion Market Research
Contact Person: Mr. Anurag Tiwari
Email: [info@omrglobal.com](mailto:info@omrglobal.com)
Contact no: +91 780-304-0404

The ~global vacuum pump market~ is projected to grow at a CAGR of 4.8% during the forecast period (2023-2029). This Vacuum Pump Market research report focuses more on a number of distinctive as well as foremost market sectors. It further focuses market segmentation. Industry-specific interviews are carried out with market players to foresee future business growth. Various facets of the industry are also depicted here under each industry sector. Future development visions and a wide range of subjects are covered in this Vacuum Pump Market study report. All this crucial data greatly assists key players to establish their presence in the competitive market. It verifies and revalidates the knowledge provided in this global Market report. It also allows several organizations to learn more about a range of opportunities already available in the market and makes aware to firms about upcoming opportunities too. It ensures several firms to attain a long-standing business success by capturing all of the latest updates about market growth. Most important participants are able to employ such report as a great resource to attain a competitive advantage over the cut-throat market.
Get Free Sample link @ https://www.omrglobal.com/request-sample/vacuum-pump-market
The global vacuum pump market is segmented on the basis of type and end-use application. Based on the type, the market is segmented as positive displacement vacuum pumps, momentum transfer vacuum pumps, kinetic vacuum pumps, entrapment vacuum pumps, and others. Based on the end-use application, the market is segmented as food & beverages, chemical processing, oil & gas, electronics, pharmaceutical, power generation, and other.
full report of Vacuum Pump Market available @ https://www.omrglobal.com/industry-reports/vacuum-pump-market
· Market Coverage
· Market number available for – 2024-2031
· Base year- 2024
· Forecast period- 2024-2031
· Segment Covered- By Source, By Product Type, By Applications
· Competitive Landscape- Archer Daniels Midland Co., Ingredion Inc., Kerry Group Plc, Cargill
· Inc., and others
Global Vacuum Pump Market – Segmentation
By Type

• Positive Displacement Vacuum Pumps
• Momentum Transfer Vacuum Pumps
• Kinetic Vacuum Pumps
• Entrapment Vacuum Pumps
• Others

By End-Use Application

• Food & Beverages
• Chemical Processing
• Oil & Gas
• Electronics
• Pharmaceutical
• Power Generation
• Other

Global Vacuum Pump Market – Segmentation by Region
North America

• United States
• Canada

Europe

• UK
• Germany
• Italy
• Spain
• France
• Rest of Europe

Asia-Pacific

• China
• India
• Japan
• South Korea
• Rest of Asia-Pacific

Rest of the World
The Report Covers

• Annualized market revenues ($ million) for each market segment.
• Country-wise analysis of major geographical regions.
• Key companies operating in the global Vacuum Pump market. Based on the availability of data, information related to pipeline products, and relevant news is also available in the report.
• Analysis of business strategies by identifying the key market segments positioned for strong growth in the future.
• Analysis of market-entry and market expansion strategies.
• Competitive strategies by identifying ‘who-stands-where’ in the market.

For More Customized Data, Request for Report Customization @ https://www.omrglobal.com/report-customization/vacuum-pump-market
About Orion Market Research Orion Market Research (OMR) is a market research and consulting company known for its crisp and concise reports. The company is equipped with an experienced team of analysts and consultants. OMR offers quality syndicated research reports, customized research reports, consulting and other research-based services. The company also offer Digital Marketing services through its subsidiary OMR Digital and Software development and Consulting Services through another subsidiary Encanto Technologies.
Media Contact:
Company Name: Orion Market Research
Contact Person: Mr. Anurag Tiwari
Email: [info@omrglobal.com](mailto:info@omrglobal.com)
Contact no: +91 780-304-0404

The ~global security robot market~ is projected to grow significantly during the forecast period. This Security Robots Market research report focuses more on a number of distinctive as well as foremost market sectors. It further focuses market segmentation. Industry-specific interviews are carried out with market players to foresee future business growth. Various facets of the industry are also depicted here under each industry sector. Future development visions and a wide range of subjects are covered in this Security Robots Market study report. All this crucial data greatly assists key players to establish their presence in the competitive market. It verifies and revalidates the knowledge provided in this global Market report. It also allows several organizations to learn more about a range of opportunities already available in the market and makes aware to firms about upcoming opportunities too. It ensures several firms to attain a long-standing business success by capturing all of the latest updates about market growth. Most important participants are able to employ such report as a great resource to attain a competitive advantage over the cut-throat market.
Get Free Sample link @ https://www.omrglobal.com/request-sample/security-robots-market
Innovation like K5 by KnightscopeInc., are signalling a potential future scope for security robots. Earlier, these robots had insufficient potential, however, with development in sensor technology and automation capabilities, these robots have been advanced to be useful in working applications. The development and improvements of neural network technology have also given these robots the capability to learn over time and enhance their functionality.
full report of Security Robots Market available @ https://www.omrglobal.com/industry-reports/security-robots-market
· Market Coverage
· Market number available for – 2024-2031
· Base year- 2024
· Forecast period- 2024-2031
· Segment Covered- By Source, By Product Type, By Applications
· Competitive Landscape- Archer Daniels Midland Co., Ingredion Inc., Kerry Group Plc, Cargill
· Inc., and others
Global Security Robots Market – Segmentation
By Type

• Ground Robots
• Aerial Robots
• Underwater Robots

By Applications

• Spying
• Explosive Detection
• Patrolling & Surveillance
• Rescue Operations
• Other Applications

By End-Users

• Residential
• Commercial
• Military & Defense

Global Security Robots Market – Segmentation by Region
North America

• United States
• Canada

Europe

• Germany
• United Kingdom
• France
• Spain
• Italy
• Rest of Europe

Asia-Pacific

• China
• Japan
• India
• Rest of Asia-Pacific

Rest of the World

• Middle East & Africa
• Latin America

The Report Covers

• Annualized market revenues ($ million) for each market segment.
• Country-wise analysis of major geographical regions.
• Key companies operating in the global security robot market. Based on the availability of data, information related to products, and relevant news is also available in the report.
• Analysis of business strategies by identifying the key market segments positioned for strong growth in the future.
• Analysis of market-entry and market expansion strategies.
• Competitive strategies by identifying ‘who-stands-where’ in the market.

For More Customized Data, Request for Report Customization @ https://www.omrglobal.com/report-customization/security-robots-market
About Orion Market Research Orion Market Research (OMR) is a market research and consulting company known for its crisp and concise reports. The company is equipped with an experienced team of analysts and consultants. OMR offers quality syndicated research reports, customized research reports, consulting and other research-based services. The company also offer Digital Marketing services through its subsidiary OMR Digital and Software development and Consulting Services through another subsidiary Encanto Technologies.
Media Contact:
Company Name: Orion Market Research
Contact Person: Mr. Anurag Tiwari
Email: [info@omrglobal.com](mailto:info@omrglobal.com)
Contact no: +91 780-304-0404

The ~global wire drawing machine market~ is anticipated to grow at a significant CAGR of 6.7% during the forecast period. This Wire Drawing Machine Market research report focuses more on a number of distinctive as well as foremost market sectors. It further focuses market segmentation. Industry-specific interviews are carried out with market players to foresee future business growth. Various facets of the industry are also depicted here under each industry sector. Future development visions and a wide range of subjects are covered in this Wire Drawing Machine Market study report. All this crucial data greatly assists key players to establish their presence in the competitive market. It verifies and revalidates the knowledge provided in this global Market report. It also allows several organizations to learn more about a range of opportunities already available in the market and makes aware to firms about upcoming opportunities too. It ensures several firms to attain a long-standing business success by capturing all of the latest updates about market growth. Most important participants are able to employ such report as a great resource to attain a competitive advantage over the cut-throat market.
Get Free Sample link @ https://www.omrglobal.com/request-sample/wire-drawing-machine-market
The global wire drawing machine market is segmented based on the types and application. Based on the types, the market is sub-segmented into the bull block wire drawing machine, wet wire drawing machine, dry wire drawing machine, OTO wire drawing machine, and straight line wire drawing machine. Based on the application, the market is segmented into electrical wiring, cables, springs, paper clips, spokes of wheel, and others. Among the application segment, cables are expected to dominate the market due to their major utilization in various other industries, such as the construction industry, manufacturing industry, and automobile industry.
full report of Wire Drawing Machine Market available @ https://www.omrglobal.com/industry-reports/wire-drawing-machine-market
· Market Coverage
· Market number available for – 2024-2031
· Base year- 2024
· Forecast period- 2024-2031
· Segment Covered- By Source, By Product Type, By Applications
· Competitive Landscape- Archer Daniels Midland Co., Ingredion Inc., Kerry Group Plc, Cargill
· Inc., and others
Global Wire Drawing Machine Market Report Segment
By Types
• Bull Block Wire Drawing Machine
• Wet Wire Drawing Machine
• Dry Wire Drawing Machine
• OTO Wire Drawing Machine
• Straight Line Wire Drawing Machine
By Application
• Electrical Wiring
• Cables
• Springs
• Paper Clips
• Spokes of Wheels
• Others
Global Wire Drawing Machine Market Report Segment by Region
North America
• United States
• Canada
Europe
• UK
• Germany
• Italy
• Spain
• France
• Rest of Europe
Asia-Pacific
• China
• India
• Japan
• South Korea
• Rest of Asia-Pacific
Rest of the World
• Latin America
• Middle East & Africa
The Report Covers
• Annualized market revenues ($ million) for each market segment.
• Country-wise analysis of major geographical regions.
• Key companies operating in the global wire drawing machine market. Based on the availability of data, information related to new product launches, and relevant news is also available in the report.
• Analysis of business strategies by identifying the key market segments positioned for strong growth in the future.
• Analysis of market-entry and market expansion strategies.
• Competitive strategies by identifying ‘who-stands-where’ in the market.
For More Customized Data, Request for Report Customization @ https://www.omrglobal.com/report-customization/wire-drawing-machine-market
About Orion Market Research Orion Market Research (OMR) is a market research and consulting company known for its crisp and concise reports. The company is equipped with an experienced team of analysts and consultants. OMR offers quality syndicated research reports, customized research reports, consulting and other research-based services. The company also offer Digital Marketing services through its subsidiary OMR Digital and Software development and Consulting Services through another subsidiary Encanto Technologies.
Media Contact:
Company Name: Orion Market Research
Contact Person: Mr. Anurag Tiwari
Email: [info@omrglobal.com](mailto:info@omrglobal.com)
Contact no: +91 780-304-0404

Hi everyone!
I’m a full-time growth strategy consultant and part-time content creator with a background in photography/videography diving into my first tech startup. As a new start-up founder, I wanted to document my progress, share my learnings over time, and improve my writing capabilities. I’m hoping that while reading these posts that you can relate to and learn from them as we all dive into this tumultuous, but fulfilling journey. Since last October, I’ve been in the process of devising a tech startup idea I felt strongly about; I’ve had ample experience facing and solving this specific problem while simultaneously believing I have the branding/marketing experience to bring this idea to life. And since May 1st, I’ve found two team members (one technical co-founder, a design intern) to build this idea into a reality. I'll disclose that while this isn't week 1 exactly, I'll call this "week 1" of the series. Inspired by u/mindingmomma
What has happened over the past 2 1/2 weeks :
Ideation As it turns out, the best startup ideas that you can *execute* on are the ones you have the closest relationship to. Inspired by a problem of escaping “loneliness” that plagued me for several years after moving solo to a new city, I realized building a B2C app with a “new take” on a loneliness solution would be a game changer in the market. I’ll hash out the idea further as we near our proposed launch date.
Team Formation As a non-technical founder, the idea would never materialize if I didn’t find a technology whiz to own the development side. There are two defining elements in finding a co-founder: initiative and serendipitous FORTUNE. My criteria for a co-founder included:

• Software expertise: The ability to take complete ownership of the technology component with an understanding of front-end/back-end development, algorithms, and artificial intelligence.
  • Specifically, I looked at prior resume experience and wanted to see that they’ve worked in fast-paced environments and ENJOYED working on technical things.
• Personality compatability: I enjoyed spending time with them over fun outings or over a relaxed meal. In consulting, we call this personality compatability or “tolerance” the airplane test.
• Situational alignment: Their personal situation had to prioritize the startup in some capacity. Their situation would fall under the following three themes: was willing to work after his job, was only working freelance and had an abundance of schedule control, or didn’t work out of choice. I secretly hoped for the last option.
• Balance between having an ego and being egoless: I wanted a co-founder who knew that he could FITFO (figure it the f*ck out) and was willing to who was not afraid to call out mistakes and offer constructive criticism, but also willing to take initiative, not take disagreements personally, and match my energy and make this endeavor a top priority
• Proximity: Lived with me in the city so we could meet up when needed. As much as I enjoy WFH, for a start-up, having the opportunity to work closely in-tandem is unrivaled for building chemistry and spontaneous ideation.
• Common interests: We both have a vested interest in the area we’re looking to provide solutions in while ALSO being aligned to building in public through video content and blogging.

Fortunately, I happened to meet my co-founder while playing pickleball in February. I only began to speculate that he could be my co-founder after learning he quit his job to pursue his goal of building software products and about his interest in creating content. In April, we had a discussion about him joining as a co-founder and equal share owner. Once we agreed, our work inauguration became official on May 1st!
Initial Branding: My co-founder’s sister joined as a summer design intern because she didn’t have a summer internship. Lucky us! We plan to have her focus on activating our branding and building out our product design, with her having an equal say in our meetings. Safe to say that this experience will be more hands on than an actual corporate internship.
Customer Interviews: We launched an initial survey for our mutuals that fit within our proposed ideal customer profile. We received 64 responses, from which we selected 11 respondents whose answers made them seem like ideal fits as potential customers. From there, we began conducting interviews to understand personal pain points, ideate and discuss features to solve these specific pain points, and receive preliminary reviews on initial brand strategy work. We’ve aggregated 7 primary pain points and are continuing to brainstorm app features that could address these ubiquitous concerns (should I release this research in the future?). We have 2 interviews left before we finish this ideation phase of the startup and begin to servicify our concept and build out the technology component.

What we will get done this week:
Branding and Marketing:
As an app that is still in ideation, it would be extremely beneficial to garner branding feedback from a sample of potential users in the community
Will Need to Do this week

• Dive into visual strategy (e.g., color theory, typography, logo choices) and perform a competitive audit
• Cement name & tagline
• Ideate content strategy for organic social and the “feeling” we want the brand to exude
• Define key persona(s) to tailor feature nuances towards

Customer Interviews: Finish last two interviews
Will need to consider

• Further validating feature set
• Continual name validation
• Synthesizing all interviews into a few key insights (this is the consulting in me speaking lol) Broader survey: We’re doing continual validation through an anon online survey we must publish to receive some further input beyond our immediate circlesUsers: 0 Email: 0 Text: 0 Website Capture: 0 Instagram: NA TikTok: NA YouTube: NA

Question for the group:
How important do you think strategy work is in the initial ideation phase of a startup? Are you a person that glosses over all the details or wants to get straight into building after customer validation? Would love to hear your takes!

This AI tool from Micro1 sounds interesting. It looks like they focus on software engineering.
"Usually when you do a job posting, especially with global [reach], you get many, many applications,” Ansari said. “Employers usually just pick a random sample size from those applications and interview that. The decision on picking which ones to interview is very arbitrary.”
How micro1’s AI interviewer could make tech hiring more efficient and fair

I consider myself primarily to be in the film industry, but I also have experience in advertising (and would be very happy as an in-agency video producer).
I'm also from a small town where most of my work has been produced independently, and because of this sometimes I feel insecure about whether or not I'll be taken seriously in larger markets. I don't have any problem approaching people or learning new things quickly, and I want my resume to reflect this.
And finally for clarity, the black square on the right is covering up where a QR code normally is that links to a sample video of my work.
https://preview.redd.it/ywjtmg8hun1d1.jpg?width=2550&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=92e3787c34854f29f472b334433d048e2f207b99

Hello, I’m 27 yo and one year ago I got misdiagnosed with pychosis after a suicide attempt and got treated with heavy doses of typical and atypical antipsychotics. While on the meds I felt horribly, I was waking up seeing double (diplopia), I was shaking, I couldn’t swallow food, I couldn’t write, I had an extreme lack of coordination and, what bothered me the most, I presented a severe speech impairement. At that time I was told by the Psych ward physiotherapist that I was suffering from dysarthria, that’s all I know. Even though I was presenting all these problems the docs kept me on these meds for a couple of months. They were very superficial and thought that the meds were helping me. After being discharged I gradually quit the meds and I eventually regained most of these abilities. I never had any psychosis since and I even voluntarily went into a 2 weeks psychiatric observation period in a hospital facility to conduct test and interviews in order to confirm the fact that I was not psychotic and that I didn’t need an antipsychotic treatment. Anyway, the problem is that to this day I still suffer from some light muscle rigidity/coordination issues and also some speech troubles, which consist in a increased difficulty in articulating words in my mouth which will eventually lead to some kind of stuttering. Since I stutter, I became a less fluent speaker and I ve also been told to have a monotone voice. Because of these problems I now avoid getting involved in social activities as well as speaking to people in general, friends and family included. Whenever I speak with someone I have to put so much effort just to keep a simple conversation and I feel like my personality is in part gone since I can’t speak and behave in my natural way.
Considering I’m almost 12 months off of the medication which caused me those problems, do y’all think is there still time to recover or should I accept the idea that I will have to live with this condition for the rest of my life? If you’re aware of any recovery stories or if you simply have some helpful advices concerning speech therapies, diet, lifestyle, etc. please share it here, I’ll be very thankful.

I consider myself primarily to be in the film industry, but I also have experience in advertising (and would be very happy as an in-agency video producer).
I'm also from a small town where most of my work has been produced independently, and because of this sometimes I feel insecure about whether or not I'll be taken seriously in larger markets. I don't have any problem approaching people or learning new things quickly, and I want my resume to reflect this.
And finally for clarity, the black square on the right is covering up where a QR code normally is that links to a sample video of my work.
https://preview.redd.it/vzqesbssfn1d1.jpg?width=2550&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=60bc5e6d4dbc02e8862f4c79a267421bf0275ede

Welcome everybody to the third SotW of May! This week, we'll be listening to a song that was often used as a powerful opening track for Em's concerts in the Recovery era. Most of you probably know what song I'm talking about. This week's track is 'Won't Back Down', featured as the fourth track on Em's seventh studio album, 'Recovery'.
Upon the release of Recovery, the song received generally positive reviews from music critics, who praised its aggressive nature and production. Although not released as a single, 'Won't Back Down' appeared on four national charts. It was used in the game Call of Duty: Black Ops and its trailer as well as the trailers for the films Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol and Hitman: Agent 47.
Along with most of the songs from Recovery, 'Won't Back Down' was recorded at 54 Sound and Effigy Studios in Ferndale, Michigan, with recording carried out by Mike Strange. The song is one of the only Eminem songs not in a 4:4 time signature, along with Untitled (also from Recovery) and Underground (from Relapse).
Originally, the song was set to be a solo record, with Eminem singing the chorus himself. Later, Liz Rodriguez, who is also featured on Recovery's '25 to Life' and 'Almost Famous', recorded the song's chorus. Eminem however, explained in an interview that after recording his vocals for the song, he decided to include Pink on the song as he "felt like she would really smash this record.".
Although 'Won't Back Down' was not released as a single, it charted on four national charts worldwide due to digital sales on the release of Recovery. The song reached its highest position on the US Billboard Hot 100, where it peaked at number 62 on the chart for the week ending of July 10, 2010, although it fell off the chart the following week. The song also charted in Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom, peaking at number eighty-seven, sixty-five and eighty-two on their respective national charts, although on all three the song again only appeared for one week.
As stated before, upon its release, 'Won't Back Down' received generally positive reviews from most music critics. David Jeffries of Allmusic wrote positively of the song, describing the song as a "lurching heavy metal monster" that "could be used as the lead-in to 'Lose Yourself' on any ego-boosting mixtape", but wrote more critically of the lyrics, denouncing the pop culture jokes featured throughout the song, particularly ones aimed at Michael J. Fox, calling the line "Make like Michael J. Fox in your drawers, playin' with an Etch-A-Sketch" "less effective" than other jokes aimed at him. Steve Jones of USA Today described it as "rock-tinged" and stated that Pink's appearance provides "outside star power".
A remixed version of the ESPN trailer of the game Call of Duty: Black Ops featuring 'Won't Back Down' was released on June 14, prior to the E3 Activision conference for which he also performed. The song was also featured in the game's credits and zombie mode map 'Five' as an easter egg.
Em has performed the song on live sketch comedy show Saturday Night Live accompanied by Lil Wayne and Mr. Porter. Idolator reacted positively to Eminem's performance, stating that he proved "once again what a dynamic and energetic live performer he is on this exceptionally angry tune (even by Slim Shady standards)." He also performed the song on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon.
Every week there will be a new song that gets featured at the top of the subreddit. Users can leave a comment and the song that gets the most votes might be the new Song of the Week. Suggestions for improving the next post are encouraged.
This week's Nominator: PokemonBwLowHealth
The Song: Won't Back Down - iTunes
In-App link(s): spotify:track:5KzRfDOUpMVaB4eYugEVjE
Featuring Artist(s): P!nk
Length: 4:25
Recorded: 2009 - 2010
Release: June 18, 2010
Album(s): Recovery - iTunes
In-App link(s): spotify:album:3PogVmhNucYNfyywZvTd7F
Sample(s): None
Media: Album: Cover / Alternative - Back
Label(s): Shady Records, Aftermath, Interscope
Format: Digital, Disc, Vinyl
Producer(s): DJ Khalil
Extra: Lyrics Video: Fan-made Music Video - Lyric Video Full header image
Live Performances: Comerica Park 2010 (From Unreleased Recovery Documentary), Live on SNL, Jimmy Fallon 2011, Pukkelpop 2013, E3 2010
This is an open thread for you to share your thoughts on the current SotW or to nominate a new song. Avoid vague statements of praise or criticism. This is your chance to practice being a critic.

I spoke with a recruiter that is trying to fill two spots for Industrial Hygienists - preferably holds a degree and/or certification in IH as the two positions were held by people with these credentials. I have neither at the moment but got through to two rounds of interviews.
My background: B.S. in Interdisciplinary Studies with 55 credits of Life Sciences coursework (ecology and biology)
Work experience: field sampler at an environmental lab for NPDES/EPA regulatory fulfillments — mainly water sampling + working with on-site H&S managers (1.5 years); community outreach coordinator for an environmental non-profit conducting air and noise monitoring and writing reports. (3 yrs)
I am not looking to immediately pursue a master’s degree because of the additional student loan burdens, but I am seeking advice on which certifications and trainings could add to my resume (outside of the obvious IH certification I would seek down the line).
The employer would consider someone without the IH certification once the first IH vacancy is filled, but I still need a stronger background to justify them hiring me. Any advice is appreciated. I know there are no shortcuts but I don’t think it is unheard of for someone to start in the field without full credentials.

Hey yall! This is my first post but I felt like this was the place to go for comfort (I guess?)
So I have been in a whirlwind these past two weeks all because I developed a celebrity crush. It has taken over my life.
I constantly look for edits of the celebrity on tiktok, watch their interviews, constantly check their reddit community, constantly check their Instagram for new updates, rewatch their old videos AND THEIR FRIENDS, hoping to see a glimpse of them; listen to all of their songs and yada yada.
I used to have crushes like this when I was like 15 , but they stopped when I went to university. the scary thing is that I am actually 24 now and have a boyfriend. Don’t get me wrong I love my boyfriend, but this crush is messing up my head.
I find them super attractive and get into those delusions on how I will meet them, talk to them and they’ll fall in love with me, basically that im the perfect person for them , but they just don’t know that yet, cuz I haven’t met them. They r a musician so I started to make my own music, I feel like im changing my style too and trying to be someone I think that the celebrity would like. It's embarrassing to even be writing this stuff and I just feel so insane half of the time, It got to the point where I was talking to myself for hours pretending that im having a conversation with them and also crying hysterically.
I realise that they would probably be freaked out by me cuz I sound so stalkerish and i couldnt leave my boyfriend even if my delusions came to life, But I just cant help but be obsessed with them. I somehow find a way to feed my delusions and i feel like I need psychiatric help.
Maybe someone has felt like me and can give advice on how to get over this faze?

Backstory: I’ve been unemployed for 10 months now and thinking to put on my resume that I’ve done freelance work for 5 months to bridge the gap. I applied for 100+ jobs now and only landed 3 interviews so the employment gap is not getting me a job.
For freelance work, how do you write it in your resume? Do you put the companies you’ve work with and the duration? What’s the shortest time you’ve worked with the company as a freelancer?
Also when you applied for a full time position, did recruiters ask for reference of your freelance work, samples you did, and anything else they asked you related to freelance work you did?

over the years anytime i listen to a dr dre song you always see comments such as the one below
"this man single handily created the Gfunk era" as soon as i see this i know that the person has very little knowledge on this subject and its the casual rap fans who always seem to say this, for example the song let me ride was written by RBX the sample was given to dre by Warren G, yet there are endless comments on how he did this all himself let me ask you why did eazy put everyone on the album cover yet dre only had himself on The Chronic cover?
why did dre let Warren G sleep on his sisters floor and possibly get killed in the hood after all the help he gave on the chronic album ?
why did he tell Warren G he did not like Regulate the song that literally saved DefJam from crumbling?
why was dre portrayed as a super hero in the NWA movie, and eazy was portrayed as being very emotional about seeing the chronic album bill board as if he was somehow not balling himself
why has DOC never ever gotten the credit he deserves ? you do know DOC was the one who showed snoop how to lay out a song properly , how to set it off etc? why is dre getting all the praise ? i know why its due to ignorance of the facts of the matter anyone who has looked into this will find it very hard to maintain any respect for Dr Dre he
Why did JFLEX get no credit you know the guy who wrote California love? or keep their heads ringing
i know there will be some out there who have listened to dre 83 times and think he did it all himself i know dre is very talented but only in a very specific area he needs a certain crowd around him to produce albums like The Chronic
dre definitely read the 48 laws of power "let others do all the work and take all the credit"
too short also mentioned in the Gfunk documentary that dre is not the kind of guy who gives people detailed credits people like DOC are too nice and tip toe around the situation and say things like "he is his own man" ??? what does this mean can a man not give the people who helped him to change his entire life with number 1 albums not put their name on some documents ????? and if you see dres interview where he talks about how he had ben taken advantage of at ruthless yet he did worse