It’s like arguing absolute zero doesn’t have consensus as if I was part of the specialists that push forward our collective knowledge on the matter while at best knowing 0 is a small number.
The salient point is that Something HAS to exist because the opposite is literal meaninglessness and that has scientific consensus.
That's literally opposite to the scientific consensus. People are in fact looking for models that justify why there is something rather than nothing, and it's not because "the opposite is literal meaninglessness".
Please, please, please think of all the people that infer knowledge from an autoritatve language heard online.
Another common argument is that it’s very resource intensive and wastes energy. This is true, but there’s no reason to believe this won’t be optimized. In fact, we’ve already seen a lot of optimizations happen in just a few years that now make it possible to run models that used to require a data centre to run on a laptop.
On the matter of "collectible", how is it even ontologically sound to "collect" things that are expressily produced as collectibles?
You collect things, coins, paintings, stamps, phone cards, even gaming cards. All things that exist in their own merit that you choose to collect, usually giving them value according to their accidental rarity.
With this shit you are not collecting, you are just purchasing.
I'm not sure exactly what "having an open calendar" means. Assuming a not fully locked one, it's just any boss that does 9 am to 6 pm, either because the company runs itself or, less likely, because he is in fact able to delegate.
The other stuff is a quite common combination of hobbies for a certain lifestyle.
My bet would be somebody that inhereted a company, so as not to be consumed by the "hustle" but is not a complete moron (so he's not ego driving the company into a wall).
I used to bury myself under a copious amount of videogames. Unlike what one could expect, mostly online but never engaging with people (I've never engaged with the rather common habit of inviting people to duo / coop / join the party after a good performance, having stranger's voices invade my head and other rather normal experience for 2024).
I guess it worked, to an extent, because it kept me busy.
On the long run I never said no to any chance of socialization that arised from work (I guess School would be the equivalent here).
It can leave you vulnerable to rejection, or rather unentusiastic spotty invites, but it should eventually lead to a couple of lifetime friendship, possibly more if you are not as caustic as me.
For reference, since this is the most upvoted reply as of now, this is not a description I (and possibly other people) resonate with.
I'm not referring to prostate stimulation, I mean the concept of hornyness as a burden and orgasm as a an escape from it. I'll add that I would never in a million years pick a foot massage or scratching an hitch as preferrable.
It’s like arguing absolute zero doesn’t have consensus as if I was part of the specialists that push forward our collective knowledge on the matter while at best knowing 0 is a small number.
That's literally opposite to the scientific consensus. People are in fact looking for models that justify why there is something rather than nothing, and it's not because "the opposite is literal meaninglessness".
Please, please, please think of all the people that infer knowledge from an autoritatve language heard online.