iltoroargento @ iltoroargento @lemmy.sdf.org

Posts

0

Comments

407

Joined

2 yr. ago

This is a distinction I had to explain thoroughly when communicating with people in state jobs. It's genuinely different. Mainly because of the added oversight.

But you can win by outspending...

Welllcooome!

Totally get that. And of course!

I think stuff that gets you out of the same headspace and even room in which you game can help reprioritize things.

Video editing is a super useful skill and it may make you want to go out and capture different shots or compile something for someone else, too. My highschool buddy started getting into AV stuff a while ago and just did a really good job compiling the highlights of another of our friend's weddings and I guarantee all of us are gonna keep that file on some drive for a long time!

As others have said, if it's that progression loop kinda thing you're stuck in like with an MMO or online shooter, I say kick that stuff as fast as you can.

If you really wanna keep going with some of the MMO stuff, look into hosting your own game. My buddies and I love old school World of Warcraft and finally decided to host our own server which has been a game changer.

Idk if that's all gonna be applicable, but you can cut down or out a lot of stuff by just identifying what "itch" is scratched by your gaming. If you take steps to control how you consume that media, you are more aware of the time commitment and effect it has on you.

Hope that helps and it's awesome you're looking to introspect about your hobbies!

Honestly, mine came about organically with other responsibilities and interests.

Earlier on, I'd moderated myself but picking up another hobby, like playing bass guitar and adding that into my priorities.

Once out of college, other priorities, like making better than decent meals, my significant other, and continuing my tabletop RPG crew kinda helped me stop spending endless weekend or day off hours on a game.

Probably, the largest piece for me is having a family and a friend group that I care to keep up with. When I was younger, I escaped through games, but now I use them more like how I use a book or TV series and look for experiences I'll find meaningful instead of just grinding rep or xp points in a loop.

Love Diedrich Bader. I remember watching him in Outsourced (2010) and being pretty miffed it didn't get another season.

I feel distressed, tbh...

I hear this is what all atheists look like after a few years.

They turn into globglogabgalabs with all their unnecessary thoughts not directed toward prayer.

Remember kids, keep that spiritual sphincter closed unless it's Jesus or one of his earthly representatives who wants in!

/s

Still, not enough.

"Fuck my life..."

They just like the cool greens. I feel like that may be an interesting experience.

Just saw this, but yeah, definitely. I just wanted to be clear that I'm not dumping on experts in general lol I think people took offense.

And I think it's even more dangerous than that, it's not just people providing a solitary or fringe supported theory or conclusion.

Especially with a test like what was described, if you get an expert to put their thumb on the scales of an already pretty cloudy issue, it's even more effective in a case. If they're mainly doing that to help line their pockets, they'll be more likely to play fast and loose with their statements.

Boomers act like preteens...

Quite a few. It's definitely hyperbole, but in civil litigation, it's hard to get people who are actually doing research/still practicing their craft and have recent knowledge/are the real deal as they feel like they're better serving their interests by not wasting their time on a court case (which I find pretty hard to disagree with, tbh).

Edit: added the stuff about recent knowledge as there are definitely good intentioned people who will start doing this kind of work as they wind down their practice or research.

I mean, context matters, I'm mostly talking about the ones employed in a civil litigation context.

I would say those approached by journalists are less likely to be in on the take.

Lol I find it infuriating as well. Ugh...

Agreed. Functionally, the laziness of the US justice system incentivizes quick and easy answers and simple findings of fact. Not much inquiry or investigation going on in your average case.

Additionally, the pool of "experts" consists primarily of people in a field who have already made the choice to sell their services to the highest bidder.

Now, of course, there are experts who jump into a courtroom because they've been righteously incensed by the subject matter at hand or want to make sure that facts and scientific conclusions are presented accurately, but in my experience, every medical "expert" I've met is a mercenary.

Edit: Your point about peers is a very good one, although I don't see courts expending resources to incentivize or force actual peers to convene for every malpractice dispute. No matter how much I wish they could.

The term sounds dumb off the tongue and, you guessed it, has no actual philosophical or historical weight aside from a callback to the name for Roman emperors.

Sadly, those who are interested in regression don't access a lot of critical thinking skills, so they'll glom onto this surface level reference and see it as deep and meaningful.

Yeah, the inclusion of this test in any kind of deliberation would just muddy the waters. I don't see how that serves any goal of justice.

John Wick origin story material, here.