Don't know if it's a consequence of people moving away from cash for purchases and thus not having change or what, but it just hit me at random that it's been ages since I've seen those charity coin collectors where a slot drops your coin at the edge of a funnel and it spirals in
They're apparently called "spiral wishing wells" and you can buy one for $400-500. The price is surprising but I assume it's because it's designed to collect money in a public place, and also have kids leaning all over it.
Video for anyone who doesn't know what I'm talking about, or just wants the satisfaction of seeing one.
If it weren't a pandemic I would be hunting one down and feeding a roll of quarters into it one at a time.
Hmmm. So now I wonder if they're more deprecated in the United States compared to countries that have non-fractional currency in coins? The text on the one in the video mentions loonies and toonies, for instance.
I feel like this revisionism she's talking about... it's the kind of thing that happens when we immediately abandon nuance to try to make a truthful counterargument as simple as the lie it's countering.
Truth: No vaccine has a 100% prevention rate.
Truth: Nobody said this one would.
Truth: A less than 100% prevention rate can still 100% eliminate 100% of infections if enough people are vaccinated that the virus's survival odds in the wild fall far enough, fast enough.
Truth: The vaccine also makes it so that in the unlikely event that you get a breakthrough infection, you're less likely to have symptoms, and if you do, less likely to have severe symptoms, and if you do, less likely to die.
I had an emotional day yesterday. Which is no surprise as I've been having an emotional time. If you follow me, you may know already that I have complicated feelings about emotions, which obviously results in infinitely recursive complexity because those are emotions.
I spent much of yesterday trying alternately to be angry at my emotions, sad about them, and afraid of them, in a vain attempt to fight fire with fire and make them go away.
This morning, after sleeping on it, I've come to a bit of a realization about myself.
The connection between this realization and the set-up tweets won't be apparent to most of the people reading this, as I'm not going to get into describing my day, but it might be helpful or interesting to somebody anyway.
Sometimes when I have talked about systemic solutions to people, the answers I get consist of "But surely people would do something about that." and "Wouldn't it be better if people just...?"
But building a system *is* people doing something.
It's like how if there's something that you want to do on a regular basis, relying on the fact that you want to do it to make sure that you to do it, for most people most of the time, won't work.
You have to make it easy to do and hard to miss. You need to build a structure.
The thing -- or a thing -- about leaving things that "everyone want" or "we all agree would be good" up to individual responsibility is, it makes it possible, even easy, for individuals to not do it, and makes such lapses harder to notice and officially none of our business.
Sitcom where Kacey Musgraves and Janelle Monáe play housewives who live in neighboring houses with a white picket fence in between their perfectly manicured lawns.
First scene of the pilot shows each of them walking out a side door and towards the picket fance.
They have a strangely generic conversation with each other with perfectly blank faces and muted aspect, exchange formulaic well-wishes and excuse one another, then walk back to their houses, which are revealed to be cut off right where the initial shot was framed.
The episode and then the remainder of the series continues with every scene taking place only in the extant portions of the houses or yards (which end just as abruptly as the houses). Events elsewhere are referenced, sometimes as though the audience had seen them.
transphobes: For anyone to be "non-binary" there must be a binary for them to be outside of and if the binary exists no one can be non-binary because then it wouldn't be a binary anymore.
real life: "Henges" are a class of earthworks named after Stonehenge. Stonehenge isn't one.
Transphobes seriously act like they believe language is a magical programming language for objective reality, and if there's ever any kind of disconnect between the two, any kind of ambiguity or contradiction, it's going to break the universe.
Meanwhile, in actual reality, language is like... IDK, man, whatever.
This is true when talking about people who leave religion, and there is a broader point about nuance: words absolutely have different meanings that allow for apparently contradictory things to be true at the same time.
The word "paradox" has been flattened of a lot of nuance by the fact that so many of us learn about the concept through sci-fi stories that present it as something like a destructive force of nature: something that cannot be, and will punish the universe if forced to be anyway.
But paradoxes in the classical sense includes statements that when read in an obvious and straightforward way appear to be self-negating, but which when parsed out as intended will nevertheless resolve as true.