> I do wonder if our society would be better if we had more honourifics and formality. China has instituted social media rules based on qualifications. Many indigenous societies have forms of secret and sacred knowledge.
In the US we administer a test at age 16 that determines lifetime "qualifications" and access to "secret and sacred knowledge". How much further is there to even go on that front? Back to inherited nobility?
I don't know if you're being flippant but the information at universities is neither secret nor sacred. Sure, there is a stupid price for academic journals but most of it can be found freely on the internet.
Eldership, acceptance into a hierarchy based on deeds and demonstrated virtue within a relatively small social grouping that does not recognize the value of money is, I believe, worthwhile. And the socially formal recognition, not easily won nor necessarily expected from anyone who has not been permitted to give it perhaps recognises that our society has values and that you are still expected to grow, even as an adult.
> I don't know if you're being flippant but the information at universities is neither secret nor sacred. Sure, there is a stupid price for academic journals but most of it can be found freely on the internet.
Those institutions are chalk full of secret & sacred knowledge. Good luck becoming POTUS, a Tech Billionaire or Nobel Prize winner through freely available information on the internet.
> Eldership, acceptance into a hierarchy based on deeds and demonstrated virtue within a relatively small social grouping that does not recognize the value of money is, I believe, worthwhile. And the socially formal recognition, not easily won nor necessarily expected from anyone who has not been permitted to give it perhaps recognises that our society has values and that you are still expected to grow, even as an adult.
The point is we already have an extremely rigid hierarchy that encompasses our entire society (the mandarin system would be envious, it was just for officialdom!) and unfortunately unlike your ideal - it is not independent of money & does not expect growth.
We've had only 1 president and 1 supreme court justice in my lifetime who didn't attend the Ivy league. It's already de facto, why expand it or make it de jure? This sort of credentialism is what brought us the Bay of Pigs & the War in Iraq.
> People tell me that I'm over training, which is ridiculous, because anything less would be easy and contravene the purpose of the workout.
This doesn't mean you aren't over training.
If it's strength training... Without knowing the specifics what you are describing sounds like too much volume (and training for hypertrophy). Lower reps (3-5) & higher weight will have more of a strength stimulus and be less taxing.
If it's cardio... you probably should be at a lower intensity and going for longer.
"Globally, Abbott has received reports of 736 severe adverse events (57 in the U.S.) and seven deaths (none in the U.S.) potentially associated with this issue."[1]
Thanks. That’s very different than the headline claim that the issue killed 7 patients. The “associated with” is a broad term in cases like this that means the device may have been used at the time, not that the bug specifically caused the death.
> Western shows are all about the "you don't have to sacrifice anything to win" and Eastern shows are all about the "you're the chosen one"
This probably has more to do with the type of content you are consuming. If you watch things for young adults, it will probably follow "the Heroes Journey" - wether it is LOTR, Harry Potter, Star Wars etc. (the West) or Naruto, Pokemon, Dragon Ball/Journey to the West (the East)
That's the point. AFAIK Gundam is a mecha-anime for young adults - the same audience as Marvel movies or the average Oscar winner. It's not East of Eden or The Remains of The Day.
I think this erases some interesting nuance. The original Gundam is unabashedly a toy commercial--ostensibly marketing to children in the exact same vein as the OG Transformers--except apparently nobody told the director, so it's an extremely emotionally mature show (more so than nearly all YA fiction) where the main character, a teen soldier, is narrowly escaping death, is killing people, is watching everyone around him be killed, is suffering the effects of PTSD, is being openly used as an expendable tool by his superiors, is on the run for his life being hunted by half the world, is coming to terms with the costs of war and the throngs of innocent bystanders being reduced to burning ash for the sake of cruel and ambitous men, and did you know you can buy his cool robo-flail accessory at Toys 'R Us today?
It's not that nobody told the director. It's that the director knew nobody cared what was actually in the show as long as the end product moved units on the shelves.
It's part of the reason the names are so wild. He was actively pushing the envelope with outrageous names during pitches to see how far he could go before producers would stop nodding along without paying attention.
Those names include "A Baoa Qu", "Gelgoog", and a variety of insane character names that sometimes sound cultureless yet futuristic like Bannagher Links and sometimes are just "M'Quve" or "Full Frontal".
The original intended audience for Gundam was supposed to be college students if I remember correctly and not highschoolers. 1976 was the real start of when you had this massive wave of engineering finesse in Japan that overtook everything else in the world. It was the time when Japan was forming an obsession with mechanics, with model kits of everything from fully articulated 1:36 scale 50cc scooters to giant 1:20 scale warships that would take up an entire table. Kids couldn't afford these models as they were priced strictly for adults.
Gundam definitely fit into that "engineering fantasies for young professionals" niche, at least until ZZ came around in 1985. Gundam has the root word of "gun" because they were originally these more grounded fantasy weapons instead of man made demi-gods that appeared in shows like UFO Robot Grendizer. They weren't supposed to be superheroes, they were what engineering minded young men thought would be cool to have if they were given an unlimited budget to create bipedal tanks that could do the job of bomber aircraft, navy destroyers, and orbital bombardment satellites all in one. That's why Gundams, especially Zaku units, move slowly, pivot in unnatural ways, and use jets and wheels for locomotion, because they're giant tanks with manipulators that hold guns and not suits of armour. BattleTech also comes from that same origin, although it and Mechwarrior's development went all in on the "tank but with legs" idea instead of slowly losing their identity to the super robot genre.
The melodrama they mixed in as framing to discuss Japan's post-war military pacifism was incidental to creating and populating the backstory for an engineer's dream unlimited budget mobile weapons platform. So they weren't the Marvel equivalent back in 1979, they were more like Japan's answer to some of Robert Heinlein's militaristic concepts in Starship Troopers and The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress, where the concept came first and the story was just an excuse to see that concept in action.
G Gundam and SD Gundam are more like the Marvel movies, in that they strip away most of the issues being discussed and coast on the aesthetic similarities and caricaturized versions of themes from the source material.
This is a good rundown of (the history of) the appeal, particularly to male viewers. I hesitate to call the melodrama "incidental", though, as the female viewers it drew in were the ones who saved the franchise (per Tomino) when it initially failed to take off. The creators recognized where their bread was being buttered, which is why so many series in the franchise (including the ones most grounded in some semblance of mechanical and military knowledge) end up centering around either love stories or a troupe of unusually handsome young men.
That was half the equation; the other half being the transition from toy-based to model-based merchandising, as you said, which drew back in the male fans.
His Mastodon is linked at the bottom of the page and from what I've seen it's likely that this is because of a dislike of ICE.
The thing that confounds me is, this person thinks that what ICE is doing is illegal, so why does he think ICE would suddenly care about the law when it comes to software licenses?
What percentage of NYC's students are in these programs?
I was a student of public Texas ISDs, and briefly taught in Tennessee, so "public school" is an entirely different definition/beast than NYC's [probably better] education systems.
As a younger person myself, this talk is incredibly entertaining, kind of eye-opening too; the passion for engineering that speaker radiates is immeasurable.
> Please don't pick the most provocative thing in an article or post to complain about in the thread. Find something interesting to respond to instead.
> Bobby Kennedy made that speech, was assassinated shortly afterwards, and Nixon won, prolonging the Vietnam War for another 6 years. Bobby Kennedy, also made a historic speech in Indianapolis that quelled rioting after the MLK assassination
You are talking about the same speech. It was a great speech
In the US we administer a test at age 16 that determines lifetime "qualifications" and access to "secret and sacred knowledge". How much further is there to even go on that front? Back to inherited nobility?
reply