Maybe one day I’ll have time again!

I had an Index, and after many years one of my lighthouses died (was actually from the Vive I had before that). But I wasn’t playing it enough to justify buying a new one.

Now the kids are getting older I might get back into it at some point.

I don’t have mine anymore :(

That part isn’t on the original cover. Is this a real foldout from a recent MAD issue that is an updated version of the 1974 cover?

Hmm the original doesn’t have that bit in the bottom right about the original concept. Is this a real MAD foldout based on an old cover but updated for the current hot topic?

I don’t think this is real. If you search up the issue number you’ll see the real version. It’s also from 1974.

We don’t lie, and talk about “who is going to be Santa this year”. Treat it like a game. I don’t think the youngest quite understands and we don’t purposely ruin it, but that the adults are Santa is openly talked about.

Recently one of my kid’s friends got an elf on the shelf, and my kid asked what it was. I think that if other parents lie to their kids that’s for them to sort out, we can’t be expected to lie to our kids to keep up another lie. So I straight out told them what it was and that some parents use it to try to trick their kids into being good. They replied “can I have one?”

Ooh I really liked this game, I played it in VR. I remember thinking they did great job with the difficulty curve.

It’s a philosophical argument, not directions for how to live your life!

I think it works better for giving others the benefit of the doubt instead of blaming people who have made poor decisions for not “pulling themselves up by their bootstraps”. But you definitely should not try it in reverse, “I’m gonna go get addicted to drugs because it’s not my fault” 🫤

If you think back a step, think about why some people are the way they are. Is it because of their genes? Because of a teacher or role model they had growing up? Because of the parenting methods or advice they got from those who raised them?

People are who they’ve because of a number of factors that at their heart are all random.

There’s a town in New Zealand called Rotorua and is famous for its hot pools and geysers. It definitely smells.

There are other places around New Zealand with natural hot water that doesn’t smell.

I guess it varies?

I’m pretty sure the idea is that you shouldn’t avoid buying the best because of the cost. Not that you should buy the most expensive, because it’s often not the best.

No problem!

Personally I don’t do a full meal prep day, I just cook 3x more than I need and freeze the extra. By the time you’ve gone to the effort of cooking what you need, cooking a much bigger batch generally isn’t that much extra work. That way I only have to cook a few times a week yet get home cooked meals every day, and also get different things each day (not 7 days of lasagne).

I tend to find the saucier or sloppier a dish is, the better it freezes. I also avoid chicken as I don’t think it comes out very nice after cooking, freezing, and reheating.

Minced meats work well. Lasagne, moussaka, bolognese (cook the spaghetti at time of eating, don’t freeze it).

Also stews, pulled pork, or other slow cooked food. If you use a slow cooker, most of what you cook in there is probably good for freezing.

In general I prefer to cook vegetables, pasta, rice, etc at the time of eating and then eat with the reheated food, because they don’t really taste that nice after being frozen and reheated, but it should be pretty quick to do those and don’t really need much work.

What if you cooked meals that freeze well. Then you could cook some meals, and freeze into portions.

When you get hungry, heat and eat. Separate the cooking and eating stages?

I think this is still not a citable claim. You link to the affirmative conclusion from a negative premise which includes that statement, but that page is explaining what that is. Your other page is using a claim to prove a different topic.

The problem is that Wikipedia is not where you prove things. You need to cite somewhere else that proves it, and you need to do it in an impartial way.

For example, saying that ‘“If you have nothing to hide you shouldn’t fear surveillance from the state” is a logical fallacy’ and citing the book makes Wikipedia have that stance.

But in contrast, you could say that 'Critics argue that the argument “If you have nothing to hide you shouldn’t fear surveillance from the state” is a logical fallacy" then cite the book, this way the critic is the one with the opinion and not Wikipedia.

More citations of more critics would probably help too.

I’m not an expert on Wikipedia by any means, but I do see why someone may have considered this statement not belonging on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia has some info here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view

Also see the links at the top of that page about “Verifiability” and “No Original Research” as these are the three key things needed to allow the statement.

Not that I disagree, but Wikipedia requires specific criteria for sources. I am not sure that a book about it being a logical fallacy meets that criteria any more than a book about parenting could be used to prove how to parent a child.

Are there other Wikipedia pages that claim things to be logical fallacies that could be used to see what the burden of proof is for this claim?

The title has two questions and this one only fits one of them.

Wish wasn’t cancelled, yes!

Wish they brought it back? No, it was a long time ago, and they made Serenity to close off the story and tie things up. It’s likely that bringing it back would do more harm than good.

You are sure that no one has heard of Homestar Runner on a website of technology savvy early adopters whose age averages in the 30s and 40s?

I think the implication is he was the greatest idiot until all the other Impressionable idiots outdid him.

Yes, but this is something you are using 5-10 times a day… right? Something else can go.