CocaKoala

A lift would be rad, but I think we'd have to completely redo the garage doors to get enough vertical clearance for it. In a couple years I think we're planning to redo the garage so that it's more effective as a workshop, maybe we can include a lift as part of that.

It looks like all three Borla ATAK catbacks for the GR Corolla are active exhuasts[0], so you can dynamically switch between quiet operation and loud operation.

[0] https://www.borla.com/2023-2026-toyota-gr-corolla-exhaust-sy...

When my wife was pregnant, our garage had an ND Miata (mine), a BRZ (hers) and an Elise (also hers). We pretty quickly decided that we were going to need some kind of car that we could reasonably put a car seat in, and while the BRZ nominally had a back seat, neither of us were interested in trying to fit a car seat and child into it.

We actually did consider a GR corolla, but ended up getting a used evo x that's been pretty fun instead.

A quick browse of Sweetwater shows 689 different s-style body guitars, four of which are made by Fender under the Squier label. The other 685 different varients are made by companies that I'm not immediately identifying as Fender or Fender-owned. Anecdotally, that doesn't seem significantly different from the status quo I remember 10-15 years ago when I was actively guitar shopping. The body style has been widely used and generic for decades.

I think it is imprecise to say that the facts were not argued - they were! As the judge writes in paragraph 58,

The authorship or control of these accounts has consistently been strenuously denied by Dr Garrett. I have no evidence from the Defendants to support it. Instead, they necessarily rely on an inferential case built on a limited number of pleaded facts, some of which are undisputed. I consider them in turn.

There were not _witness statements_ presented by the defense in support of myriad facts, but it's not like the case for the defense wasn't made at all.

More specifically, it's highly doctor-dependent. The FDA hasn't approved shingrix for people under 50; some doctors are willing to prescribe it without FDA approval, others are not. I personally had shingles in my early thirties and have thus far been unable to have my doctor prescribe shingrix.

Also, I would like to point out that having shingles was possibly the single most physically unpleasant experience of my life and boy it sure would have been fantastic to have been able to get the shingles vaccine before I got shingles, as opposed to sometime after! because wow, having shingles sucks.

Pilot Precise V2 got me through grad school and when I started journaling recently, a set of those was the first thing I went and picked up. Great pens.

I remember at one point a couple years ago, I saw a thread on the Bogleheads forum where people could basically call their shot on market crashes; they would post and timestamp when they exited the market and when they re-entered, so that people could go and calculate if the timing was correct or if they lost money by missing out on market growth.

I might not have the dates correct, but I remember the general strokes of one guy who decided in like 2017 or something that the market had topped out, the crash was coming any moment now, and he sold everything and called his shot. He missed out on three years of incredible gains, and then the market absolutely _crashed_ in early 2020. He got it right, by a very small amount; he had gotten more selling his positions than he would have gotten selling in march 2020. He buys back in at what ended up being the absolute nadir of the market in like april 2020 or something. The rare success story of timing the market, you love to see it.

And then a few days later, he decides that actually, no, the market still has more to drop, and he sells again. Oh well.

Ah, see, my experience is exactly the opposite of yours; I don't listen to the ChilledCow streams, but I do listen to the Chillhop playlists (and in fact purchase the seasonal essentials collections on vinyl) and one of the reasons I like them is because there's a lot of curation that goes into the playlist and they tend to feature artists that I end up liking - Blue Wednesday, Purple Cat, Joey Pecararo are all reliable artists in the genre for me.

If cooking involves boiling, what are you doing when you put a steak in a hot cast-iron pan?

To the rice cooker point, I'd argue that an oven uses a heating element of some form (electric coils, gas flame, wood fire) to heat the air in a closed environment, and the air transfers heat into an item. In contrast, a rice cooker uses a heating element to directly heat a metal pot, and the metal pot transfers heat into an item. Usually that's going to be a combination of rice and water, but you can e.g. pour pancake batter into the pot and get a large souffle pancake, or put bread dough into the pot and get a loaf of bread. The trick is that the metal pot is much more efficient at transferring heat than the air is, so the rice cooker doesn't need to be at the same temperature as an oven to get the same amount of heat into whatever you're cooking.

What's the difference between baking and cooking in your understanding? You can make bread in a rice cooker, which nobody has ever called a "rice baker".

edit: and a rice cooker is definitely not a small oven.

With the caveat that I haven't done any sessions run by SpeedSF, the description for their AutoX events at Sonoma usually says something like "Show up and drive, we have dedicated course workers, you can expect to have 20-30 runs in a day".

For something run by a group like TrackMasters or GGLC or PCA, then you're definitely correct, you'll have somewhere between five and ten runs depending on how smoothly it goes, you'll work the course for a while, and you should view it as a fun day of hanging out with people who like cars and you'll get to drive a bit.

You're also definitely correct that autocross is a lot of fun and anybody who is interested in driving their car for the joy of it should try it out.

You're imagining the Guilty Gear series, which gives you a variety of defensive options in the system - you can jump, double jump, or super jump to avoid something with different take-off timings, jump arcs, and speeds; you can block, instant block, or faultless defend to change the amount of chip damage, block stun, and pushback in an effort to throw off your opponent's timing; you can dead angle while blocking to try and recover initiative; you can backdash or throw out a move that's invulnerable on startup in an attempt to get your opponent to whiff.

Eh, we're currently fighting to get some claims covered. Before a certain date, all the claims are denied; after a certain date, all the claims are approved. The claims are all for the same thing, related to the same procedure (physical therapy after a joint replacement).

Could the claims have been rejected due to a simple human error? Sure, it's plausible. Was there another human error that caused the claims to be rejected after we appealed? Maybe, but probably not. Could a third human error cause the claims to be rejected again after our second appeal? Seems pretty unlikely.

Ball is rolling towards the goal - if the attacking player touches it, it will be offsides: A player in an offside position has entered active play by "interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate".

Goalkeeper makes a save, since the ball is rolling towards the goal. If the attacking player touches it, it will be offsides: A player in an offside position has entered active play by "challenging an opponent for the ball" or "gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has [...] been deliberately saved by any opponent".

The goalkeeper deliberately plays the ball. Immediately afterwards, the attacking player receives the ball played by the goalkeeper - this is not offsides, since "a player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball, including by deliberate handball, is not considered to have gained an advantage, unless it was a deliberate save by any opponent."

https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules...

Interfering with the ball is sufficient to be called for off-side - you need to be in active play, but you can do that when your team doesn't have possession.

As long as a nominal defender (not counting the goalie) is in between you and the goal, I don't think you're off-side. So presumably it means you have to a) maintain possession of the ball or 2) clear the ball before all other defenders are able to make it past whoever currently has possession. A) sounds a lot easier than 2), though.

Mazda's also one of the few carmakers that's independent, as opposed to being part of a much larger conglomeration!

You can indeed encode digital data onto a vinyl and then play it back meaningfully to a computer - http://boginjr.com/it/sw/dev/vinyl-boot/ is somebody making a vinyl boot disk and using it to boot DOS.

As a teen I thought adults were boring because they didn't do any of the things I wanted to spend my time doing - as an adult, I have a bunch of hobbies that are pretty inaccessible to children and I think they're very neat hobbies, but I would also forgive a child for thinking that I'm boring because I like to drive my car or go on wine tastings instead of watching cartoons on saturday morning.

The current Miata (ND) has some fairly aggressive headlight styling but still maintains the wide grin "mouth" for the front grill: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_MX-5_%28ND%29#/media/Fil...

They look pretty neat in person, it's a very nicely designed car.

It eliminates the times you uncontrollably think about a past event - note that voluntary recall isn't affected. So it's saying that this lets you process the trauma in a controlled environment when you're in a position to deal with it, but otherwise resume a life that isn't interrupted or dominated by it.

I'll occasionally see cars like that - bright pink, or some other bright colour, and they always make me smile. I've taken to describing them as "a car that I'd never want to own, but I'm really glad it exists". Like the pink camo-wrapped Dodge Charger that I occasionally see tootling around town - do I want to own a Charger and do it up in pink camouflage? Absolutely not. Am I glad that the option exists and somebody has availed themselves of it? Absolutely yes.

I disagree that it's bad advice - it can certainly be applied badly, but so can anything. You meet somebody, you become friends with them, you start dating them, you get married - that's an extremely natural arc. You shouldn't ask all your friends on dates (just like you shouldn't ask everybody you meet on a date) and you should be cognizant of hints that somebody isn't interested in dating you, but to say that somebody is EITHER a friend OR a romantic partner and there's no overlap between the two is strange to me.

And this isn't the only way to get dates - dating apps certainly try and short-circuit the "be friends" part. But I've been friends with every girl I've dated before we started dating, including the woman I'm now married to. If you're not friends with somebody, even a little bit, why do you want to date them?

edit: And of course, if you're going into friendships with the intention of trying to date the person, that might work out poorly. Meet somebody, be their friend, and if you're both open to something developing, it can happen. Asking them to have lunch is a way to start that.

The question was "how to get dates" - "how to get friends" is a different question. The easy way to get dates is to ask your friends on dates, and the easiest way to do that is to ask a friend to get lunch with you. What part of that reduces to "get lucky"?

Absolutely I'm trusting that stated expectations are the same as real expectations - if somebody lies to me about what they want in a partner, then we're not going to be a good match anyways and so that serves as a useful way to thin the potential pool.

I agree that it's hard to judge the reasonableness of other people's decisions, but I think that if they either fail to find what they are looking for, or expect more than they offer, the expectation may be unreasonable.

Sure, but the article also says that the group of lonely single men is growing so on balance it sounds like the women are finding what they're looking for. Who's got the unreasonable expectations, here?

I'm sorry, I'm not trying to sidestep the argument but I'm also clearly not understanding what you're saying. I read your statement as "Women say they want emotionally available [etc etc] men and yet I see women paying attention to men who are [high status/beefy as hell/richer than god/etc etc] - there is a disconnect here" - is that approximately right?

I'll address that argument, but if it's not what you're trying to say then please correct me. There are many different women, and they all want slightly different things, at different priorities. That said, I think that focusing on mental health, communication skills, and emotional availability pays dividends for everybody independent of whether or not it gets them a relationship.

You are correct, the advice to achieve the third level of Maslow's Hierarchy does not address what you have to do in order to achieve the first two levels.

It's hard to say that somebody's expectations for what they want in a parter are reasonable or unreasonable - you're allowed to decide who you spend your time with, and if that means you don't spend time with anybody, you're either satisfied with that or you change your expectations. If somebody says "I want to date somebody who is emotionally available", it's not anybody else's place to say "Wow that's completely unreasonable of you".

Same thing when somebody says "I only want to date a man who's rich, taller than me, conventionally handsome, and will cater to my every whim" - do you meet that criteria? Maybe not, but they've decided that they only want to date exactly one person in the entire world and they're gonna hold out until they find exactly that person, who are you to tell them they're wrong? It's their life.

There's no magic bullet that will get you through "any door" - every person is different, and every person has different things they want in a partner. There are some people who will absolutely refuse to date somebody who isn't taller than them, and if you're too short, then yeah - nothing you can do will change that.

But there's nothing you can do to change that, so why get hung up on it? There are plenty of other people (I'll drop the dehumanizing metaphor of doors here because it's not needed) who have different criteria that you could meet, and focusing on the things about yourself that make you happier (like being emotionally available, being able to communicate, and having a clear sense of your values) seems like a pretty reasonable way to go about meeting those criteria with a side-benefit of making you happy.