rquantz

I don’t think OP wants to be an instagram star. They want a change in career and have only a nebulous sense of what exactly they want. “Suck it up” is not only a mean spirited response, it is beside the point.

You don't think it would be good for people googling an issue to be able to find out that there's a relevant petition?

I posted this both because it is a fascinating subject, and because this is a remarkable model for pedagogical video. It's hard to believe the resources and ingenuity that went into every aspect of the American war effort, including something as small (and also, obviously vitally important) as teaching soldiers how guns work.

Oh you read that article too? There are ways of thinking about happiness that still allow for striving. Also, unhappiness is not only caused by entitlement.

Yes, specific suggestion about qualitative changes to college curricula, based on qualitative results of a study. That seems reasonable to me. Once these changes are enacted, of course, they can be subject to quantitative study.

You're maybe non familiar with qualitative research methods? A study like this can be used to discover the kinds of challenges that women face in engineering work environments. It would be a mistake to try to make quantitative claims about these results, but no one is doing that here.

You present "I chose not to eat" as if you made the moral choice. But there is no shame in asking for help if you need it. I don't have illusions about what most people asking for money are going to spend it on. Honestly, they have to deal with loneliness and destitution somehow. That is why I specifically say regardless of whether I think they deserve it.

I always give a dollar to the first person who asks for it in any given day, regardless of whether I think they deserve. If they're asking for money, they probably need it. I don't think telling people they need it for bus fare is a scam, it's just another strategy.

If nothing else, in many NYC neighborhoods it would be simply impossible to greet every person you see.

Still, there are plenty of residential neighborhoods where no one acknowledges each other on the street, and there is no sense of neighborliness. Paradoxically, given this article, I find that the more wealthy a neighborhood, the less likely you are to be greeted by a stranger. The poorer the neighborhood (I would imagine down to a lower bound – I seldom go to the truly poor neighborhoods simply because they are so far from the city center in New York) the more likely that greeting is, especially in a black neighborhood like Bed Stuy or (when I first moved here) Harlem.

We just don't need that many people to do all the stuff.

Yes we do. There is so much work to be done. The problem is the poverty of the public sphere, brought on by specific, ideologically motivated decisions.

Sure we do. Cap and trade. Boom.

Is it good faith? It comes off as either pedantic or trolling to my eyes.

Because being a startup hub has been so good for SF? Not everywhere needs to be a startup hub, for goodness sake.

In case it wasn't clear, I was referring to the price difference as ludicrous. I have an Iizuka viola and it's worth every penny.

The classical world is more diverse than people seem to think. Most string players I know play on modern instruments, made within the last hundred years. Likewise actual musicians don't idolize young prodigies – both of these things are marketing phenomena that the actual artists generally oppose.

That said, the idea that there's no difference between a great old instrument and a modern one is just as fallacious. Perhaps as a not great violinist you never got to the point where you got to find out, but there are qualities of an instrument that have nothing to do with sound. The fact that a Strad costs $5 million and an Iizuka costs $27,000 is ludicrous, yes. But the great old instruments are still around for a reason.

Honestly, it does look like fun. But also like a lawsuit waiting to happen? Like a future source of broken noses and arms and what-have-you when people trip or run into walls. Which, that's fine, if that's a risk you choose to take. But I think "what could go wrong?" is justified.

Hey, it's like laser tag, but you have to look through a tiny screen while you run and jump and try to evade and attack! What could go wrong?

It is deeply conservative, possibly even royalist. Do you think propaganda has to be unsubtle? This is just appealing to a different audience than Rosie the Riveter.

All right you made your complaint. Now flag the article if you must and let it go, please.

Yes, that's true, one definition of literature can be anything that is written. I'm not trying to have a semantic argument with you though. Use whatever words you want, but if you think of this long form journalism as a form of... let's call it art writing, then maybe it would make more sense. If you want to say that having magenta pull quotes makes it not art then I can't help you.

In the Strand, the section you're talking about is called "Literary Fiction." Since we're talking about sets:

  literature ⊃ literary fiction

Would it help if you think of it as a form of literature, rather than a means of devouring information by the most efficient means possible? It may still not be for you, and this may not be a good example of it, but it is a genre with purposes other than what you are assuming.

Your comments about US states may have been true prior to the civil war, but certainly have been true since then.

It doesn't say it's unlikely to aid in speech, just that it's unlikely to be reinforcement for the stresses caused by the tongue while speaking.

What an excellent idea. My first thought was that it must have something to do with speech or expression – maybe having a protruding bone bobbing up and down somehow makes speech more comprehensible? The idea of it contributing to facial expressions seem more likely though. Hopefully someone here will take up this line of inquiry.

Sorry, "socialist utopia" in this case is reclaimed from the Republican insanity of the last 8 years, where any government program is "socialism" and ergo synonymous with evil. I'm not suggesting the majority of New Yorkers want a dictatorship of the proletariat, I just mean most of us want to have the public infrastructure necessary to live in the city, and would probably be ok with better social programs. And would you deny that the city is more "liberal" than Upstate?

I'll admit to ignorance here. A poster above suggested NYC does not own the Rondout reservoir, another one said they do own two other reservoirs. If the city owns all of them, great. If there are some needed for the water supply, then they would have to be purchased.

Of course, all of this is on the level of fantasy, because it's not going to happen.

I'd imagine any deal to separate the city from the state (and it would have to be a deal, there would be no forcible exit) would include the city's purchase of that reservoir.

Again, this is not about thinking we're better managed, it's about the fact that Albany won't allow us to meet our own needs.

Yes, of course I know it will never happen (or rather, because never is a long time, it won't happen while the current political system is in place).

I'd be perfectly fine with subsidizing upstate if they let us fund our own infrastructure. The fact that we give our tax dollars to them and then they tell us we can't raise enough money to pay for our subway, public housing, etc., is what makes me want to effect massive change.

how can we keep the system running with the atrociously-limited amount of money we get from the state

I've been saying for a while that NYC should cecede from New York State. We send more money Upstate than they send down, and in return we still aren't allowed to run the socialist utopia most city residents actually want. Make the mayor a governor, and we'll have a noble experiment on our hands.