I do NOT want to see what building Minecraft in Minecraft would look like. I've seen some of the redstone calculators and such and those are already bonkers.

"What on earth are you talking about?"
-newt

The rules for property and income when one or both parties decide they no longer want to be in the relationship.




"not having a marriage means you almost certainly will pay for them for 18+ years but won't have many rights to be in their lives"
-newt

Incorrect. If you are on birth certificate, you have the same rights and obligations.
The only pitfalls are that :
- Child support is calculated from the income of the parent with less custody (rather than from the true cost of raising a child).
- Women almost always get custody if the choice is between two parents (like when they live far apart and child can only be at one or the other).



"and may lose your rights to any assets if she grabs first"
-newt

Negative. Co-parenting does not conflate property.

Shared assets when not married are divided either by percentage of purchase price contribution, or by percentage stated in a contract.




"My brother paid well over a hundred thousand dollars for his divorce in Texas"
-newt

"My brother won."
-newt

Won by your own definition. Hence I congratulate.




"You assume women take off time to raise the kids"
-newt

No assumptions. Although afaik they still do it more often.




"You start from a false position that men work both harder and better, but you have no data to back that up. "
-newt

Top result from a zero effort google of "men working hours vs women working hours"

https://towardsdatascience.com/is-the-difference-in-work-hours-the-real-reason-for-the-gender-wage-gap-interactive-infographic-6051dff3a041




"Um...so since you admit many women outearn men and the trend reinforces that"
-newt

I admit that women [as a group] under 35 out earn men under 35 because of preferential admittance (such as to higher education) and preferential hiring (such as to managerial positions).

I did not say that women earn more in the same position for the same hours worked. Young men are simply getting shut out of opportunities, so their incomes are lower. As by design.

It does however highlight how affirmative action is being poorly controlled.
The target statistic is based on overall population at all ages.
The adjustment is skewed to younger ages (school admission is typically for younger people).
So the system is trying to balance out incomes of older men by trimming up incomes of younger women, with no accounting for the effects on younger men or consequences of older men retiring.
The situation is doomed to overshoot with time.

A natural result is the popularity of people like Jordan Peterson, with messages like : "Young men, nobody will help you, stop waiting for someone to help you, stop lamenting your situation, you gotta pull yourself up by your boot straps. Start by cleaning your room, then go make something of yourself".






"Bullshit. You said you would immediately dismiss any woman who has...
"Long dating history? Too much risk[etc]" -scheherazade "
-newt

Straw man argument.

You know I stated that those marriageability criteria exist specifically due to risk of consequences of divorce.

I never stated that I have personal issues with those attributes.
I have dated women on that list. I didn't /marry/ them.

My only criteria for a relationship that I am happy being in is :
- We are mutually attracted
- We like each other
- We are nice to each other
I don't care what your religion is, your politics, your family status, whatever. It's all just noise to me.





" And again, prenuptial. Do you not know what they are?"
-newt

Prenups can be negated by these simple words :

"I did not understand what I was signing"
or
"My lawyer was not present".

Poof. Prenup thrown out.




"their husbands are more likely to break their vows first"
-newt

A woman to cheat needs a willing man (easy)
A man to cheat needs a willing woman (hard)

Times have changed. Online dating made chatting someone up in person and make an impression uncommon, and even considered creepy/unusual. Now people are picked on their online profile based on looks/height/social-media-game.

Dating apps and sites publish their statistics. Nowadays, around 20% of men match with around 80% of women.
Most men aren't having sex. Most men can't find a match to cheat with if they wanted to.

The tall cute photogenic guys are cleaning up.
The 20% of men that match the bulk of women are going through women like a mill. They will smash whatever bored housewife crosses their path.

A 2 second google result :
https://usustatesman.com/economics-of-dating-2-the-brutal-reality-of-dating-apps/




"Women don't like men that believe wholeheartedly that all women are just lessers, leeches"
-newt

Agreed.

Fortunately, I never say that about women.






" you can't grasp that a codified, delineated, agreed to partnership is almost always better, more fulfilling, and has many benefits cohabitation lacks"
-newt

False equivalence.

Cohabitation and Partnership are mutually independent.
Meaning both can exist at the same time.


-scheherazade

They should respond to the letter with a single number: 1 Quadrillion.

(reference: https://videosift.com/video/Why-was-Bidens-win-calculated-to-be-ONE-IN-A-QUADRILLION )

Your video, Why was Biden's win calculated to be ONE IN A QUADRILLION?, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

The video I agree....my calculations show his newest stated plan, herd mentality (immunity), "that's going to happen", leads to 7-8 million dead at a best case miraculously perfect execution, and in reality more likely >40->50 million due to an overburdened medical system. I don't have a clue where they get such a lowballed estimate as 3 million. I'm with you there....Shame.

The data for what I sent is at John Hopkins university, the NPR data source is listed, statistica requires a free account, but their data matches Hopkins.

You told me, don't you remember?! You don't support me so that can't be it, and no...no pedo....who do you support? That guy who hollas at 10 year olds in public, lusting hard. Who was that guy again? He raped a 13year old at least once....it's on the tip of my tongue...help me out...who is that?

So, if I were a pedophile, that would explain how I know you support them. No denial though. Hmmmm. That's a public admission Bobby, Duh.

I was thinking I can pretty much calculate my age from that video.

C is my native tongue (but was far from my first language) but I just realised it's probably 20 years since I used it in anger. I do the odd bit of scripting at home and work, and still have an android app to scratch a personal itch that I keep failing to make time for.

I'm also surprised at the recent stats - some languages far lower than I'd expected, some far higher. It is nice to see Python up there - as a Monty Python fan I remember seeing it very early on and have been urging it on ever since.

Lol. I've done similar at that turn in my Civic with super wide tires, it was a go-cart, totally rode on rails, but that turn had the rear end hanging out and the front tires smoking. I also got pulled over doing 110, but on the straight right after the turn, just before the artichoke fields. The cop asked didn't I think over 80 was a bit fast, I said yes, he let me go. I was so lucky. Should have lost my car.
Then there was the Acura Legend I inherited...the Speedo topped out at 150, but the car sure didn't. I think I got it to around 175 based on rpm calculations. Ahhh, to be young and stupid again. Crashed it into a K rail at 55 mph, went airborne. Good times!

Your video, The Shape Of You - Calculator Cover, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by Mordhaus.

Very cool vid

*dupeof=https://videosift.com/video/Cosmos-Eratosthenes-calculates-Earths-circumference

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by oritteropo. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

240 what? Pixels slope?
235 what? Elephant ball hairs run?
46 right angle what? 46 mouse penises rise?

No it isn't calculus, it's barely trig, and fuck you, my math is spot on...and they're WAY closer.

It's measurements we disagree on....yours suck donkey balls. You claim the stage floor is 4.5' high and the ramp run only 23.5' long....neither is close to right.

I estimated rise, 3' based on the width of stripes, and run, 40' based on the length of stage segments. That's 4.3 degrees. Do you disagree with the estimation, gleaned from pictures and video of the whole stage/ramp?
You can only be saying it's a 23.5' run and 4.6' rise, that's insanely off on both counts, but granted does give you the 11degree number.

The stripes are 1.5' high, the top of the ramp floor (and stage height) is two stripes high....stage segments are at least 10' long, the ramp extends well beyond 3 segments as seen in the full descent video. If you need to nitpick, it might be 35', but 11 degrees still puts that stage floor at 6'9". It's not 1/2 that....It's 3'. 3' rise at 11degrees makes the ramp 15' approximately....also clearly not the case.

It's Trump that makes himself look awkward, and his attempted bullshit excuses are just awkward icing on his cake of awkwardness.... it was not in any way a steep ramp.

Lol. Yes, they got it wrong by about 1.3 degrees. They should commit seppuku in contrition....
But you got it around 6.7 degrees wrong, and now are still fighting about it using unassigned units of measurement on values pulled from....measuring an off center picture from breitbart of 1/3 of the ramp on a monitor?!... to do calculations, and are clearly measuring it insanely wrong, or they altered the picture, or both.

Put 40' run and 11 degrees into the calculator, you get 8' rise, 35'run gives 6'9" hight. It even gives you visual representation. Do you honestly think that stage floor is 8' up, or even 6'9"? If so, you are insane and no math, picture, argument, or fact will change your mind, because it's clearly waist high, two stripes, about 3'. If you aren't saying it's at least 6' 9" high, admit you got it wrong at least to yourself, and let's move on.

Kinda lost me when he claimed wind creates 11g CO² per kwh with no reference, calculations, or explanation.
Wind energy production is zero emission.
Are they including every gram produced by every step of construction and estimating a short lifespan, but not doing the same for nuclear, which takes exponentially more resources to build, run, fuel, store waste, and dismantle?
I also have a problem with him saying more expensive, higher profit natural gas plants have better prices because they're much HIGHER than nuclear prices per kwh.
He seems to ignore the spent fuel disposal/storage costs, which are significant in both cases, but while the natural gas plants don't pay for their waste (massive amounts of CO² and methane), nuclear has no choice.
Diablo canyon refurbishing was canned after Fukashima, because it's got all the same dangerous issues of being in an active earthquake/tsunami zone right on the coast with no way to shield itself from tsunamis. Before Fukashima, they totally planned to revamp and continue operations.
His levelized cost of electricity slide conveniently ignores the cost of environmental damage caused by fuel production/use.
Include all costs, coal is worst, followed by natural gas, then nuke, hydro, wind, and solar cheapest. Geothermal is great, but only in areas where it can be easily tapped, which are few and far between.

In short, his vast oversimplification and inconsistencies in what's included in his cost basis make his conclusions relatively meaningless, imo.

How much money did you calculate the officer personally stole from you? Please show your math.

Or as MSNBC calculates, that's $1,300,000,000 per pixel.