Pinned
was the sino-soviet split a yaoi divorce or a yuri divorce
Two great motherlands so definitely yuri
> what the fuck are you doing with your life
Worm training. He's doing worm training.
Seeing hundreds of >100 IQ university staff lining up to spend an hour waiting for a free shitty burger, definite blackpill for free thought and economic reasoning
but it's free!!!!
free food has jank willingness to pay (in time here)
Time is expensive.
More correct economics view: they don't internalize the cost of waiting, since it's just a work hour. The university didn't anticipate demand well and the opportunity cost of staff time will vastly outweigh the monetary cost of food.
Even More Correct Economics - Salaried, full-time officials professionals on-average actually work ~20 hrs a week, their time and work is fungible, what you are paying for is precisely their pre-commitment to availability within work hours, a necessary precondition to getting the gears of a large organization to turn smoothly. Meanwhile the start-up costs of freelance or piecemeal work are both very high and not factored in to the per-hour rate, and don't additionally factor in the "productive energy cost" from domain-switching between different job responsibilities and reduced amount of down-time. Not only would 90%+ of the people in that line incur a greater cost than their time-computed wage trying to substitute in a freelance career to pay for faster lunches via the friction of setting up such an enterprise, but the organization itself is losing no actual worker productivity as employees take that 1 hr lunchbreak out of their built-in relaxation, is enhancing worker commitment to the org via socialization, and is able to compensate workers with in-kind goods that obfuscate their true net compensation package making employer-shopping more opaque.
You are looking at a fully Pareto-optimal 1 hour wait for a free burger.
also university workers are poor as shit and free food is free food
These ones were middle class office bureaucrats, not poor ones.
So there is currently a court case about whether or not the executive actually has the authority to use NatSec excuses to raise tariffs. And I gotta say that might be the most important court case on the planet right now. Was very important before! But man.
The President's power to immediately tank the economy and drive allies into the arms of our enemies is a VITAL tool to protect the nation's security.
Whenever someone complains about the $80 USD sticker price on new games, some folks like to bring up the fact that many Super Nintendo cartridges were retailing for the same price way back in the 90s.
The subtext of these observations is usually that AAA game prices have been effectively static for thirty years, so really, once you take inflation into account, AAA games are cheaper than ever.
A more pointed observation would be that, in spite of those thirty years of inflation, that $80 price tag has managed to become less affordable to the average gamer in 2025 than it was in 1995, which is an indictment that reaches much further than the AAA gaming industry.
If the inflation adjusted price hasn't risen (true) but inflation adjusted median wages have risen (true) then this is just making stuff up about Modern Day Bad Old Times Were Gooder
Lost Seinfeld episode - “The Anime”
Synopsis: Jerry gets hooked on an anime (that’s animation from Japan) cartoon he discovers late one night but can’t remember what channel it was on. Kramer finds the channel but keeps it a secret because he’s become infatuated with with one of the female characters and doesn’t want to share her. George and Elaine get mugged.
excuse me What
guess what I've been reading
Criticizing the logic of the Navy endlessly waiting for Godot in terms of frigate design without ever examining the even more lopsided logic of how the Navy is supposed to use that frigate is self-defeating. Currently, the idea is that the Navy will use said frigate to fight a war on the other side of the Pacific, against an industrially superior power, while lacking the capacity to sustain logistics, replace casualties, or repair combat damage. No serious American military planner from the mid-twentieth century (back when the United States enjoyed a massive industrial advantage compared to the rest of the world) would consider this to be a coherent or practical goal to begin with. Let us thus put the real nature of the issue at stake in the most blunt terms possible: the Navy is being asked to maintain the dream of the American empire. Lacking a political class willing to seriously acknowledge or address the very real crisis this empire now faces, the burden of that political crisis is being shifted onto the shoulders of admirals and generals who were never intended to take on that role in the first place, nor do they have the capability to do so. Yet even so, by promising some unspecified, undefinable capability at some hazy point in the future, the Navy is, in its own peculiar way, doing the best job it can with the hand it has been dealt. This job cannot be done by delivering a handful of unremarkable Italian frigates, frigates the Navy cannot realistically repair in wartime nor fully crew in peacetime in any case. The Navy is not just building ships; it is trying to shield an increasingly fragile American leadership class from reality, and like the other services, it is paying a ruinous cost to do so.
Once you deliver some frigates it can be clear that frigates are shit but you can do so much with having everyone imagine a frigate, an imaginary frigate could do anything!
The underling issue that Navy leadership has to deal with is that the main scenario the Navy is supposed to prepare for—a kinetic war against China—is actually completely nonsensical, or at least it would have appeared as such to mid-twentieth century military planners. The Pentagon itself estimates that China’s shipbuliding capacity today is roughly 230 times greater than America’s. Many Japanese elites, most notably Admiral Yamamoto himself, were extremely skeptical of the idea that any sort of combination of tactics and strategy could make up for the gulf in industrial potential between Imperial Japan and America, and yet that advantage was an order of magnitude less than the advantage enjoyed by China today; it was far closer to ten to one than a hundred to one. To add insult to injury, one of the central themes of the ultimately disastrous Japanese doctrine of Kantai Kessen—decisive naval battle doctrine—was to leverage the vast size of the Pacific Ocean itself to partially make up for the difference in industrial capacity. The (ultimately vain) Japanese hope was that America would have to stretch its supply lines to the point where the Imperial Japanese Navy could still hope to engage in set piece battles under locally favorable conditions. The Japanese imagined themselves using the tyranny of distance to draw America into one or several confrontations in the mold of the battle of Tsushima, after which the American public or its military planners would hopefully conclude that a protracted war in the Pacific simply wasn’t worth it, resulting in a negotiated settlement where both sides recognized the other’s sphere of influence. The disastrous failure of many of the assumptions underpinning this doctrine would end up dooming the Japanese Empire, but at least the Japanese doctrine made some measure of basic sense. No Japanese planner, no matter how optimistic they were about Japan’s chances, even considered for a second the idea that a war with America was somehow going to be winnable if it had to be fought off the Californian coast.
The parallel with Imperial Japan doesn't perfectly fit - the USN could maybe, possibly enforce a sea blockade of China in concert with allies in the region. The Imperial Japanese Navy could never possibly have done this to the USA.
But dooming on the state of the Navy does feel justified in general.
I miss them