I find it uncomfortable not to understand. It has taken me decades to make peace with the notion that being different is not only acceptable, but good. Many people don’t get me, but the ones who do become friends for life. Many people find things interesting or enjoyable that would make me cry from boredom.

I’ve chosen to find it charming.

You might be able to do that, too. If not now, then one day. It took me a long time.

Peace.

The fact that the loop is doing “find first driver matching these strange criteria” seems most obviously obscured by the pattern of assigning a value, then killing the loop or not. This strikes me as the part that makes the algorithm tedious to test, since it forces us to use a collection to test the intricacies of the inner conditions.

Once we isolate “find first driver matching condition” from computing the condition for each driver, I consider the rest a question of personal taste. Specification pattern, composition of filters, something like that. Whatever you find easier to follow.

Wise personal account, if you want virtual cards. They’re debit, not credit, but it’s an option.

I am definitely keeping an eye on my electricity bill right now, since I have Unmanic running full speed and it’s about 3 weeks into a 4-month job that might only save 1 TB.

I want you to feel free to stop buying presents for anyone that you don’t want to voluntarily buy presents for.

If it feels forced, then that means you don’t mean it. So stop. It will be fine.

Yes, I know. I also agree.

The comment I replied to, however, was not that. It asked why the corporations’ reason is valid. It’s valid because that’s what the economic system is designed to promote.

Businesses exist to make profit, not to take care of you. Corporations will only care about your welfare to the extent that that creates profit for them or the laws require them to.

Dekametre and hectometre, rarely. Mostly mm, cm, m, km.

In Europe, hg is relatively common, whereas in Canada, prices for deli products are “per 100 g” instead of per hg.

Also in Europe, cl and dl are common in recipes and bottles of alcohol, but in Canada, almost uniquely mL and L. (And yes, lowercase litre in Europe, but uppercase Litre in Canada, although that’s gradually changing.)

In what way does your second paragraph contradict your first? They seem independent of each other to me. The two together mean that a thought is something that we can attend to, and I believe that’s true in part because I have experienced it.

I agree that a thought is a thing we can attend to and I don’t know how that could possibly conflict with describing attention as the act of directing thoughts to a particular thing, including to a particular thought. I am, right now, attending to the thought “I don’t understand why this person sees these statements as conflicting with each other” in part because I want to remain curious about why you think these statements conflict with each other, and so I am attending to these thoughts in order to be on the lookout for judgmental thoughts that tend to interfere with being curious.

Why “though”? We usually reserve that word for when we’re about to introduce a counterexample or some other means of contradicting a claim.

But thoughts are also particular things, so clearly one can direct their thoughts to particular thoughts. And even to the act of thinking in particular about thoughts, because that is a thing one can think about.

More-common terms in any language tend to be shorter or at least less standard/more irregular.

The act of directing your thoughts towards something in particular.

This is one of those things that, once you’re aware of the effect, you can make more-conscious choices about. It doesn’t make you immune from the effects, but perhaps you can notice them more easily and process them sooner. This might be a way to practise not comparing yourself to others, which I consider a skill for everyone to cultivate.

If it seems like you never progress and you just keep chasing engagement, then get out and walk in nature more, if that option is available to you. Building a habit like that might provide you with the attention capacity you need to let the social media stuff in without it consuming you.

I still chase engagement, but not nearly as much as I did three years ago. It takes time, but it can change.

Even so, remember that you want to be accepted and loved. That seems unlikely ever to change. Maybe you can find that sense of belonging somewhere else.

Good luck.

At one extreme, one finds what you describe of your behavior from childhood. At another, one finds people pleasers, who compulsively elevate everyone else’s needs above their own.

You seem to have found a balance between the two. That’s probably good for you.

How to decide how much of each to do? That’s complex, meaning there are feedback loops. There is no right way. You bounce between too much and too little, you pay attention to your own reactions, and you converge towards a satisfying life. You do your best.

Does this help at all?

Cunts.

ILJM.

Yes, but it’s learning optimism.

From Canada it seems like this: poverty down there is a trap from which escape is almost impossible and it’s a trap that’s constantly threatening everyone except the richest 5% of the population. Very high risk and very high reward and success seems to depend much more on luck than hard work and intention.

What would it mean to you to tailor resources specifically to men? How would they differ from resources available to everyone generally?

An ugly powerhouse Linux application? What will they think of next?!