A town I grew up nearby has a small amusement park. 20 or so years ago, they built this thrill ride called the "Screamer", its name in bold, illuminated letters on the front of the machine, facing the freeway and serving as a sort of landmark. Soon after it was opened to the public, complaints started rolling in- not from riders, but from residents of the homes across the freeway. The screaming was making its way through open windows at night, and eventually the park had to initiate a "no screaming" rule on the Screamer.
I disagree that the comment is harmful or transphobic. It isn't punching down or attacking trans people, it's making fun of the insane belief that school teachers are performing medical procedures on children without their parents' knowledge or consent.
I want to make a few things clear before I go any further: body / gender dysmorphia is not something that magically begins at the age of 18, and the idea that treatment for it should be held off until that age is as ridiculous as implying depression or anxiety not be treated until then. There's also a myriad of reasons as to why someone under 18 would want to seek this treatment without their parents' knowledge.
That being said, the extent to which treatment and discretion should be provided is obviously a hot topic in today's political climate, and whether you're in the group that supports or condemns it, nowhere are there schools with teachers performing secret transition surgeries on children without their parents' knowledge. The poster is not making fun of an actual thing that is happening or even has a high likelihood of happening; they're making fun of the lunacy and (often intentional) failure to understand the actual argument, and highlighting the strawman behind their defense.
I was going to liken the comment to someone making fun of an anti-Semitic news article by saying something like, "my Jewish friends always say they're too busy running the world to hang out with me", which could be taken at face value as an anti-Semitic joke; but the comment in your OP doesn't even say anything negative about trans people (or those that provide treatment for them, for that matter). The only ones really being mocked are the people that believe the second statement is true.
That does make it a bit better then. I still think a traditional, non-rock sculpture could've been more appealing and the price tag does seem kind of steep. But then, I've never had to manufacture 3 massive boulders of plastic and figure out the logistics of placing them.
Yeah, I came to the conclusion elsewhere in the thread the "low mileage" is a subjective term. 90k for a "50 year old car", low mileage. 90k for a "car from the 70s", high mileage.
Agree to disagree I suppose. When I think of "boomer Facebook group" I don't think of them casually criticizing the police state or militaristic profiteering, and when I think of "slop" I think of things that are lazily generated by AI.
I don't see how you can say it isn't at least trying to be a centrist meme when "liberals think x, conservatives think y, they're both wrong and I'm a genius because I think z" is the oldest centrist meme template in the book
What about this is boomer slop? It's a little "enlightened centrist" (if you conflate liberals with the left, which let's not get started), sure, but most boomers are depicted on the right panel, and at least 2 of the 3 background images are old memes so not slop
Edited my comment. I didn't mean to say, "the average car from '79 would have x miles on it" (if a car that old managed to survive this long while being daily driven it would have well over 500k), so much as I was highlighting how impressive it was the car was still at such low mileage despite (presumably) still running and being driven occasionally.
I suppose "low mileage" is subjective. It's got less than 1/5 the miles it "should" based on age, but it also probably has less than 1/5 of it's remaining mileage left before something goes bang (unless work has already been done on it).
It seems silly to me. The rocks don't look like they're made of plastic so unless someone already knows about them or finds a plaque to read about them they're just going to assume that they're big rocks. Which are pretty enough, don't get me wrong, but rocks made of rock are also pretty, won't potentially seep micro plastics into the ground, and don't cost 100k a piece. If the point was to show off what can be made with recycled plastic, making something that looks naturally occurring and visually hiding the fact that it's plastic is an odd way to do it.
Idk, I think more cities should invest in public art projects but this one seems pretty off. I get the concept. But if the idea is, "look what can be made with recycled plastic", why not make a sculpture that's actually interesting or pleasant to look at? It might've even been better if the rocks were just whatever color(s) they ended up being after they were made, but the based on images in the article it looks like they were made to literally just look like big rocks.
I feel like this project just does not achieve the goals it sets to meet. It's not particularly thought provoking (unless there's some sort of plaque that explains what it is, but who's reading that?), and the visual appeal can be replicated at a fraction of the cost with something that does not need to be maintained and has zero chance of causing environmental harm.
When I opened the post and saw the year/mileage I was surprised. 90k for a '79 would definitely be considered low mileage. I know corvettes are a stereotypical "garage kept, barely driven" car, so I'm sure most are under the average usage, but even if the car was driven 1/3 as much as the average car it would have over twice the miles (assuming it still ran.
I just finished cutting some 1/8" aluminum panels with an angle grinder and can attest to how hot metal gets when cutting. I kept forgetting where would be hot and got a nice burn across my arm to show for it.
How does this not meet the definition of 3d printing? The machines that do this are legitimately just giant core-XY machines with concrete hoppers instead of a hot end
You are describing something millions of people have gone through
Price of a few individual components of a motherboard: goes up 50%
Price of the entire motherboard: triples
A town I grew up nearby has a small amusement park. 20 or so years ago, they built this thrill ride called the "Screamer", its name in bold, illuminated letters on the front of the machine, facing the freeway and serving as a sort of landmark. Soon after it was opened to the public, complaints started rolling in- not from riders, but from residents of the homes across the freeway. The screaming was making its way through open windows at night, and eventually the park had to initiate a "no screaming" rule on the Screamer.
No, I'm pretty sure that every man who has had sex at least once in their life turned out to be a top bloke
I disagree that the comment is harmful or transphobic. It isn't punching down or attacking trans people, it's making fun of the insane belief that school teachers are performing medical procedures on children without their parents' knowledge or consent.
I want to make a few things clear before I go any further: body / gender dysmorphia is not something that magically begins at the age of 18, and the idea that treatment for it should be held off until that age is as ridiculous as implying depression or anxiety not be treated until then. There's also a myriad of reasons as to why someone under 18 would want to seek this treatment without their parents' knowledge.
That being said, the extent to which treatment and discretion should be provided is obviously a hot topic in today's political climate, and whether you're in the group that supports or condemns it, nowhere are there schools with teachers performing secret transition surgeries on children without their parents' knowledge. The poster is not making fun of an actual thing that is happening or even has a high likelihood of happening; they're making fun of the lunacy and (often intentional) failure to understand the actual argument, and highlighting the strawman behind their defense.
I was going to liken the comment to someone making fun of an anti-Semitic news article by saying something like, "my Jewish friends always say they're too busy running the world to hang out with me", which could be taken at face value as an anti-Semitic joke; but the comment in your OP doesn't even say anything negative about trans people (or those that provide treatment for them, for that matter). The only ones really being mocked are the people that believe the second statement is true.
You fly your colors, I'll fly mine.
That does make it a bit better then. I still think a traditional, non-rock sculpture could've been more appealing and the price tag does seem kind of steep. But then, I've never had to manufacture 3 massive boulders of plastic and figure out the logistics of placing them.
Yeah, I came to the conclusion elsewhere in the thread the "low mileage" is a subjective term. 90k for a "50 year old car", low mileage. 90k for a "car from the 70s", high mileage.
Agree to disagree I suppose. When I think of "boomer Facebook group" I don't think of them casually criticizing the police state or militaristic profiteering, and when I think of "slop" I think of things that are lazily generated by AI.
I don't see how you can say it isn't at least trying to be a centrist meme when "liberals think x, conservatives think y, they're both wrong and I'm a genius because I think z" is the oldest centrist meme template in the book
What about this is boomer slop? It's a little "enlightened centrist" (if you conflate liberals with the left, which let's not get started), sure, but most boomers are depicted on the right panel, and at least 2 of the 3 background images are old memes so not slop
My "real" car is an 07 Honda Fit with 215k and no signs of stopping. If the motor or transmission blows up I'll get a new one for like $300.
Edited my comment. I didn't mean to say, "the average car from '79 would have x miles on it" (if a car that old managed to survive this long while being daily driven it would have well over 500k), so much as I was highlighting how impressive it was the car was still at such low mileage despite (presumably) still running and being driven occasionally.
I suppose "low mileage" is subjective. It's got less than 1/5 the miles it "should" based on age, but it also probably has less than 1/5 of it's remaining mileage left before something goes bang (unless work has already been done on it).
It seems silly to me. The rocks don't look like they're made of plastic so unless someone already knows about them or finds a plaque to read about them they're just going to assume that they're big rocks. Which are pretty enough, don't get me wrong, but rocks made of rock are also pretty, won't potentially seep micro plastics into the ground, and don't cost 100k a piece. If the point was to show off what can be made with recycled plastic, making something that looks naturally occurring and visually hiding the fact that it's plastic is an odd way to do it.
Idk, I think more cities should invest in public art projects but this one seems pretty off. I get the concept. But if the idea is, "look what can be made with recycled plastic", why not make a sculpture that's actually interesting or pleasant to look at? It might've even been better if the rocks were just whatever color(s) they ended up being after they were made, but the based on images in the article it looks like they were made to literally just look like big rocks.
I feel like this project just does not achieve the goals it sets to meet. It's not particularly thought provoking (unless there's some sort of plaque that explains what it is, but who's reading that?), and the visual appeal can be replicated at a fraction of the cost with something that does not need to be maintained and has zero chance of causing environmental harm.
Whenever someone (usually Peter) falls, dies, or just generally eats shit, they tend to make this pose.
When I opened the post and saw the year/mileage I was surprised. 90k for a '79 would definitely be considered low mileage. I know corvettes are a stereotypical "garage kept, barely driven" car, so I'm sure most are under the average usage, but even if the car was driven 1/3 as much as the average car it would have over twice the miles (assuming it still ran.
I'm not sure 90k miles for an almost 50 year old car would be considered "very" high mileage. The average 10 year old car has more mileage than that.
I just finished cutting some 1/8" aluminum panels with an angle grinder and can attest to how hot metal gets when cutting. I kept forgetting where would be hot and got a nice burn across my arm to show for it.
How does this not meet the definition of 3d printing? The machines that do this are legitimately just giant core-XY machines with concrete hoppers instead of a hot end
Did they get it for using the cow-word?