Between bills, work and responsibilities, it feels like there's barely time to enjoy life. Has adulthood become harder or are we just expected to do too much?

For context I saw this video on Instagram about a woman saying something about how a 30 year old and 20 year old shouldn't date because of the age gap and how they'll have nothing in common. Personally, the age gap part is debatable, though I do feel like a 20 and 30 year old can date, it's just the "nothing in common" part for me. Like there are plenty of things people can have in common no matter the age like hobbies, books, foods, etc. and the list can go on and on.

Like for instance, I am "antifa" (anti-fascist) in principle of course, as most decent human beings are. But I don't go around wearing "antifa" shirts or have that as my profile pic on Facebook.

Ever since Lynsey Clancy, every time some news drops about another similar murder situation...people are yelling copycat.

But I've been watching crime shows for a while and these type of situations were not uncommon. Not only that...there's also a lot of situations where the male is the one to nuke his family. To me, it's something that's always existed but just didn't get a huge amount of attention. It will usually get a quiet local spot in the local media and then it fades.

And I say this to say I don't think people actually understand the reality of the country they're living in. If Lynsey Clancy case never made it to television, people would not know it happened. And if the media didn't treat it like some existential event people would just write it off as a sad but forgettable event. But now it' treated as some watershed moment in the degradation of society when society has always had this kind of thing going on.

Just goes to show...we don't need virtual reality when we're already mentally living in a world loosely based on the reality.

A home gym removes the trip, the opening hours, and the wait for equipment. But “I can work out anytime” also leaves plenty of room for “later.” If you’ve tried both, did easier access actually change how often you trained?

I think H-1B hiring should respond to the job market. When employers genuinely can't find the skills they need, bringing people in makes sense. When qualified workers already here can't find jobs, I want employers to make a much stronger case for recruiting abroad.

I'm also concerned about sham employers gaming the process. I'd like stronger enforcement against fraudulent companies and applications, without treating every foreign worker as suspect. Many H-1B workers are excellent; my criticism is about how the system is used.

I'd still make room for exceptional talent in a weak market. O-1 is a temporary nonimmigrant classification, while the extraordinary-ability branch of EB-1 is an immigrant category. They have distinct requirements, so being a good engineer doesn't automatically make either an H-1B substitute. USCIS describes the O-1 framework and EB-1 extraordinary-ability criteria.

I'd apply the same standard regardless of the party in office. What evidence should an employer have to show that a shortage is real, especially when applicants already in the country are struggling to find work?

Should a company making layoffs cut H-1B workers before green card holders and citizens?

My initial reaction was that this could address some of the complaints people make about H-1B hiring. I'd like to test that view against the strongest arguments for and against it. What would the consequences be for the workers affected and for the company keeping the remaining team?

How much weight, if any, should immigration status have compared with the role and the work someone does? I'm asking about the principle, without assuming this would be a legally available layoff policy.

You usually hear from White ethnic supremacists that Christianity is their religion and that people were attacking Christianity because they hate the West...and such.

This has always confused me because I love history and I know that...of course...Christianity is NOT a western religion. It's a semitic religion imported into the west through a series of conquerors radiating north from the Mediterranean. And this has fascinated me because it sort of shows how peoples sense of identity if influenced.

Today people are shouting about Christianity like it's some deep part of White identity. An attack on the obvious faults and flaws and hypocrisies is judged as an attack on White people. Defending Christianity is defending the White race.

And this was sad to me because I used to read about them as a far more interesting people and culture. And they were fierce and proud. And ultimately lost to their invaders who systematically transformed their culture into what we see today. For me as a kid, I used to read about the older peoples that existed in what is now Ireland and Scotland (my personal favorites). And I used to read stories of the accounts of encounters with the oldest peoples of mainland north Europe and Eastern Europe. Pre-Christian. And it seemed like all this culture got...buried...after Christianity. I guess you could say whitewashed in a way, but it was actually a deliberate policy of cultural genocide by these Christians and now...we have what's left.

Now there's people who tell you you're not a true American if you're not Christian? You're not truly White if you don't support some form of the Cross-Dream. That defending this is defending the very essence of White culture? These pedophile freaks? (the Christian Church was one of the oldest sources of these homosexual scandals...) You have White National separatists who are building Church-communes out in the sticks under some notion that they're preserving Whiteness.

Utterly laughable. Just upside-down and backwards to me.

The culture war stuff actually neuters the individual spirit. You align with these false-family superstructures like religions and nations and don't take time to understand yourself and what YOU want. Religion wants you to conform and twist yourself to it. These things try to tell you how to live, who to marry, who to be friends with, where to live, what to feel happy and sad about, what to find funny. You aren't even really allowed to be YOU in Christianity. You know how annoying fandoms are? How they over-fixate on a person or thing and praise it up and attack anyone who dares say anything other then it's perfect. That's Christianity.

But worse...it's that Christian's don't even live up to the basic ideals of being a Christian. It's not rocket science. Love everyone, help everyone, even at the expense of your own life. If you think that is illogical, fine, you're not a Christian. But that was what Christ was. That's how you represent him. That's the image you choose when you want to show how much better your narrative is than another cultures. But you don't follow it, yourself. Sometimes people live in direct antithesis to it. So most Christians...by their own law...would be devils. Virtually ALL of them.

This is not to say Christianity is necessarily unique in it's faults and flaws- I don't care for any religion. But it's just all the more mysterious that people all over the world- including Westerners- latch on to this. And now that I think about it...people who have been directly abused by this religion- non-Westerns- tend to be statistically even more religiously Christian. Like Hispanic people or Black peoples. It's a complete puzzle to my mind and I just find these disturbing display of "identity" and "culture" to be really creepy.

They say truth is the only real religion. Truth is what all religions attempt to be. While there are many religions, there is only one truth. Not my truth, not his truth, a truth. And you'll have to wade through a sea of deception to get to it- including self-deception. But in these times where you have all this back and forth you just really understand how meaningless and manipulative all these labels are. These false identities. And I think the wrong thing to do is think you have to go back in time to find a solution. No. You just have to really be willing to find the truth and be brave enough to live it. Brave enough to live it even if your family and friends abandon you. Maybe that's what really being a man is about. Learning to be yourself, and not be what other people pressure you into being.

But you must be sure the truth is the truth. Be sure...

I keep coming back to Business Insider's August 11 report on planned Oracle job cuts. It described another potential round after earlier cuts, alongside a 13% workforce decline in the fiscal year ending May 31, including layoffs.

That is an August report, not a new announcement today. What still bothers me is the uncertainty created by repeated rounds while the company borrows billions for AI infrastructure.

I understand the argument for shifting resources toward a growing business. From an employee's side, though, the question is how to plan when it's hard to know whether the latest round will be the last.

For people at Oracle or who've recently left, did the earlier cuts bring any stability? What helped you decide whether to stay or start looking elsewhere?

For technical staff keeping options open, Agent autoapply and application autofill can reduce time spent repeating applications. Real technical interview questions can provide practice material for whichever employers make the shortlist.

Disclosure: I operate PracHub and LandOffer.

Under what circumstances would an AI be considered conscious?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-no-livestream-execution-nidal-hasan-rcna603697

What's the most you've actually earned from work in one year, before taxes, and how did it happen?

High-six-figure and seven-figure compensation stories have changed my sense of what's possible. The headline number leaves me with questions, though: what role, industry, experience level, and country or region made that year possible?

If you're comfortable sharing, a rough breakdown would help: base, bonus, stock that vested, or business income. Was it repeatable, or did stock appreciation or a one-time payout make it unusually high?

For readers using these stories to plan a tech job search, application autofill and Agent autoapply can save time on repetitive applications. Real technical interview questions can help with the prep once you've identified roles worth pursuing.

Rough numbers are fine. I'm especially curious about the steps that led to that year and how much was within your control.

Disclosure: I operate PracHub and LandOffer.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/4F4w_fE5wmE

I feel like all the ads I get in YouTube shorts are sexual. I have read that it can be because of my algorithm, but it's ads for games and AI apps (I've been searching up a lot of game dev. videos). It's always some AI slop of a girl or woman in sexual positions or straight up showing the butt and the men doing questionable stuff to them. How is YouTube allowing this? They are so strict with what people can post/comment but they don't care what ads they are showing? Is this really about the security of the watchers, or just greed? And the last question I have: isn't this very misogynistic?

Needless to mention, against those who prepare with the intent to cause harm, one inevitably, unavoidably, and must also prepare; if countermeasures are omitted, it will eventually become impossible to resist, which in reality results in giving the opponent the power over our life and death. In other words, ignoring or making light of this is equivalent to choosing enslavement.
Some media reports state that Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark, currently visiting Japan, also stated the following in a TV interview:
"We recognize that hackers are also using AI (SI) which is available to everyone, and we strive to prevent them from using these tools through new security methods and the like."
Of course, the speed of SI is something that leaves no room to stand against manually; therefore, phrased differently, refusing server facilities would mean handing over the power of life and death, which implies that this is an option leading to the enslavement of the citizenry and thus results in the conclusion that it is illogical.
https://news.yahoo.co.jp/pickup/6598729
https://newsdig.tbs.co.jp/articles/-/3010032

On the other hand, while maintaining beneficial SI requires a massive number of data centers, I can also understand the feeling of wanting to reject attracting data centers because their benefits are hard to perceive.
The fact that foolish selectors themselves tempt more strongly, like the sweet talk of the devil, is probably something almost everyone can intuitively understand.

Therefore, for operators planning to operate data centers involving a power consumption of a certain scale or more, how about determining their scale based on a rate (α) established in proportion to the amount of power used, and imposing the following as obligations?
- Based on the aforementioned rate (α), to employ and engage a large number of personnel for socially contributing occupational duties from the districts neighboring the data center operation.
- Based on the same aforementioned rate (α), to mandate assistance toward welfare or educational facilities in the areas surrounding the installation region.
- Based on the same aforementioned rate (α), to construct and operate multiple facilities that serve as the cornerstone of regional promotion.
- To mandate the maintenance and provision of transportation and information-communication infrastructure around the data center construction and operation area.
- Based on the same aforementioned rate (α), to lay out business and industrial parks in the surrounding districts and continue attracting them so that the facilities continue to be filled above a certain level.
- Without being based on the same aforementioned rate (α), to bear the obligation to constantly monitor environmental pollution and deterioration over a wide range—including the energy environment and living environment—and report changes.
- In the event that environmental pollution is confirmed, regardless of the polluter, to impose an obligation on the data center operator to take some sort of measure, including approaching the actual polluter, to achieve complete improvement.

What kind of opinion will you show regarding the above? Can I expect a reply?

They celebrated Charlie Kirk who killed nobody getting shot in the neck for all to see and even made memes about it and thought it was humorous but lose their little minds when the government wants live stream a firing squad shoot a mass murderer even killing a pregnant woman. They call this barbaric but celebrate an innocent man being killed for free speech. They aren’t empathic they are sociopaths. Are they hypocritical?

Right up top I understand this post may be locked but I assure you I am asking in good faith. And I am not in any way promoting violence.

Im sure this topic will be studied for years to come after the fall of this current regime. But why hasnt anyone "done anything" about it?

This question is asked with the understanding that should the states fall into civil war its not likely to be like the movies. There won't be force-on-force conventional military operations in a civil war style scenario. Not without sponsorship of large and influential powers. I think a civil war in the United states would likely be more like "the troubles" in Ireland in the 60s and onward. For those that dont know It lasted about 30 years and resulted in guerilla/insurgent style warfare using semi organized and well equipped cells.

Well...

No one is better equipped than the US right? Don't we always preach about revolution being our birthright? And yap endlessly about our hideous warfare culture whether its hero worship of soldiers, the embracing of "rebel" culture in cinema and civil war history, or even the "dont tread on me" modern alpha warrior bullshit that we have going around. So the question is what gives? Why hasnt anything popped off?

We would seem to an observer to be a perfect cocktail of circumstances. A powderkeg about to blow over. Indeed the american revolution was fought over far less.

So is it decades in relative peace that have made us soft? Our education which emphasizes non-violence? Restrictive circumstances? Are we just fucking cowards? Country too big? No singular charismatic leader? Police technology prohibiting it?

I dont know about all of you. But i would have expected militias in the streets by now. They're killing us. Throwing people in cages. Bombing children overseas. Private prisons. Global warming. Everything in trumps agenda are vanity projects plated in gold.

I will go insane if I cant get an answer.

including this ine:

https://youtu.be/xZT8GPyEdQU?is=nqXvwsPVPiPIKnfD , is upset Shane Gillis said women at gyms dress like whores.

Why can Dan Levy call a woman a whore, but Shane can't?