I listen to podcasts all the time, ones by American, British, and Australia speakers, and I think my aural comprehension has actually improved from that. I have a friend just like you though. Has to turn on subtitles for everything.

That's a terrible ping 😂

Unfortunately I go there still anonymously for when I need help or advice on certain life things, but I browse in a social media sense on Lemmy.

I've said this before: if there was a way to create more discoverability of Lemmy through a search engine, I'd choose it over reddit. Lemmy has different domain names based on server/instance, and that makes wild card searching impossible.

I know there are other search engines out there specifically for Lemmy, but that doesn't work for me.

Don't forget about loneliness. If people don't engage with one another in the first place, then abortion isn't even needed, let alone any parental care or accomodations.

Thanks American individualism for that.

What's the issue with a debit card again? Are you saying that we should be using credit cards, or physical currency?

No free lunch

That guy was an asshole for doing that to you. I wonder if that might be considered trespassing. Dunno if you can have any civil remedy served to you, or if it's even worth it, but still sucks.

That tool is so good lmao, also if you're quick you can refresh websites + do a screenshot to get the text before it's blocked out. Ctrl + P works on some sites too if you're quick

It's this comment here that makes me think of how naive some people are when they say that solutions to problems mostly described by "tHe ToP 100 cOrPorAtiOnS PolLuTe thE mOst" talking point have to be addressed by government action and government action alone. Republicans at the top are so deadset on anything anti-change to where national politics are super volatile and hardly something to bet the direction of the country on.

Local level politics allow for more stable growth in change, such as how we've seen with marijuana laws.

I mean, as a progressive I still want to vote for the most progressive candidates that can represent me, which often leads to blue over red, but that doesn't mean we the citizens can't contribute local government as much as more regional or national governments.

Top-down & bottom-up ftw

It all depends on the cost of living relative to the wages accrued. Often wages haven't kept up with the cost of living, so people feel more and more that the deal with their employers gets worse and worse. Someone earning 200k/year might be living the same as someone working 60k/year depending on where those people live

Now, there is something to be said about why cost of living should vary from place to place. Part of it is scarcity of habitation: if there aren't very many available flats or lots, there might be fierce competition for people to fill what flats or lots do become available. Supply and demand.

Other aspects might be debt accrued by businesses that they pass on to their customers, externalities like wars or laws, etc.

I also want to point out that a lot of people associate more wealth with more consumption, so you might see people rise to spend all of the new resources they accumulate rather than securitizing and saving that wealth for unforeseen events. Lots of people consume at terribly non-sustainable rates, and there should be conversations about what effects behaviors can have on the world, outside of the economy.

No, this is Patrick

I think about the difference between the two using differences instead of absolutes. That looks like this:

It's kind of hard to do this calc:

F = [ (9/5) * C ] + 32

Or this one:

C = (5/9) * (F - 32)

I refer to those as absolute equations. You have to take into account the pesky offset everytime you want to convert. What if we drop it? This makes:

F = (9/5) * C = 1.8 * C

C = (5/9) * F ~= 0.6 * F

I refer to those as relative or difference equations because if you subtract a temperature from the other, you get the same thing:

F1 = [ (9/5) * C1 ] + 32

F2 = [ (9/5) * C2 ] + 32

F2 - F1 = [ (9/5) * C2 ] + 32 - { [ (9/5) * C1 ] + 32 }

= [ (9/5) * C2 ] - [ (9/5) * C1 ] + 32 - 32

= [ (9/5) * C2 ] - [ (9/5) * C1 ]

= (9/5) [ C2 - C1 ]

F2 - F1 = (9/5) (C2 - C1)

∆F = (9/5) ∆C

So, why is this useful?

Say you have a temperature in Celsius and want to go to Fahrenheit. Simply multiply that number in your head by 1.8 (or think of this as multiplying by 180° as in trig) and finally add to 32. So, 1 °C is (1 * 1.8) + 32 °F or about 34 °F.

Going the other way is a little bit weirder. I make approximations when going the other way by thinking of 180° and how that can be divided. So, 180°, 90°, 45°, etc. corresponds to 1.8 °F (1 °C), 0.9 (0.5 °C), 0.45 °F (0.25 °C), etc. I also approximate by choosing the nearest multiple of 5 or 10 °C (9 or 18 °F). So, 44 °F is between 41 °F (5 °C) and 50 °F (10 °C), closer to 41. It's off by 3, which is about 3.6, which is 2 in Celsius world. This means 44 °F is about 7 °C.

Hope you get the gist! Celsius really is better. I remember this in a pinch:

10 °C = 50 °F

20 °C = 68 °F

30 °C = 86 °F

40 °C = 104 °F

50 °C = 122 °F

Etc.

The freezing temps are a little hard since you cross zero into negatives, but the extrapolation can help