Youtube comments of wishsnfishs (@Umbrellagasm).
-
1200
-
159
-
112
-
99
-
68
-
67
-
62
-
59
-
51
-
49
-
47
-
35
-
33
-
32
-
31
-
24
-
22
-
19
-
18
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@rumplstiltztinkerstein my friend, I barely understand what your point is. If you're referring to professional bodybuilders, yes they take all kinds of androgens, but they also work furiously hard at the gym because that's their job. Do most people want a body like an Olympia competitor? No, because they're bodybuilders not models. And they are as a rule extremely strong in the rep ranges they train in - Tom Platz famously squatted 525 pounds for 23 reps in 1992. Looking at modern athletes is not a good indicator of what was useful to an ancient warrior. Warriors had to fight with heavy weapons, armor, and shields with no weight classes in close quarters that often turned into violent shoving matches. Clearly the guys had to fight long and hard, perhaps after a forced march, so they didn't look like sumo wrestlers, but a 155lb jujitsu monkey wouldn't cut it either. Having a large volume of muscle mass would be highly desirable. In my reading of Greek writings, they frequently praise powerful male bodies, and I have never once seen them critique a warrior for being "too muscular". Also, Protein is a macronutrient not a drug.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JonDoe-uq1mk I'm not implying that chatGPT has some kind of inner life comparable to our own, I was responding to the comment implying that LLMs don't have human senses. However, as to your point, I see no reason why these models could not, in the near future, emulate the responses of human being so well as to be indistinguishable from an artificial consciousnesses, with all the emotions and other intangibles that we identify as uniquely human. Again, that does not in any way mean that it's having that experience.
I'm also not quite sure what your point is with the asprin vs maths example. Do you mean to imply that as evidence that it doesn't understand what it's saying? Well, yes, I agree that it fundamentally doesn't "understand" anything, but I don't see that example as evidence of that. It just means that it is an intelligence that is better at some tasks than others, much like a human.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mikerhonevich481 As a firearm owner I am well aware of the cost of ammunition; and besides if the substantive costs of capital punishment were accrued by the methods themselves, we might as well make like the Khemer Rouge and use rocks and sticks.
A report by the Indiana Legislative Services Agency, prepared for the General Assembly, examined murder cases from 2000-2007 and found the average lifetime cost (legal+incarceration) of a death penalty case to be $505,773, whereas life without parole cases cost $151,547.
A 2008 study by the Urban Institute on the costs of the death penalty in Maryland between 1978 and 1999 found "...an average capital-eligible case in which prosecutors did not seek the death penalty will cost approximately $1.1 million over the lifetime of the case. A capital-eligible case in which prosecutors unsuccessfully sought the death penalty will cost $1.8 million and a capital-eligible case resulting in a death sentence will cost approximately $3 million."
A study by The Dallas Morning News found that death penalty cases cost Texas an average of $2.3 million, while high security life without parole cost $750,000 for 40 years. A newspaper may not the most scholarly source, but I include it because some people think any study from a university or government agency is part of some anarcho-communist conspiracy.
A casual search will find the overwhelming majority of studies coming to the same conclusion.
So I reiterate that the death penalty is a huge waste of taxpayer resources, and certainly not an agenda that I want my taxdollars frivolously spent upon.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@zakiahmed6655 I still don't get what you're talking about - I'm not referring to my personal experience in psychotherapy, I'm talking about the vast body of literature supporting its efficacy. And unless it was a very poorly designed study, researchers don't just ask clients "do you think therapy helped yes/no". They use a wide range of statistical and research tools to insure internal and external validity, such as double blinding to control for belief effects, factorial design to understand separate and combined effects of multiple independent variables, Solomon four group designs to control for testing effects, the use of independently verified (i.e. supported by their own body of research) assessments/inventories such as the the Beck Depression Inventory, the Diagnostic Interview for ADHD in Adults, and the NEO Personality Inventory for five factor personality analysis.
There have been over 300 peer reviewed studies supporting the efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), over 100 for acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), and over 200 for motivational interviewing, not to mention the dozens of other therapeutic modalities.
So no, my belief in the efficacy of psychotherapy is not based on personal anecdote.
1
-
1
-
1