Erik of Hazelfield

On 4/18/2024 at 10:53 PM, Toth said:

Shit. The conversation from Tuesday has caused my anxiety to flare up again in full force. I'm constantly ruminating that I don't deserve love because I could be incapable of feeling it myself and expressing it in the right way. There is just no hope... I have no concept of love, no reference point on how to feel it and how to express it. Trying to act confident and considerate may just end up hurting someone if I turn out to be incapable of backing it up...

Dude, this happens to all of us, albeit with a slightly different twist. There’s always a risk when you’re dating that one will like the other more. There’s always the possibility that you’ll have to break someone’s heart, or have yours broken, because you’re not both equally into each other. And it sucks, but it’s the only way. You can’t fall in love unless you let go of some control and let yourself be vulnerable. It’s part of the game.

You’re not incapable of love. No one is, except possibly psychopaths, and you’re clearly not one. Don’t fret over this. Of all the things you need to worry about, this is the very last. 

1 hour ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

You can also just lie. Having a sign in your yard saying you have a security system works almost as well as actually having one. 

It works because it’s credible. You may very well have a security system at your house. If you want to make the claim of having nuclear weapons though, you better back it up with some concrete evidence or other countries won’t buy it. Deterrence is a credibility game.

55 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

There are a fair number of countries, including Canada, that if they were willing to spend the necessary money, could make a nuclear weapon in less than a year.  They haven't done so because they do not want nuclear weapons, but if the calculus changes where those weapons are needed for defense, then the list of nuclear powers could get quite a bit longer very rapidly. 

I disagree that Canada could develop nuclear weapons in less than a year. See my previous post. This article agrees with me:

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/how-quickly-could-canada-build-an-atomic-bomb
 

I’d say a minimum of 10 years. That’s roughly the timespan for building a civil nuclear power plant, so it’s hard to imagine a nuclear weapons program taking less time. 

Sweden decided against continuing its nuclear weapons program in 1968 after having spent two decades to try to build them. The reasons were not only political but also economical. The program realised they had to build a uranium plant, heavy water plant, a uranium enrichment facility, and one or two reactors just to produce the plutonium needed. This was so costly and time consuming that they decided to scrap the program and pursue other means of defence. 

I take Sweden as an example because I happen to know about it, but I’m sure other countries have similar stories. Now, the G20 countries are far more populous than Sweden and have more resources, but that doesn’t mean they can automatically pull off what Sweden failed to do in the 60s. It also doesn’t mean it’s any better of an idea than it was for Sweden back then. It’s a shitload of money to build something you hope never to use and which may be of limited military use anyway. Nuclear weapons are only a true deterrent if you have lots of them and the means to deliver them to you target, i.e. ICBMs or advanced bombers, and lots of those as well so they don’t just get shot down in flight. You can’t just build one bomb and call it deterrence. And then there’s maintenance and training and security around those bombs… did I say shitload of money?

For these reasons, I don’t think any country has nuclear weapons apart from the already known ones. 

Congratulations on the achievement! I had one too many illnesses to battle to follow my diet to the end (having a two-year-old kid in preschool does that to you) but I stopped the rapid weight gain so that’s something.

So what would be needed for Ukraine to win the war? And can the democracies of the world provide it to them? 

In other good news, the Czech Republic say they have now secured the funding for the 800 000 artillery shells that they managed to source outside Europe. 18 countries contributed and now the much-needed ammo can reach Ukraine within weeks. 

And what a relief it is that this shit show of our NATO admittance is finally over after two years.

Two weeks and two kilos down, three to go of each! Still hungry all the time. Some people get angry when they’re hungry - I get slow. Lose focus. Speak slowly. It’s probably quite painful to watch.

How’s it going, @Fragile Bird? Still keeping off the good brown stuff? 

I’m so envious of you guys. Watching a total solar eclipse is one of my lifelong dreams. I saw a partial one in Sweden 10 years ago and watched it through double 1.44” floppy disks (it works! You pull the cover aside to reveal the disk itself and watch the sun through it). I remember running around showing it to random people at the beach. They must’ve thought I was crazy. 

It won’t happen where I live for another 100 years, but the cool thing is it happens almost every year somewhere in the world. One day I’ll book a trip to a country where it happens and see one. 

On 2/26/2024 at 10:24 AM, Toth said:

I wonder whether the important bit is that you did it 10 years ago. I already noticed a difference between three years ago and last year on the same sites. More functions put behind paywalls and three years ago I at least had three conversations, last year none at all. A sentiment I've been seeing online is that the apps have become, much, much worse. At least on the Match-group sites that dominate the market. Or of course then there's the attractiveness thing...

This might be it. It’s not quite 10 years ago, just 6, but I agree that apps tend to get shittier all the time. Wouldn’t surprise me at all if it was the same with dating apps. It could also be a cultural difference - this was in Sweden - not that we’re that much different from the U.K or U.S., but when it comes to specific things like dating and Internet use, the differences can be quite striking.

On the attractiveness… I guess that might be a contributing factor. I have no illusions being God’s gift to women, but my fiancée certainly thinks I’m hot. I think this may be a difference between men and women, where a woman would get far more matches because there are so many men just swiping right on more or less everyone. 

11 hours ago, Knight Of Winter said:

It both fascinates and appalls me how profoundly unsuccessful dating apps are at their most basic purpose: connecting sane and normal people who would be interested in meeting each other.

A few of my female friends were on dating apps, and their experience was eerily like yours (and many many other women): lots of matches, however, these are - lots of guys looking for hookups, lots of low-effort guys, lost of guys prone to flakiness and indecisiveness etc. As I said - lots of matches, but rarely a single serious one.

Meanwhile, myself and my male friends who were on dating apps at some point had the opposite problem: namely being radio-silenced. Likes were rare, and matches even more so, of out few matches half don't respond to first message, and out of those who continued chatting few would end up in dates. I'd say one date every several months was the norm.

It's obvious that apps are full of women and men who are serious about looking for a relationship - yet these somehow rarely end up interacting with each other. You'd think that it would be easy enough: "Hey, we're all on this app, so we're looking for a partner. We've matched so there's some basic level of attraction. Let's talk and/or meet and if we click: great, we're dating. And if we don't: great, we'll move on and meet other people". But nope - what happens is that normal women end up meeting creeps and hookup-wannabes while normal men don't end up meeting anyone at all. Ughhh, rant over.

Obviously, this is not everyone's experience. Success stories do exists (seriously, congrats @Erik of Hazelfield ), but judging from everything I've seen, heard, read or experienced - they're far less common than expected.
  

People go to work for work, and to college to study - yet workplace and college are statistically two most common places to find your marriage partner. Same applies to all the other hobbies, activities and clubs. It's not (or rather: it shouldn't be) about desperately searching for a partner doing things you're not really interested in, but expending your social network and sphere of interests (as you note in your last sentence), however these expansions naturally lead to more dating opportunities - especially since you're surrounded by like-minded people who are interested in same hobby or club. All other factors being equal, I'd certainly say someone with regular 2 hobbies and 1 club has much higher chance of meeting compatible romantic partner than a homebody whose lives revolve around workplace and solitary home activities.  

It’s interesting how profoundly different our experience with dating apps have been. I wonder why that is. It wasn’t just my wife-to-be that was a rare exception - I really did meet many girls having the same goal as I did, to find a partner. Of course I didn’t connect well with all of them once we met, but I never felt like we were after completely different things or that it was a waste of time.

Regarding the finding-a-hobby strategy, I think it depends on where you start. I had friends and hobbies already - what I wanted was a girlfriend. To me it made little sense not to go the most direct route, so to speak, but to others it’s probably a very good idea. 

 

Regarding online dating, I met a whole lot of nice women on Tinder, the last of which became my current fiancée, so for me it worked. But I think it may differ between countries, among other things. This was also five years ago and things may have changed. 

In any case, for me online dating was a huge advantage, because it provided me with a non-awkward way to find a date. I’ve always been a better writer than talker, so that part fit me pretty well, and the fact that I knew she had looked at my profile and liked what she’d seen gave me some confidence. But most importantly, it had me dating regularly, as opposed to just hoping that someone nice and single happened to come my way and ask for my number, which obviously didn’t happen ever. 

I’m personally a bit sceptical to the idea of joining a class, meet-up or organisation of some sort and hope to find friendship there that can eventually lead to love. In what other context would you recommend someone not to go for what they want, but instead do something completely different and hope that, by some stroke of luck, you find what you’re searching for? (For practicing your social skills and making friends, that’s a whole other story. Just don’t expect to find a girlfriend there.)

The particular oatmeal I eat is made of fibre enriched oats, chia seeds, quinoa, almonds, cinnamon and dried cranberries. When I cook it I add some frozen blueberries and eat it with a milk-resembling pea drink. Pretty good actually. 

I basically get all the recipes for everything I eat, which is the main advantage of this diet. Do exactly as it says and you will lose weight. No counting calories or anything like that. 

The hunger though. I have no trouble refraining from the sweets and drinks because I just don’t have them at home, but it’s hard to resist eating more when I’m still hungry. 

Totally agree on the “not being able to keep chocolate around” thing. Just after my last diet ended it was Halloween, and the weather was so rainy almost no kids showed up, so I ended up eating all of the candy myself. And now I’m suffering from the consequences of my gluttony. If I had to choose a deadly sin, that’d be it for sure. 

My girlfriend and I have now started our challenge (a bit late, I know). Porridge for breakfast, diet powder shake as a snack, cold smoked salmon and melon salad for lunch. All good, but I know I will get very hungry soon. 

I used to be a hat wearer in my youth, but ironically now that I’ve just turned 40 I feel like hats makes me look too old.  Especially with the beard that I’m currently sporting. 

You can always boot a Linux live USB and copy your files from the disk before you format it. But you need to have one prepared of course.

Don’t know where you live but this kind of service is often available in local computer shops.

So I went on a diet last autumn and lost almost 12 kg in 9 weeks, but since beginning of December I’ve regained nearly half of that, so now I’m doing it again. I’m not religious either, but I guess Lent is as good a time as any. 

In this diet and training program, the only allowed food is taken from a recipe bank, or you can cook your own as long as you follow the guidelines. There is no sweets allowed, no alcohol, no chocolate or ice cream or anything like that. And no exceptions or cheat days. I’m cool with that. It’s no big deal, you just get used to it. The hunger is the worst part. 

I therefore sign up and welcome this thread as a place to vent. Good luck with your Lent, Bird! May your willpower win over the chocolate!

46 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

 

According do the IMF and UN estimates, Germany's GDP is more than twice Russia's.

Sorry about that. Looks like I found GDP (PPP) values, not nominal GDP.

In reality the difference is almost certainly much bigger anyway since Russia tends to inflate its numbers. 

Europe will do what it thinks it needs to do to stay safe. Old truths can go quickly down the drain once reality changes around us. The war on European soil has shaken Europe in a way that many U.S. observers may not fully comprehend. Finland and soon Sweden are now members of NATO. European countries have responded almost as one and provided massive aid to Ukraine - maybe not enough, but far more than Putin expected of the weak, degenerated West that let him take Crimea in 2014. Germany increasing its military spending to match its economical muscles isn’t hard to imagine, and if they do then they alone will be able to match Russia’s military power (they have similar GDPs). 

On 2/2/2024 at 12:20 AM, Zorral said:

Sweden: Where it's taboo for dads to skip parental leave

https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20240130-sweden-where-its-taboo-for-dads-to-skip-parental-leaveI

Have seen folks declaring they hate socialism with all their being.  Why?
 

I recently came back to full-time work after having been on parental leave for 6 months full time plus five months half time. It was awesome. My son and I got so much closer and I learned a lot about how to take care of him. (My girlfriend had about 11 months full-time parental leave before that.)

The long parental leave in Sweden is so popular and ingrained in our society that not even right-wing governments like the one we currently have will so much as discuss reducing it. The only thing the left and right are disagreeing on is how much of it should be earmarked for each parent. Maybe something to pick up as an election winning issue for leftist parties in other countries. 

I give blood in Sweden. There’s a bus coming by very close to my office a few times a year and I get a notification in my phone and by email. I often book a slot but it’s not really needed because there are so many free ones.

Every time I need to fill out a digital form and the requirements are quite tough. No new sexual partner for the last six months, no travel to many countries where blood diseases are common, no drug injections, no male-to-male sex (that one’s controversial) and so on. Also you can’t be sick. If you show symptoms of a cold the next day (or for any other reason) then you call them and they discard the newly given blood, no questions asked. 

A very cool feature is that I will often get a text message after a week or so saying my blood has now been used to help a patient. This is far more reward than the cookie and little present (teddy bear, umbrella, coffee mug, that sort of thing) that I also get. 

I’m pretty thankful that despite all the ways our public service has gone to shit over the past few decades, this one is still awesome.

Those are ambitious goals for the Starship! If they succeed with just half of those then that’d be a resounding success.

If all this came to pass - what would still be needed to be done before a manned trip to Mars could happen?

3 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Please point out to me where Ukrainian troops are currently moving by car, anywhere. This ain't April 2022 where Ukrainians are driving around in 4-wheelers taking on APCs. 

Please point out where Ukraine is suffering from not having enough artillery to use. The problem is not the guns, it's the fire itself (and to a lesser extent the maintenance of those guns which are being used well beyond what was expected of them). They can probably use more, but it's not nearly as desperate a situation as it was in 2022. Plus the problem still remains being able to actually supply them with the ammunition needed to fire in the rates they have. 

Now, fighters - maybe? But F16s aren't going to beat S300s and S400s, and you still need qualified pilots and training. Ukraine only has so much of that. Can the West give enough F16s to give Ukraine air superiority? Very unlikely. 

On that I agree. Ukraine could use significant air defense capabilities both for their cities and for their troops. Having Patriot systems being able to be used to take out planes would be a major benefit as an example. That won't help the breakthrough, but may help with attrition. 

More military aid absolutely matters, but that wasn't what I was arguing about. My point is that the things that people are clamoring to give to Ukraine are not nearly as crucial now as they were then, and begging for tanks and APCs when Ukraine isn't even using the ones they have - because they're not effective in the things they're doing - is pointless. 

The words were from Zelenskyy giving a speech by phone link on a Swedish defence conference yesterday. He thanked for the aid and specifically mentioned the Archer artillery system as saving Ukrainian lives, and back in August he said the same about the CV90. I don’t know about your statement they’re not even using the ones they have, but both Sweden and Denmark are giving more and they are also setting up a factory in Ukraine for the CV90 so I doubt they have more than they can use. 

For the tanks you’re probably right. The dense, artillery guarded mine fields render them ineffective.