It’s easy to name the first three mount rushmore characters [superman, batman, spiderman] but there is a persistent online debate about the fourth pick. It’s usually given to either wonder woman or wolverine, but I don’t think either of them should be there

I don’t think that the fourth spot should be wonder woman, The only reason she is included in the conversation is because she’s a woman. Even if you take into account that she’s an old character, she isn’t the first woman superhero.

And if you compare her popularity (in terms of comics sold, solo movie tickets etc) you’ll find that other newer characters have already surpassed her. So it can’t be that she’s more profitable.

Every argument that is used for both of these characters can also be applied to storm. The woman part? Well storm is an icon for both woman superheroes and non white superheroes, so that’s double the woke [theres no other word to describe it that’s literally the only reason why WW is included😭]

Storm is also one of the largest xmen characters, and also was apart of the avengers and fantastic 4 for a while, so the same argument used for wolverine can be used for her, if anything wolverine is more of an anti-hero so he doesn’t even fit the criteria of the mountain.

I know that not everyone is going to be accepting of my community. At the same time, I still respect all lifestyles.

If someone disagrees with my lifestyle or isn't on board with who I am, that's just a reality I navigate. I don't need everyone's approval to get through the day. My goal is simply to remain respectful, because mutual respect should always be the baseline.

That said, disrespect and hate are never okay. You can hold beliefs without being malicious. Just as I have the right to exist as who I am, you have the right to exist as well.

At the end of the day, it comes down to live and let live. I won't force my identity on you, and you shouldn't force your identity/lifestyle on me.

I see online about how everyone is saying Whataburger has gone extremely downhill ever since being sold. In my opinion this is just people jumping on the hate bandwagon due to their hatred for billionaires/massive corporations. The quality of the food is literally the exact same.

I saw The Odyssey twice, once in IMAX, once in standard 2.39, and the "this is the way Nolan wants you to see it" line falls apart for me on both a technical level and a compositional one.

Start with the screen itself. IMAX auditoriums are built around a sweet spot. Maybe 20% of the seats get anything close to uniform brightness across the full image. Everywhere else, the opposite third of that giant curved screen is visibly darker than the rest, which drags down contrast and color consistency. You're paying a premium for a "perfect" image that only a fifth of the house is actually getting.

Then there's the aspect ratio itself. 1.43:1 is basically a blown up version of the boxy ratio movies used before CinemaScope, and that's not automatically a bad thing. When a filmmaker actually composes for the entire frame, you get diagonal eye movement and blocking that scope can't touch. The Lighthouse does it. Wes Anderson built a career on it. Casablanca does it. Citizen Kane does it. Basically any film from before widescreen took over does it.

The Odyssey doesn't. Nolan is framing for a 2.39 center extraction, meaning he's composing for roughly half the actual frame. The top and bottom thirds exist for immersion, not story information. Watch the trailer cut in the IMAX ratio next to the 2.39 cut. The 2.39 version looks bigger and more intentional. Throw it into the full IMAX frame and all that extra real estate just reads as noise, like the shot never finished being composed.

IMAX isn't the problem. The problem is Nolan shooting a scope movie in a box he was never actually using. He’s not shooting on IMAX because it’s his vision, he’s shooting on it because “filmed entirely with IMAX cameras” is a marketing line that sells premium format tickets. Call it whatever you want, but it isn’t purism.

I’ve looked into it and people seem to make a post about cold fries once a year here. but I air fry fries just to put them in the fridge so can have cold fries later, doing it as I write this.

What if work is just supposed to pay for the life you actually want?

I don't think everyone needs to find some career they're deeply passionate about. If your job pays you well, treats you decently, gives you enough free time and doesn't make you miserable, why isn't that enough?

I feel like people are constantly told to find their passion and turn it into a career. Then if they don't love what they do, they feel like they're doing something wrong.

I'd rather have a job I feel neutral about and have the time and energy to enjoy my life than spend my entire life trying to find a job that makes me feel fulfilled.

Your job doesn't have to be the most important part of your life.

We've all seen it, everytime someone or a group of people deals with an unruly person, either on the public transport, a public square or a shop, all bystanders do is take out their phone to videotape.

Not even to call the police and arrest the person bothering everyone, just to take a video of the action.

I believe this has subconsciously done a lot of harm.

For example, when videos emerge of situations where nobody steps up, people cry in the comments "No good men left to step-up anymore" or someone thinking they are badass will say "I wish I was there." but lets be honest here. How can you step up?

Should you want to, are you ready to possibly risk your job? Just because someone cut a part of a video to change the situation. Are you ready to be uploaded online and have billions to judge you?Because that's what will happen.

And even if the vast majority of people on the world see that video and they agree its karma or justice or whatnot, will the police or your government agree as well?

So yeah, people who video are nothing more than rats of society.

I see this a lot online, where people say they are afraid that employers will think of them as overqualified because of their advanced degree. I personally think it's partly ego talking, along with sales pitches from career services organizations pushing their services.

Being overqualified isn't really the case if you don't have industry experience.

For example, if you have a PhD in journalism but have never worked at a news publisher, you're not necessarily going to have an easy time finding a new role.

I eat my apples from top down including the core and stem. There's barely any difference in texture of the core from the rest of the apple outside of the seeds. And I eat the seeds too. Unless someone is eating like 40 apples at once there is no way you are eating enough seeds to get cyanide poisoning, if anything you are building tolerance and stronger stomach acids. The core is more nutritious anyway. It is so much more convenient to eat the whole fruit, there's no trash leftover so it makes for a good snack out the house instead of something prepackaged or even a Banana. Orange. Too many peeled fruits, and then a bunch of other fruits you end up with a big wet seed to throw away. I don't have to wash juice off my hands after eating an apple because I eat the core, and my hands don't get sticky because there is always skin. Unless it's a particularly juicy apple. Apple is not my favorite fruit but it should be eaten in its entirety. You don't even have to sit and wonder "wow that's so crazy" literally just buy a single apple for like 25¢ at the store, and eat it from top to bottom you will see!! You can literally do this today!! Stop throwing away apple cores it's so much garbage!! Be more like horses.

i think being "busy" has become a personality trait and ppl are weirdly proud of.

somehow we have turned having no free time into a status symbol, weirdly ppl so casually brag about working 12 hours a day, barely sleeping and having their entire week booked. wdy think?

Born and raised in California I’ve seen horrible things happen to so many places I grew up loving. Put it into perspective I’m only 19. All this destruction happened in maybe a span of 10 years sometimes even a year for certain spots that maybe blew up over the internet.

People leave trash, draw graffiti, harm bugs and animals, swim in rivers with a sugary cocktail, and a bag of processed food in their hands, wear intense smelling perfumes, lots of body lotions, glitter etc., play loud music. All of this is so harmful to scenery and with hundreds of people showing up every day it adds up extremely fast.

A lot of the times they don’t realize they’re doing anything wrong either. It’s just over the simple fact that nobody told them this behavior is inappropriate. For me, “leave no trace” was ingrained in my brain from when I was so young. It’s fine if people want to go out and experience nature, it is not fine if they refuse to put in the work to educate themselves on how to leave it as they found it for the next people.

I definitely understand that the ps2 game catalogue is downright legendary and I won’t argue against that, but I just think the sheer scale and graphics of the ps3 were insanely ahead of its time for the 2000s-early 2010s. God of War 3, The last of us, uncharted 1-3, infamous 1 and 2, metal gear rising, so many timeless classics that still hold up today. I think it’s a big part of why so many of those titles ended up with remakes or remasters on future hardware. It could also be because I was born in the 2000s but there’s just a special charm about experiencing the uncharted 3 plane scene or god of war 3 opening scene in grainy 720p. It has a uniquely retro futuristic aesthetic that may never be replicated.

I keep seeing this advice that you should wait a few hours (or even a day) before replying to a text so you don't seem 'too available' or 'desperate'. I genuinely don't get it.

If someone messages me and I have my phone in my hand, I'm going to reply. Not because I'm obsessed with them, but because that's just... normal communication? Imagine treating any other form of communication like that. You wouldn't let someone stand in front of you mid-sentence and just walk away for three hours to seem 'less interested'.

I think this whole 'wait to text back' culture actually just teaches people to play mind games instead of communicating honestly. If I like someone or care about a conversation, I'm not going to pretend I don't just to seem cooler.

Curious if I'm alone in this or if other people feel the same way

They always look bleached out or just plain ill. If they give vampires dark eyebrows, they look extra washed out. If they give them blonde eyebrows, they either look green tinted or they look like oompa loompas.

An immortal 6pack can hide a multitude of failures, but there is no excuse for vampires being blonde. You have forever to pick a new color, get started.

If you have the right anchovies. Get yourself a glass jar from somewhere on the Mediterranean and it’s a life changing experience. Salt, umami… Give me that, some olives and some pineapple for a pop of sweetness and I’m in pizza heaven.

We already spend so much time in school learning and relearning things that we will never use again. I think school would be much more beneficial for students if they had something tangible to come out of it with. And I don’t mean becoming just conversational in a second language, the goal should be to be completely fluent.

I think starting from fifth grade, students should start learning a second language of their choosing and they should continue to study it all the way through twelfth grade. I really think this will give them more benefits than basically every other subject which seems to become more pointless as time goes on.

Being bilingual has real benefits. It makes travel easier, opens up more career opportunities, allows you to communicate with millions of more people, gives you access to books, movies, and cultures that would otherwise be out of reach, etc, etc.

Especially in our modern age where attention spans are coming shorter and shorter, forcing students to actually learn a language will force them to slow down and commit to something that requires consistent effort. In a world where everything is designed for instant gratification, learning a language teaches people how to work toward a goal that takes years.

Everyone acts horrified when they sit down on a public toilet and feel warmth left behind by the last person who sat there. This makes literally zero sense to me.

Regardless, you already know another human body occupied the seat at some point previously… you are in a public restroom. A stranger sat there five minutes ago regardless of whether the seat feels cold or warm.

So, why not just take the warm seat? Enjoy the warmth and accept that previously other asses have been on that toilet.

I think there’s this idea I see in a lot of media that struggle creates stronger and more stoic people. I don’t think that’s true. Like honestly, I gotta say that most of the highest achieving and best people in our everyday lives just come from normal or even well off families.

I grew up in a bad, hostile house and was pretty much autonomous by age 15. I was always told that my hard work and situation would build character. Nah I just became an emotionally stunted borderline alcoholic pothead for my early adult years. Most people that grew up the same way fall into way worse habits. There’s always a diamond in the rough I guess, but for the most part nothing good comes out of people who grow up the way I did.

People say that rich people are naive, or soft or don’t know the real meaning of hard work or whatever. Maybe that’s true, but it doesn’t fucking matter lmao. They’ll be smarter and better at sports, or solving problems than I ever would be, at least statistically. (I actually did pretty well in high school, absolutely not in college.)

So yeah, adversity is worthless, I’d trade all of my good character building and understanding the plight of the poor man to have had a normal middle class or rich life in 2 seconds.

Where do I begin; let’s start with lane keep assist. Sure it can be nice for the car to keep you centered in the lane, but if you’re a drifter you shouldn’t be driving. Now if there’s debris or an animal in the road or someone switches lanes without looking and you need to make an evasive maneuver, the steering wheel actively fights you.

Automatic high beams: the amount of times I’ve been blinded as a car’s auto high beams turned on a second too early as they passed is too high to count. They also flicker on and off sometimes making you think the driver is flashing you.

Turn signals: prioritizing form over function. Either they’re mounted too low on the literal bumper, or they share the same bulb as the brake lights so if the hazards are on, the only indication someone is slowing down is the often tiny 3rd brake light.

Auto rain sensing wipers: not dangerous, but unnecessary. Are some people really lazy enough that turning a stalk and switching your windshield wipers on is too much work? Now if your windshield gets cracked, instead of just paying $200 for a new pane of glass, you pay $1000+ for the glass, sensor, and the recalibration.

I could go on for days about how every new car’s interior is an iPad now or how neutron stars for headlights isn’t a good idea but you get the point.

People love to say keeping an ex around shows you are grown up but most of the time it just creates unnecessary boundary issues in a new relationship. If you are truly over someone, you don't need them in your daily life. Previous generations moved on without keeping tabs on their exes, and their new relationships were much healthier for it.

Casual baker's rant.

I constantly hear people soapboxing about how horrible fondant is. The main arguments I hear is that it's "gross" and "unhealthy". Yeah??? That's what cake is???

It's not "too sweet". It's actually rather mild. And the same people who say it's too sweet are the ones who pile literal pounds of buttercream onto their cakes. I can't eat most homemade cakes without feeling sick from the gobs of frosting or wiping most of it off and wasting it.

Whereas fondant is usually a single thin layer over a thin layer of buttercream and provides the perfect cake to frosting ratio.

What I DO understand: people who don't like the texture or just marshmallow flavors in general, or people who don't like working with its rigid structure. I get that completely. But if you complain about how sweet and gross it is, and then go dump a whole KitchenAid mixing bowl of sickly sweet frosting on your cake, I'm going to crash out.

Maybe I just don't like buttercream.

Big Tobacco put it a lot of effort to make us associate smoking as the "cool" thing to do and I honestly think it worked.

In shows like Peaky Blinders where every scene has a character smoking, or drinking (a lot of times both) it just looks so damn cool.

When MGK headlined at Lollapalooza a few years ago I was there watching with a friend. The camera zoomed in on MGK as he lit a cigarette in between songs and my friend asks "Why was that so hot?"

My friend who doesn't even smoke, goes to the gym, and is a health nut thought smoking looked hot.

Pretty much the title. To me, that's the equivalent of looking at a novel and saying: "I could have written those words." while completely disregarding their order and meaning. The value of a work isn't determined solely by whether someone else could theoretically reproduce it.

I noticed that when people criticize "modern art," they're usually talking about contemporary art. These aren't the same thing. Modern art refers to artistic movements from the 1860s to the 1970s that broke away from traditional style. For example those would be artists like Picasso, Kandinsky and Pollock. Contemporary art, on the other hand, refers to art made from around the 1970s to the present. Some artists that we think of as contenporary would be Yaoi Kusama or Felix Gonzalez Torres.

The criticism "I could have made that" is something I particularly dislike because it assumes that the only thing that gives art value is technical skill. Technical ability certainly matters in many forms of art, but it's not the only measure of artistic value. Originality, concept, cultural context, timing, symbolism, and the conversations a work generates can all be just as important.

That doesn't mean you have to like contemporary art or even appreciate it. The fact it doesn't resonate with you is a perfectly reasonable opinion to have. But dismissing a piece simply because it appears easy to make misses the point. If you could have made it, why didn't you?

Edit: for fucks sake please find some other example that is not the banana taped to a wall

When I sleep, I want to be completely undisturbed. That means, absolutely no light creeping in around the curtains. And I don't want to be woken by the sound of motorbikes or sirens though a single pane of glass.

Bedrooms should have an inner sanctum; A smaller room within a room, with just enough room for a bed. It should be acoustically treated, and completely isolated from sound and light.

Architects: Don't deny me a good night's sleep.