Fuck wasps

Removed by mod

Like if you have blurry vision, and you don’t wear vision-correcting glasses, does that set off an inevitable downward spiral of degradation of your vision?

Not really. It depends on how bad. But not having good eyesight which leads to blurry vision isn’t a blanket condition, in that, your entire world isn’t just a blur. You can focus on some things (far sighted vs near sighted) and even if you can’t see well close-up, you can still force your eyes in some circumstances to produce better vision if you put in effort. It’s like trying to lift a bag that’s too heavy for you. You may not be able to get it above your head, but maybe you can lift it off the floor if you try hard enough.

What causes an inevitable degradation is more to do with age and how our bodies just fail over time. Headaches and other ailments associated with poor vision are the number one cause for most people to see an optometrist. Your eyes can only handle so much load before it takes a toll. Which should be the red flag for you and your “blurry” glasses.

Closing your eyes is the most ideal because it cuts off sensory information, which saves energy (your sensory and motor cortex are spared or operate with less resources). It’s like lying still vs running a marathon. It requires a lot of energy for your brain to continually process info. And humans are visual creatures. We take vision above all else. If it looks like a duck, but sounds like a sheep and smells like bread, it’s still a duck to us. Which tells you just how much of our brain is carved out for that sense.

Baggage checkers at airports that sit behind the x-ray machine usually lose sharpness after about 30m (which means they can allow potentially dangerous objects onto aircrafts). Attention is super expensive and if you call on someone’s total, undivided attention, that can only be maintained for so long before the brain sort of checks out.

And not it’s not a dumb question.

gila@lemm.see answered your question below regarding simulated blurriness and I added a bit to it if you want to read more.

It is different for simulated blurriness, because simulated blurriness can’t be modulated by your ocular muscles, so they won’t reflexively strain to focus.

You couldn’t really achieve that effect by actually putting any kind of lens in front of your eyes though. That is not a simulation of blurriness, it is actual blurriness.

This is the correct answer. It’s like using an image with depth to work your depth perception: it won’t work because you can’t transition between each layer to bring them into focus. Seamen who stay in submarines for extended periods are prohibited from driving for quite a while when they get back on land because a submarine is too small of an enclosed space and your depth perception crumbles over time when it’s not being used.

Turning your world into a blur will basically cause your eyes to try and hyper focus at all times, unable to do so. This will lead to massive eye strain but also a ton of headaches and other ailments. It is the opposite of relaxation for your body.

Still absolutely terrible for any length of time.

So he just whipped it out for fun? This just gets worse as more details emerge

FBI testing heavily damaged the firearm before Baldwin’s team was able to examine it for any potential modifications, and authorities failed to photograph the individual elements of the firearm beforehand, the defense had argued.

Looks like he’s still sticking to his “the gun just fired by itself” defence. Which is both sad and confusing as he pulled it out on set with the intention to pull the trigger for the scene. Whether it went off on its own is moot as even if it didn’t, he would still moments later have pulled the trigger. It’s not like the gun flew out of hits holster and shot Hutchins.

The FBI and an independent firearms expert found the gun functioned normally and would not fire without the trigger depressed, but Baldwin’s defense team has argued that the firearm was prone to malfunctioning.

So you admittedly used a known, malfunctioning gun? How is that better or even exonerates him in this case? I guess based on his history with finance, he got one of those bargain basement lawyers to build his defence.

The entire set was a gong show and this is what happens when you don’t follow the proper safety rules and bring in a bunch of unqualified people because you stiffed the former crew for pay. Sad that an innocent person had to die.

You really don’t care about your eyesight do you… this will absolutely wreck your eyes.

Not that the over/under debate was even a thing, but this should convince those diehard lunatics not to hang their TP improperly!

Not the best patent to use if you want to settle the debate. This one from Wheeler is the nail in the coffin: patent

It also shows why it was over and not under as at the time, the TP holder was a hanging wire, which kept the paper against the wall. Not protruding out like todays hangers.

Dynamite in water is the same basic principle used for sea mines. History has taught us those actually work. With the bullet, it’s more about surface tension which makes sense as falling from a high enough cliff onto water if you don’t land right is nearly the same as falling onto concrete.

Cool stuff regardless and I always found their testing to be quite spot on, scientifically.

LOL. Oh no some random dude made a list a long time ago. Oh no. A clone of what? Because rarbg was shutdown a while ago. Maybe think for yourself.

Also, the site looks nothing like the original rarbg, so I guess they failed there to. It’s another website linking to torrents, nothing more. I’ve not seen a single thing suss about it and I’ve been using it for months.

There is always something you can do about it. Always.

My fav was if you could shoot someone in water. Turns out that just 3 ft. of water was enough to stop a 50 cal! So as great of a film as Saving Private Ryan was, the opening scene where bullets wiz thru the sea killing soldiers was pure fiction.

Visit yandex.ru. It’s not the main Yandex domain just go visit it. Bro. Please. Stop.

Only 15% 🤨

Gotta at least have a name bro lol. Without a name what do you want us to do?

But if you don’t have that, you will want to find some movie clubs in Maltese and ask around there. You can also try to find some Maltese movie groups too. One thing I’ve found is that there’s always a group interested in everything. Vintage vacuums? Yeah, there are people that deal in just them and likely know every vacuum made between 1920 and 1960. You just have to find them.

When you have the name, find out who their distributers were or find out what studio produced it. Then reach out to them.

Sadly most go bankrupt so the originals are lost or even destroyed. There are plenty of indie films with some decently big names that end up this way too (I’ve been trying to find a decent copy of “Live Free or Die 2006” since it was released but sadly that movie looks to have evaporated despite having some huge names attached).

At this point, DDG is basically Bing, which heavily regulates piracy. Most often searching for a list of scrapers won’t even result in a search return. I know 1337 is pretty blacklisted.

You should be using something like yandex.com for your search queries as they are one of the last ones I’ve seen that still return pretty unfiltered results.

DDG/Bing, Google, Ecosia (Bing), Yahoo, all of the US based search engines have long filtered torrents or websites known for piracy. Places like steamunlocked or steamrips have also been removed.

Except that no good VPN does this anymore (I believe Mullvad was one of the last to pull the service and cited massive headaches due to CP violations). So if you find one that does, it’s most likely pretty sketch or just not that secure.

BT protocol works thru both parties. You have seeders and leachers (called peers). Both need to make a connection but how that connection is initiated and opened is important. If a peer initiates the connection and has their ports open, you’re good, regardless of your own setup.

Unfortunately not every seeder does this (for various reasons). And that’s when having your ports open makes a world of difference. Because if the peer also has their ports blocked, you will never get a successful handshake between the two of you.

On torrents that have hundreds of peers, you’re likely fine; they’ll be plenty that can initiate the transfer for you. But when you get obscure torrents with only a handful of peers, you’re likely fucked. I’m over simplifying for the sake of discussion.