EPTAsk and answer stupid questions here! - Page 207
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Yurie
12148 Posts
| ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4783 Posts
On March 23 2015 16:13 Yurie wrote: Are there suits with sewn in shirt collars so you don't have to wear a shirt beneath? I hope not - why would you bother with a suit if you are only going to do it half-assed? | ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On March 23 2015 12:48 Najda wrote: I just had the weirdest phenomenon happen to me in my life. I plugged unplugged my headphones from my computer and into my phone to listen to a metronome while I practice guitar but I noticed some weird spanish music playing in my left headphone. I was messing around more with my phone to try to find where it was coming from, and these are the things I have determined: It only happens when the speakers are active (playing music or metronome app open). It's only with these headphones (steelseries spectrum 4xb). The volume of the spanish music is inversely proportional to the volume of the phone. The clarity of the music is proportional to the volume of the phone. It only happens while I'm touching the side of my phone (metal part of the iphone 4s). It only happens while the mic of my headset is still plugged into the computer. (So I can't test talking around the house). What is going on? It'll be some kind of interference. When everything is connected you get a longer antenna and you catch the frequency of the Spanish radio station. It seems like your finger needs to touch the phone part of the antenna as well to catch the signal...  When the phone music is loud you are less sensitive to the interference and it'll be more quiet, and the other way around. When it is more sensitive it'll also pick up more noise I guess. Only the headphone producers will know why it only affects the left headphone... | ||
|
icystorage
Jollibee19350 Posts
| ||
|
Yurie
12148 Posts
On March 23 2015 18:32 Ghostcom wrote: I hope not - why would you bother with a suit if you are only going to do it half-assed? Because then you would have 100% chance of a suiting shirt. You would also only need to wash/dry one item instead of 2. Price would be the same I would assume. It should also be cooler since you are wearing less clothes. I think it seems a great idea. | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4783 Posts
2. Washing less/Costing less = doing it half-assed - and thus ruining the point of a suit. 3. The warm part is largely due to the fabric of the suit which tends to be thicker than that of a shirt meaning that on a warm day where others would simply remove their jacket you are stuck sweating up your own little wear-able sauna. 4. No possibility of offering your jacket to someone else (read: date/woman you want to hit it off with). Whilst old-fashioned it still works like an absolute charm. EDIT: This seemed a lot harsher than I meant it. I'm just completely unable to see any actual benefits, but then again, who am I to judge? | ||
|
Najda
United States3765 Posts
On March 24 2015 01:32 Yurie wrote: Because then you would have 100% chance of a suiting shirt. You would also only need to wash/dry one item instead of 2. Price would be the same I would assume. It should also be cooler since you are wearing less clothes. I think it seems a great idea. But then you always have to wear that suit with that shirt so you lose versatility. You'd also have to always keep it buttoned etc. It would become an even bigger pain to find one that fits you properly, and cost more to tailor. Would it be some kind of pullover? It would just look cheap to anyone paying attention to the details, but a suit is supposed to be the exact opposite of that. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18411 Posts
On March 24 2015 02:11 Ghostcom wrote: 1. It is much easier to find a suiting shirt than a suiting suit off-the rack. 2. Washing less/Costing less = doing it half-assed - and thus ruining the point of a suit. 3. The warm part is largely due to the fabric of the suit which tends to be thicker than that of a shirt meaning that on a warm day where others would simply remove their jacket you are stuck sweating up your own little wear-able sauna. 4. No possibility of offering your jacket to someone else (read: date/woman you want to hit it off with). Whilst old-fashioned it still works like an absolute charm. EDIT: This seemed a lot harsher than I meant it. I'm just completely unable to see any actual benefits, but then again, who am I to judge? Honestly, you're not even washing less, because you are now sweating straight into the armpits of your suit, meaning you have to dry clean your suit every X days of wearing it, instead of just switching shirts and throwing the dirty ones in with the weekly washing, and dry clean your suit only every few weeks (or if you spill stuff on it). This also leads to more wear on your suit, causing it to need replacing sooner. Finally, it would just be uncomfortable, because generally the fabric they make suits of is not made for being worn against your skin all day. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
here's a typical conversation involving rand. a: hey, objectivism? b: you realize you sound silly? try again. so yea failed at the door. sorry. | ||
|
ThomasjServo
15244 Posts
On March 24 2015 02:32 Acrofales wrote: Honestly, you're not even washing less, because you are now sweating straight into the armpits of your suit, meaning you have to dry clean your suit every X days of wearing it, instead of just switching shirts and throwing the dirty ones in with the weekly washing, and dry clean your suit only every few weeks (or if you spill stuff on it). This also leads to more wear on your suit, causing it to need replacing sooner. Finally, it would just be uncomfortable, because generally the fabric they make suits of is not made for being worn against your skin all day. But but but he's just trolling Acro -___- | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On March 24 2015 06:26 oneofthem wrote: rand is not worth reading. i've never read her and have no deficiency in any subject she touched upon. here's a typical conversation involving rand. a: hey, objectivism? b: you realize you sound silly? try again. so yea failed at the door. sorry. She's also just a bad writer. It's not even a fun waste of time. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
Any way to get something like that in Canada without paying $75 for shipping? Shit's amazing. | ||
|
Shiragaku
Hong Kong4308 Posts
| ||
|
Gowerly
United Kingdom916 Posts
| ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
| ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On March 25 2015 20:18 Gowerly wrote: This sounds like an extension of Pascal's Wager to which the answer in this situation being "No". As the payoff is finite, but the fail case is infinite. Pascal's wager is different in that in the hypothetical question posed above you get to choose whereas in Pascal's wager you're expected to be able to toggle your belief on and off at will. But yeah infinity is harsh. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On March 25 2015 14:21 Shiragaku wrote: Would you accept the ability to have anything you want, be it personal or social, but there is a .01 chance of the wish going wrong which would result in you being tortured for all of eternity? No, but if it was a 1% chance of death then maybe. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On March 25 2015 22:02 Djzapz wrote: Pascal's wager is different in that in the hypothetical question posed above you get to choose whereas in Pascal's wager you're expected to be able to toggle your belief on and off at will. But yeah infinity is harsh. Being able to toggle isn't really the point of the Pascal's Wager I feel... In Pascal's Wager the assumption is that there is a yes/no answer in death wherein we either believe in god (gain everything and lose nothing) or don't believe in god (gain nothing and lose nothing). He posits that believing in the finite vs the infinite is unreasonable, so one has to believe in god because not believing has no gains. In the posters question, it is reversed. If one gets to choose to be happy now, even if it means possibly being eternally punished--then which should be chosen. Much like Pascal's Wager, one should never bet against the infinite when the opposing side is the finite--only unreasonable people do that. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On March 25 2015 23:32 IgnE wrote: No, but if it was a 1% chance of death then maybe. Finite vs finite is fair Infinite vs infinite is fair Finite vs infinite is unfair | ||
| ||
