zil2

I know this is an old thread, but here are two biologists talking about fasting (specifically going without food or water, as we do it), but for extended periods, and some of the biological impacts (positive). I'm not done, but finding it interesting enough to share. Perhaps it will help others who struggle with fasting to find motivation to try. (This couple fasted from both food and water for 7 days - thereby disproving the "you'll die without water after 3 days" claim.)

Even if it's only the tip of the iceberg, if they can succeed, it would be a huge win, showing that it can be done, and we can be better off for having done it. I fear the "deep state" may be too strong to overpower, but who knows, maybe not yet. If nothing else, these guys are going to make the next two years interesting.

If, like me, you didn't / don't know much about these folk, this interview will help. If you cringe at watching an hour and 43-minute video, do like I did, and start training yourself to hear faster - start by watching videos with familiar voices played at 1.25x. When that gets comfortable, go to 1.5x, etc. pretty soon, you'll be listening to all but mumblers and people with strong accents at 2x! ...going back to continue reading NT's post.

Let's hope you have more than one second, then.

I think the opposition was always there among those who knew what was going on and the extent of it. If Trump's election made a difference for some people, I'm baffled - Trump's election will not diminish the viciousness of the response from the alphabet soup community if they perceive you are anything less than fully and explicitly in favor of them.

This was my thinking. I've never heard of a gun firing when engaging the safety. I'd be surprised if that safety even worked as intended once engaged. And it is my personal opinion that an unloaded gun is mostly useless, and without a round in the chamber, your gun isn't loaded.

I think my friendships will matter 10,000 years from now. I managed to maintain relationships with some college and high school friends via postal mail until email became a thing and no one wanted to send letters. I tried to maintain friendships via email. It never worked. It fizzled out into mundane and thoughtless messages - but I was never the last person to write, not via any method. I tried rekindling old friendships via social media like facebook. It never worked. People posted mindless photos and 140-character blurbs, but would not engage in any meaningful way. I don't know why (except that it was obviously unimportant to them). But I wonder if it's like temples in Utah - it's so easy that we put it off with thoughts of "I can always do it later". Or maybe they're so busy with the illusion of maintaining relationships that they don't have time to actually have any relationships outside immediate family. I don't know what's different about my fountain pen friends, but clearly, something is. Maybe we're all introverts, or maybe there's just something "writer-y" hard-wired into our souls1. Or maybe the dual benefit of friendship and using our fountain pens in a meaningful way tips us over the edge. Maybe I'm not the only one experiencing a digital disconnect in relationships and longing for something better. My reaction to the idea of losing the postal service is entirely because I believe it would diminish my relationships with my pen pals - all my past experience says it would. Maybe I'm wrong, and we'll all write our letters, scan them, and exchange them electronically (even though that would greatly diminish the experience) - but I fear that history will repeat itself, the method will overcome the meaning again, and gradually everyone will stop writing. I don't need the postal service to find a variety of meaningful and satisfying was to use my fountain pens, and if fountain pens don't exist in heaven, oh well. But here on Earth, the pens and postal service are and have been a way to enjoy forming relationships that I would otherwise not have formed, with people I would not otherwise have met. Every one of them knows I'm in Utah and that I go to church. Some of them know that I'm a Latter-day Saint (the rest probably assume it). In addition to forming friendships, I'm at least giving them a positive impression of members of the Church, which might be more than they would get otherwise. And in exchange, they better my life in a variety of ways. So for here and now, I'm hoping and praying that the postal service remains. (I'm already stocked for life on pens, inks, and papers - though I might need more envelopes - so if those industries fail, I'm still OK. Other people have food storage - I have food storage and stationery storage.) 1It's common for new folk in the online fountain pen community to talk about how they discovered fountain pens, and perhaps the most commonly repeated part of the story is that the person has been "obsessed" with "making marks on paper" from childhood, always wanting to try different colors, different papers, different types of writing implement (annoying Mom on trips to the office supply store or the "school supplies" aisle) - until they find fountain pens and throw the rest out. We appear to be born to it. (A few folks keep their mechanical pencils; the artists keep a wide variety of marking implements; the rest of us go "all in".) I suspect that has benefited you greatly - the research suggests that it significantly improves memory and comprehension of the things you're writing - even if you never look at it again - the mere act of writing by hand solidifies memory. Well, now we all want to know what this sentence is. Feel free to make and post an audio file! (I'll transcribe it with a fountain pen. ) Certainly, there are benefits to this that can be had no other way - particularly when done face to face. Via video is second best, audio-only a distant third. The greatest disadvantage to this (unless exchanging recorded messages, which would lose a lot of the benefit) is that both people have to make themselves available at the same time - and people today have overbooked themselves all the way up until their funeral, and probably for three months after it. IMO, electronic adds nothing to the written word other than speed (of recording and exchange) and ease of editing. But I entirely agree that this (what we're doing now) is absolutely fabulous and wouldn't want to lose it any more than I'd want to lose the postal service or fountain pens. This forum (and the FP ones) is a blessing in my life. I will literally weep the day MGF shut down this forum (if they ever do). (The same would be true if they shut down the postal service.)

No one said it was for everyone. Handwriting is a skill. But even if illegible, it would still activate a lot more of your brain than typing would, and so that part would be good for you.

I've got science behind me (regarding the benefits of handwriting - it activates nearly the entire brain, whereas typing activates a relatively tiny portion). As a dyslexic person, it may not be for you. That does not prove that it isn't of benefit to others. Further, while I wrote letters to my father by hand, most of his were typed, printed, and then mailed - so being "pen-pals" does not require writing by hand - that's just the best option for those of us who enjoy it. I do not know why, exactly - I submit it is not 100% by choice - but there is something different that happens when you have to slow your life and your brain down to "handwriting speed". Could I type the same things? Perhaps. But maybe my brain wouldn't slow down enough to realize and compose the same things.1 And there is something deeply personal about a letter in another person's handwriting - holding in your hand what they held in theirs, knowing that they set aside hours just to put pen to paper for you. In comparison, computer-printed text is no more personal than a form letter from your bank. My friend in Canada always does little drawings on his envelopes and throughout the letter. He's from Iran, but managed to escape. I doubt he would trust the personal things he tells me to electronic communication - everyone knows email isn't private.2 One of my friends in the UK is an artist. He can do things with stick men that you wouldn't believe could be done until you saw them. He includes prints and original artwork in some of his letters. He's also a typewriter fanatic, so most of his letters are written on a typewriter - still much more personal than computer-printed text (typewriters have character). My friend in Austria and my German friend in Sweden have the most beautiful handwriting you ever saw. 1I submit that this is proven fact. Watch what happens when a missionary goes out and starts sending home emails. The initial emails will be long, excited, descriptive, emotional, and very interesting. As they adjust to missionary life, their emails become impersonal, mundane, relating "just the facts". The personal elements fade out. Letters to and from my pen pals only get longer, more personal, and more frequent the longer we know each other. Look at the emails you've received from family and then compare them to the personal letters we have from history - completely different animals. People could maintain a deep connection via email (in theory), and yet they don't. People don't even use email anymore - it's all text messages. And they cringe at making phone calls. I tell you that while technology may help you, @Traveler, it has made our communications much less personal, less intimate, less thoughtful and less thought-out. Technology has made us perfunctory. As far as I can tell, the only technology that has not completely ruined human communication is forums like this one. 2If you didn't already know this, welcome to the 21st century.

As I said elsewhere, I wasn't arguing the right or wrong of taxation rules. I was pointing out that some of us are subsidizing others of us (for good or ill). I think a postal service enables good things to happen (it certainly does in my life), and so I want it to continue, even if it means people who don't use it are taxed to help pay for it.

FWIW, talent is not needed to write a letter. You don't even need a fountain pen. Paper, writing implement, envelope, stamp and an address. There is something about writing by hand on paper that causes us to slow our thoughts, and communicate in a more intimate* manner than happens by email or texting - sometimes even more than by phone or in person. You have to set aside the time to do it. Depending on the recipient, you may need to exchange letters before it becomes very personal, as you get acquainted. It's a very different experience from any other form of communication I know. *This has nothing to do with romance or sex. It's only about making a close connection with another human.

Not that anyone would care, but there's a whole new industry that would go out of business if the postal service shut down - stories told in the form of letters. There are a variety to choose from for each company that offers them. Some appear to be romance stories, others are mysteries. They appear to include paper "souvenirs" like tickets, pictures, etc. But they're all as if someone living the story is writing you letters, and they're delivered via postal mail, as a series over multiple months / weeks. Whatever the cost to get the story, the price would double (or more) if it cost package rates to ship the letter (and it would cost package rates to ship the letter via any service other than the postal service). There are also charities that ask people to write letters to those in the armed services, in nursing homes, to aging veterans, etc. You write your letter and send it to the charity, they then distribute the letters to the folks identified as needing them (after removing your outer envelope so the recipient doesn't get to know who's writing them, just whatever name you sign on the letter). Again, an entire service ended. Folks who don't use the USPS for meaningful things don't realize (or don't value) the meaningful ways in which others use it. By all means, get rid of government stupidity when it comes to running the place, but to end it would be tragic.

Meanwhile, that's a nice hat-band. The splotchy just makes it look like it's been out on the range a while. Enjoy your hobby, however long it lasts.

Hooray! That works. Edit your OP. Cut the first URL (leaving the cursor where the text was). Click the "Other Media" button in the lower right corner of the editor window. Choose "Insert Image from URL". Paste your URL. At least, that would work for an actual image URL, but not for the google, I think... Test... Yeah, nope, gives an error because it's not really an image but a webpage. Ah, but after you load the image page, click the image to get it alone, you can then right click and get the image URL and use that:

You can upload them here, look at the bottom-left of the editor window when typing a response.

None of your images shows for me - they're all grey blocks with a grey circle-bar sign in the middle. In another browser, they're black and the icon is white.

So when are you changing your screen name to "The Mad Hatter" or maybe "The Mad Cowboy Hatter"?

Are you saying you don't get any deductions? If you get deductions, single people are subsidizing you. The end. It doesn't matter if you're paying obscene amounts of income tax now, it only matters if you're paying less because of filing married and with dependents. NOTE: I am not arguing one way or the other how income tax and marriage and children should or should not be handled. I'm arguing the simple fact that as a single person for all but 7 years of my life, I paid more taxes so that (in theory), you could pay less. Now I'm flipping the tables and saying that as a user of the postal service, I want all tax-payers to subsidize the postal service, whether they use it or not, so that I can go on using it.

Single people have been subsidizing married people and people with children for ages. Would you be paying more if you filed as a single person? Would you pay more (now or previously) if you couldn't (hadn't been able to) count your children as dependents? Pretty sure you would be / have been. I'm perfectly fine with removing waste / fraud / abuse from the postal service. But ending the postal service would be a nightmare for letter-senders and small businesses who use them for package delivery. Amazon would become more of a monopoly, small businesses would go out of business because of the "free shipping" obsession, and letter-sending would cease altogether.

I already have wax and seals. I could not afford to send my letters at FedEx prices - who could? According to FedEx, sending a letter to my friend in Austria would cost me $99.23 (as opposed to $1.65). My pen-pals are in: Canada UK (England) x2 Australia Austria New York state Pennsylvania New Jersey Florida Sweden / Germany (he's a university student in Sweden, but from Germany - I have both addresses) And I'm open to adding more. If I could not send letters at (near) postal rates, I would not be able to send letters at all, and this would be a tragedy (and that is not hyperbole). And I'm a-resistin'! (As are all my kind.) Like I said, I subsidized your marriage and children, so I'm not going to feel bad about demanding you subsidize my pen-pals.

As I said previously: I write to my pen-pals. And if you think that's the same as emailing, it's only because you've forgotten the extreme difference between emails and hand-written letters received in a mailbox.

Like I said, a price ordinary people can afford. I don't know what the point is with electronic payments, so I'm ignoring that. Right now, I can send a letter inside the US for $0.45 (because I bought a gazillion "forever" stamps eons ago) and internationally for $1.65 (I think that's the current rate - also bought some "global forever" stamps). I don't have to rent anything.

Noooooo! As one of the few thousand people who still send postal letters - please, no! Amazon / FedEx / UPS would not take over sending my letters - not for a price any normal person could afford. And a variety of providers would make for more lost mail and slower service. I've been subsidizing your spouse and children for my whole life, now you all get to subsidize my pen-pals.

I know nothing about Musk's computer programming skills. I don't really care about them either. However... Python is a scripting language, not a programming language. Most real programmers will look down their nose at Python. Just because one can write code in one language, does not mean one can read code in another. Also, you'd be shocked at just how unreadable code can be when the scripter / programmer made it unreadable either intentionally or through poor command of the skills associated with writing "good code" (crappy code can function perfectly to spec and still be crappy code).

Thank you! (Persession? Did Otto Co-wrecked make this request? ) Meanwhile, that nib is beyond bizarre!