testfactor

joined 1 year ago
[–] testfactor@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That all sounds like it sucks, but I don't think it's as hopeless as I'm sure it feels.

Obviously this is just a snapshot into your life, and I'm sure there are more details under the hood, like what exact "adult responsibilities" and stuff you've got going on. That said, even in this text I think you've outlined a good bit of good stuff you've got going on.

First, I don't know why you think conflict deescalation isn't an absolutely in demand skill. Every job under the sun has conflict, and being able to manage that is huge. Even within Engineering, you could put that to huge use as a Sales Engineer or some other customer facing technical role.

Second, you got your bachelor's in an engineering discipline. You can poo-poo your grades all you want, but at the end of the day you succeeded. No mean feat my man. That's worth celebrating.

Finally, if you're simply looking for a way out, there are institutions that are always looking for technical people. Obviously this is gonna vary a lot by country, so ymmv, but the government/military is always in need of people in technical roles, and rarely are able to fill them. It probably doesn't pay nearly what a "normal" engineering job would, but it'd be more than an internship, and it would give you some of that structured camaraderie that you previously felt the lack of when trying to leave.

All that to say, don't give up hope my guy. I know I'm just some schmuck on Lemmy of all places, but I think you're capable of breaking out and getting to a better place.

You got this!

[–] testfactor@lemmy.world 18 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Genuine question, why not just walk away?

Like, it doesn't solve the mental issues you're already dealing with because of the years of trauma, but like, it seems like step one of healing would be to remove yourself from the situation, no?

Like, tell your dad he should probably get out, because you're not gonna be there to play witness to keep him out of jail anymore, and then pop deuces?

[–] testfactor@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

I feel like we're abusing "historical" here. Is this something of particular note that's going to be taught to future generations?

Does the African American community know which president was the first to nominate twelve judges of color? Do women know which president was the first to nominate twelve women?

This is a good thing, but like, it's a good fun fact at best. I think saying it's "making history" is overstating. It'd be like saying the person who has the Guinness World Record for longest handstand is "making history."

[–] testfactor@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

I feel like "making history" implies that they did something that's gonna make it into the history books and be taught to future generations.

And like, maybe strictly, but like, which president appointed the twelfth black judge during their term? The twelfth female judge?

The first of anything, yeah, that's in the history books. Everything past that, maybe a footnote.

A good thing for sure, but "making history"? The language feels strong to me.

[–] testfactor@lemmy.world 42 points 1 week ago (9 children)

This is great and all, but does the 12th time you do something count as "making history"?

You'd think after two or three you'd just stop counting.

[–] testfactor@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Oh, I just failed at reading comprehension.

My first read was something like, Lindsey G says "I love gay people," or something he's equally unlikely to say. MTG says, "That's not something you hear often from LG," to which he responds, "she's right, I don't say that a lot."

The obviously more accurate read is him saying "she's right," and following that comment up with "huh, not something I often say about her."

Ambiguity. The Devil's volleyball.

[–] testfactor@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

What is this in reference to? It never establishes MTG saying anything about Graham in the article that I saw.

[–] testfactor@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Google doesn't seem to find anything with that title when I Google it?

The Ash Tree seems to be some early 1900s story, and Daniel Harms doesn't seem to have anything of that title as far as I can tell. :(

[–] testfactor@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

No, it was kind of a standalone type web forum. Greyish background, iirc.

Pretty sure I was linked it from Lemmy, and I don't subscribe to no sleep here.

 

Okay, I read a story someone linked here a while back and I'm trying to remember the title.

The story was structured as an old school web forum where people were discussing the meaning behind certain lines of an ancient poem.

The poem described a malevolent force in the woods associated with a particular kind of tree that would, cyclically, take people from the town.  Maybe oak?  Ash?

I think that the person taken was turned into wood in after being lured in by a beautiful girl.

One user on the forum was trying to trace the historical roots of the poem and managed to find the town he believes was the one referenced in the poem.  They had a yearly festival that included cutting down all the trees of that type and burning them.

In the end, they guy researching is presumably taken by the forest, after some events outlined in the poem begin to happen again and then he stops posting.

Any guesses?

Edit: I found it. Managed to piece together enough memories to get there. Title was "Where Oaken Hearts do Gather" https://www.uncannymagazine.com/article/where-oaken-hearts-do-gather/

[–] testfactor@lemmy.world 35 points 3 weeks ago (7 children)

The issue isn't that you're not well informed.

The issue is that, when confronted with being wrong about something you're uninformed about, you double down and act like an ass.

[–] testfactor@lemmy.world 166 points 3 weeks ago (19 children)

Well, not every metric. I bet the computers generated them way faster, lol. :P

[–] testfactor@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

To be clear, harassment and defamation are crimes in the US as well. Freedom of speech doesn't mean that you can harm people with your speech with impunity. It's a prohibition on the government from meddling with political speech, especially that of people who are detractors of the government.

view more: next ›