Especially once you factor in the lower cost of living (relative to FAANG jobs) in that smaller city.

I would say yes, insofar as the text and SCOTUS interpretations of the constitution count as law, so anything that violates, for example, the separation of powers would be illegal.

But hasn't the SCOTUS also ruled that anything the President does as a part of his duties legal? Where does that ruling actually end?

I believe that’s for criminal prosecution and probably has a lot of room for additional precedents to be set

I hope that that precedent starts to get set here, because right now it's not looking good.

My spouse not even recognizing me might have some emotional impact. Didn’t seem the least bit odd.

Interesting to compare this narrative to "A history of 'wokeness'". (Specifically, it's interesting that the "origins" seem to have very little to do with the history.)

https://www.vox.com/culture/21437879/stay-woke-wokeness-hist...

Came to share the same link, much better piece than PG's

Wouldn't it potentially make it less rare, if it turns out to be an additional mechanism? (Isn't it possible that there'd be multiple paths?)

It's what happens when the average voter has no clue about who to blame about anything.

Blaming anyone about anything is extremely unlikely to improve your individual situation and is typically a colossal waste of time. This is from a financial and life milestone standpoint.

And in cases where it isn't, you should be talking to a lawyer asap.

Not if you learn something out of it! And thank you for the legal advice (:

I'm not sure if you are responding to the vague, unsubstantiated claim that the parent comment is, or trying to push a vague claim yourself.

I think that was parent's point.

"In many ways, this age group is in a better place financially, on average, than their parents were at this age. The problem is that they don’t seem to know it."

The phrase "in many ways" is doing a lot of lifting. I wonder: what ways? What details need to be ignored in order for the rest of the sentence to seem plausible?

I love this. Here's another interesting thing I encountered. It's a way of organizing chromatic subsets by brightness

https://www.reddit.com/r/musictheory/comments/1etydas/i_made...

That is cool and different. Glancing at the bottom several rows I tend to agree with the classification, as a trained musician. I wonder though, what is (the mathematical principle) behind it that is causing the brightness/ darkness in the sound of these chords?

Don't say "dissonance" (or explain what dissonance is)- that much is obvious, looking for something a bit more detailed, e.g. why 1-2-5 sounds brighter than 1-4-5

It is going to be the relative amplitudes of the overtones. Pure tone (like flute) is bright, many overtones present with the appropriate mix can sound dark (french horn). Next, you are going to ask me for the coefficients, but I don’t know that. Break into the nearest church with a proper pipe organ and start pulling and pushing stops to see what happens. (Or ask your friend the organist to take you so that you don’t get arrested)

It's a reference to this particular chart, not the general idea of brightness of a sound. And it's regarding chords or scales, not timbres.

I don't really understand this chart at all, but I think it's based on the idea that an upward movement of a fifth is bright, and a downward movement is dark. 1-2-5 can be built on two upward movements of a fifth, whereas 1-4-5 can be built be one upwards movement, and one downward (from the tonic)

All this means is that you poorly curated your follows.

I’m not logged in. This is based on what I see as a potential user checking out the site for the first time.

Pepperidge Farms remembers that Indiana Jones was the good guy.

Censorship isn’t absent from Twitter. Quite the opposite.