I was under the impression that this is a misconception about the songs meaning.

At the time women would be expected to say no outright and go home. To say they have to leave, instead of having autonomy and being promiscuous.

So in the song the woman wants to stay but is following the societal expectation to say they need to leave and the man is giving her all the excuses she could use to explain why she didnt leave, so people wouldnt suspect her of staying over to have sex.

These days that expectation is not there so the song is interpreted in a different way and sounds super rapey.

To be clear. I am not advocating for this old way of thinking, nor am i saying i know the explanation i have given is true. I am only telling what i have heard and felt like to me that actually makes a lot of sense in the right context.

Basically, women wanted to be able to have sex with anyone they wanted, but people would look down on them for doing it. So, to avoid being ostracised, they would avoid situations like that.

But again. I may be wrong. I have just heard this explanation and wanted to share.

The first time i saw one of his reviews, i thought, “This guy isn’t genuine.” “That’s not an opinion. it’s a specification disguised as an opinion.”

He gave off real shill vibes, and then i later found out he was an apple simp, and it all came together. He isn’t super biased, but he definitely gives more providence to apple products.

His recent review of the apple vr headset was too nice. He said some bad things but qualifies each critisism with a “but i like that” or “but it’s not a deal breaker.”

Maybe i created a bias against him based on my early impressions, but i just get a bad vibe from him. He doesn’t seem to give his opinions.

I will say, though, an exception would be that rabbit thing he reviewed poorly recently and got some backlash from the manufacturer for. I believe he then came back and justified his review. Although everyone was reviewing it poorly so he would give the game away if he said it was good. So perhaps its not an exception… i dont know. Im just freestyling this comment…

She doesn’t love me. :p

Not many people get it until they get one. I got a fold 3 when it came out and have just upgraded to a fold 6 because i just couldn’t go back. Its a better form factor for a mobile computing device. Its a phone thats also a small tablet! I gave my old one to my wife who was always averse to getting a fold and she has told me multiple times since then that its her favourite phone shes ever had.

That’s what i am saying. You need to learn it. If someone explains it to you, then you are learning. If someone gives you the answer, then you dont understand it, so you are less good at said something.

You agree with me…

Because AI and previously google searches are not a substitute for having knowledge and experience. You can learn by googling something and reading about how something works so you can figure out answers for yourself. But googling for answers will not teach you much. Even if it solves a problem, you won’t learn how. And won’t be able to fix something in the future without googling th answer again.

If you dont learn how to do something, you won’t be experienced enough to know when you are doing it wrong.

I use google to give me answers all the time when im problem solving. But i have to spend a lot more time after the fact to learn why what i did fixed the problem.

That’ll do it 😀

Depemds if you are logged i to google services on your phone and on you pc browser. If you log into anything google on your browser it retains that log in across all the apps

Im gonna need a map or a family tree or something. I can’t follow who was who.

That’s the whole basis of CBT

I dont think it applies if everyone you know is actually an asshole.

The takeaway from the phrase is just to check yourself and your attitude. Make sure you aren’t the one being difficult before you confirm that all these other people are shit heads.

Juat about self-awareness.

I think thats what they are saying. They were getting the company to pay for their gym membership but as a stipend. So into their bank accounts as part of their salary as a reimbursement for the gym membership they were supposedly paying for. But they weren’t going to or paying for the gym. They were just claiming the money.

Same. Got in early, and it’s just my first and last name. I use it now as a bin for accounts for websites i dont want in my main inbox.

I also have an aol email address from around the same time that im scared to open.

Who knows what’s in there.

So what you are saying is, it’s just as Risc-E

That beeing said, there are people that insist on obscurity beeing security (sigh) and want to keep doing dns views when using IPv6. But even then things are much easier when the result would be the same in either view.

OMG!!

This guys a bee! Everybody run!!!

Its as long as an ipv6 address

The : is ok. I dont struggle with the shortening part. I struggle the “everything else” part.

I’ve had a look into it, and it doesn’t work if you try to do it mathmatically. You always need more than 3 gos on the seesaw.

There is a solution in the replies to my original comment that is the actual solution, and it works every time and is much simpler than any grouping method.

It involves assigning a letter to each person and then aligning that with a grid of positions “left” or “right” or “none” on the seesaw. Over the three rounds. So, person A is on the right all three rounds person b is on the right for 2 rounds then on the left for the 3rd round.

You end up with a list of 12 patterns that do not repeat or mirror any other pattern like “LLL” “LLR” “LRR” “LR-” etc. Then you do all three rounds and compare the position the seesaw was in with those patterns.

If the seesaw was down on the left 2 times the down on the right the third time then you look for which person had that pattern in this case it was person B. So they are the one with a different weight and they were heavier.

Equally, if the opposite pattern occurred. It was down on the right 2 times, then down on the left for round, then that is the opposite pattern of person B and does not occur anywhere else, so it was person B, and they were lighter.

person:  A B C D E F G H I J K L

round 1: L L L L R R R R — — — -

round 2: L L R R R — — — L R L -

round 3: L R R — — L R — L L — R

Oh i get it. So if in round 1 it tilted down on the right. Round 2 it was even then round 3 it tilted down on the right then it was person G and they are heavier. However if it was reversed and tilted on the left then even then left then it was still person G but they are lighter. Because that pattern only occurs once. This is brilliant. Thankyou to you and the person you corrected the formatting of.

Im sorry when i read weigh two of them i counted it as two separate weighings of two sets of groups. My bad.

What about the 4th group? There are 12 people