A person’s perception is highly informed by how well or poorly they understand the subject or situation in question.

Let’s say you got stood up by a first date because they got hit by a car on their way to you. Your perception of them is going to vary wildly depending on whether or not you know the facts behind why they didn’t show up.

Similarly, knowing how you actually fit into things at your job - i.e. your importance to your working group, the company, it’s customers, society itself, allows you to have a more accurate set of facts to base your perception on.

So yes, the truth matters.

I’m going to have to disagree with you on this.

People have all sorts of beliefs that can qualitatively be proven as right or wrong. For example, all the wingnuts who believe that the COVID vaccine has trackers from Microsoft. Their beliefs are 100% bereft of reality.

Now, can they go ahead and act on those mistaken beliefs? Sure. But that doesn’t make their beliefs correct in any way.

While I get that this is an article geared to laymen/the general public, I do think we should be holding science communication to a higher standard.

I agree with you 100%.

It’s perfectly possible to have both a reasonable salary as well as intrinsic satisfaction.

However, I will say that getting both of those characteristics together is far more likely with a skilled job compared to an unskilled job (i.e. jobs that require specific training and/or degrees).

It’s worth pointing out that feeling like you work in a pointless, meaningless job doesn’t necessarily make it true. This paper is solely about people’s perceptions, not facts.

A light breeze is enough for Google to lock accounts, and they make it nearly impossible to re-access. And they have no reliable customer service you can call or email.

But the final straw for me was when they started this bullshit of saying “tell me your phone number so we can make sure it’s you”. They never had my number in the first place, so it was clear that this was pure bullshit of them trying to associate real world identities with their accounts.

After that, I said “fuck em”, changed to other providers, and haven’t look back since.

Go ahead and delete my accounts - your service is pure garbage anyway.

You won’t find that level of detail in typical articles, because they are intended for the general public and are intended to be an overview that a layman can comprehend.

However, the paper itself, which the article links to, has more detail including deformation testing.

Believe it or not, you’re the one being racist now - by painting all of the US and all Americans with the same brush.

You don’t hear about all the people that are perfectly fine folks and all the places that aren’t insane because that makes boring news. So the only news you hear about are the whackjobs and bottom-feeders like this.

Don’t make the same mistake of judging an entire country by a partial set of facts because that puts your feet on the first steps of the same path the people in this article walked.

I understand what you’re saying completely. I’m not even saying that I disagree with you - to be honest, I’m not quite sure what to think about this circumstance.

However, I will say that there are limits to being lax on someone just because they are a child. This was a serious offense that could have cost multiple people their lives and a serious response is justifiably warranted.

If we were talking about shoplifting, sure. This case is more serious, however, and I’m not sure the same approach would be taken under the circumstances.

Your issue is that she’s still there? The article implies that this only happened yesterday, so she’s only been there for 1 day. That’s not unreasonable for a felony.

This entire topic is about shortening the work week without any loss in pay.

Have you not been reading articles on this topic? Yes, we are talking about a 32 hour work week with no loss in pay.

Two things to consider are:

1. In my hypothetical, I did say that these were androids which could convincingly emulate personalities and human behavior. In other words, they would be capable of fulfilling psychological and emotional sides of a relationship.

2. The dating scene is particularly rough for men at the moment for various reasons. The internet’s effect on social activities magnifies that, and the shift to work-from-home has made it worse.

It shows 5 if you scan w14.monkrus.ws.

And this is Quttera’s analysis here:
https://quttera.com/detailed_report/w14.monkrus.ws

Whether there is a real problem or not, it might be something the monkrus admins want to look into in order to address it.

But if anyone else has a better understanding of what’s going on with their site, I’d love to hear it and it’s probably good information for the rest of this sub.

There’s nothing absurd about it. Your ignorance doesn’t make your perspective valid.

What a load of BS. Where did I say that unrealistic standards referred to basic hygiene and the ability to enjoy being out of the house?

You’re making up imaginary statements and then refuting them. Try improving your reading comprehension.

The two authors and their editor need to go back to school and re-learn what an order of magnitude is.

I find regular briefs to be the most comfortable.

You pointed out one of the issues with boxer-briefs, and regular boxers is like throwing a random wad of fabric down there and finding new ways of being uncomfortable throughout the day.

JFC, the answer to your question is literally the first sentence of the article. It would have taken you less time to read it then to post your question.