It's one of the most exhausting things about living here. Vendors here make it seem like they are doing you a favor, ignoring the fact buying and selling is a mutual contract. Amazingly, it's not just in one sector either but is instead across every single aspect of the customer or service experience here. Interestingly, I notice the younger generation is much more polite (maybe 25-30 and under), for example in McDonald's or something. Sure, the trade off there is they will almost always screw up the order, but at least they do it with a smile.
Looking back to which phones we were using in 2015, Jim Hillier wrote an interesting article where the authors at DCT described their mobile phone experiences.
In 2015 I was using a Galaxy S3, which at the time was the bees knees. How things have changed in only five years as I now use a Galaxy Note 8, which today is well out of date.
What do the forum members use?
I think the Galaxy S3 was already quite old by 2015, in fact the S6 (the first metal phone from Samsung) with its then radical curved display was available.
I have a Galaxy S10 but will likely soon move to the Note 10 simply because I like the design more. With either, I won't see the need to upgrade for a few years.
Looking back to 2015, I had the HTC One. That was an excellent phone and really nice looking too. I moved to the Galaxy S6 and then a couple of iPhones in-between then an now.
Is this an exact updated remake of the 1998 game? I remember playing Resident Evil 2 way back when with my friends after school. The scenes when the Licker first shows up.
I have always thought his masterpiece was Extras. He can write funny very well and fell into Pilkington and milked it for all it was worth. The Office is a time and a place thing, but still being copied to this day. Also, it relies on seeing it for the first time in my opinion because so much of it is Brent saying unexpected things.
That said, the movie he did "Life On The Road" while a pale imitaiton of The Office still had me and my wife chuckling simply because Brent is so pathetic. Although, it becomes problematic as you increasingly realize Brent has a proper mental problem, it's not quite as funny then.
I find him fairly annoying as a personality but I do enjoy him holding these actors over the fire a little bit.
There's no doubt the UK is now a test.
If things go wrong, the other major nations will know its best to stay in the EU. If its paradise of independent trade that some leave campaigners promised, then some countries may be looking for the Frexit or Grexit. Also, for all the grandstanding about no way back for the UK, if it goes wrong and the UK wants back in (I am talking a decade or more from now), the country would be welcomed back.
As with everything else, it will probably fall somewhere in between and the world will simply go on.
Having said all that, I share Splinter's view and think it was a vote built on unfounded national pride and could have used some cool heads. For me, it showed democracy in action perfectly, but also highlighted why democracy is not the final form of governance many think it to be.
I'm looking for the problem, the issue that makes your title sarcastic, but I can't find it. Help!
Isn't Asperger's more a form of autism?
A lot of big teeth I see here and not really a care if their straight or not. However, most people I see in Argentina seem to look after their teeth in terms of daily routines.
My teeth are good aesthetically, they are straight enough and white enough. However, I have soft poor quality teeth, which must be genetic. Weak teeth.
As for Americans, I have never met anyone from the states with good teeth (massive exaggeration for effect). Often very white, and very straight, but also often crowned. I mean if you have five crowns, you don't really have good teeth, you have a good dentist.
From one pit of snakes to the next.
I get this vibe so often in places that are empty. Shops, beer places, when getting food and regardless of if they know I am from here or not. It is not wise to be the first or only customer it seems.
Very interesting, Semigoodlooking . And informative as well. In the future, I will remind myself not to be so quick to dismiss teen angst. You seem to have a lot of knowledge/experience with teenagers' inner feelings. I really do not have a lot of patience for self-pity, given the very concrete problems faced by people - including teens - in miserable circumstances all over the world. But I do understand that emotional obstacles do arise from within, and even people who are not clinically depressed can feel hopeless whether living on the street in India or in Buckingham Palace.
For me, EMO is a downer. Just listening to a steady diet of it would have had me moaning. As for Billie Eilish, I suspect you are right about the corporate nature of her garage-produced music, but who ever knows showbiz hype from truth. I know that she is singing for and to teens and not the likes of me, but I find her music, well, boring and lacking in anything remotely entertaining. I was surprised that she swept the Grammy Awards, but more power to her for reading the mood of the age. For what is pop culture if not commercialism?
I find myself less and less interested in pop culture, not just what's hot and what's not, but even caring what it is I'm turning my back on. By definition, it exists for the under-30's demographic, because they are its largest consumers. I remember being a teenager and really caring about the latest fads, music, clothing. I'm glad that teens now allow themselves to be supercilious enough to care about those things too, because life will soon enough demand more seriousness from them.
That's part of the problem, deciding what is whining teens or depressed teens is becoming increasingly hard to judge (without therapy) because it has become cool to be depressed, or at least pretend to be.
Regarding Eilish, I agree. There have been plenty to artists through the years that appeal to a demographic that I am not part of or interested in that I have found merit in. She is not one of them, I think considering the production value, style, and her appeal to teens, I find her music remarkably without substance.
I just had a little laugh to myself though because I am sure kids would have it no other way. Look at us moaning on an internet forum about an 18-year-old singing songs for 14-year-old kids. There's some irony there.
I had to look up EMO culture and came up with this:
'Easily offended' hits the nail on the head and although I don't mix with teenagers, I do live in the same house as a 23 year old lad. He's not immature, but he does have difficulty with confrontational discussions about gender politics for example, which people of our age, not being woke, find either amusing or hard to get to grips with. Very often our comments are waved away as boomer attitudes and other such labels.
And yes, labels are de riguer nowadays.
One wonders how much sympathy you can pile onto an EMO, if at all.
Before getting to sympathy on EMO and the general direction of teen culture, it is worth pointing out what happened with EMO.
EMO as you pointed out was a punk or more closely a post-punk music movement and it was a legitimate subculture. By the mid 2000s it had been bastardized and fully adopted by teens and the music transformed too. The classic moping teen is the very definition of EMO once that transformation happened. Mid-2000s EMO basically amounts to moaning. What's interesting is that EMO seemed to have largely died down around 8 years ago. However, it seems that is not the case and it simply shed its skin (dark gothic look) and bled into general teen culture.
I am sure there is still a committed EMO subculture but there's little doubt many of the EMO ideals were adopted widescale by this generation of young people. For example, the general move towards malaise, moaning about everything, feeling that the world sucks (even if it doesn't).
Obviously, depression is a real thing and many teens do suffer from it. I am failry forgiving about the clear growth in diagnosed depression in teens. It can be explained by a general opening of discourse that allows mental illness to be discussed and many cases of depression were previously overlooked.
Despite that, the growth in teen depression has given other teens a free pass. Now it's cool to be depressed and is worn as a badge, whether the person is actually depressed or not.
Looking at what you said about young people being afraid to tackle confrontational subjects, it's very true. Worse than that is the fact teens will now get their stance from social media, apply no critical thinking to it, and think they are enlightened. That's fine and in many ways teens have always been like that (minus the social media). However, now there is definately a basis of being uninformed and discussing topics like they are reading flash cards provided to them by someone else. In this regard, it's an offshoot of the celebrity thread.
By the way, I am not pulling all of this out of my ass, althougn some is obviously opinion. I am generally informed because I am only 35 myself, I was a young person during the EMO shift 15 years ago and again I have teenage children now. Basically I have lived the teen experience on and off directly and through osmosis for around 20 years.
Make no mistake, in general teens today lack nuance and emotional intelligence. It's ironic because their projections would have you believe they are willing to be more adult than previous generations would have been during their teen years. The reality is they are more misguided and childish than those previous generations.
I have a 16-year old daughter so I know her and will be standing outside DirecTV Arena later in the year when she plays here and my daughter goes in.
She speaks directly to teenagers (mostly girls) who have taken EMO culture and mixed it with pop culture. It's for a generation that thinks its cool to be depressed and if you don't have "something wrong with you" then you don't fit in. These days, fitting in is not fitting in.
I suspect she (Eilish) is much more corporate than her general act would suggest. Either way, the music is as calculated as Britney Spears was 20 years ago, it's just fits more in what teenagers want in 2019/2020.
I spend a lot of time around teenagers (also have a 14 year old boy) and I cannot stress enough that this generation of kids are the weakest, easily offended, most childish generation of young people there has ever been. Billie is a teenager, so.
By the way, that makes it seem like I hate her and the music. I don't, but neither do I care.
The problem is, that most famous do not have a superior IQ I guess, so their ideas or thoughts are not better than any other persons!
A lot of the famous would be better of keeping the piehole shut.....Roger Waters is a good example, or any rapper or popstars in general....
The low IQ argument (although you may have been saying it flippantly) is something I have thought about, and it is interesting even if I have not come to any big conclusions.
Firstly, there is some observational evidence that shows people who are locked into their path in life earlier tend to struggle with critical thinking and analysis. For example, sports stars are well known for being - for want of a better word - stupid. Their whole development is centered on becoming elite in one specific field. For many actors this is a similar path.
It's a generalisation that I have not quite come to terms with yet so don't want to go too deep on it. Of course, if your path was centered on something that involved critical thinking (like physics) then your world view may be more expansive.
However, there is no way all people fall under this and some people in the world of celebrity must have a grasp on current affairs and knowledge. The question is where are they? You mention Roger Waters and for me he fits in with Robert De Niro. Someone who is reputed as making thoughtful art does not equate to having something thoughtful to say on other subjects. It's got nothing to do with whether I agree with them or not, they offer such low effort arguments and deal with slogans. They don't even realize Trump saw what they were all doing in pursuing self advertising and seeking approval and took it to the 10th degree and became president off it.
Edit to add that having an IQ higher than the next person does not neccesarily make your opinion on a given subject more valuable.
I am a sucker for cheescake. It's hit and miss here because you never know what you're going to get from place to place. Still, I am not a snob and basically like any cheesecake you put in front of me. Of course, I will smash a tub of ice cream or bar of chocolate as much as the next person. Oh, add in some carrot cake to my sweet preferences too.
Social media has a lot to answer for, especially Instagram which is now the new Facebook.
You're right about Instagram, but only to a degree. Instagram has become the platform for teens and celebrities, so it is definately the platform where they are pushing their views.
However, the celebrities pushing opinions are rarely basing the information on their own views. For the most part they are following memes (I mean meme in the truest sense), which are still largely pushed on Twitter and to a lesser degree Facebook.
I guess what I am saying, in terms of political discourse, Twitter and Facebook are still far more influential, and dangerous. Celebrites will take issues (whatever the meme issues are that week) and often conflate them before summarizing them in their "own view" on Instagram.
Social media does have a lot to answer for, but if you removed Instagram, the problem would not improve. If you removed Twitter it arguably would. Or at least until the environment around political discourse moved to another platform (so, yeah, about 2 minutes).
On the actual subject of the thread, rarely have the celebrities had something interesting to say. I watched the actors round table from last week where De Niro could not help to push his political agenda. Now, I agree with De Niro in terms of his general politics, but every time I have heard him talk about it he comes across as empty with little to say. Of course, we think of him as this legend of film and automatically believe he must also be extremely thoughtful.
Another example is Ben Affleck attacking Sam Harris on Bill Maher's show. On many, many subjects I don't agree with Harris (although I do on some) but rate him or not his whole schtick is discourse. I will let you decide the merit of his intellectualism, but the point is he enters into debate. Affleck instead believed debate means to attack and spout ill-conceived arguments. It was embarrasing and highlighted to me that for the most part, celebrities should keep their mouth shut.
Having said that, Trump was a celebrity and got quite far by not keeping his mouth shut, so, who knows.
Yeah, $69 is relatively affordable for a hotel these days, unless it is a targeted budget one. I don't think you'd get much for that price in Argentina.
However, Uruguay is more expensive than Argentina.
Looks like this was a win all-round for you Splinter, both the travel and the place itself. I doff my cap.
Just a glance at the situation of news on TV here shows the journalistic standards. There's almost zero investigative reporting here. Yeah, news is going down the toilet just about everywhere but it seems it was never out of it in Argentina. Oddly the collapse of quality news may be felt less here becuse it was never great to begin with. News is very rarely informative in Argentina, instead it's lieterally, this happened, that happened, goodnight.