CraigOhMyEggo

Of course I'm not asking you to give away your passwords. But for those of you who have so many, how do you keep track of them all? Do you use any unique methods?

I know many people struggle between having something that's easy to remember and something that's easy to guess. If you keep a note with your passwords on it, for example, it can be stolen, lost, or destroyed, or if you make them according to a pattern that's easy to remember, the wrong people might find them easier to guess.

There is an individual I know who has probably pissed off entire communities with a lot of ambiguously moral situations. People don't keep it a secret they don't like her, and occasionally someone who notices her object to how they treat her will quip "if so many people wreak of being shit to you, maybe you should check your own shoes".

Once in a while though, I noticed she would respond to that statement with "if it were my own shoes, it's also the shoes of the local authorities, as they have no problem with me, only those of you they're stepping on do". Oddly enough, this is completely true. I see situations like this where it's the masses VS people in positions of wisdom (with situations like this making you wonder if the people in positions of wisdom are enough to outweigh the masses) and I am intrigued because it makes you ask why both exist, and it makes me wonder if people who spend so long not putting salience into a systemic process of conflict mediation have trouble navigating how to deal with it.

I would wonder if they reflect, and reflect, and reflect, until some trivial detail triggers a eureka moment, for example two people might be fighting bitterly with each other and it might be difficult to put one as more moral than the other, until you realize one of them had been previously banned from the place they're fighting in.

The last time you had to assess who was the asshole in a certain situation, what was that tipping point, that last straw, the tiebreaker that made you realize there was a slightly larger moral weight on one side than the other?

There is an individual I know who has probably pissed off entire communities with a lot of ambiguously moral situations. People don't keep it a secret they don't like her, and occasionally someone who notices her object to how they treat her will quip "if so many people wreak of being shit to you, maybe you should check your own shoes".

Once in a while though, I noticed she would respond to that statement with "if it were my own shoes, it's also the shoes of the local authorities, as they have no problem with me, only those of you they're stepping on do". Oddly enough, this is completely true. I see situations like this where it's the masses VS people in positions of wisdom (with situations like this making you wonder if the people in positions of wisdom are enough to outweigh the masses) and I am intrigued because it makes you ask why both exist, and it makes me wonder if people who spend so long not putting salience into a systemic process of conflict mediation have trouble navigating how to deal with it.

I would wonder if they reflect, and reflect, and reflect, until some trivial detail triggers a eureka moment, for example two people might be fighting bitterly with each other and it might be difficult to put one as more moral than the other, until you realize one of them had been previously banned from the place they're fighting in.

The last time you had to assess who was the asshole in a certain situation, what was that tipping point, that last straw, the tiebreaker that made you realize there was a slightly larger moral weight on one side than the other?

You can consider this installment four of my previous question which is the third installment.

Throughout history, we have developed many methods of telling time. The most famous two examples being the clock and the sundial. The ancient Egyptians invented the clepsydra, an extremely simple device that uses dripping water as a way to tell how much time has passed. There are also, for example, hourglasses, which flow sand as a measurement of time.

Suppose, though, you were an intelligent dolphin and, for some reason, had to always have a time reference on you. Being under the water seems to present a challenge, for technology like clocks and hourglasses don't seem to be possible to make under the water, a clepsydra certainly wouldn't work since you can't pour water underwater, and a sundial wouldn't have the proper lighting. So you must improvise in order to find a way to keep track of time. How would you improvise in order to keep track of time.

You can consider this installment four of my previous question which is the third installment.

Throughout history, we have developed many methods of telling time. The most famous two examples being the clock and the sundial. The ancient Egyptians invented the clepsydra, an extremely simple device that uses dripping water as a way to tell how much time has passed. There are also, for example, hourglasses, which flow sand as a measurement of time.

Suppose, though, you were an intelligent dolphin and, for some reason, had to always have a time reference on you. Being under the water seems to present a challenge, for technology like clocks and hourglasses don't seem to be possible to make under the water, a clepsydra certainly wouldn't work since you can't pour water underwater, and a sundial wouldn't have the proper lighting. So you must improvise in order to find a way to keep track of time. How would you improvise in order to keep track of time.

This question was inspired by a conversation with someone I know on here who has been trying to curb theft. Specifically art theft. The person is an artist and has noticed how common (and sometimes seemingly random) art theft is and has been trying to curb it by taking a hit and hinting that her art is stealable (as in she wouldn't mind if it's stolen, as long as no deception is at play). This got us thinking, as though they are noble intentions and the massive backlash she has gotten for it comes off as weird, I don't think encouraging theft is a good idea, nor do I think it's a matter of kleptomania if it's digital (plus I think it would already curb kleptomania to say kleptomaniacs are allowed to take something, advice appreciated if available). But it got us talking about what they would even want to steal. Is the appeal in the rarity? The sensory input? Something else? The person is a "passive progressive" and has done something similar to curb compulsive lying, and it has somewhat worked, so maybe I'm wrong.

To those of you who habitually steal stuff or know someone who does, what aspects of stolen items increase the appeal to steal them?

This question was inspired by a conversation with someone I know on here who has been trying to curb theft. Specifically art theft. The person is an artist and has noticed how common (and sometimes seemingly random) art theft is and has been trying to curb it by taking a hit and hinting that her art is stealable (as in she wouldn't mind if it's stolen, as long as no deception is at play). This got us thinking, as though they are noble intentions and the massive backlash she has gotten for it comes off as weird, I don't think encouraging theft is a good idea, nor do I think it's a matter of kleptomania if it's digital (plus I think it would already curb kleptomania to say kleptomaniacs are allowed to take something, advice appreciated if available). But it got us talking about what they would even want to steal. Is the appeal in the rarity? The sensory input? Something else? The person is a "passive progressive" and has done something similar to curb compulsive lying, and it has somewhat worked, so maybe I'm wrong.

To those of you who habitually steal stuff or know someone who does, what aspects of stolen items increase the appeal to steal them?