The Box of Chocolates Thread (You never know what you're going to get!)

99% of the time people’s favorite music is something they picked up when they were 13-25 based on their personal experience. Like for example , i love led zeppelin and pink floyd! but I will never have the same emotional and cultural connection to them they way I do to early 2000’s bands like for example tool or my chemical romance or anti flag.
In gay culture sure Britney spears will always be an icon but people like Britney Spears and things like mean girls are not culturally relevant to gay people in their young 20’s the way they were for a millennial.

I only post on my phone. On my laptop I can switch vpn service to many different nodes/countries and some of them have me ip banned from many different sites for presumably various reasons that have nothing to do with me

Maybe you were having a DNS issue with your router, Victor?

could be, I just changed it on my machine. anyway, too bad d2 is banned and cant tell me how dumb I am.

We are all sad about the lost content :(

I can’t tell you how dumb you are either because name calling is banned.

You absolutely did in the mod thread. Then it got deleted

Truth

I grew up with mostly hair metal but loved run dmc, beastie boys and public enemy

When public enemy and Anthrax got together to remix Bring the Noise i loved it

ThatÂ’s so cool. I love beastie boys. Yeah one thing iÂ’m barely too young for is a lot of that stuff from that time period. Like for example IÂ’ve never seen ghostbusters. Michael Jackson did his moonwalk live for the first time about three-four years before I was born. When I was in high school as a freshmen bands that were popular with seniors in the school were things like pantera, nirvana , pearl jam. bands that were more my time period include things like slipknot, tool, dream theater, korn, mars volta. I always find it surprising that people think their musical tastes are so divorced from their upbringing, although I think the more someone cares about music the more common this is. I think the less someone cares about music the more their favorite bands of all time converge on the first time they had fun at a concert or what they listened to when they first hooked up. ThereÂ’s such a strong cultural imprint in music based on where youÂ’re from , your friends and family and where you grew up.

IÂ’m kind of curious where you got the idea that someone was saying they stoped listening to music at 25. No one stops listening to music.

On the last sentence, I agree with you. I think that objectively the stuff being made in the 20Â’s is better than the stuff from mid 2000Â’s by and large.

What are some bands you like?

Someone said most people stop listening to new music after 25, not that they stop completely. I think that's generally true, although some may listen to new music by older artists.

Last night I saw Slothrust and Weakened Friends. Tonight Lydia Loveless and Jason Hawk Harris. Tomorrow night Squirrel Flower and Goon. All acts I hadn't heard of 5 years ago, although some have been around for longer.

I've been discovering tons of new music lately since I mostly just listen to Japanese or Brazilian music. Apps like YouTube music/Spotify certainly help for that and probably make it easier now to discover new music than ever before.

Was in a 6.1 earthquake last night. Heard a rumble and dogs started barking which were the P-waves then when the S-waves starting hitting I woke my friend up and was like "Earthquake! Get outside". But it didn't last long and everything was fine at least where I am.

My second earthquake within the last year. There was a 5.7 in Colombia and I got an alert on my phone before it hit. Google has a system where it senses if phones are vibrating and then sends alerts, although for whatever reason that didn't happen last night.

I did stop. Listening to new music at ... maybe 25 is correct
I dvr snl and almost always skip. The musical act

Not sure why but glad I'm not alone

For me, it's not that I don't sometimes discovery new music to me at my age, but it was the same kind of music that I was listening to when I was between 10 and 25ish. To give some perspective, I was really excited about that Daft Punk album that came out like ten years ago. I listened to it all the way through and hated it, as it was not the Daft Punk house music that I loved from when I was younger, but a completely different type of music that sounded completely foreign to my ears. It is the same thing with hip hop: I am a big fan of the hip hop sound from the late 80s to the early 2000s, and then when I hear a mumble rapper or whatever the hell it is called these days, I am not even sure I am hearing.

Ad Rock from the Beastie Boys discusses this in this video at the 5:42 mark, and I am sure I have seen an actual study about this which is where I got the 25 years cut off.

https://youtu.be/23ZlUOeiCqo?si=T1d32vpB...

Oh, hi guys.

DonkJr, kind words. Way kinder than I expected or deserved, thanks.

But everyone was kind of upset about my banning. Almost like more upset than I was. So thanks, guys.

And bowser, no hard feelings.

I nearly cried but didn't. That would be wussy.

If I said 10 meters, would I have got 4 days?

Just need to understand how this works.

d2_e4, you have to be careful with Bowser, you are already on thin ice.

Bowser can't be bargained with. He can't be reasoned with. He doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear! And he absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are banned here for life!

Honestly d2_e4's talents of insulting people are not being appreciated here. I missed his insults when he lobbed them at me once upon a time ago.

Now browser sends him to the abyss on a 10 inch leash.

This is an abomination.

I've been stewing on this question for a while now and am looking for input from others. Perhaps this isn't the place for said question, but I can't think of anywhere else to ask. I know, in advance, that by even asking about this I am subject to backlash but I am genuinely curious as to what other people think.

Over the past few years, I'll be reading either a locally (Boston) based news article or a nationally based sports article and I've noticed a trend of when describing different races, the "B" in black will be capitalized and the "w" in white won't be.

What exactly are these media outlets doing? It's obvious to me that if the situation were reversed there would be outrage (justifiably so) but what exactly is the message being sent and how is it good for members of either race?

I'd suggest starting with a quick Google of the subject; there's been plenty written about it.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/capitaliz...

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/05/insid...

https://www.cjr.org/analysis/capital-b-b...

I had wondered about it myself, but never enough to read up on it until now. The inconsistency didn't make a lot of sense to me; now I can understand it.

Dear Colleagues,

At The Times and elsewhere, the nationwide protests over racism and police violence have prompted discussions about many aspects of our coverage. One element has been a renewed focus on a longstanding debate: whether to capitalize the term “Black.”

We have talked to more than 100 staff members to get their views, reviewed the arguments that have been made over many years, and consulted with colleagues at other news organizations. The feedback has been thoughtful and nuanced, with a wide range of opinions among colleagues of all backgrounds.

Based on those discussions, we’ve decided to adopt the change and start using uppercase “Black” to describe people and cultures of African origin, both in the United States and elsewhere. We believe this style best conveys elements of shared history and identity, and reflects our goal to be respectful of all the people and communities we cover.

The change will match what many readers are seeing elsewhere. The Associated Press and other major news organizations have recently adopted “Black,” which has long been favored by many African-American publications and other outlets. The new style is also consistent with our treatment of many other racial and ethnic terms: We recently decided to capitalize “Native” and “Indigenous,” while other ethnic terms like “Asian-American” and “Latino” have always been capitalized.

We will retain lowercase treatment for “white.” While there is an obvious question of parallelism, there has been no comparable movement toward widespread adoption of a new style for “white,” and there is less of a sense that “white” describes a shared culture and history. Moreover, hate groups and white supremacists have long favored the uppercase style, which in itself is reason to avoid it.

The term “brown” as a racial or ethnic description should also generally remain lowercase and should be used with care. “Brown” has been used to describe such a disparate range of people — Latin, Indigenous, Asian, Middle Eastern — that the meaning is often unclear to readers. A more specific description is generally best.

The change to “Black” is effective immediately; relevant stylebook entries will be revised in the coming days. Here are a few additional points to keep in mind:

Both “Black” and “white” should normally be used as adjectives, not nouns.
“African-American” remains an acceptable alternative for Black people in the United States; we should generally choose the term that the subject favors.
Under our longstanding guidelines, we should include references to a person’s race or ethnicity only when it is pertinent and the pertinence is clear to readers.
Take care to avoid implying that “white” is the default (for example, by noting the race of a Black person in a story but not specifying the race of others). And avoid implying that any racial or ethnic group is monolithic in its outlook or views.
Thanks to all the staff members who shared thoughtful, nuanced views on this complex subject, and to Mike Abrams, who helped guide our discussions and thinking.

https://www.nytco.com/press/uppercasing-...

Ok, so I read the three articles. The second two are more or less the same as the first which contains this interesting passage at the end:

I'm not really sure how to respond to the reasoning here. Black people have a shared history, but white people don't. Well, for starters, that's an extremely racist statement but aside from that it's pretty moronic. I have met people with black skin from African countries and, on the whole, they dress, talk and behave differently than the black people I grew up with in America. Just like the white people I've met from European countries dress, talk and behave differently than the white people I grew up with. Why is this? Because they/we don't have much shared history, if any at all.

Going further, saying that white people have "enough" capitalization due to being Irish, German, Polish etc is moronic. Black people come from different countries as well, and since I've been able to read, I've never noticed when somebody is being described as Ethiopian it is done with a lower-case letter. If it were, my mind would immediately register it as a slight and I would question the publication.

The best part is the end though. Basically, if you notice this change, as a white person, and mention it, you are already being labeled as a supremacist.

Listen, I live in America. I've gone through school, I've heard about slavery, Jim Crowe, ridiculous policing of black people, block busting etc. The black race has had it tough but crap like this is not the answer to the problem. While I never met the man, I really don't think this is what MLK had in mind.

I don't know what I'm hoping to achieve here. I just feel like I am living in a bizzarro world sometimes and am looking for other people to connect with. People who aren't white supremacists but also recognize the above "explanation" as the pile of gibberish it is.

My long term fear is that the more the trend of marginalizing white people continues the more the extreme far right is going to grow. It's almost like the media is making it easier for them to recruit.