Yeah, agreed that reducing concussion is definitely a good thing. Especially strict rules around return to play after concussion cause that’s when you can really do damage.

My problem is that scientists can say: “CTE is a problem in the NFL.” And then the NFL can say “we are addressing it by offering goofy helmet coverings, reducing punt return collision speed, and using better protocols for post concussion”. Then no one is pointing out that none of those changes address CTE at all, and the NFL knows that. In reality, reducing CTE would involve changing the sport in ways that the fans would not like.

I’ll spam this fact wherever I see comments on CTE.

CTE is not correlated with the number of concussions. It’s correlated with years of exposure to repetitive minor hits. It’s a very important distinction because the NFL (and every other professional sport with blows to the head) is trying to push the narrative that concussion is the boogeyman, so that if they can reduce concussion (and they can), they can declare their hands clean from CTE. The only way to reduce CTE is drastic changes to the game.

The way i look at it is that they make it real easy to seek and destroy trees-of-heaven, even in a forest where all you can see is the trunk.

It’s called Robertson by proud Canadians, in the US, at least, “square” is common. A square drive also wasn’t invented by Robertson, he just made the tooling for manufacturing the screws to be economical.

Canadian detected.

I would argue that it is currently a big part of the current economy if you know where to look. Lots of labor works via the principles of a gift economy.

E.g., you help your friend move to a new house, they help you redo your deck, you babysit your brother’s kid, they cook you dinner, etc.

The problem with bartering is that it doesn’t handle 3+ way trades (i.e., person A needs something from person B who needs something from person C, who needs something from person A), and it doesn’t usually handle asynchronous trades.

In gift-based systems, people can literally retire based off the goodwill that they’ve cultivated. There are many old people who serve their families/communities for years who then get taken care of when they need it.

Bartering wasn’t made immediately illegal when currency came in. Currency was made to make bartering easier and more fairly divisible.

I pointed this out above, but I think it’s worth repeating: bartering did not exist before currency, or at least there’s no anthropological evidence suggesting it did. People barter when they are used to currency, but don’t have access to any.

Bartering is a replacement for currency. There is no anthropological evidence of bartering existing before the introduction of currency. You would think somewhere there would be, but there’s not.

Ah, that makes sense. It’s like when the car dealer shows you the version of the car you want with slightly different features since the one you want isn’t on the lot yet.

That’s an attack sub (for attacking ships/other boats), not a boomer (which have nukes).

Weird that they specify “conventionally powered” in the Canadian article since this is a nuclear powered sub.

Only congress can declare “war”, but as far as I know, that hasn’t happened since WW2. The president just does what they want.