Fun fact: cringe comes from an Old English word which meant to crumple or fall in battle. So power word cringe must be a synonym for power word kill 🧙

I know it’s 1/48 cup but that’s a stupid fraction and doesn’t follow any logic, one of the main reasons it should be thrown out

Well, it could be sarcasm but:

1. It doesn’t make sense, what is the witty commentary?
2. Their post history is abrasive and aggressive about silly stuff like this

There’s nothing inherently more natural about cooking in the metric system, people just prefer base 10 these days. People balk at 4 quarts to an arbitrary gallon but love 1 liter being the arbitrary cubic volume of 10 ten-millionths of the distance from the Equator to the North Pole passing through Paris [but not quite].

Cooking by volume was natural before everyone had accurate kitchen scales. You didn’t have a digital tare button in the 1800s but you did have a bunch of containers in common sizes.

what happen when you need 3/4 of a cup ? Or 1.5 cup ?

Generally you have 4 sizes: 1, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4. You just use a combination of 2 sizes (1+1/2) or multiples of your smallest size (3x1/4).

You usually don’t need high precision for cooking, common ratios are good approximations (1:1, 1:2, 1:8, etc…). Baking is a different beast and I don’t know how people did it before weight.

Also, fuck tablespoons and teaspoons. They should just be replaced with 1/16 cup and 1/32 cup.

Since I’ve seen you trolling in multiple threads and know you get a kick out of it, I’ll bite:

What in the world is wrong with this humor and why does it have anything to do with modern males?

I don’t think it’s that crazy or draconian at all. You’re still free to engage in the safest way possible. You have confidence that it’s a safe location and your drug of choice isn’t cut with fentanyl. Why would there be a black market? Addicts generally don’t like buying from untrustworthy sources and passing out in alleyways.

There’s a strange pushback to accepting that humans are physical creatures that evolved for certain stimulus. Society functions by self restraint and a social contract that says, for example, my neighbor won’t go into a stimulant induced psychosis and assault me. Its not a poor reflection on his moral character, that’s just how a human reacts to the substance.

It’s kind of a childish libertarian view to demand full personal freedom at societies’ expense. Your freedom to use a drug anywhere at any time means that the rest of us have to distribute narcan at the library, regulate 45,000 liquor stores, hire more police to counter intoxicated driving, and expand EMS to handle completely preventable emergencies. All that to save you a weekly bus trip to the casino?

Changing the economic system has no impact on any of that, those are the set costs of addiction. Addiction doesn’t cease being a problem because you give up on preventing it. You’re undermining the money going to social services by avoiding simple deterrence-by-inconveince

Any safety and recovery programs are a lot easier to manage when you know exactly where your source is and who’s using. Safe injection sites already exist and have been shown to eliminate overdoses and increase access to social services without any honeypot effect or increased drug use. Adding safe and tested drug sales to the site is a pretty logical step.

Requiring transportation is a detail for implementation, you already need it to do anything in the USA. Unless you think every person has a right to get drugs delivered to their doorstep?

There’s reasonable balances between free and total access to liquor stores on every corner and locking up every bathtub moonshiner.

A good part of the reason prohibition failed was 10,000 years of societal dependence with no alternatives. Humans aren’t built for the sedentary lifestyle and structured civilization we’ve built up and we really do need something to compensate.

We now have the technology and medical knowledge to reliably treat mental and physical ailments, we don’t need ethanol as our cure-all. If I could snap my fingers and swap professional treatment and healthy recreational norms for traditional drugs I’d do it in a heartbeat.

with crystal meth the statistics say, that only a few percent (we’re talking 1-2%) get addicted.

Couldn’t find the numbers on meth specifically but I’m highly skeptical.

70% of users who try an illegal drug before age 13 develop a substance abuse disorder within the next 7 years compared to 27% of those who try an illegal drug after age 17.

25.4% of illegal drug users have a drug disorder.

I’d argue that any form of self medication is inherently unhealthy, and free access to legal substances doesn’t fix that. Some people are able to navigate it responsibly but it’s not possible for most people.

The human brain is a complex soup of chemicals and electrical impulses, altering it with a substance won’t result in an objective self assessment of the effects.

Taking your example, plenty of normal and reasonably happy people get addicted to opiods. The first experiences are on such a different scale to regular chemical pleasure your brain generates that it alters your perception of normal feelings.

If you ask someone to compare that high to normal life before or after, they’ll tell you they never experienced “true” happiness before.

There are real, observable, permanent changes to brain structure from drug use. I don’t think that type of change should be taken lightly with personal experimentation. It should have the same scrutiny and medical guardrails that we give other permanent body choices.

For anyone interested, some reading on heroin’s impact on the brain

Deal 🤝