His formatting leaves a bit to be desired, but that basically boils down to

1. Knives with certain features like a double edge, a handguard, butterfly knives and certain other one-handed opening mechanisms (I assume switchblades, maybe assisted openers, possibly gravity and flick knives) are weapons and can be owned but generally not carried

Otherwise...

2. Knives (and I assume this applies to other bladed tools as well since he mentioned an axe)with a blade length of less than about 5.5 inches are ok to carry for no particular reason, as long as either the blade doesn't lock or it needs two hands to open it (from how he wrote it sounds to me like one or the other of those features is ok, but not both)

3. You can carry a bigger knife if you have a good reason that you need one, like if you're going campings/hunting, or clearing brush with a machete (and from how he phrased it sounds like you could also carry a one-handed locking knife with a good reason)

4. You get carded to prove you're an adult if you want to buy a sword (I assume knives as well)

Which is pretty straightforward, and actually similar to a lot of laws in the states (looser than some states I believe, and stricter than others)

A lot of us don't think of our knives as weapons, they're tools.

It's rare that I don't carry a knife, and using it in self defense is the furthest thing from my mind every day when I put it in my pocket. I use it for things like opening packages, cutting string, sharpening pencils, use various other tools on the knife like screwdrivers, pliers, awls, I have a lot of outdoor hobbies like camping, hiking, fishing, and knives are kind of indispensable for those pursuits.

If I'm ever in a situation where I absolutely need to defend myself, and I don't really foresee that ever being necessary, I'm probably not even going to think of using my knife in self defense, I don't think of it as a weapon anymore than I think of my wallet being a weapon, it's just something that lives in my pocket that I frequently need to use.

And knives make a shitty weapon, if you're close enough to stab someone, you're close enough to get punched in the face, or for your assailant to wrestle it out of your hands and stab you with it. You'd be better swinging around pretty much any larger object within arms reach to create some space. They say about knife fights that the loser dies in the street, the winner dies in the ambulance.

The knives I tend to carry especially aren't good weapons, most need 2 hands to open, aren't really designed ergonomically as fighting knives, most are fairly small so I'd have to get really lucky to hit anything vital and would probably just piss them off more and not stop the attack quickly, some of them don't even have a pointy blade so not good for stabbing (I actually make it a point to choose less threatening looking knives for my EDC needs) some of them don't lock open so they'd just as like close on my fingers as cause any harm to my assailant, and some of them actually lock in the closed position so definitely not good for a weapon.

I'm not saying that everyone who carries a knife has the same mindset. Lots of people do carry them as weapons, those people are idiots. And not everyone puts the same thought into the knives they carry and just get something that looks cool whether or not it's functional for their needs.

I also don't carry anything for self defense regularly and don't own a gun (not opposed to gun ownership in general, but my thoughts on that are part whole 'nother debate,) in general if I feel like I need to be prepared to defend myself if I go somewhere, I just don't go there. There's a bit of privilege to that, since I live in a safe area and can make that call, not everyone is lucky enough to live somewhere they can feel safe. The only exception is the pepper spray I keep with my dogs leash, since my wife or I often end up walking her alone at night, and that's more of a precaution against loose dogs, coyotes, etc. than against people.

There's a lot to say about Americans' love of violence and weapons and the sort of mindset we have about self defense, and overall I tend to think that a lot of my country is absolutely insane when it comes to those matters. That said, I also think people who look at the little swiss army type knives, or Leatherman multitools I tend to carry and see a terrifying deadly weapon have their own issues to work out too.

As far as straws go, I agree that for most people in most situations they're unnecessary for most soft drinks. I do, however, think they're a pretty important part of the experience with some cocktails though, it has some effect on how fast you drink it, how it hits your tongue and you experience the flavors, if the drink is layered it effects how those different layers mix, what order you get them in and how the drink evolves as you drink it.

That said, I think most reusable straws make for a bad substitute in a lot of cases because they're too thick compared to the coffee stirrer type straws I usually tend to get in bars when I order a cocktail that calls for a straw. Thinner straws would probably be kind of a pain to clean though.

I'm not a huge fan of metal straws, they're just too hard and kind of unnerving if they crack against your teeth.

I have some bamboo straws I like, and they fit my vibe since I make a lot of tiki drinks at home.

AFAIK, these tethered caps are mostly an EU thing (and at the very least are not widely used in my area of the US) and a lot of European countries are less knife-friendly than the US.

A lot of them absolutely do learn those skills the same way I did

But for a lot of parent/child relationships, being gay can still be a pretty big stumbling block. If your dad is rejecting you, doesn't want anything to do with you, maybe even kicking you out of his house, you're not going to be able to learn anything from him. If he's overall supportive but worried about not wanting to push you into traditional gender roles and ideas of masculinity and such that you may not identify with, he may not try hard enough to pass those skills on. If a kid coming to terms with his sexual orientation feels pressured to act a certain way because of pressure from his peers or society, he may push back against his parents trying to teach him those skills, etc.

It's not unique to being the father of a gay son, lots of parents struggle to find ways to bond with their kids who have different personalities, interests, opinions, etc. than they do, but being gay can throw an extra level of complications into the mix and so I suspect you'd see it at least somewhat more among gay guys than otherwise comparable straight guys.

In addition to being disinherited, discrimination, moving to more expensive bluer areas that are more tolerant, and such that people have already touched on, and I'm sure are significant factors at play, I just kind of want to spitball a couple thoughts. I'm no sociologist or economist or anything of the sort so I don't know how much these thoughts hold water

The sort of stereotypical American dream- husband & wife, 2.5 kids, 2 cars, house in the suburbs, etc. probably looks at least a little different for many LGBTQ people. In many cases, the kids are kind of a non-starter- adoption, IVF, surrogacy, etc. are out of reach for a lot of people for a few different reasons, and if you're not planning around having kids, you may not need that house in the suburbs with a good school district and a yard for them to play in. And if you're not spending money on kids, you may want to spend that money elsewhere, it may be more important to you to be close to other things, or to not have a mortgage hanging over you're head and want to be able to move to a different neighborhood, city, state, or maybe even country every few years when your lease is up.

I'm a fairly stereotypical straight dude, I grew up holding the flashlight for my dad and getting yelled at while he fixed pretty much everything around the house himself, and it gave me a pretty solid foundation as a handyman. There's not much around a house that I'm not confident I could fix myself or with a couple buddies if I needed to, and I suspect that a lot of girls and probably many gay guys have a different experience with that kind of thing in their childhoods. Not that they can't learn those skills on their own later on in life if they want/need to, but it can be a pretty daunting prospect, and I could see a lot of people who didn't grow up learning those skills choosing to live in an apartment or rental house where they can just call maintenance or their landlord when something breaks instead of needing to learn a bunch of plumbing, electrical, carpentry, drywall, etc on the fly as your house is falling apart around you. I'm not sure I'd want to take on home ownership if I had to start from square one and relearn everything I picked up from my dad on my own.

There was already some amount of cultural awareness about the Titanic prior to the movie, after all they pretty much started making movies, plays, documentaries, etc. as soon as it happened and kept right on making them

It also got a pretty good bump in popularity when the wreck was found in the 80s

Even if the movie weren't made, there'd probably be a pretty decent chunk of people who would know about it from the scene in Ghostbusters 2 if nothing else.

It probably wouldn't be something that pretty much everyone knows about, and certainly not in the kind of detail we do now, but you'd probably still have a pretty good chance of people who'd at least know that it was a big passenger ship that sank.

It's hard for me to be impartial about this though, I was in elementary school when the movie came out, prime age to learn how to play "my heart will go on" on the recorder in music class and to see that big brick of 2 VHS tapes for rent in blockbuster. To this day I actually haven't seen it, but it's hard for me to imagine a world that people don't know about the Titanic because the movie was just so omnipresent in my formative years.

I feel like it's a pretty common experience for a lot of us maker types- we come up with a solution to a problem, maybe we tried searching for one and came up empty, or maybe we just thought it would be fun to make from the get-go, then sometime later we stumble upon someone selling pretty much the exact thing we made and think "huh, so thats what these things are called" maybe with a touch of disappointment that your idea wasn't as original as you thought, or maybe just intrigued because you just added another term to your vocabulary and you have a better idea what to search for next time.

Yours looks good though, It's probably unnecessary but I'd be tempted to add like a U-shaped cradle piece to the top to help keep it in place if your computer ever gets jostled for any reason, and maybe a jam nut at the bottom to make sure it stays where you set it. Again probably totally unnecessary, but I always figure that if it's worth doing it's worth overdoing.

What sort of printer and filament/resin are you using? I'd worry a bit about it warping or sagging over time from the heat inside a computer. I know some materials can handle the heat better or worse than others, but I haven't dipped my toes into 3d printing myself yet, so I may be overestimating how much of an issue it is.

And can your printer make decent screw threads, or do you have to clean them up afterwards with a tap and die or something? I'm not really up on the current state of 3d printers, but one of the first 3d printed objects I remember ever handling was back in high school 15 or so years ago. One of my teachers went to a conference where they were showing off new gadgets for computer and shop classes, and he brought back a couple 3d printed crescent wrenches for us to fondle. I remember the screws being really crunchy and they almost but didn't quite work, so in the back of my mind I've always thought of functional screw threads as something 3d printers can't quite do, so it's wild to me if we've gone from barely able to make even a coarse thread with huge tolerances work to being able to make pretty fine threads with pretty tight tolerances.

Of course back then, they hadn't even really settled on calling it "3d printing," I remember that teacher calling it a "rapid prototyping machine" when he was telling us about it, and described it as being "like a 3d printer"

I may be misinterpreting what you're describing, but it kind of sounds like you've reinvented the machinist jack.

Not throwing shade, it makes sense and there's a reason that machinists the world over use them to tackle the same sort of problem of how to support sagging parts- it's simple and it works. And coming up with the same solution shows that you have a good understanding of the issue and how to tackle it.

Just pointing it out because I love the overlap between different fields and hobbies, and maybe if you didn't already know that machinist jacks were a thing you'll find inspiration for a version 2.0 if you ever feel the need to make one.

I'd also like to see your version when you get around to sharing it.

I think the scam calls are annoying, but it takes basically no effort to ignore them when I'm not in the mood to mess with them, so I don't mind them so much.

I figure though if I can keep one tied up talking to me for a few minutes that's one less chance for them to be scamming someone's grandmother. It's a tiny drop in the ocean, but it's still potentially one less person getting scammed that day, and that's worth something.

There's probably a lot of different variables, cows vs bulls, the breed, how they're being raised, if they have calves with them, how you're behaving, etc.

In general though, safest bet is always going to be to give them space and not approach them. Not to say they're necessarily going to be aggressive or anything, but that's just kind of rule number 1 with any animals you're not familiar with.

Annecdotally, when I was a teenager, I did Philmont, which is a big property the Boy Scouts of America (now changing their name to Scouting America) owns in New Mexico, where scouts can go backpacking. They also maintain a working cattle ranch there, and I believe so e of the neighboring ranches allow their cattle to (grave? Free range? Roam? I'm not sure of the correct terminology) the Philmont property, so it's not uncommon to encounter cows in various places there.

They give pretty much the same lecture, don't approach them, don't do anything to spook them, and give them some space.

At one point my group was hiking along a trail coming to a junction, and a few dozen cows came down the trail we were about to head up and went into the woods. We weren't super close to them, but it was probably about the closest I've been to a cow outside of a petting zoo in my life, and there was nothing but a few yards of open trail between us. We just stood back and watched them go about their business, the cows didn't pay any attention to us, we hung out for a couple minutes after they passed in case there were any stragglers, and sure enough there was a lone cow that came running down the trail trying to catch up with its friends.

I'm no cow-ologist, but my general understanding is that they tend to be fairly laid back, and if anything curious. That said, they're big, powerful animals and you don't want to spook them.

I don't know the specifics of this project, but not all Amtrak trains are electric, they also run diesel and dual mode (diesel/electric) trains (I'm pretty sure, but not certain that the northeast corridor is all electric)

There's also other things worth considering like emissions from construction or maintenance vehicles, some lines are used for freight and passenger rail, construction might stir up any crap that might be in the soil, I suspect there's some amount of metal dust created by the constant grinding of wheels on rails, plastics from brakes and such, leaks from any hydraulics onboard the train, refrigerant leaking from the air conditioning, etc.

In the grand scheme, even if they're running straight diesel trains, leaking fluids, asbestos brake pads, etc. it's probably all negligible in emissions compared to just living in Baltimore, maybe even offset if it leads to more people using Amtrak instead of driving but all of it is still worth considering.

It depends on what I'm doing

If I'm going somewhere out of easy driving distance and hoping maybe some friends will come along, I'll start floating the idea about a year out, start making more solid plans about 6 months out. Give people time to get passports, save up for plane tickets, etc.

If it's an overnight to a long weekend with just me and my wife, maybe a couple weeks, we could probably do day-of sometimes but we gotta make sure someone can watch our dog.

You could chant primary colors at kindergarteners online line for a maximum of 20 hours per week, or in person for a maximum of 10 hours per week

That may work for you, and if it does I'm happy for you, but for me, as much as I want more time for myself and my hobbies, one thing I want even more is to not ever spend any amount of time doing anything even remotely like that.

I also have no real interest in working abroad even if I didn't think that job sounded horrible. A week or two of vacation, sure, but by the end of week 2, I'm ready to go home, and that's really the point here, I want to be able to just stay home, and only leave when it's to do something I want to do.

The problem is that the one thing I want to do that I'm not already doing is "not work"

I don't have any grand plans to take up new hobbies or anything in my retirement (though I'm sure I'll continue collecting hobbies just as I always have) I just want to be able to do them on my own schedule

Every time I see one of those "employees must wash hands" signs, I think about getting some custom made "and everyone else should too" signs made up to start posting below them in public bathrooms everywhere I go.

As a child on a taco commercial once said

¿Por qué no los dos?

Both show promise though need further research to determine how they should be used most effectively and safely, they have similar legal hurdles, and different patients may respond better to one, the other, or possibly even a combination of both,

It of course varries from one school or area to another, and from different age groups.

I ended up going to 4 proms, my own junior and senior proms, the senior prom my junior year because a girl asked me, and then I ended up dating a girl at another high school after I graduated and ended up going to her senior prom (in case anyone's getting skeeved at that, we were both 18 at the time we started dating, just a few months difference between us, I just barely made the cutoff to be part of the previous grade and she just missed it)

That last prom was the only one where I was actually dating my date, the other 3 we just went as friends, although I did have a pretty big crush on the girl I took to both of my own proms but could never quite work up the nerve to ask her out.

There were never any elaborate promposals or anything, that was just starting around that time and hadn't quite caught on yet, my sister a couple years behind me did it, nothing too elaborate I think she gave her friend a cake and balloons.

The promposal thing is mostly just that it's silly and fun, and nowadays I guess it probably makes for a funny tiktok.

Prom was not a particularly big deal in my area, if I had to attach any particular significance to it, it's just that it's kind of your first "adult" formal event that you're attending for your own sake, not because you're going to a cousins wedding, not something like your first communion or bar mitzvah or whatever when you're still very much a kid. You get to dress up, you get a fancy meal, you rent a limo, maybe you go to a cool post-prom party and you're going to be out till the wee hours of the morning mostly left to your own devices. It's fun for its own sake, and the kind of event most teens don't really get to experience very often.

If it is in fact the moment you walk in the door, then it absolutely is the architecture. If the architecture didn't have any effect on it, whatever's disrupting the signal would also interfere with the signal outside.

Damn near every school building I've ever been in is a behemoth of brick, concrete, and cinder blocks. Cellular and other radio signals have a hard time penetrating that.

Same for a lot of hospitals, big retail stores, and other similar places.

I work in 911 dispatch, we have caution notes attached to the addresses of a lot of schools, hospitals, various office buildings, etc. in our area that there's poor cell reception or that our responders can't get radio reception inside the buildings, so we know how we can or can't communicate with our units when they're responding to an emergency there. I can guarantee you those places aren't purposely jamming police radios.

I lose my cell signal in parts of several of my local grocery stores, big box retailers, etc. that's just part of being inside of a big concrete and metal box. Why would they even want to interfere with my ability to use my phone?

A lot of these buildings were built before cell phones were even a thing, so reception was not a concern in their design. Even in newer buildings, it's often not a major consideration.

And as others said, jamming a cell signal is a huge no-no from the FCC. If anything, and I doubt they're even doing this much, they have picocells (basically tiny cell towers) in the building that they're turning off at certain times. If they didn't have them, there would still be no signal in those parts of the building.

First of all, I'm not at all against medical (or recreational for that matter) marijuana. It helps people, and those people should have access to medications that help them, and I'd rather have the current system than no access to medical marijuana at all. I feel like I need to start off with this because otherwise I feel like parts of this comment may come off as anti-marijuana, and that's not my intention at all.

But it's always been kind of wild to me how the programs we have are handling medical marijuana, I'm pretty sure if a doctor tried to handle any other medication like we usually handle medical marijuana, he'd lose his license.

Marijuana isn't one drug, it's several, THC, CBD, Terpenes, various other cannabinoids and other active ingredients, all with different interactions with your body and with each other that can produce a variety of effects on their own or in combination with the others.

And often you're given little to no medical guidance on which ones will actually help with which issues, how much or how often you should take them, and in what way.

It's kind of like being given a bucket of assorted pills that may or may not help your condition and being told to mix and match them and try taking them in various ways until you feel better.

And don't even get me started on smoking it. Yes, it can be an effective delivery method, and you can go back and forth on how marijuana smoke is more or less harmful in various ways than tobacco, but at the end of the day putting smoke in your lungs is bad for you, and I don't think there's a doctor in the world who would disagree with that. If nicotine was some sort of wonder drug that could help with various conditions and you could get a prescription for it, I guarantee you it wouldn't come in the form of tobacco, you'd get pills, patches, maybe some kind of inhaler, vape or nebulizer, injections, suppositories, etc. some sort of purified product with a known dosage.

It's practically impossible to really do medical grade QA on a plant, there's going to be variation from one plant to another, or even from different parts of the same plant depending on weather, light, water, fertilizer, and other variables in the growing conditions, not to mention just the genetic variations in the plants, and knowing exactly how much of which active ingredients are in the product is kind of key to being able to dial in what is an effective dose.

Yes, a lot of that has to do with all of the shitty laws and regulations we have around marijuana and our broken medical system in general, I'm not going to go into that too much because this comment is already going to be long enough that a lot of people won't read it, but I'll leave it it's hard to study marijuana to figure what works and how, and it's hard to build up the kind of industry needed to make actual pure and consistent medical grade marijuana products.

Now of course, if we handled medical marijuana the way it probably should be for the best results, it would probably turn out to be a hugely expensive undertaking under our current healthcare system. There'd probably be a lot of doctor-patient interaction to help you dial in your dosages, with more guidance on how and when to take it, we'd probably be getting into territory where you'd need some sort of a compounding pharmacist who could provide you with a custom blend of the right active ingredients in precise ratios in the delivery method that's most effective for your condition and needs, there'd be a huge pharmaceutical industry (and probably all of the corporate greed that goes with it) that would need to be built to provide these medications, etc.

And unless we have some major overhaul to our healthcare system, that would all probably price a lot of patients out of being able to afford these treatments.

And yes, the current system works well enough for a lot of people, but it's possible that it could work even better for them and for even more people if we treated marijuana more like other medications.

I don't exactly have a grand plan on how to fix things. I don't want to make marijuana more expensive or inaccessible for the people who need it. I don't want to feed into the pockets of big pharma. But I do want to make sure that our treatments are as effective as possible, that we're treating marijuana seriously as a medication and that people view it as such, and that we're not just settling for our treatment options being "good enough" when we can do even better. We didn't stop at willow bark, we built on it to develop modern aspirin and other NSAIDs, and someday we will probably do the same for marijuana, there will probably come a day when almost no one will turn to plant-derived marijuana products for medical reasons because we will have long since isolated, synthesized, and developed entirely new classes of drugs based on what we learn from studying marijuana that do the same things more effectively, more safely, and with even less side-effects.