Affective fallacy Puns

An example I remember reading is a hypothetical where a man is given a choice at a dinner party he is attending: either all guests can have 1 slice of cake, or the latter half of people who joined the party can have two while the people who arrived earlier gets none. The man looks around and figures he's one of the last people to join, so he chooses the second option. However, as the night goes on, more people arrive so at the end he gets nothing.

Also an example: posts that advocate for eugenics ("We should prevent lower IQ people from having children") where the poster obviously assumes they don't fall in that category.

Trying not to be political but obviously this phenomenon applies there as well.

Similar things which I don't think are the concept I'm thinking of:

Illusory superiority (most people think they are above average)
Dunning-Kruger (people over/underestimating their ability)
In-group bias (favoring groups you are a member of)
Third-person effect (eg. "Ads affect other people but don't affect me")

I read about this phenomenon somewhere but forgot the name and I can't find it while searching. I tried searching some keywords (group, affect, policy) on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases but couldn't find what I was looking for. Did I just dream this up? Is this a real concept?

I'm fairly new to philosophy (relatively speaking), so I don't know all of the implications of epistemology within religion and religious debate but often times I see people using this fallacy. On the side of theists, people use "you can't prove he doesn't exist so therefore it's possible". And correct me if this isn't a fallacy, but atheist use " you can't prove he does exist so therefore he doesn't"? If both of those are fallacies, then shouldn't the default position be agnosticism?

With the recent issues, there have been many people discussing whether or not they should quit. Many people have been saying that the reason that they don't want to quit is because they have spent too much money on the game but they would if they were f2p. This is a classic example of the sunk cost fallacy. The link explains it better than I could, but the tl;dr is this:

All that matters are your future gains and future costs. Your past investment has no value beyond how it effects your future enjoyment. If you do not believe that the game is worth your future time and/or money despite the current condition of your account, then you are doing yourself a disservice if you keep playing.

Edit: All that said, I don't fault people who are optimistic. SG do have a precedent of responding favorably to negative feedback, although they also have a history of not fully following through with the promised changes.

Some of us have been increasingly concerned about the future of Bethesda Game Studios (do not confuse with publisher Bethesda Softworks) since 2015.

The offline open world single player studio we love is slowly turning into a bigger company focusing more and more in live services & mobile games.

The main counter argument is always the same. "Spin-off like F076 and Mobile Games like Blades don't have any effect on the main BGS Titles". Opportunity cost apparently doesn't apply to game development, and we were all a bunch of doomsday sayers.

Ladies and Gentlemen, after E3 2019 I invite you to re-evaluate your position and start facing facts.

>Let's look at BGS before 2015, shall we? before any online or mobile games:

https://preview.redd.it/2gzpt94xg4431.png?width=378&format=png&auto=webp&s=b2e1f34b3056a4360ce8c6bb4488ad3e0e416946

A main game in the Elder Scrolls or Fallout Series every 3-4 years. No more than 7 years between entries in the same franchise. 4 years have passed since Fallout 4 release now... so, where is that Starfield thingy? 8 years since the last Elder Scrolls now... where is my TESVI Bethesda?

Well, who knows? Bethesda Softworks hosted a whole conference for their several developers to showcase all their titles and we saw nothing of both from BGS.

You know what we did see? Online and mobile games. Shocking, right? Fallout 76 Expansion & Battle Royal Mode and Elder Scrolls Blades mobile game ported to Switch. WOOOOOOOOOO.

>Let's face the facts and look at BGS after 2015:

https://preview.redd.it/36ya228om4431.png?width=529&format=png&auto=webp&s=23ae7e18a4a1f23668bb2e6226f5b45a48d2a0f2

Do you see it know?

The "Spin-off like F076 and Mobile Games like Blades don't have any effect on the main BGS Titles" argument is simply false.

With all the hype around TOTY, it can be an incredibly tempting time to spend coins or buy FIFA points for packs. This temptation grows even more once people have finished opening their packs that they’ve been saving for weeks/months and haven’t packed anything desirable.

This isn’t intended to be a preachy post – people are of course entitled to do what they want and spend what they want. However, it’s best to be aware of some basic principles of probability and to not have any misconceptions before making decisions.

A fairly common belief/saying is that if you’ve had a particularly bad run of luck, then you will be ‘owed one’, or that your luck must soon change. I see this all the time with FIFA – players will often claim that their pack luck has been terrible lately, so surely it will turn around soon and they’re bound to pack something good in the next pack. What usually follows is utter disbelief that they’ve packed Volland yet again.

This is what’s known as the gambler’s fallacy: the belief that past outcomes influence future events (or that if a particular event happens less frequently in the past, then it is more likely to happen in the future). For example, many would believe (often without thinking too much into it) that a dice roll is ‘more than usually likely’ to be a six if there have recently been fewer than the usual number of sixes, or that getting tails on four coin tosses in a row means that heads is more likely on the fifth. The truth is that rolling a six will always be a one-in-six chance, no matter how many dice rolls have occurred before (and how many sixes); and that after getting four tails in a row, there’s still a 50% chance of getting one on the next flip.

So, why is this relevant to FIFA and pack luck? Let’s say you’ve saved and opened around 200 packs and not packed a single TOTY. It will be incredibly tempting at this point to believe/hope that you are ‘not far off’ from packing one. This isn’t how probability works, however. With every failed attempt at packing a TOTY, you are not any more likely than usual to pack one in the next pack.

Now, the cumulative probability of packing a TOTY does increase as the number of packs opened increases – but the probability of packing one for each of those packs does not increase or decrease based on the previous outcomes.

Again, I’m not trying to tell anyone how to spend their coins or money – but if you find yourself in the scenario of thinking ‘I haven’t packed one yet, surely

I've been learning about the Sunk Cost Fallacy which is essentially where you've paid money, time, or other resources to obtain something... that investment is non-refundable (i.e.: gone and it's never coming back). However, rather than making the smart decision and walking away, people feel loss aversion and decide to keep investing in order to avoid the guilt of perceived waste.

An example I read about was farmville... which lures you in making you think you have a choice to walk away at any time... but the game penalizes you by letting crops die or opportunities go missed and hence you keep coming back to play to avoid wasting the time you've put into your virtual farm, even though you can never get that time back anyway.

Another example was from a survey study. Assume you spent $100 on a ski weekend that is non-refundable... then you find out that new slopes have opened that will be objectively more fun and that cost will be only $50 and you put money down on that one as well (this study was from the 80s ok don't get distracted by the amounts). Now you come to find out the packages you purchased are only redeemable in the same weekend so you have a choice: the $100 vacation, or the objectively better $50 vacation? Turns out most people use the Sunk Cost Fallacy and would choose the $100 vacation, not because it's better, but because it would feel like you wasted more money if you didn't go... even though you wasted the same amount either way.

I was wondering and putting it to the community, have you ever fallen victim to Sunk Cost Fallacy? I have a theory that ADHD brains could go either way... perhaps poor impulse control makes us more prone to the farmville types of sunk cost systems, but that in other circumstances like the ski vacation, that same impulsivity might lead us to do the smart thing because it'll be more fun and who cares about a measly $100. That or the general fickleness would make us rethink our lives and jump around from thing to thing wasting ALL our time and investment! What is your experience with Sunk Costs in managing your ADHD?

EDIT:

Other Sunk Cost Fallacy examples if the above 2 don't resonate:

• Staying with a spouse or partner you aren't happy with because you've invested so much time in the relationship

• "This movie is terrible! well... I'm halfway through... might as well finish it."

• Eating more food at a restaurant than you were actually hungry for because you ordered it and don't want the extra going

Link: https://www.sec.gov/rules/concept/s70704/citadel04132004.pdf

April 13, 2004
Mr. Jonathan G. Katz
Secretary U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street NW
Washington, DC 20549-0609

Re: Release No. 34-49175; File No. S7-07-04 — Competitive Developments in the Options Markets

Dear Mr. Katz:

Citadel Investment Group, L.L.C. (“Citadel Group”) welcomes this opportunity to comment on Commission Release No. 34-49175 (the “Release”). The Release discusses recent changes in the listed options markets and seeks public comment on whether the Commission should take action to improve efficiency and competition in these markets.

Volume has increased in listed options markets in recent years due to improvements in liquidity, transparency, and competition in these markets. The ability of investors to efficiently use the listed options markets is an important cornerstone of our national market system. It is thus crucial that the Commission implement reforms that will further this trend. Specifically:

• The firm quote rule would best serve liquidity and transparency if it applied to all listed option order types up to the displayed size of any quote.

• The practice of payment for order flow creates serious conflicts of interest and should be banned.

• Internalization without meaningful price improvement reduces competition, limits price discovery, leads to market fragmentation, and should be banned.

• The Commission should not yet require the listed options markets to quote in decimals because decimalization would overload systems already pushed to their limits and lead to less transparent and shallow markets.

Citadel Group welcomes the issuance of the Release and the Commission’s other efforts to consider and open for discussion fundamental issues relating to market structure and regulation. The Commission’s willingness to focus on these difficult issues and ask the hard questions works to ensure that the U.S. markets remain the strongest and most efficient in the world.

I. Citadel’s Activities and Interests

Citadel Group and its affiliates have approximately 700 employees, with headquarters in Chicago and offices in New York, San Francisco, London and Tokyo. Citadel Group provides administrative and investment-related services to a number of private investment funds and investment vehicles. Citadel Group’s affiliate, Citadel Limited Partnership (“

As we're seeing the "Omicron is mild" narrative begin to fall apart, I'm taking more stock of some of the messaging I initially got in the past few weeks. One of the bigger themes I'm picking up on in hindsight isn't necessarily that Omicron itself was mild, but a greater hope that it would signal a shift toward a certain pandemic endgame, that being "Covid never truly goes away, but it becomes endemic." In other words, it stops being a constant pandemic affecting the whole world and starts being a seasonal illness with regional outbreaks. Or in other words, "just the flu".

Supposedly, Omicron being a "mild" variant was going to mean the virus becoming more contagious but less lethal. In theory, this was supposed to be a good sign for two reasons. Firstly, because lower lethality should kill less people. Secondly, even being more contagious was being spun as a potentially good thing, since that means could outcompetes more dangerous variants and maybe even burn itself out. Like a forest fire destroying all the flammable debris in a forest and preventing another forest fire, there was the idea that Omicron would infecting so many people that we all get natural immunity on top of our vaccines.

EDIT: I just realized that "Being contagious is actually good since everyone will get it and become immune to other variants" is basically the 2022 remix of "let it spread so we get herd immunity" with extra steps. So that's another parallel to previous dismissals of the virus now being applied to Omicron. It turns out that saying about history not repeating but rhyming is true after all.

However, no matter how mild Omicron actually ends up being on the level of a given individual case, we're making the same mistakes on the macro scale all over again.

Firstly we have what I call the Fatality Fallacy, which is an overemphasis on deaths instead of case numbers. It's flawed reasoning because case growth is exponential but death rates are linear. I'm no epidemiologist and not every outbreak is going to be perfectly exponential, but anyone can do back-of-the-napkin math and learn that a disease that spreads twice as fast kills far more people than a disease twice as lethal.

• Disease 1 with 100% death rate and cases double every day. It infects 1, then 2, then 4, then 8 people in 4 days, killing 8.
• Disease 2 with 50% death rate but cases quadruple every day. It infects 1, then 4, then 16, then 64, killing 32 in 4 days. Note that Disease 2 in this hypothet

I don't want to step on anybody's toes here, but the amount of non-dad jokes here in this subreddit really annoys me. First of all, dad jokes CAN be NSFW, it clearly says so in the sub rules. Secondly, it doesn't automatically make it a dad joke if it's from a conversation between you and your child. Most importantly, the jokes that your CHILDREN tell YOU are not dad jokes. The point of a dad joke is that it's so cheesy only a dad who's trying to be funny would make such a joke. That's it. They are stupid plays on words, lame puns and so on. There has to be a clever pun or wordplay for it to be considered a dad joke.

Again, to all the fellow dads, I apologise if I'm sounding too harsh. But I just needed to get it off my chest.

#Reddit Posts

• Everyone deserves bodily integrity. Genital mutilation is a human rights violation

• Refutations of the alleged benefits of infant male circumcision

• Complications of genital mutilation

• Economic interests behind circumcision

• Historical timelines of circumcision (religious & medical)

• Is circumcision really best performed on infants?

• Statements on circumcision by international medical authorities

#Lectures

• Sex and Circumcision: An American Love Story | Eric Clopper - a must-watch

• American Circumcision documentary | Brendan Marotta

• A historical and medical critique of circumcision | Dr. Christopher Guest

• A feminist nursing critique of circumcision | Kira Atinuk

• Circumcision The Elephant in the Hospital | Ryan McAllister

• Foreskin anatomy & physiology

• Debunking the "benefits" of circumcision

• Why cutting any child's genitals is wrong: female, male, or intersex | Brian Earp

• Circumcision - a sexual harm | Brian Earp

• Why male circumcision defenders are fighting to legalize FGM | Brian Earp

• Male circumcision violates the physician's fiduciary duty to the child | Peter Adler

• Real circumcision videos

#Literature

• [Marked in Your Flesh: Circumcision from Ancient Judea

Hello, everyone!

Moderating COVID posts is hard, and in light of some questions the moderation team has received about how we make decisions, we're clarifying what content is and isn't suitable for the subreddit.

In short, posts and comments need to be:

• Relevant to B.C.
• Productive
• Accurate

Another thing worth noting is how burdens of proof work when making claims in posts or comments. This concept is discussed at the end of this post.

Thanks for reading and participating in the sub, and have a great week!

#Relevant to B.C.

COVID posts that are most well-suited to the purpose of this subreddit include:

• COVID news specific to B.C.
• COVID questions specific to B.C. that can't be answered by a Google search
  • If you have questions about COVID regulations, testing, vaccination, and more, the site you want is the provincial government's website on COVID-19 response.
  • If the provincial website doesn't answer your question, Google should be your next stop.
  • If your question still hasn't been answered—and is truly related to B.C.—you may post it here.
• Canadian or international COVID news that directly affects B.C.
  • An example of something that would fit in this category would be the relaxation of COVID testing requirements for land border re-entry during the Fraser Valley floods.
  • An example of something that would not fit in this category would be news about other provinces implementing new restrictions for their residents.

Please note that this list does not include scientific literature about COVID-19. For discussion about scientific developments in COVID-19 research, the following subs are more appropriate places to post and comment:

• r/COVID19
• r/Coronavirus
• r/Coronavirus_BC
• r/science

#Productive

Posts that appear to only be a magnet for people who'd like to complain about restrictions, vaccine requirements, or government officials are generally not super productive.

All of us are tired, and all of us are frustrated. The term for this is "pandemic fatigue", and it is a global phenomenon. Be that as it may, we're trying to avoid the subreddit becoming a cesspool of negativity, and we may remove certain posts that don't appear to be aimed at productive discussion.

#Accurate

Posts and comments on the sub need to be factually accurate. Content that is most likely to be kept up are posts from news agencies with **published

Alot of great jokes get posted here! However just because you have a joke, doesn't mean it's a dad joke.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT NSFW, THIS IS ABOUT LONG JOKES, BLONDE JOKES, SEXUAL JOKES, KNOCK KNOCK JOKES, POLITICAL JOKES, ETC BEING POSTED IN A DAD JOKE SUB

Try telling these sexual jokes that get posted here, to your kid and see how your spouse likes it.. if that goes well, Try telling one of your friends kid about your sex life being like Coca cola, first it was normal, than light and now zero , and see if the parents are OK with you telling their kid the "dad joke"

I'm not even referencing the NSFW, I'm saying Dad jokes are corny, and sometimes painful, not sexual

So check out r/jokes for all types of jokes

r/unclejokes for dirty jokes

r/3amjokes for real weird and alot of OC

r/cleandadjokes If your really sick of seeing not dad jokes in r/dadjokes

Punchline !

Edit: this is not a post about NSFW , This is about jokes, knock knock jokes, blonde jokes, political jokes etc being posted in a dad joke sub

Edit 2: don't touch the thermostat

Do your worst!

Hello there! First of all, I hope you all have a great year 2022. I feel that this is going to be a great year, for many would-be projectors will finally achieve the out-of-body experience. To contribute to that I decided to write an extensive post with Astral projection instructions, FAQs with my answers, personal tips, book recommendations and resources to start the year strong! That being said, let’s start.

ASTRAL PROJECTION TERMINOLOGY

Before we move onto the following sections, I am aware that we use a lot of terms and acronyms in the subreddit which may be confusing for the newcomer. Because of this, I wrote this post a few months ago which covers the most used terms and acronyms in the AP community. Link: Astral Projection Terminology Post

HOW TO ASTRAL PROJECT: QUICK INSTRUCTIONS

There are many, many Astral projection methods and techniques—therefore to keep things simple, I will explain a very basic and universal strategy that happens to be the one that made me have my first out-of-body experience. When someone needs somewhere to start, I tend to explain this simple strategy due to my early successes with it. Here’s how to do it:

1. Lie down, close your eyes and relax. Preferably be in a comfortable position.

2. Visualize, as vividly as possible, that you stand up from your bed and start moving around your house/apartment/office/wherever your body is. See how your point of view changes from staring at the ceiling from your bed, to seeing your room while standing up, then waking towards the hallway (or just opening a window and jumping outside), and so on. Do this with as much detail as possible, but don’t try to force it.

3. You can incorporate other senses as well to make your immersive experience more convincing and realistic. As an example, you can use your imaginary hands to grab the doorknob to open the door—don’t just see how you do it; feel it! Feel the metallic texture and the smoothness of its surface. Also feel how your legs move and your feet touch the floor when you walk. Don’t just see how your legs move, but actually feel it. Incorporating auditory perceptions will make it even more real: the door creaking when opened, the sound of your feet as you walk, and so on.

4. Explore as much as you want. For instance, get out to the street and explore your neighborhood. Feel the warmth of the sun on your skin, or the

How the hell am I suppose to know when it’s raining in Sweden?

Mathematical puns makes me number

Ants don’t even have the concept fathers, let alone a good dad joke. Keep r/ants out of my r/dadjokes.

But no, seriously. I understand rule 7 is great to have intelligent discussion, but sometimes it feels like 1 in 10 posts here is someone getting upset about the jokes on this sub. Let the mods deal with it, they regulate the sub.

We told her she can lean on us for support. Although, we are going to have to change her driver's license, her height is going down by a foot. I don't want to go too far out on a limb here but it better not be a hack job.

They were cooked in Greece.

I'm surprised it hasn't decade.

He lost May

Now that I listen to albums, I hardly ever leave the house.

Don't you know a good pun is its own reword?

Two muffins are in an oven, one muffin looks at the other and says "is it just me, or is it hot in here?"

Then the other muffin says "AHH, TALKING MUFFIN!!!"

For background: I’ve got 100% of the F2P stickers and ribbons (beat the game with all animals at LVL 3). I’ve got countless 3x & 4x 10-wins in a row, as well as 5x 10-wins in a row once. That’s why I’m going to approach this from a consistency mindset. I’m always going for as many 10-wins in a row as I can (as I write this, 8 of my last 10 games are 10-wins). That means, I will not be recommending you to use other units that most users swear by (like scorpion and skunk) and I will be recommending others most others don’t, but that I find incredibly consistent wins with (swan and dog). It doesn’t mean their advice is wrong, and I encourage other tips and viewpoints in the comments, but my mindset in this guide will lean more towards creating the ability to get many 10-wins rather than just getting your first one through a gimmicky strategy or one based more on luck. I will section this guide into stages based on the animals/foods that are unlocked.

Here is my Animal Tier List (unsure about ~4 placements that could go 1 tier up or down) and my Food Tier List (unsure if bee and/or cans should go up 1 tier or not).

—

TIER 1:

Almost Always Buy: 1) Fish, 2) Otter, 2) Mosquito, 3) Ant
Sometimes Buy: 4) Apple, 4) Cricket, 4) Bee, 5) Horse
Never Buy: 6) Beaver, 7) Pig, 8) Duck, 9) Sloth (Hah)

My goal at the start is to get into the rounds with 3 heart loses each with 7+ hearts (3 loses allowed). I do this by always building a team of Fish, Otters, Mosquitos, and Ants. If my first shop is awful and has none of them, I will try and build a temporary horse + cricket build (I almost never do this anymore). I will even choose to have 2 animals and buy a bee or an apple (which I used to never buy) over a horse, beaver, pig, or ducks (and I will only put apples or bees on fish or mosquitos 90% of the time as otters and crickets tend to get sold and ants get pilled unless my ant receives a bunch of otter buffs and levels up quicker).

Always order your units from strongest (the highest attack if equal total stats) first and worst units in the back (unless it’s ant, ox, shark, spawners, etc.) I’ll even put the unit with Bee up in front of the first rounds sometimes, since hp is so low that bee upfront can make the difference between their strongest unit living to kill another unit of yours or dying. The reason for this is a lengthy explanation, but more

For context I'm a Refuse Driver (Garbage man) & today I was on food waste. After I'd tipped I was checking the wagon for any defects when I spotted a lone pea balanced on the lifts.

I said "hey look, an escaPEA"

No one near me but it didn't half make me laugh for a good hour or so!

Edit: I can't believe how much this has blown up. Thank you everyone I've had a blast reading through the replies 😂

It really does, I swear!

We have Y = C + I + G + X − M. So,

“If M↑, then Y↓. (If imports rise, then GDP falls.)” ✗

The above statement is a fallacy. Unfortunately, this fallacy is commonly taught by high-school economics teachers around the world (including IB Economics).

Example. Suppose we initially have

$0 = C = I = G = X = M,

so that Y = $0. We now import $1 of Mamee from Malaysia (let’s say Ho Ching eats all of it). So, M = $1. Do we now have

Y = C + I + G + X − M = $0 + $0 + $0 + $0 − $1 = −$1?

Of course not.

GDP (Y) is total domestic value-added. When we import $1 of Mamee and Ho Ching eats it, we’ll also have C = $1. But this $1 wasn’t domestic value-added (instead, it was imported). So, we don’t want to count this $1 as part of GDP. Which is why we deduct M = $1:

Y = C + I + G + X − M = $1 + $0 + $0 + $0 − $1 = $0.

As expected, GDP (total domestic value-added) is $0 (the same as before). ∎

Each of C, I, G, and X may contain some imported goods as inputs. But such imports aren’t domestic value-added and so shouldn’t be counted. This is the reason we deduct M.

Unfortunately, the above important point is rarely explained well (or at all).

This deficiency in understanding leads teachers and students to mindlessly take “Y = C + I + G + X − M” as some sort of mechanical formula (rather than an accounting identity that requires a little understanding). From this error, they are then easily led to the fallacy, “If M↑, then Y↓.”

---

Small remarks.

1. Wolla (2018a, 2018b) discusses this fallacy at greater length:

we subtract imports to account for the fact that the good has already been counted … correctly calculated, imports don’t count negatively in GDP; rather, they have no impact on GDP …

Referring to a textbook “published by the National Council on Economic Education*“, he writes,*

At three different points, the lesson introduces a scenario that increases imports, and all three times the provided answer key informs teachers that GDP should decrease. … this lesson is likely used by high school teachers who often lack content knowledge in economics … and might fail to identify and correct the error.

And now I’m cannelloni