I envy you nap people, everyone in my family takes naps. I take a nap, wake up with a headache, then can’t properly go to sleep later. My body’s like ‘you slept for 20mins? Nah, you’re gonna need another cup of coffee now.’
Have water and maybe something sweet nearby to help wake you up.
Have a timer on so you do not sleep too long.
Have a pillow or something allowing you to sit up a little bit afterwards.
Then just schedule some time after your timer goes off where you just ease into the pain of being sentient again. It is also possible to drink coffee before you nap, since the effects of caffeine will not kick in before after you wake up. Regarding the first point it is also really sweet (pun intended) to put say a small piece of chocolate on your tongue and just sit up and close your eyes.
Lastly, you just have to learn what works for you. Falling asleep is also not mandatory for resting well!
I know that headline must be incredibly infuriating for a public like lemmy, * but *, personally I have some conflicts about the whole retirement concept since it starts a chain of cognitive decline and isolation (this is a source but there are many more: bmcgeriatr.biomedcentral.com/…/s12877-017-0556-7)
I’m not saying that people should be working forever, I just wonder if there could be some optional way for some elder people to contribute to society in a way that feels meaningful? Are there jobs where they could fit and have that feeling of fulfillment? Understand that I have met a fair amount of old people that felt useless and was just “waiting to die” in a depressive way. In some ways jobs can be a source of happiness if people isn’t being exploited. What I’m thinking about would be optional and with less hours involved
On the other hand, maybe what I’m describing is not necessarily a “job position for old people” per se, maybe if we as a society invested more in quality of life for the elder I believe we could make them happier. I feel terrible that we’re barely doing anything for the loneliness problem…
A cool project idea that popped up a few years ago in China was a home-to-home food delivery service. Basically, a grandmother whose grandchild lives in another city can cook her grandma-level food and the delivery guys would pick it up and bring it to students in the area. Probably embedded in an extractive economic model, but the core idea was quite nice.
In Japan I see many elderly guys work as traffic assistants, eg to help children get to school safely. Can be annoying at times and I don’t know how/if they get paid, but definitely gives them something to do and connects them to other people.
It’s a psychological trick used both by hostage negotiators and con men alike to build trust and inclusitivity, and to maintain engagement of the other person in what otherwise might be a confrontational exchange where the other party would be motivated to disengage. It exploits people’s tendency to try to meet kindness with kindness.
People generally respond positively to hearing their name, and will sort of pay attention for the next few seconds to hear why they are being addressed. In a “selling it” context, using their name frequently keeps the other person engaged by making them feel involved in a conversation that might be entirely one-sided, or where their contributions are being minimized, dismissed, or rebuked. It also builds comradery through familiarity. If you are taking time to use their name and to include them, then you become a bit less threatening and perhaps even more familiar to them. Over time, it can wear down predispositions and make people reconsider that r commitment to their own goals.
Yes, it’s just as insidious as it sounds, and is a technique used by gaslighters, con men, and other abusers as much as it is by sales people, crisis negotiators and politicians. Pretty much anyone who needs to soften your opinion of their position would use it to try to draw you in and keep working on you might use it.
The only real defense is to spot it being used on you, and to assertively disengage.
Oh that explains why it makes me so uncomfortable when my coworker uses customer names over and over. She comes from a sales-oriented industry and she’s using the same techniques even though that’s not at all the kind of job she has now. I really hate people trying to sell me stuff, so apparently I’ve been feeling annoyed on other people’s behalf.
Well good thing I strongly dislike my name and it’s usage. I’ve actually have had to tell some friends specifically not to use my name. I’m impervious to being more socially connected to people!
Spot it, use the same technique and double down on your opinions. Deliberately become rigid and take the exact opposite position from the person you’re talking with. It’ll gradually annoy and frustrate them.
The key is awareness. Once you’re aware, you can take more control of the situation.
In case anyone from the UK needed another reason to prostrate themselves before the altar of Scandinavian interior design and foodstuffs this weekend, IKEA UK now sells the double hotdog at the exit bistro.
Snapping half the life forms also snaps half of the world’s gut bacteria. If we removed half of the gut bacteria from those who weren’t snapped, that would be removing 75% of the universe’s gut bacteria, not 50%.
Why assume that though? The Infinity Gauntlet isn’t a Monkey’s Paw, it reads beyond the words and answers the intent of the wielder. So much so, in fact, that it even includes subconscious thoughts and feelings as part of its interpretation. I see often these ideas predicated on the Gauntlet working on Monkey Paw logic despite that being clearly and specifically not how it operates within canon.
50% of what Thanos considers life since it was powered by his will. Since he seemed to imply that nature (plants and animals) where not part of this it’s safe to assume it was sapient life only.
Except animals definitely were - remember endgame, Barton went into the office looked out the window to a small garden and found birds had appeared. Very indicative that the snap included animals
Do we know if Thanos believed in life at conception or birth? Does someone with a donated organ count as one life, two or zero since they wouldn’t be alive without the organ. If I only ate one foot, or how about one toe, does that make me a cannibal?
Yeah, the Gauntlet wouldn’t leave anything that can’t survive on its own, like gut bacteria, nor remove anything that’s needed for the proper functioning of another lifeform. It’s why there weren’t any fetuses falling to the ground after the pregnant women vanished.
I would assume that conjoined twins would be a both-or-neither situation, since removing one would leave a gaping wound in the other even if they could have survived independently with surgery,
It kinda sidesteps the whole thing, since the standard is life that is dependent on other life to survive is not counted separately. Like the conjoined twins thing I mentioned.
Which is, of course, just a bullshit justification. Reality-altering power, and your solution is to kill people? Not create more resources, or make it so living things require less resources? He’s an unimaginative idiot.
Wait. If that is how it happened that means when half the population came back they all came back with 0% of their gut bacteria. Holy shit that would be horrible. The population doubles overnight and every single person and animal has the worse runs of their life. Meanwhile they can’t get the nutritional needs no matter how much food they eat. Spend the next few months while their family cries as they wither away surrounded by food.
No, the desired effects was to undo Thanos’s snap, not double the human population. This means that all of the gut bacteria got unsnapped exactly the same as everyone else
Yeah you’re correct, my bad. In the films, however.
edit: I guess they kind of tackle the issue, although they for some reason seemed to focus more on where these people go rather than how to handle the sudden resource strain
Don’t worry, the litter of bodies from people that were on planes or high speed trains, or on ships will provide nutrients for the starving masses.
Then suicides and murders as people return to find their loved ones remarried or dead because they committed suicide, should also provide another nutritional bump in the following weeks.
Then the following World War should deal with everyone else.
This is one of the many reasons why I say Tony Stark is a bigger villain to the universe than Thanos.
A sudden LACK of mouths is much more favorable than suddenly DOUBLING them.
I order to keep his family alive, he just brings them all back, many years out of place in a universe completely and totally unprepared for their arrival. Not to mention all the people who died AFTER the snap, as a direct result of the snap, will still be dead.
Tony stark is supposed to be smart. So he should know the consequences of his action, and completely disregards it.
And the series pretends he did the universe a favor.
slrpnk.net
Active