How about getting to know and interacting with women as people first? Instead of as prospective bedmates? Getting involved in activities women also particpate in but NOT as a means for trolling for dates, just building relationships founded on mutual interests that may or may not flower into something else?
When we’re talking about whether “young men age 18-25” have ever “approached a woman in person,” I presume we’re talking about approaching a woman with romantic hopes (or hopes for which romantic is a euphemism) and not someone so shy they can’t say “hello” to the girl at the next school desk or woman in the next cubicle.
And while “hitting on” someone is admittedly not the best term, I don’t think it inherently means some clueless pick-up-artist laying down his oiliest line and then not taking no for an answer. There’s nothing inherently wrong with someone wanting a bedmate, as some men and women sometimes do at times in their lives, and IMHO there’s a happy medium between jackass PUAs making themselves obnoxious and absolutely every romantic relationship having to grow organically from an existing relationship, ideal as that is.
How about approaching women as people, getting to know them, later perhaps becoming friends then, if it happens, becoming romantically involved? Approaching strangers just to see if romance is possible before you even know them is downright creepy.
That raises an old question: is it easier to make a lover a friend than to make a friend a lover? Both are possible but conventional wisdom hold with the former
Man crashes his car, blows .3 on the breathalyzer, is arrested, held overnight, and released in the morning, then crashes in the exact same intersection exactly 24 hours later and blows a .3 again.
.3? For most of us, that would be lipwalking. Though, a friend told me as an army nurse in training, one of the nurses noticed a whiff of alcohol on an orderly, so, for practice they tested him and got a .4 – and he seemed normal. In earlier stages of alcoholism, they develop high tolerance, until the liver wears out and it all goes the other way.
The lawyer “emphasized that at no point did he act in bad faith or proceed with malice”
The judge replied: “An empty head but a pure heart is no defense”, that’ll be $15,000 please.
Just skimming that case, I think he put his foot in his mouth. I get the feeling that if he apologized to the court and promised not to screw up again, that may have been the end of it.
However, while being asked about it, he stated that he’s used it before AND that he doesn’t actually know how it works or what it’s shortcomings are.
Mr. Ramirez explained that he had used AI before to assist with legal matters, such as drafting agreements, and did not know that AI was capable of generating fictitious cases and citations.
and when fining him $15k, the judge stated:
While this amount is at the higher end of the sanctions that have previously been imposed for similar conduct, Mr. Ramirez’s professed ignorance of the propensity of the AI tools he was using to “hallucinate” citations is evidence that those lesser sanctions have been insufficient to deter the conduct.
Side note, I learned a new word, shepardize. It comes up a bunch of times and refers to the act of drilling down through the cites to make sure they’re correct and apply to the case.
Crypto bro who calls himself “MistaFuccYou” loses all his money in a rugpull, shoots himself in the head during a livestream, and the viewers start launching coins named after him while he bleeds out and dies.
If he was playing Russian Roulette, then “misfire” might just mean that the hammer fell on an empty chamber. It sounds like something a journalist with little knowledge of firearms would write.