That's my secret, Cap: I'm always tired.

Now of course loans. To my understanding "loans" are commonly done, but miss what is hot. Loans, real loans, impose risk (though on both parties to some degree) and a beautiful struggle against the grim inevitability of a formula. With high interest rates and complex clauses (particularly on default) they are even better, and that symmetry of risk can be distilled into something beautiful. As Getty said, "If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem. If you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem".

But these are the obvious financial instruments, and also somewhat boring ones. There isn't really much creativity in them.

But what about (re)insurance at favorable rates? Just think of the moral hazard and asymmetry of risk! Or imagine the classic of highly leveraged basis swaps piling up risk with insufficient margin management infrastructure! Or, somewhat related to the previous, non-consensual ownership of the basis risk of a structured product? Or how about some contract selling a share of all future earnings which is tradable and creates a fiduciary duty to whoever holds it? Or slavery in exchange for a transfer of debts? Or an endless, terrible spiral of PIK toggle notes! (And just imagine the risk to note holders!)

My boss doesn't know that the "my partner" who I needed time off work to help recover from surgery last year isn't the same person as the "my partner" who's family emergency I warned him I might need time off work for this year.

The fact I'm also a woman is no barrier to visiting my girlfriend in hospital.

We did have to be careful about exactly how we described me and how we described everyone else to make sure nobody thought we were pretending to be partners.

My family aren't exactly supportive, but they got over themselves and decided that being with my girlfriend was good for me even if it was a very strange relationship.

My family do not know that the "a few friends in different parts of America" I keep talking about are my partners.

theres a skill called athletics as well. this determines how fast you run - because running is different from walking. walking is extremely slow, so running is important. Athletics is the fourth most important factor in determining your movement speed.

theres another stat called "strength". among other things, it determines your carry capacity. the percentage of your current carrying capacity which is currently 'filled' determines how fast you move. In practice, this is the second most important factor in determining your character's movement speed.

Now, old hats of elder scrolls games can see where im going with this. most know that in skyrim, your speed is actually someone determined by your height. this means that, in practice, high elves are a little bit faster than everyone else. In morrowind, the characters also have different heights, and its actually more pronounced than in later games

This has no effect on movement speed*.

There is a secret stat, determined by race and gender, in morrowind and only morrowind. it is called 'Weight' and for some reason determines how wide chests are and how jacked your character looks when shirtless. For some reason, this hidden and unchangeable stat is the single biggest determinator of movement speed. A male wood elf, the smallest race at a diminutive .9 weight and a fast starting speed of 50, will move significantly slower than a male orc, the most jacked beefcake race at 1.35 weight with only 30 starting speed.

How to see whether a Chinese handmade teapot is well done or not - quality of the spout is an important standard. 

These tests get used for all kinds of stuff, and they get used by a lot of people who don't actually know what they're doing, how to interpret the data, or whether there's any real link between what they're measuring and what they're claiming. It's why you see shit going around like "men think of women as objects because when they look at a woman, the same part of their brain is active as when they look at a tool!" and "if you play Mozart for your baby for twenty minutes then their imagination improves, we imaged the brain to prove it!" and "we found where God is in the brain! Christians have more brain activity in this region than atheists!"

There are numerous problems with this kind of science, but the most pressing issue is the validity of the scans themselves. As I said, there's a fair bit of stats to turn an MRI image into 'brain activity', and then you do even more stats on that to get your results. Bennett et. al.'s work ran one of these sorts of experiments, with one difference -- they used a dead salmon instead of living human subjects. And they got positive results. The same sort of experiment, the same methodology, the same results that people were bandying about as positive results. According to the methodology in common use, dead salmon can distinguish human facial expressions. Meaning one of two things:

Dead salmon can recognise human facial expressions. OR

Everyone else's results are garbage also, none of you have data for any of this junk.