Alice finds herself all on a secluded camp ground late at night. Outside are the dead bodies of all the other camp counselors and the killer who killed them, lurking somewhere in the dark forest under the full moon.
But at least Alice is safe locked in the cabin. Suddenly the corpse of her co-worker Brenda comes flying through the window which means the killer is right outside and can now get in through the smashed window. All she can do is guard the window with a sharp object.
But from the distance she sees the headlights of a jeep driving into the campground. It must be Steve, the owner of the camp finally returning. Little does she know Steve is dead. She runs out to greet him, only to find an all American soccer mom coming out of the jeep.
“Who are you?” she asks
“…an old friend of the Christies”
If Alice looks like the girl next door, this lady looks like the lady next door. She’s the kind of lady every middle class kid in American has known their whole life. She might have been your teacher, or your mom, or your best friend’s mom.
The actress who played her was Betsy Palmer. Palmer was a fixture on daytime TV during the wholesome days of the 1950s, much like June Cleaver. My grandmother used to watcher on the game show I’ve got a secret.
On the most terrifying night of her life, it feels so good to see a face she can trust, the all American soccer mom, the girl scout leader, the lady down the street, here to rescue Alice from camp blood & drive her to safety with her jeep. Alice gives her a big hug as if reuniting with her own mother.
Making matters even better, she’s a strong strapping woman who can protect Alice from whoever is killing everyone. The ultimate girl scout leader. She worked at the camp in her youth and knows the place inside out.
As a kid I remember being so relieved when Palmer took over. She exuded leadership and competence. All I knew about the F13 movies at the time was that the reason Jason killed people was because the camp killed his mother. But why did the camp kill his mother I asked by British Pakistani babysitter one day. Because his mother was a witch who killed people, she said.
I probably took the term “witch” a little too literally and was looking forward to Palmer and Alice heading into the woods like Hansel and Gretel to find the witch’s cabin.
But instead the film took a very different turn which I so stupidly didn’t see coming, despite having had the huge advantage of knowing the killer was a woman. But I was only nine.
The sheer genius of this film is it had the goriest most graphic most spooky killings we had ever seen (axe to the face, arrow through the mattress from someone hiding under the bed) being performed by the most wholesome person we had ever seen cast as a killer (Palmer).
My favorite part was when she said “Oh I could never let them open this place again, could I?” almost asking Alice to talk her out of her killing spree.
But perhaps the scariest moment is when Palmer pulls out her hunting knife and charges Alice while screaming “AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH”
Part of what makes this so scary is how insane she is. She is killing people for the drowning of her son, even though those people were not even born at the time. And the way she slips from competent and coherent to batshit crazy is so spooky. Is this schizophrenia do you think? Or early onset Alzheimer’s? I wish the character had taken the WAIS.
One may ask how someone as respectable as Palmer got cast in such a gruesome low budget horror film. Her Mercedes broke down and she needed $10 K to get a new car.
“Universe find me $10,000” dollars she remembered saying. I wonder if she’s an Oprah fan because Oprah is always preaching to put thoughts into the universe though Oprah was not famous until several years later, but maybe how she much later described the story was influenced by Oprah-speak.
Either way, she was soon offered a part which paid $1000 day for 10 days work.
There’s just one catch. It’s a horror film.
“Oh no,” said Palmer. “Well send me the script.”
“What a piece of shit!” she recalled saying after reading it. “This will come and this will go. No one will see it”
Little did she know it would become the influential horror film of the last 50 years, though the role of Palmer herself has been largely forgotten, eclipsed by the iconic hockey masked Jason.
But that’s why I love the film so much. Everyone knows about Jason but so few know how it all began and the brilliant role Palmer played in its genesis. The film is the ultimate hidden gem.
At first Palmer was embarrassed to be associated with such a cheap gory film but over time she came to embrace her iconic status as Queen of the Slashers. Sometimes while shopping in the store she would hear mysterious customers behind her whispering the film’s terrifying sound track:
Ha ha ha
Chu Chu Chu
Betsy Palmer: 1926 to 2015
RIP America’s sweetheart turned Queen of the Slashers
Pumpkin Person 
I’ve always found it a bit strange the way actors are paid so much to make movies. People would pay to be in the movies so they could get away with paying them peanuts.
Well if having Ryan Reynolds in your movie adds tens of millions to a film’s box office gross, it make sense to pay him tens of millions & the law of supply and demand would dictate it.
On the other hand they could probably get unknown actors to work for free if the film were high profile enough, but then acting would become another field were only the children of the rich could afford to work. One reason the media is so pro-rich is they often don’t pay their interns so only rich kids can afford to break into the field.
Most actors are from the upper class/upper middle class as far as I can tell.
The choice wouldn’t be Ryan Reynolds vs a nobody. It would be Ryan Reynolds vs 40 other actors that had some profile and could do the role. Economics dictates you could replace him with a lot of other people and still pull in a good audience.
But there are certain actors like Jim Carey or Robin Williams where people go to their film specifically because they are the lead star. Thats true alright.
Most actors are from the upper class/upper middle class…
no actor is from the upper class moron. and it’s in britain where they tend to be from the upper middle class, in the american sense, not the british sense. american actors are from every wrung except the rich. one reason why british actors are posh is they have to have the right accent. michael caine and sean connery are exceptions. and liam neeson in irish. posh british sells to foreign audiences too. and britain’s is the most rigidly stratified society in the developed world. whereas britain’s pop music successes are from the lower middle or lower class.
class is so absurdly important to brits because they don’t have any innate class. my mother was in england and asked about her family. her grandfather was a shipwright, iirc. and this british woman says, “middle clahss. middle clahss.”
my dentist told me he left the UK cause they’re so class obsessed
…every rung except the rich…
but…famous actors have to be ambitious and acting isn’t like sports…it requires some of what IQ tests test…especially stage acting…
like i admit…i am too stupid to play king lear on stage…because i could never learn the lines…never!
i was kicked off the school play because i literally couldn’t memorize my lines. but it was a big part and i didn’t actually try.
so your mediocre WISC-R digit span had predictive validity. I’m great at learning lines, or at least was. I can still recite most of the dialogue from Halloween (1978)
so can i.
have you seen how big the king lear role is?
and NO!
i’ve tested myself on shakespeare’s sonnets.
i can memorize most of them in less than 10 minutes.
but yes. when i was 9 years old…maybe…my digit span now is at least 10…call numbers.
in a good way.
Youre fucking dumb Mugabe. I know more about celebs than you. First of all many actors are relatives of other famous actors/Hollywood elite and automatically means theyre from a family of millionaires. Other actors usually have rich parents to be able to tolerate subsidising their career choice and go to acting school. Then you have 40% or whatever of actors that are jewish and from rich parents too.
Basically about 10% of actors are ‘working class’ and theyre mainly the comedy actors.
yes.
robin williams’s dad was a rich’n’.
julia louis-dreyfus’s dad was a billionaire.
but in general, american actors come from a lower stratum than british actors.
yes! pill and i agree.
but let’s do a test.
highest box office american actors vs british actors vs class.
will smith’s father was bourgeoisie, he owned his own business.
anthony hopkins’s father was a baker. did he own his own bakery?
and BUT!
In 1949, to instill discipline, his parents insisted he attend Jones’ West Monmouth Boys’ School in Pontypool. He remained there for five terms and was then educated at Cowbridge Grammar School in the Vale of Glamorgan.
class is more than money AND more than occupation.
ron jeremy’s father was a professor of physics.
His mother, Lilian (née Unitt; 1916–2001), was a non-observant Catholic who worked days at a factory.[14] His father, John Thomas “Jack” Osbourne (1915–1977), worked night shifts as a toolmaker at the General Electric Company.
that’s ozzy.
also money is more than class.
mugabe: his father was a lawyer and his mother was a buyer and trainer for an industrial distributor.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/20/russian-emails-vladimir-putin-llcinvest
So its exactly as I said. Putin doesn’t actually have a bank account with all his money in it. He farms out the assets to cronies under their nominal ownership but basically controls everything.
Anyway, I think £4.5b is only a small part of his real fortune.
Notice puppy how even with much better journalists than the people at Forbes, they can only uncover a small part of Putins real fortune. This is the exact same for the rest of the real list of the world’s richest people.
So its exactly as I said. Putin doesn’t actually have a bank account with all his money in it. He farms out the assets to cronies under their nominal ownership but basically controls everything.
No Whore, this is exactly what I said FIRST. The reason Forbes doesn’t put dictators on their list is their fortune is divided among so many people in an effort to hide it that the dictator does not qualify as a billionaire.
Notice puppy how even with much better journalists than the people at Forbes
LIE! Forbes are the best journalists because they’re the only ones who’ve revealed the huge ethnic differences in wealth which you claim to believe in, but then disrespect those who do the hard work to prove it.
they can only uncover a small part of Putins real fortune.
Because it’s not HIS fortune. It’s stolen money
This is the exact same for the rest of the real list of the world’s richest people.
No, most rich people don’t have to behave like Putin did cause their wealth not stolen and there are more efficient ways to avoid paying taxes than hiding wealth. You can simply borrow against the value of stocks like Elon Musk does and that’s all public
Youre so naive. What age are you again? Mid 30s and you still believe in mainstream media like Forbes. You realise the forbes people probably take bribes or are threatened with lawsuits or violence if they reveal certain names right?
Most billionaires have their assets in similarly opaque and complicated structures like Putin. For example I know another billionaire Usmanov who uses his accountant Farhad Moshiri to hold most of his wealth on his behalf. LOL, you think he’s the only one thats figured that out?
I would say at least 50% of the real top 100 richest people in the world don’t actually hold their wealth simply in a bank account or a bunch of direct share holdings. Its under someone else’s name or in a tax haven nobody can get info on unless theres a leak.
Youre so naive.
You’re so dumb.
What age are you again?
What MENTAL age are you again? 90 judging from the dementia.
You realise the forbes people probably take bribes or are threatened with lawsuits or violence if they reveal certain names right?
They’ve been sued and won. And the people coercing Forbes NOT to put them on the list is probably roughly balanced by the people coercing them to PUT them on the list. Trump sued a NY Times reporter for saying Trump’s nowhere near a billionaire.
I would say at least 50% of the real top 100 richest people in the world don’t actually hold their wealth simply in a bank account or a bunch of direct share holdings. Its under someone else’s name
Then it’s not THEIR wealth, dumbass. They might still control it making them defacto billionaires but they’re not ACTUAL billionaires and Forbes only claims to be measuring the latter. You might as well argue the president of the United States is a trillionaire because he has significant control over how trillions of tax dollars are spent. You’re confusing wealth with power.
It doesn’t matter if Forbes literally identifies the precise X richest people since that’s unknowable unless you could force everyone to liquidate by a certain date. The point is it measures a close enough approximation. As Mug of Pee says, all models are wrong, but some models are useful.
Forbes’ yardstick, imperfect as it may be tells us many important things such as Ashkenazi being 60% of the 10 richest Americans despite being only 3% of America, and blacks being less than 1% of the richest Americans despite being 13% of America. The World makes more sense if we assume Forbes is more or less right.
You could call me naïve for believing in IQ tests too. For Chris Langan might not LITERALLY be the smartest man in America. There might be dozens of people smarter but they lack the motivation, mental stability or education to perform on an IQ test but all we can go by is what we can measure, and whatever mistakes we make will tend to cancel each other out, leaving us with a good view of the big picture despite flaws in some of the details.
Then it’s not THEIR wealth, dumbass. They might still control it making them defacto billionaires but they’re not ACTUAL billionaires and Forbes only claims to be measuring the latter. You might as well argue the president of the United States is a trillionaire because he has significant control over how trillions of tax dollars are spent. You’re confusing wealth with power.
How is having their wealth under a different name make the wealth not theirs? Are they the one that own it? In paper, maybe not but it’s technically theirs. That’s like saying Putin isn’t the richest, simply because the money isn’t seen on his bank account.
Forbes looks for the general popularity in the media. If everyone is talking about Elon Musk, they’ll just add a couple more billions to his net worth and put him on the cover as the #1 even if he is not the richest despite some other people clearly having way more. If you ask them, they’ll just say that’s what they have found out after the research.
The president can’t just go to the bank and get all the tax money. That’s the difference between owning the wealth and controlling it. The owner can make a few phone calls and get the money on his table in a day while the president has to convince everyone that he has a valid reason to take the money for himself, which is impossible. The power the president has is mere control over decisions on the overall cash flow. Almost everything is regulated, even with people that have relatively small power over the control of the money compared to the president, such as someone who controls a company’s money. And even if it’s not regulated, that person simply cannot say they own the company.
Thank you for reading!
Elon reads my comments
How is having their wealth under a different name make the wealth not theirs? Are they the one that own it? In paper, maybe not but it’s technically theirs. That’s like saying Putin isn’t the richest, simply because the money isn’t seen on his bank account.
Putin is the arguably the World’s most powerful man, but nowhere near the richest. I separate the two.
Forbes looks for the general popularity in the media. If everyone is talking about Elon Musk, they’ll just add a couple more billions to his net worth and put him on the cover as the #1 even if he is not the richest despite some other people clearly having way more. If you ask them, they’ll just say that’s what they have found out after the research.
I give them more credit than that. They take what they do very seriously. Now they did put Jay Z on their cover of the Forbes 400 to sell magazines, but they never put him on the actual list. They simply did an article predicting he might make the list one day and that was the pretext for profiling him.
The president can’t just go to the bank and get all the tax money. That’s the difference between owning the wealth and controlling it. The owner can make a few phone calls and get the money on his table in a day while the president has to convince everyone that he has a valid reason to take the money for himself, which is impossible.
False. Elon Musk is worth $228 billion but he can’t make a few phone calls and get anywhere near that much cash on the table in 1000 days, let alone one. Indeed the mere act of liquidating would cause his fortune to crumble. But we can still say he’s a centibillionaire because he has legal ownership of those assets.
People who want to not be listed in global magazines – 90% of rich population.
People who want to be in the magazines – 10% of the rich population, absolute MAX. Get it?
“Then it’s not THEIR wealth, dumbass. They might still control it making them defacto billionaires but they’re not ACTUAL billionaires ”
Wrong. They are actual billionaires if they control it. The US president doesnt have control over any money. Read the laws.
Also you have this weird cognitive glitch where you try to explain everything through statistical theory like you did when explaining the biology of high IQ reproduction. No the mistakes don’t balance out with the hits idiot. Where did you get evidence for that beyond a statistics textbook? We’re talking about the worlds richest people not fucking big data. It takes world class investigative journalism to uncover the list of people who are rich and nobody has the resources and time to do that effectively. What Forbes discovered is that a good chunk of billionaires are jewish from a SAMPLE. I agree with that aspect. But the overall population of the richest people in my opinion is basically unknown to anyone but the top executives of the world’s private banks and maybe some specialist law firms. [redacted by pp, 2022-06-21]
People who want to not be listed in global magazines – 90% of rich population.
People who want to be in the magazines – 10% of the rich population, absolute MAX. Get it?
0% of the criminal population wants to be in jail therefore none of the people in jail are criminals #thinklikepill
Wrong. They are actual billionaires if they control it. The US president doesnt have control over any money. Read the laws.
Really? Presidents can’t sign or veto bills deciding whether Israel gets a multi-billion dollar Iron Dome? A billionaire is not just anyone who controls billion(s). That’s a POWERFUL person. Billionaires are a subset of powerful people with LEGAL authority over 10 plus figure assets.
You’re also ignorant about how little tax most billionaires are asked to pay which is why you think half the rich people are donating their money to their accountants or hiding it in Swiss Banks. Jeff Bezos has amassed a fortune of $134 billion & only had to pay a mere $1 billion in federal taxes. Why hide in the shadows living beneath his means when he can enjoy all the luxury, attention & status of having ALL THAT MONEY? He needs a swiss bank account like a moose needs a hat rack.
I understand many rich people would still want to hide because they fear grifters, jealousy, blackmail & public backlash, but one of the secrets to America’s success is it’s an incredibly great place to be openly rich, though less so in the last 15 years.
Also you have this weird cognitive glitch where you try to explain everything through statistical theory like you did when explaining the biology of high IQ reproduction. No the mistakes don’t balance out with the hits idiot. Where did you get evidence for that beyond a statistics textbook? We’re talking about the worlds richest people not fucking big data.
My point is the number of false positives on Forbes lists (centimillionaires who Forbes mistakes for billionaires) and false negatives (real billionaires that Forbes fails to identify) largely cancel out, so their count of the actual number of billionaires is not as far off as you think.
What Forbes discovered is that a good chunk of billionaires are jewish from a SAMPLE. I agree with that aspect.
Assuming a positive correlation between Jewish ancestry and wealth, one can predict that the richer the people on Forbes list, the more likely they are to be Jewish. So if the list were only 0.0001% Jewish, we’d expect the list to be made up of those in poverty. If the list were only 3% Jewish, we’d expect the list to be made up of the middle class. If it were 10% Jewish, we’d expect it to be perhaps the richest 1% etc. Once you get to over 35% Jewish for the list as a whole, to 60% Jewish for the top ten, then you’d expect they’re sampling the richest 0.000001% which is means they pretty much are sampling the richest people in society (with a few exceptions here and there)..
By the same logic, we know that the list of the ten fastest runners in the World must be sampling something very close to the fastest people in the World because 100% of that list is black. That doesn’t mean there can’t be someone out there who is faster than Usain Bolt. But there’s unlikely to be DOZENS of such people, because you don’t get an all black sample unless you’ve sampled the fastest of the fast.
“Billionaires are a subset of powerful people with LEGAL authority over 10 plus figure assets.”
So Farhad Moshiri is a billionaire according to you, but Alisher Usmanov is a homeless person. Great logic Puppy.
Billionaires are people like Putin who owns a billion dollar house and has it ‘legally’ (whatever thats supposed to mean in a place like Russia) in another persons name but basically still owns it.
You just don’t get it puppy. Youre getting confused about labels rather than effective ownership. The president doesn’t effectively own anything.
“My point is the number of false positives on Forbes lists (centimillionaires who Forbes mistakes for billionaires) and false negatives (real billionaires that Forbes fails to identify) largely cancel out”
False and a dumb argument. Even in your statistical theory its takes a larger and larger sample size for things like that to cancel out. The top 100 richest people in the world is too small a number for that phenomenon to happen and you are totally wrong about the rigour of the compilation of the list anyway. Forbes journalists have no access to tax haven records which contain 1/3 of the world’s wealth.
The rest of your comment is stupid and circular and I never disagreed that jews make up a large number of the top 100 as I keep saying I accept that.
So Farhad Moshiri is a billionaire according to you, but Alisher Usmanov is a homeless person. Great logic Puppy.
Huh?
Billionaires are people like Putin who owns a billion dollar house and has it ‘legally’ (whatever thats supposed to mean in a place like Russia) in another persons name but basically still owns it.
Putin doesn’t own any billion dollar assets, he just uses the power of the state to bully those who do into letting him mooch off them. You could say he’s the functional equivalent of a billionaire, but wealth is not a functional concept, it’s a legal one.
You just don’t get it puppy. Youre getting confused about labels rather than effective ownership. The president doesn’t effectively own anything.
He effectively owns (while in office) the white house and all its servants, a private jet, world class security, the ability to stop traffic anywhere in the World, access to classified information, the ability to pardon anyone in America of any crime, including those they haven’t been charged with yet, discretion over who gets government contracts and funding etc.
If Epstein had Kompromat on both Putin and a newly elected President, the latter would sell for much more on the black market. The U.S. presidency is effectively a multibillion dollar asset. Bloomberg spent $1 billion just trying to get the NOMINATION for president, let alone the presidency itself.
Forbes journalists have no access to tax haven records which contain 1/3 of the world’s wealth.
Assets are positively correlated so you don’t need to see all of them to guess someone with 50 washrooms in their house and a private jet is probably richer than someone with only 25 washrooms and a helicopter. If Forbes can identify the owners of the 400 biggest public known assets in America, that’s enough to find MOST of the 400 richest Americans
The rest of your comment is stupid and circular and I never disagreed that jews make up a large number of the top 100 as I keep saying I accept that.
No it’s not circular at all because we already know a priori that rich people tend to have high rates of Jewish ancestry, low rates of black ancestry, high rates of Ivy League attendance etc, so if Forbes did a good job finding the richest people, we’d expect them to display these traits to a very high degree. The fact that they do proves the list is mostly correct.
can i still post rap videos if youre going to censor me PP?
no one here is interested in rap.
“Putin is the arguably the World’s most powerful man, but nowhere near the richest. I separate the two.”
I gave Putin as an example. I didn’t mean to say he was the richest person. But that’s not the point. You just ignored the question.
“False. Elon Musk is worth $228 billion but he can’t make a few phone calls and get anywhere near that much cash on the table in 1000 days, let alone one. Indeed the mere act of liquidating would cause his fortune to crumble. But we can still say he’s a centibillionaire because he has legal ownership of those assets.”
Elon Musk is an extreme example. There are always exceptions and Elon Musk is the very top one because his net worth depends too much on the public. Once again you are trying to find a hole in the question instead of answering it
. If you think about an ordinary everyday millionaire, he can indeed get all the money on his table in a day (Of course if the wealth is only money and not investments like stocks or etc.)
“He effectively owns (while in office) the white house and all its servants, a private jet, world class security, the ability to stop traffic anywhere in the World, access to classified information, the ability to pardon anyone in America of any crime, including those they haven’t been charged with yet, discretion over who gets government contracts and funding etc.”
What I am trying to say is owning and controlling is different. Even if the money is in a different person’s account the millionaire still owns it. You said the president owns the white house while in the office, then isn’t that the same as a rent house? Can the president sell the white house? No, just like a renter. You are basically saying renting = owning. The president is basically renting the white house and all other services he gets from the government. Think of it as benefits that a tenant gets.
Not trying to argue just for the sake of it but what you say is very illogical
What I am trying to say is owning and controlling is different.
We agree on that. I’m saying to OWN something requires legal right, not control per se.
Even if the money is in a different person’s account the millionaire still owns it.
Not if he gave up his legal rights to it.
You said the president owns the white house while in the office, then isn’t that the same as a rent house? Can the president sell the white house? No, just like a renter. You are basically saying renting = owning. The president is basically renting the white house and all other services he gets from the government. Think of it as benefits that a tenant gets.
Renting the white house and all its perks (secret service, servants, private jet, Camp David) for 8 years would cost 10 figures so the president is enjoying a billion dollar life style at tax payer expense.
“We agree on that. I’m saying to OWN something requires legal right, not control per se.”
There is difference between legal rights and truth. if the government says you don’t have a house but you literally do, then you do have a house! It might not be “legal” but you still own it!
You can’t trust and obey the government with everything!
“Not if he gave up his legal rights to it.”
Legal rights in which government, really? What if the guy is a citizen of two countries and one claims the guy has $1 million and the other claims the guy has $50 million? Which one of the “legal right” is the truth? What if the guy doesn’t have a bank account and simply gives his money to his friend to keep it for him? Then who is the government? What’s the truth? Well it is of course the guy’s money and both him and his friend will tell you that!
“Renting the white house and all its perks (secret service, servants, private jet, Camp David) for 8 years would cost 10 figures so the president is enjoying a billion dollar life style at tax payer expense.”
Yes that’s right. It isn’t exactly a relaxing, fun “life style” since the president has to worry about stuff all the time (relations with other countries, his rival party, votes, terrorists and million more) but you’re right!
Isn’t it hilarious how Elvis could have had any woman he wanted but that he was basically a paedophile?
Jerry Lee Lewis married his 13-year-old cousin💀 Watched Taxi Driver a few days ago in honor of the liberation of John Hinckley, who tried to assassinate the President of the United States to impress a 13-year-old lesbian. Jailbait has Myers down horrendous
I have the same personality disorder as the character from taxi driver. [redacted by pp, 2022-06-21]
why doesn’t the pill personality just say it?
1. oprah has a man’s voice.
2. she looks like a gorilla.
3. she’s a psychopath.
You said many times her voice is sexy and she looks gorgeous for a 68-year-old because money can buy looks:
source?
i have never said either!
EVER!
YOU LITERALLY CAN’T STOP LYING!
THE AFRO PERSONALITY WAS SO RIGHT!
SAD!
No I added the AND she looks gorgeous for 68. Not included in the “you said” part of my sentence.
Specifically you said something like if any man could hear (not see) but hear a 100 women calling him, and one of them was Oprah, he would pick Oprah based on voice alone.
You needed to add a comma if you wanted it to be interpreted as an independent clause.
I said Oprah looks like a gorilla many times but it was censored. Puppy lets you say way more stuff than he lets me like the n word.
it is impossible to make a very high score on the SAT, GRE, ACT, etc…
if you have the attention span of oprah…
but would i have scored higher if i’d taken amphetamine?
no!
peepee’s life has been predicted by gypsy…sad.
Oprah would probably score +3 SD on Digit Span. Both her mother’s cousin (who hates her) and her producer has said she has an amazing photographic memory. The producer knew because she had to prep Oprah for extremely complex choreography for Favorite Things show and she never had to worry about Oprah having it down. She learned to read & recite scriptures by age 3.
^^^^AHAHAHAHAHAHA
Puppy’s head just exploded.
smyslov and petrosian proved that even timed chess isn’t just digit span, the ability to calculate so many moves ahead.
and now with the super good chess engines…
only the correspondence players have a chance…
and theoretically…
the very best correspondence players should always win…
vs any computer.
why?
because whatever new positional criteria alpha-zero et al discovers is available to humans.
afaik the last chess engine vs slow human (correspondence human) match ended in human wins.
chinapeople are like computers.
natural slaves.
sad.
it was actually the middle school play. i had been in the play the previous year. no problem.
i literally can’t make any effort at doing gay shit.
i admit it!
the kid who replaced me wasn’t the smart kid. he was the gay kid. he had memorized my part and everyone else’s. why? because genius? no! because gay!
rest in piss betty palmer?
So will you be writing the whole story of the movie, PP?
Is that a problem?
Yes
“complications from diabetes” or AIDS?
https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=1-hLAAAAIBAJ&sjid=JowDAAAAIBAJ&pg=5992%2C3800872
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Bell_(journalist)#Death
there are legit bathhouses, no sex. a spanish co named AIRE has one in manhattan and one in chicago.
all the bathhouses started out as legit. the 70s was the peak. before AIDS. today gay bathhouses are for old dudes among the 20% of europeans immune to AIDS…or so i have read.
So I spent the whole day in the office researching aoe 3 strategy and they paid me big money to do that HAHAHAHAHA.
Whatever happened to gypsyman the commenter?[redacted by pp, 2022-06-21]
if you’ve never been in a steam room or sauna…you’ll wanna go again…the yiddish term is “schwitz”…
so at some point these legit bathhouses transitioned to gay sex shitholes. did it happen overnight? or slowly?
in that article some old queer claims “in the interim” there were cops on every floor and no sex, just arrangements for sex somewhere else.
so even today i’ve read some eastern europeans will show up at a gay bathhouse just for the steam…ignorant…
which would be cool…except they do it in the steam room too.
and then there’s the other art bell’s question: why has this never caught on with women?
because ultimately it comes down to power.
not just inherent difference between the the sexes.
but most fags weren’t into bathhouses either.
the rule is: women are hornier than men, but only horny for a small minority of men. women are picky and horny.
there are consequences real and merely feared for female humans acting like female chimps…not just STD consequences and pregnancy consequences but SHAME consequences…
the reality is…
in a truly gender equal society a small minority of women would attend a straight bathhouse where the men were screened for physical attractiveness…
youre that insecure wtf! have confidence! Mug!
youre censoring a guy who is banned. how gay!