Woman livid, man trying to hold laughter and agreeing because some fights just aren't worth having
Imagine being so short you need to puff up your hair to look taller than an Asian woman.
I always get a kick out of people going "there was a guy with racist puppets you could never do that today"
What? Have fun? How dare he we should all die in pain for making fun of (checks card) terrorists and chilli peppers.
What? Have fun? How dare he we should all die in pain for making fun of (checks card) terrorists and chilli peppers.
Please pay no attention to the meaning of life. Continue to consoom and work for ultraglobalmegacorp as a drone until you die of overwork.
My first few vehicles were manual, and I've got no problem with manual transmission, but it really depends on the sort of driving that you do on a day-to-day basis. If you live in deep in a badly designed city, when you're stuck at a traffic light and you're moving forward 3 ft at a time for half an hour, that automatic transmission is worth its weight in gold. If you live in a small town or the country, it's not really that big of a deal and the benefits of a manual are more obvious.
That's true, and if there was a general right to medical privacy that they claimed existed in the constitution, then it would apply to many things other than abortion. Everyone correctly pointed out and that vaccine passports and like would have been absurdly illegal, but also the entire medical arm of the FDA would be illegal. The ramifications of such a right existing would be massive, and honestly in some ways maybe positive.
But the thing is, later court case is established that there is a right to medical privacy only for abortions somehow. And not just that, but it is a right that is not enumerated but is supposed to be more heavily protected than every enumerated right. The way that it was protected under roe, it was more protected than speech. It was more protected than the right to bear arms. Could you imagine if the second amendment gave you an explicit right to kill innocent helpless people with your gun?
And as is the case with politicians in america, in spite of over the past 50 years having moments where they had the presidency, the judiciary, the congress, and supermajority in the Senate, at no point that they consider codifying most of the things that were pushed through the courts as actual laws. They just took the arbitrary court decision and declared victory.
But the thing is, later court case is established that there is a right to medical privacy only for abortions somehow. And not just that, but it is a right that is not enumerated but is supposed to be more heavily protected than every enumerated right. The way that it was protected under roe, it was more protected than speech. It was more protected than the right to bear arms. Could you imagine if the second amendment gave you an explicit right to kill innocent helpless people with your gun?
And as is the case with politicians in america, in spite of over the past 50 years having moments where they had the presidency, the judiciary, the congress, and supermajority in the Senate, at no point that they consider codifying most of the things that were pushed through the courts as actual laws. They just took the arbitrary court decision and declared victory.
Senor, I came from the Walmart parking lot, but sam Walton kicked me out, talking about making Walmart parking lots great again.
It seems to me that like many rules, they conflict. The simplest design isn't very usable for example, or understandable.
When you're used to human centric ui design, it seems intuitive after some time but sometimes you'll see someone who makes what I like to call "programmer UI" -- it's very simple, but has no indication of what anything does or why and so unless you're already an expert you can't use the thing.
When you're used to human centric ui design, it seems intuitive after some time but sometimes you'll see someone who makes what I like to call "programmer UI" -- it's very simple, but has no indication of what anything does or why and so unless you're already an expert you can't use the thing.
I'm not opposed to x86 or x86-64 getting superceded by ARM or the like, but I do have a major concern that the end of x86-64 will be the end of the open PC.
We all have lots of ARM devices, and for the most part none of them are open like a PC. You can't boot off of a standard USB stick to start up some thing, because for the most part there is no real bootable standard, because none of these devices are standard. They're each their own proprietary thing, and often they're running their own proprietary software. You make a different sort of media for each one, often running a different sort of OS.
Contrast the open PC, where you can use the same USB memory stick to install the same OS on pretty much every PC, give or take a couple device drivers.
If we lose that openness, I don't think we'd get it back anytime soon. Potentially every laptop becomes a semi-proprietary ecosystem.
We all have lots of ARM devices, and for the most part none of them are open like a PC. You can't boot off of a standard USB stick to start up some thing, because for the most part there is no real bootable standard, because none of these devices are standard. They're each their own proprietary thing, and often they're running their own proprietary software. You make a different sort of media for each one, often running a different sort of OS.
Contrast the open PC, where you can use the same USB memory stick to install the same OS on pretty much every PC, give or take a couple device drivers.
If we lose that openness, I don't think we'd get it back anytime soon. Potentially every laptop becomes a semi-proprietary ecosystem.
Local open source everything. We've come to a point where slowly people are asking permission to do what they want to do in many ways, it's time to flip the script.
Yeah... It's an equation with two sides, caloric intake and caloric output. If you take two people, and one of them is sitting there posting on Twitter all day and the other one is riding in the tour de france, it should be self-evident that if they are eating the same amount the outcome will be significantly different.
So let's take another situation, two people sitting on Twitter all day, but the basal metabolic rate is slightly higher in one than the other. We know that certain things affect the basal metabolic rate such as general activity levels or genetics, and potentially certain foods may it affect that as well.
The composition of the food can also make a big difference. As I recall, the test for caloric intake of food basically involves burning the food in a controlled manner. Well there are things that are highly calorie dense but also somewhat inedible. For example, a piece of wood is made out of all kinds of carbon that will burn, but it is insoluble fiber when it comes to our body's ability to break down and use those calories, and so it will basically leave the body the same way that it entered. If you have one person eating 2,000 calories of wood and another person eating 2,000 calories of sugar the body is definitely going to be interacting with those two things in a fundamentally different way, and so one person will starve and the other person will be more or less just fine.
The nutrients contained in food can also have a big difference. When I first started taking vitamin b complex, I was shocked I just how much energy he gave me, because vitamin B is critical in helping your body process fat.
All of this is true, but it's important when trying to lose weight not to get bogged down in details -- in that case calories are the easiest way to gauge where you are and where you're likely to go, but we're not talking about individual weight loss here but the populations, and given the date points we're looking at the details start to matter.
So let's take another situation, two people sitting on Twitter all day, but the basal metabolic rate is slightly higher in one than the other. We know that certain things affect the basal metabolic rate such as general activity levels or genetics, and potentially certain foods may it affect that as well.
The composition of the food can also make a big difference. As I recall, the test for caloric intake of food basically involves burning the food in a controlled manner. Well there are things that are highly calorie dense but also somewhat inedible. For example, a piece of wood is made out of all kinds of carbon that will burn, but it is insoluble fiber when it comes to our body's ability to break down and use those calories, and so it will basically leave the body the same way that it entered. If you have one person eating 2,000 calories of wood and another person eating 2,000 calories of sugar the body is definitely going to be interacting with those two things in a fundamentally different way, and so one person will starve and the other person will be more or less just fine.
The nutrients contained in food can also have a big difference. When I first started taking vitamin b complex, I was shocked I just how much energy he gave me, because vitamin B is critical in helping your body process fat.
All of this is true, but it's important when trying to lose weight not to get bogged down in details -- in that case calories are the easiest way to gauge where you are and where you're likely to go, but we're not talking about individual weight loss here but the populations, and given the date points we're looking at the details start to matter.
I don't mind the concept of enshittification, but I'm getting sick of constantly seeing people repeating the word in every single article about big tech getting worse like trained parrots. Often they barely have anything else in the message, they just "go oh yeah that's enshittification" as if that's an insight.
Reddit has been dead for a long time.
It's filled with an extremist monoculture. The mere idea that someone might believe something different than the Reddit monoculture is thought of as if you're trolling, they are so used to seeing nothing but their own opinions that the only reason anyone might have another opinion is that you're trying to attack them.
For a long time I had a reddit account, and it was my main place to see things and have discussions about things. After a while I started to erase my account every few months because there was a very real threat of having some psycho track down where I lived based on hints in my posts. Eventually I deleted my account for the last time, because there was only one opinion you were allowed to have, and if you didn't have that opinion you'll be down voted into oblivion, banned from a subreddit, adjust face a torrent of low effort "refutations" that essentially beg the question -- the assumptions built into discussion mean discussions can't even take place.
A lot of redditors moved over to lemmy, and now lemmy has the exact same problem. There were once a couple decent instances that got chased off the platform, and the large reddit population now socially polices that platform too.
I have ended up on the fediverse, and it's absolutely incredible. The level of intellectual diversity is beautiful, I'm mutuals with on one hand people who have hammer and sickle in their name, and on the other hand people who have black suns and swastikas in their name. That doesn't mean that I endorse either ideology whatsoever, but it does mean that all across a broad spectrum I can see all kinds of different opinions and that's kind of what I want.
It's filled with an extremist monoculture. The mere idea that someone might believe something different than the Reddit monoculture is thought of as if you're trolling, they are so used to seeing nothing but their own opinions that the only reason anyone might have another opinion is that you're trying to attack them.
For a long time I had a reddit account, and it was my main place to see things and have discussions about things. After a while I started to erase my account every few months because there was a very real threat of having some psycho track down where I lived based on hints in my posts. Eventually I deleted my account for the last time, because there was only one opinion you were allowed to have, and if you didn't have that opinion you'll be down voted into oblivion, banned from a subreddit, adjust face a torrent of low effort "refutations" that essentially beg the question -- the assumptions built into discussion mean discussions can't even take place.
A lot of redditors moved over to lemmy, and now lemmy has the exact same problem. There were once a couple decent instances that got chased off the platform, and the large reddit population now socially polices that platform too.
I have ended up on the fediverse, and it's absolutely incredible. The level of intellectual diversity is beautiful, I'm mutuals with on one hand people who have hammer and sickle in their name, and on the other hand people who have black suns and swastikas in their name. That doesn't mean that I endorse either ideology whatsoever, but it does mean that all across a broad spectrum I can see all kinds of different opinions and that's kind of what I want.
My wife got mad at me when I looked at my son and said "you're such a beautiful baby, and don't worry if you weren't I'd tell you"
I love how discord is like "Attention everyone! Prepare to be banned at any moment. Also, would you like to pay us some money in our store?"