This is a good anecdote about misinformation as well - when someone believes that they have the answer, they often never reassess the situation, which can get to the point where the real answer is staring them right in the face, but they can’t see it because they’re not looking; why would they? They already know the answer! This is how lies can spread so easily even when easily debunked. Nobody bothers to listen to the debunking.
There’s a window in front of my kitchen sink at my current house. I’ve been there for over a year and never once opened those blinds.
Eh, I had the Gameboy, then the Gameboy pocket, then the Gameboy color, then the Gameboy advance, then the Gameboy advance SP, then the DS, and so on. Sure, some were just different models of the same base console, but several were real upgrades with exclusive game libraries. This upgrade feels par for the course when it comes to Nintendo handhelds, and honestly, I like that. The switch was a great idea, and jumping to a new thing just because there’s some competition would be lame. Pretty much the only benefit of capitalism is supposed to be the whole “competition breeds innovation” thing. Maybe we’ll get a bit of that in the handheld market for once.
Some humans are more trustworthy than others. Even the difference between “I think fire is cold” and “Fire is cold” is immense. To err is to be human, but to err with complete confidence shows that you’re a little too comfortable with erring.
Because you stated 2 things as if they were fact, and I know at least one of them is wrong. It’s okay not to know things, but definitively saying something is true when it’s clearly not true proves that you state unfounded ideas as if they were facts, which can and should undermine people’s trust in the validity of all definitive statements you make.
Eyes are highly specialized organs for sight. Chances are that the first form of “sight” in our ancestors was a patch of cells that could vaguely detect the presence and absence of light, which was enough of an advantage for it to be selected for in that population, causing it to slowly get more and more optimized over millions and millions of years until it became an actual eye. For a structure as complex as an eye to pop into existence before any simpler sight-giving predecessor organ would be highly unlikely.
No, but if you say that you discovered inner peace and fire is cold, I don’t trust that you discovered inner peace.
Love the “Arms: 2”
Which goes to show how legality isn’t a measurement of correctness.
Correct. Those people, who were doing all that anyway. I’m not saying they were good people, but their revolution had nothing to do with the indigenous genocide. I do know that a lot of people were hurt or killed from “being too apologetic to British forces.” I don’t personally know enough about the French revolution to know about the amount of innocent casualties, but 30,000 doesn’t surprise me.
Things are bad over here, and they’re only getting worse. If I end up being one of the people killed during the - at this point - inevitable uprising, whether from fighting or from being mistaken as being too friendly with the corrupt elite, at least I could be happy that there would be a light at the end of the tunnel for those who do survive.
Yeah, I mean, look what happened in the late 1700’s. A bunch of people in the new world did a kind of “kill the oppressors” movement, and then they had to start a whole new country with a new set of ideas - what a pain. Then people in France caught wind of it and decided to start the movement there, too! It was a whole mess for the bourgeoise of the time.
Would you be arrested? Probably not, but you’re more likely to be than Trump. See, committing a crime isn’t the only factor that influences whether or not you get slapped with the punishment for that crime, even if it’s plainly obvious to everyone you committed it. Another major factor is whether or not someone is going to go through the effort of ensuring you get punished - if nobody does, or if they try, but can’t get to that finish line of getting a judge to declare you to be guilty in court, then you walk away scot-free.
So, the thing that’s keeping you from being arrested is your relative insignificance. You’re just some person, so it’s unlikely that anyone will go through the trouble of ensuring you receive the punishment for the crime you committed, even if it’s a relatively easy thing to do. Now, if you were to go on TV and say it, that would significantly increase your risk, since now more people are seeing you and someone who gives a shit might decide to go after you. That would be damning for you, since it would require very little effort to punish you - you clearly committed the crime, and you have no way to influence the court to make you harder to punish.
For Trump, his protection isn’t insignificance - there are plenty of people who would like to ensure he’s properly punished; instead, his protection comes from making it really difficult for someone who wants to punish him to be successful in that endeavor. He has a lot of money and influence, so he can hire good lawyers that can drag out the expensive legal process - something he can afford, but a lot of people who might try to go after him can’t. His lawyers are also good enough to find loopholes in the law to avoid punishment, so even if you can afford a cheap lawyer for a long time, he’ll likely still walk away unscathed. He’s also shown that he has the ability to influence what judge gets put on trials he’s a part of, which is another factor that influences whether or not he might get punished for the crime.
Ultimately, you’d have to have a rock-solid case presented by a team of very good lawyers working non-stop for months to years in order to bring Trump to justice, and the only people who reasonably have that power are almost exclusively on his side to begin with. Trump has knowingly committed multiple major crimes, and has shown that he has the ability to prevent them from hurting him, so he knows that he has virtually no chance to be punished for minor crimes, and commits them openly all the time.
I put my alarm far enough away that I need to get up to turn it off. By then I’m already out of bed, which is otherwise the hardest part for me by far.
As someone who works with door hardware, this would be a pretty easy interview.
I’m definitely in support of A, regardless. I only know complex words from having seen them used correctly in the wild; how could anyone be expected to learn them otherwise?
The ability to find an approximate definition of a new word using context - and slowly whittle it down to the actual definition over subsequent encounters - is invaluable for gaining better language comprehension.
Ultimately, it should be a law. Companies will always want to exploit their workers whenever possible, and the entire point of a government is to enforce the will of the people against things like corporations that are too big for any single person to fight. It’s basically the concept of “If you’re not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear,” but applying it to companies instead of people, because the people should be free, not the corporations.
The issue with that sentiment is that a significant amount of the population simply can’t afford to be picky. They buy the cheapest available version of whatever they need because that’s what they can afford. All of the power of consumer choice is slowly being stripped away as more and more people are pushed into poverty, and that’s by design.
As I mentioned, I have a wife who I live with and spend time with every day. We met online, and only later realized that we went to the same school, but were in different grades. We probably saw each other on multiple occasions, but we were just strangers then. I also have plenty of local friends who I spend time with as well. However, I live in completely different states from some of my oldest friends from school. We voice chat online every week, and meet up in person every few years.
I have a couple groups of people who I play video games and tabletop games with online who I’ve never even seen in real life, and wouldn’t even recognize walking down the street, but we’ve known each other for years and have real, meaningful connections. Two of the friends from one group even realized they live near one another, and have since begun dating, making plans to move in together soon.
And yes, I am a part of several online communities in forums, sites like Lemmy, and elsewhere that I keep up with. We have nice conversations and heated arguments. We help each other with problems and questions. We’re simply a group that any member knows they can turn to when they need to connect with someone.
Life is complicated, and there are an insane amount of different ways to connect with people. Amazingly, some of those are through the internet. The idea that some connections are real and the others are fake is complete bullshit, and you’re clearly making a bad argument in bad faith to let off some steam.
I was planning to get a Switch 2 just to keep it at 1.0 and wait for a scene to develop, but even the console alone is a bit out of my price range.