For serious comments, my true audience is the unknown reader. For jokes, my audience is myself alone.
Lemmy dev suggestions: Remove all downvotes. User blocks should keep the blockee from seeing the blocker.
In the United States, for reasons that are difficult to explain, it is legal to gerrymander.
I think that Democrats should be trying to gerrymander to insane degrees to give Democrats the advantage, and at the same time, they should introduce a constitutional amendment to make gerrymandering illegal. The amendment needs to be written by experts in political science and gerrymandering so that we can do our best to get rid of this disease.
As long as they say, "We are against gerrymandering, and all of these states have ratified the amendment. But if we don't do this, the red states will never ratify the amendment," then I think they can make it work.
In the short run, the Democrats would win, and in the long run, as long as the amendment is written well, the American public would win, which hopefully would also be wins for progressives.
To my great shame, I haven't read the book, but based on the different movie adaptations I've seen, another interpretation could be simply that he ate some dinner that disagreed with him, and then just had some bad dreams for the second panel.
Nancy really made his bald head shine!
I think that my definition of "resurrect" is not the same as their definition of "resurrect".
Like, imagine that you went out and found an actress who was willing to dress up like your dead grandmother, and who would also study videos of her, and could do a perfect impersonation. I doubt anybody would say that she was "resurrected". But this is precisely what the AI is attempting to do.
To call it a "resurrection" is an insult to her memory.
People have been saying that about Stephen Miller since before Trump's first presidency.
It's just as unsurprising as Elon Musk's Nazi salutes on stage at a GOP convention.
The reason Musk accidentally makes Nazi salutes when he gets excited is that he's a Nazi.
The reason Stephen Miller's rhetoric is the same as Nazi rhetoric is that he's a Nazi.
I'm not speaking metaphorically. I don't mean "Neo Nazi". I mean that Stephen Miller, like Elon Musk and Donald Trump, idolizes Nazi Germany, and in all likelihood, literally thinks of himself as a Nazi.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
In college, I had a URL in my email signature, and the website was about etiquette in emails. I did this because I had to frequently communicate with a person who typed in all caps, and I hoped that he'd read it at some point. But anyways it wasn't a well-known domain, nor was it one that I had registered myself.
And then, somebody sent me an email asking what kind of sick sense of humor I had, and it turned out that the link now went to a hardcore porn website. Not the best link to have in your email when you're using it to try to find a job.
Thinking about it now, I wouldn't be surprised if it was a prank by somebody who knew me.
She never deserved to get known by those initials in the first place. Her name isn't difficult to say. They were just envious of AOC and forced it.
I always just called her Greene or Marjorie Greene. Hopefully it's all moot now anyways and we can forget about her.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Yeah why does the teacher have the equation for a line next to what appears to be a parabola?
And I don't think either function is going to describe some random cock very accurately.
On the other hand, the GOP, along with some Democrats, just approved a huge military budget, $900 billion IIRC, and what have they been doing with that? Blowing up fishing boats, hijacking oil tankers, and basically gearing up for some sort of larger military action in South America, perhaps. More suffering and death.
The GOP knows that causing suffering and death is in their best interests. They need "others". They need victims. And they need hate. If people were able to calm down and rationally vote in their own best interests, instead of billionaires' best interests, the GOP would be gone within a few years. And after that, the Democratic party would have to change quite a bit if they wanted to stick around, as well.
This being a poll, the most important information is the exact question they were asked. If you ask the same question in a different way, you can get wildly different results. I clicked through to the Reuter's link from this article, but I'm not sure it says the exact question.
From the graphic on that page, it says:
"The federal government is hiding information about Epstein’s alleged clients"
From Republicans, the "Yes" is 61% (I'm assuming this is a rounding issue with their software), and "No" is 17%.
So, strangely, the headline of this post and of the article that OP linked seem to be accurate, but if you read the content of that article, it's quite a bit less accurate. It's the opposite of what you normally expect from clickbait news articles.
Next experiment will be the Banach–Tarski paradox.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you. - Lyndon B. Johnson
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Here's another thing that doesn't make sense about that post:
If you play Dungeons & Dragons, this object probably stops you in your tracks.
If you just play Dungeons & Dragons, then it looks like the hundreds or thousands of other d20s you've seen. Barely worth a look.
On the other hand, if you just like dice, like a lot of TTRPG people do, then it might catch your attention.
I think I don't get it.
Like, the only thing that looks like a joke is that Batman filled out he form with NA and signed it "Batman" because he's not Bruce Wayne. But then, why would he fill out the form that was given to "Mr. Wayne" at all?
So, I think I don't get the joke. Can somebody explain it to me?
EDIT: I got it right after finishing the comment.
Nanananananana Batman.
Have you ever gone up to a stranger and asked them to give you something for free? It's about 1000x more socially awkward than anything the other person could do. So, the other person doesn't need to stress, at all.
Whether they give you something once, or they give you more than one thing, or they don't give you anything, it is a trivial thing compared to asking. My advice is just do what you want to do, and if you think about it and change your mind later, then, just do the other thing.
One time, somebody came up to me on the street and asked me for money, and I said, "sorry," and he got super pissed off at me. He said something like, "You can shove your 'sorry'." I assume he wasn't used to begging, and was ready for people to either give him money or ignore him, but he wasn't ready for the awkwardness of somebody speaking to him to refuse. Begging is super awkward.
I was not familiar with this book, so I just watched a video of a Canadian lady reading it.
My biggest takeaway from the book was that "FUCK THAT'S A MOOSE! IT IS GOING TO KILL YOU. THAT'S WHAT MOOSE DO."
All of his wishes could be interpreted as only applying in the past.