Anyolduser @ Anyolduser @lemmynsfw.com

Posts

0

Comments

518

Joined

2 yr. ago

Because Californians love writing laws as a knee jerk reaction to the crime de jour.

Some pearl-clutching local will go to their state legislature and demand that WiFi jamming be banned despite the fact that the FCC is all over that shit. They keep passing redundant gun control laws in the same way for the same reasons.

Ampersand is another good example. "&" was considered the last letter of the alphabet for a while. Schoolchildren would recite the alphabet and finish it with the phrase "and, per se and" ("and, meaning and").

The words got mashed together over time and the word "ampersand" was born.

The bar is pretty low these days.

Yeah, but like ... movie ugly. Like Ogbert, the nerd that nobody realizes is handsome until he takes off his glasses.

The boss said "shoot this at the drones", so they did.

If it's any consolation, you're just hearing from terminally online partisans, actual lunatics, and foreign intelligence agents trying to destabilize us.

The on-the-ground experience here is not accurately reflected on Lemmy.

That is a shockingly accurate assessment.

That sounds like a fantastic plan. Enjoy yourself.

Thank you! That sounds like something a human would say.

Can I have your flavoring if you're not going to eat it?

Correct.

The pot-stirring also exacerbated rioting in the summer of 2020, too. Both of those events got the media to lay off a little bit, but that only lasted for a little while.

If you read between the lines the messaging is "holy fuck, you got people killed in 2020. Cut this shit out because you're getting people killed again".

Not to the "base" of either of the major parties, no. Those voters are already committed to their candidates.

This election is likely to come down to independents and undecided voters. Where that messaging could matter is with people who are unsatisfied with the Democratic party AND dislike Trump.

The idea that "they hate me enough to kill me" might be compelling to someone with a strong dislike of the Democratic party, perhaps enough to get them to hold their nose and vote for Trump. That being said, I wouldn't even venture a guess at how many people that would be.

Just because a lot of people use a phrase incorrectly doesn't mean that it should be the accepted meaning.

A good example is "have your cake and eat it, too". As the Unabomber famously fixated on, the phrase was originally "you can't eat your cake and have it, too". That saying actually makes sense and has meaning.

After a while people began to jokingly say it backwards, as "you can't have your cake and eat it, too". That was dandy, until people forgot that it was a joke. Now, years later, we're all left with a saying that is fucking ridiculous sounding and but we keep saying it because we need the original phrase in our language.

Sure, language evolves and changes. Sometimes though, it's a good idea to be sticklers about the rules.

No shame in sitting things out for a bit.

A whole slew of politicians from every party and every corner of the Union have more or less said "can the media and firebrand politicians chill out before we all start getting bumped off?". I'm paraphrasing, of course.

American here, I haven't heard one peep about Trump getting more support because of this outside of Lemmy.

Whether or not the Trump campaign can spin this in their favor depends entirely on the motive of the assassin. If they were just some nutjob, there really isn't much they can do.

If, on the other hand, the assassination attempt was politically motivated, there are two ways I can see this whole thing being spun:

1. "The other side knows I'll win and the only way to stop me is to kill me. If you don't like them, vote for me because I scare them and they hate me."
2. "The other side is so evil and vile they would stoop to try to kill me rather than have a fair election".

In the event that the assassin wasn't some flavor of crazy, spin number one is more likely than spin number two, but they're hardly mutually exclusive.

Uh, negative. I am a meat popsicle.

Also, what's with the shoulders on the guy from the show? It's shaped like scales, but looks like the same material as the breastplate. Sure, armor can have a lot of decoration, but that means he can't lift his arms very high. Boromir has proper, segmented pauldrons. If he lifts his arms up, the plates slide past each other and he's good to go.

Also, armpits are one of the biggest weak points in armor. Boromir gets hit in the armpit (or a point slides off his breastplate into his armpit) and his chainmail has a good chance of stopping it from penetrating or at the very least from getting too deep into him. The Aragorn we have at home is wearing what I will charitably assume is a gambeson, no mail. The tip of a pike or spear slips in and he's got a punctured lung.

You'd think for a billion dollars they could pay a consultant to work with the wardrobe department, especially because they're following up a film series known for absolutely excellent costume design.

But to be fair, thou art more lovely and more temperate.