RainfallSonata @ RainfallSonata @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

327

Joined

2 yr. ago

I mean, the planet's dying, but ok. At least we've got robots that "excced human performance" in making their overlords profits. Imagine if these scientists were putting their efforts to real use.

Another I just thought of is Legend of Grimrock.

You all just keep "Nuh-uh!"-ing yourselves right into a second trump presidency. The fact of the matter is that economists and politicians exclude food and energy costs from inflation calculations, then just want us to believe "the people are wrong." Fuck that shit.

Can't you wait even one full day before reposting older content?

the core inflation rate... excludes food and energy costs—economic indicators that affect Americans’ daily lives.

This right tf HERE.

Did you actually read the article? There was nothing Republican, conservative, or even centrist about it.

That wasn't the point of the article though. It isn't either/or.

"The legislation amends the Violence Against Women Act so that people can sue those who produce, distribute, or receive the deepfake pornography, if they “knew or recklessly disregarded” that the victim did not consent to those images."--The article.

archive.is

Anything you would watch on tv is available free on the internet. No subscriptions, even Netflix. I"m not being sarcastic. Hang your f'ing monitor on the wall, then. That's all that makes this "tv" different. Well, and its advertisements.

I don't understand why anyone uses one of these,when you can stream anything you want for free on your computer in your web browser.

Parents can be licensed for use by other companies.

Turn-about is fair play?

😉

I assumed she was losing custody as a result of the difficulties of caring for his medical needs as a single parent. But no, it's because they say she failed to protect her kids from her abuser. Yet when she called for help, what happened? It's the experience of most abused women that there is no help. And worse, that the systems designed to help do more harm. That's certainly the case here.

If someone asks me for "a few" I'll give them three or four. If someone asks for "multiple" I'll give them a handful and ask if that's enough.

I don't know where in the world this theory is coming from, but here, two would be "a couple" and three+ would be "a few." Not that "a pair" (never just pair) and multiple aren't used in other contexts, but you wouldn't use pair and multiple in the same context. A pair is specific, multiple is an estimate.

Sports news isn't news.

Who said several?

If you EVER limit yourself to a portion of a bar you've got to be the only person in the world who does that.

Consumers aren’t going to do this.

Of course not. That's why consumer reports does it for them. You don't believe samples are representative? That's ridiculous.

Tony’s Chocolonely

Better check the lead levels on that one.