Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)XA
Posts
3
Comments
1,144
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Tangentially, is "bastard" gendered? It feels like it's always applied to men, so it seems gendered. And yet, the original meaning of the word "bastard"--someone born out of wedlock--doesn't imply any kind of gender.

    So it struck me as weird that this person would call themselves a bastard. nbd, just thought it was odd

  • On the one hand, a sign like this definitely did have enough room for the full spelling of "through". There seems to be no reason to abbreviate it.

    On the other hand, isn't drive-thru just, like, its own noun now? Part of me thinks this was always spelled correctly.

  • Oglaf started off as a legit porn comic but then they figured out they're actually geniuses at writing jokes. This is a great example; there's no spoken punchline here, just his face.

  • To sum up: we recently got the awesome FTC instruction that noncompete agreements are disallowed in almost all cases.

    Noncompete agreements keep workers from being able to work in their trained field just because they previously worked somewhere else in that field and had to sign a paper to do so. They're a tool used to harm worker power; traditionally for knowledge workers, but now it's being used all over the place.

    The judge SC said, you can't ban those. Noncompetes are cool and good. Fuck workers.

    EDIT: This was a 5th circuit judge, so not the USSC. A little below that level.

  • Oh, that's cool, I respect that.

    Anyone know offhand their stance on jackbooted thugs kicking in the doors of people who write emulation software and sending them to prison? Just trying to get a pulse on that

  • A constitutional amendment implies that the constitution doesn't already cover this when, in its plain language, it definitely does. This provides an implicit concession that the court was right.

    Don't give them that. Pack the court and issue the opposite decision at the earliest opportunity.

  • OK I also briefly thought "our problem" but I'm actually PRETTY CONCERNED about the words "only goal" when I really think about it? "Only", as in "Yeah, feeding on humanity is definitely ONE thing we're shooting for, but come on guys, there's lots of applications"

  • He can do that by officially assassinating the conservative SC justices, nominating new ones, and then having armed marines inside the senate comittees to ensure they are confirmed immediately.

    There's probably a few more steps, but this would get us back on track. He would have to be willing to give up his powers at a certain point, which means installing the legal apparatus (in the form of government officials) with the will to strip those powers.

  • Romance 💕

    Jump
  • Heh, your reaction is totally valid, I had the same thoughts when I was looking at the comic. I added "so people don't think it's gay" just to be funny, I don't know anything about the artist. I was mainly drawing attention to the fact that--as you just said--nobody has to do this. We get the joke without the tits.