Why bother? They’re safe at room temperature unless they’ve already been refrigerated, might as well use that fridge space for some that actually benefits from the cold.
At room temperature they’re good for a month or two. If you want long term storage you might as well prep and freeze them which will last you about a year, or there’s a ton of other long-term preservation techniques.
“Better economy” is vague and nebulous, it’s my belief that if someone tells you that’s why they voted they way they did they either didn’t care enough to actually look into their candidates’ policies or they’re trying to hide the real reason they voted. And it’s very unlikely if their primary concern is the economy they wouldn’t bother looking into economic policy beforehand. If that’s what they truly voted for they’d have specific concrete talking points instead, eg changes to some specific tax or changes in funding for some specific type of business.
The same goes for candidates with a platform of “better economy”. Is it a better economy if everyone still struggles as they do now but the people at the top get infinitely richer? Is it a better economy if all big businesses fail but more people now have enough to live healthily and safely? “The economy” is too broad, it means nothing. Specific policy or it’s all bullshit.
The T being added in is what? Maybe fifteen years old?
This didn’t sound right to me, I’m sure I heard LGBT more than 15 years ago, so I looked it up. According to Wikipedia LGBT was first used around 1988 but OED says 1992, other sources say it became widespread in either the 90s or 00s (varies by source). So 15 is a lower bound for widespread usage but I don’t think we can get much more specific than “15 to 35 years ago”.
The fact it’s a long game isn’t an issue, the problem is that it’s long and bad. A winner is usually determined pretty early on but then there’s still half an hour of random rolls as everyone slowly loses their money. That’s why house rules are mostly adding safety nets, the game’s already over and it’s just not fun running around a board watching your numbers go down. Since house rules don’t change the core gameplay they don’t fix the game and just make it drag even longer.
There’s some very good long games and some very good short games, how long a game is doesn’t determine how good it is.
If you’re pressing a button and want to cancel you can pretty much universally just move off the button before releasing the press and it won’t trigger the action. Works 99% of the time with a mouse, almost as often with a touch interface. Some custom-coded buttons will action on start press (not great imo) and some buttons do some other action on a long press, but if you’re holding it and nothing else has happened just dragging off is safe enough.
It doesn’t read that way to me, but either way my point still stands. There is absolutely nothing wrong with doing something you like, and calling that “wasting adulthood” is incredibly fucked up.
The last line is literally telling people they are terrible for enjoying themselves. There is no excuse for that.
Jesus Christ, this is toxic as fuck. You are not a bad person for enjoying life. You are not a bad person for being happy or seeking happiness. Excessive consumerism isn’t great but you are still not a bad person for owning things. You are definitely not a bad person for trying to improve your life or the life of people around you.
I have no idea why they decided to attack renewable energy, it’s undeniably better than the fossil fuel systems it’s to replace. They say they’re against alternative energy immediately after complaining that a third of the world has no electricity. This doesn’t even make sense! They don’t want you to make electricity available to people, they just want you to feel bad about it.
Inequality sucks, but you are still allowed to enjoy things.
What does make you a bad person is actively seeking to make other people’s lives worse. For instance, making a comic with the sole intention of shitting on people just living their lives.
There definitely are rules to language, which are determined by how the language is actually used. The issue with prescriptivists is that they invent their own rules which often go against how the language is used, i.e. the rules are nonsense.
Take the “less vs fewer” argument. Everyone happily uses ‘less’ in pretty much the same way for nearly a millennium, then some prescriptivist asswipe comes along and says they don’t like it so now there’s a rule. Prescriptivists spend the next couple of centuries yelling about their new rule and creaming themselves over how they’re now ‘better’ at the language than other people while everyone else just doesn’t give a fuck and continue to speak normally.
In the end language is just a tool to communicate ideas. If you clearly understood someone but whine because they ignored your made up rules you’re the asshole.
I did already back up the claim with a source, but okay:
US: Senior 128k USD, mid-level 94k USD
CH: Senior 118k CHF (~139k USD), mid-level 95k CHF (~112k USD)
DE: Senior 72k EUR (~80k USD), mid-level 58k EUR (~65k USD)
NL: Senior 69k EUR (~77k USD), mid-level 52k EUR (~58k USD)
Yes, US and Switzerland are outliers.
100k USD per engineer assumes they’re exclusively hiring from US and Switzerland, that’s not a general “developed country” thing. US is an outlier.
According to a quick search, the US has the 6th highest incarnation rate per capita but is only 148th lowest in intentional homicide rate. Obviously this is far from conclusive but it suggests there’s no strong correlation. There are likely much more significant factors than how prison-happy a country is.
This isn’t exactly an in depth study so I could still be wrong, but it’s much more convincing than just some assurance from a random stranger on the internet.
You clearly didn’t bother to read anything I wrote (or you completely lack reading comprehension), but I’ll give it one more shot.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zucchini
This article is about the vegetable. For other uses, see Zucchini (disambiguation).
In cookery, it is treated as a vegetable, usually cooked and eaten as an accompaniment or savory dish, though occasionally used in sweeter cooking.
A 1928 report on vegetables grown in New York State treats ‘Zucchini’ as one among 60 cultivated varieties of C. pepo.
In France, zucchini is a key ingredient in ratatouille, a stew of summer vegetable-fruits and vegetables prepared in olive oil and cooked for an extended time over low heat.
In 2005, a poll of 2,000 people revealed it to be Britain’s 10th favorite culinary vegetable.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vegetable
1
: a usually herbaceous plant (such as the cabbage, bean, or potato) grown for an edible part that is usually eaten as part of a meal
also : such an edible part
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vegetable#Terminology
Posting this link again because you didn’t read it.
Culinary vegetables unarguably exist since we’re referring to a physical thing which indisputably exists. I have seen a courgette before, I can confirm vegetables do in fact exist. You’re arguing that they don’t exist because you disagree with the words used to refer to them, which is also wrong. The fact many people use the culinary definition of vegetable when referring to courgettes means that the culinary definition of vegetable is correct; language is defined by how it’s used.
Vegetables exist. The culinary definition of vegetable also exists. The fact you don’t like that definition is irrelevant.
The first sentence of your article says cryptids aren’t real, vegetables do exist and we interact with them every day. I’m really not sure what point you’re trying to make. If someone tells you their name is Bob but fails to cite a source that does not mean Bob doesn’t exist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vegetable#Terminology
it’s pretty shady to be looking for legal safe harbor for scammers who rob people all over the world every day.
This is an argument that happened entirely within your own head, not in this thread. I think I made it clear right from the start I’m against scammers and approve of (ethical) actions taken against them, but I’m also against people who dox, invade privacy, engage in vigilantism, and gain unauthorised access to other’s computer systems (particularly when it’s for profit and ego). These are not mutually exclusive, there is no disconnect there. I even gave an example of more appropriate actions to take against scammers, notably actions that are actually effective.
Criticism against “justice” porn is not remotely the same thing as condoning scammers. You’re arguing in bad faith and you know it.
This is very untrue and you definitely shouldn’t be giving out legal advice like this on topics you’re not knowledgeable on, but exactly which part is a crime and how criminal it is will depend on your local laws. Some such computer misuse laws are intentionally written very broadly with generic wording precisely so that edge cases such as unintentionally granting an unauthorised party access to a system does not clear them of wrongdoing when they do so.
As for how to tell which laws are relevant and whether you’ve breached them? Well, I’m sure the answer will shock you.
When I was in school the less well-off kids got their lunch free. There was definitely no equivalent to a “marker” the linked article mentions, unless you include the lunch ticket. I was actually kind of jealous at the time, I didn’t understand why I had to pay when I didn’t bring my own lunch and they didn’t.
Singling out kids because their parents can’t afford food is kind of fucked up.
Accessing a system you’re not authorised to access, regardless of how that access was obtained, is generally not legal. The way to sort that out is, you guessed it, a trial.
That argument doesn’t work, all you’re doing is pointing out the issues with vigilantism. He’s also committing a crime, are the scammers now in the right too since they’re targeting a suspected criminal?
This is why trials exist.
I’m not so sure about that. As an outside observer, it seems pretty obvious to me that the lack of a left vote in the US is because they do not have a notable left wing party. The best way to win someone’s vote is to represent them. If nobody represents someone nobody will get that vote.
Obviously to actually fix that you’ll need election reform, this is pretty much the expected outcome of a single vote FPTP winner-take-all system.