Depends on what you mean by "free speech". If you mean absolute free speech in the sense that all voices are present and heard, then no, because it blocks out the hateful voices. But you can't have that while allowing for hate speech either because hate speech silences the voices of its target. So no such thing can exist. If you want a platform with "free speech", you need to decide who gets the freedom and how much of it. There has to be a limit somewhere, whether it's explicitly set or not.
Last I heard, farmers make a ton of money on average. It's just tough work and your work/income is at the whims of the weather.
How can any of this actually be proven to be misinformation? We're here on our couches reading second/third/nth hand information. None of us were in the rooms where these decisions were made. None of us are on the front lines. The best we can do is make an educated guess on who is a credible source, and that's especially difficult when everyone involved has an interest in lying about the situation when things don't go their way.
You can remotely control vehicles from another planet. Get tanks set up with personal roboports and you can send them off to fight biters and repair your defenses.
In the context of OP's graph, the two terms are presumably interchangeable. Otherwise, stuffing would be left out of the vegetarian column like in the case of the turkey. And besides normally being cooked in a carcass, the actual contents of the stuffing/dressing I've had were always vegetarian. OP's graph lists two different values for environmental impact of vegetarian vs non-vegetarian stuffing/dressing, meaning that the contents of the stuffing/dressing are different. The impact of the turkey is already accounted for in the turkey row. That number doesn't change if you stuff a bunch of bread in its abdominal cavity.
TIL stuffing isn't normally vegetarian
Snow is simultaneously a particle and a wave. What you're seeing is the destructive interference resulting from its wave-like behaviour.
I would say that the pain and follow-up soreness from working hard at the gym feels amazing in a non-sexual way.
If you cook, you cook for a purpose, you don’t throw food away just because you’ve cooked for the sake of cooking, you eat it, or serve it to someone else to eat. In the end it’s a chore fulfilled still.
There's overlap, but not necessarily. If I'm cooking for fun, I'll cook things that are tasty and that I (or whoever I'm cooking for) would enjoy eating. I won't be paying attention to the nutritional content of the food. But if I'm cooking for sustenance, then nutritional value comes first before enjoyment of the process or the food. Sometimes, you have to do both for one meal.
Living in Canada. Very few of the gardens in my neighbourhood have grass. It's not as uncommon as you think.
Sad that pepe is still on these lists after all the efforts to take it back.
Don is special. Don't question it.