If it says "methamphetamine" you should get a new pharmacist, because it's an amphetamine, but not every amphetamine is methamphetamine.
Just like "root beer" says "beer" on the can, but it's not the same as Guinness.
Oh, I forgot that every joke in the universe is supposed to be used just once.
"Well if they are so dumb why do they have so much money???"
CEOs are rich enough to live in their own delusional bubble. They are very out of touch with the average person, or their own workforce. This is nothing new.
That reminds me of my favorite rock that prevents tiger attacks. I've had it with me for years and it works perfectly. Yet, whenever I bring it up, people make fun of me.
"It" is the state of the outdoors
JP is an atheist
He won't readily admit to that either. He somehow sits in the void between atheists and theists.
I think that's a really accurate characterization. He has mastered the art of speaking without communicating.
This post shows the difference between school and education. The school system is there to get a child to be able to regurgitate whatever the lesson says they should. Education is to develop knowledge as a whole.
It is sad that the teacher was not even able to consider the flawed nature of the question, because they are trained to just see if the student's answer matches the answer key for the test.
In many cases, the public education system no longer exists to deliver educated graduates. It exists to feed itself -- to obtain funding for itself the next year and to support a gradually expanding set of "administrators" that add little to the process.
Look at the effects of "No Child Left Behind". NCLB pushed test scores above all else. What did we get? A bunch of students that were very good at passing standardized tests. That does not necessarily translate to a better educational outcome. The value in the skill of passing standardized tests plummets rapidly once one joins the workforce.
audience already agrees that complicity in genocide is an acceptable tradeoff to software freedoms
I talked about that to show one possible counterbalance between liberty and usages which are probably not explicitly wanted by the authors.
Another common example of freedom/restrictions is someone wanting to have their software permissively licensed while also not allowing cloud vendors to resell access to it. That's how you end up with licenses like Elastic's.
Or, if you want another example of "free", look at the distinction between the GPL and the BSD license as it applies to Sony and the Playstation. One of the reason Sony chose BSD for the basis of its gaming system is because the BSD license allows for commercial usage. In that sense it is MORE free than the GPL, which would not allow the type of usage Sony did with the Playstation without conferring more responsibility to Sony, for instance, releasing their source. Under BSD they have no obligation to do so, hence it is more free in that respect.
My whole point is a lot of people say "I want my software to be freely licensed" but they do not realize that they may be unintentionally opening the door to usages of the software that they do not want to see.
One should not pick a license that allows for unfettered usage of the software if you have certain ways you don't want to see it used.
As a final parting example, look at Prusa and their printers. They release the firmware and designs as open source. They they later get angry when companies clone their designs. This is permissible under the license. This is making Prusa want to lock down their future designs to avoid that usage.
Anyone considering licensing of their own software should think very carefully about what usages they support or object to and license the software accordingly. If you release your software as BSD licensed and some company comes along and makes a billion dollars with it, you aren't owned a cent under that agreement. If this makes you angry, don't pick BSD.
Here is CBS's coverage of the event:
A deli worker told CBS News New York that Hodge was ordering a sandwich when a woman at the counter got angry and began arguing with him over who was first in line to order. According to the deli worker, in that instant, the woman pulled out a knife and stabbed Hodge in the stomach. USPS confirmed Hodge was a letter carrier assigned to Manhattan.
It appears to have started over a dispute over who was first in line. It's up to you to decide if that's a rational reason to attack someone with a knife, regardless of your sexuality / gender identity.
https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/usps-worker-stabbed-to-death-in-harlem/
I'm baffled by this whole Crisco/shortening candle-in-contraptions meme circulating around. You've got folks shoving these things in everything from copper pots to elaborate sand enclosures, claiming superior heat output and somehow making a case for off-grid energy.
Let's unpack the physics, because frankly, it doesn't add up:
Combustion 101: A candle (or our Crisco-fied iteration) works by burning the fuel source (fat in this case), releasing heat and light through a chemical reaction with oxygen. The material surrounding it doesn't inherently influence this combustion process. Copper, terracotta, or sand won't magically accelerate the burning rate or somehow trap more heat.
Radiation & Conduction: Sure, these materials might hold and radiate a BIT more heat absorbed from the flame compared to open air. But the difference is negligible. Convection (hot air rising) is the primary heat transfer mechanism, and the enclosure doesn't significantly enhance it.
Scaling Up Fallacy: If this contraption truly held the key to efficient off-grid heating, wouldn't we be ditching fuel oil and natural gas entirely? Imagine a skyscraper-sized Crisco candle in a cosmic copper pot - it wouldn't magically solve our energy needs. The heat output wouldn't scale proportionally due to limitations in combustion itself.
In short -- why are people so fascinated with this? A simple test will show that it is not more effective than a simple candle, yet people seem to be continually fascinated by it.
-14
Communists, Rejoice! Collecting Funko Pops Is Actually Part of Our Praxis Towards Global Communism
(feddit.nl)
Comrades, as a staunch communist, I assure you that collecting Funko Pops is not only a hobby but also a necessary part of our fight towards global communism and the revolutionary cause. While it may seem trivial on the surface, there are many ways in which collecting Funko Pops can aid us in our struggle for social justice and equality.
Firstly, collecting Funko Pops requires dedication, patience, and discipline - qualities that are essential in our pursuit of a better world. By engaging in this hobby, we develop these traits, which translate into our work towards creating a just society. Our commitment to collecting these pop figures reflects our determination to succeed in our mission, no matter how long it takes.
Furthermore, collecting Funko Pops helps us build relationships with other like-minded individuals who share our passion for the cause. Through online communities, meetups, and conventions, we can connect with comrades from all over the world and strengthen our solidarity. These connections help us share ideas, strategies, and resources, ultimately contributing to the growth of our movement.
Moreover, collecting Funko Pops provides us with a source of joy and relaxation amidst the struggles of daily life. In a world plagued by capitalist excess and exploitation, we need ways to unwind and recharge ourselves so that we can continue the fight with renewed energy and focus. Collecting Funko Pops is one way of doing so while also staying connected to our shared values and ideals.
Finally, collecting Funko Pops also serves as a form of propaganda. By displaying our favorite pop figures, we spread awareness about our cause and inspire others to join our struggle. Whether it's through conversations with fellow collectors or simply showing off our collection, we can use the popularity of Funko Pops to spread our message and attract new supporters to our cause.
In conclusion, collecting Funko Pops may seem like a frivolous activity at first glance. However, when viewed through the lens of praxis - the interplay between theory and practice - it becomes clear that this hobby is actually an essential part of our communist praxis.
This is one of the reason that the USA being heavy handed with Chinese is going to bite us in the ass. While in the USA, we bury our heads in the sand and GM, Tesla and etc. all crank out $95,000 giant trucks/SUVs, some companies in China are making very, very affordable vehicles. These aren't necessarily garbage either -- there's models available for almost any price point.
What WOULD be really smart and forward thinking is if in the USA, the domestic brands also make some affordable models to get EV more popular. However, they are addicted to fat profit margins, and thanks to all the protectionism, they don't need to worry about offshore models being "better".
While other nations either develop and/or import affordable EVs, we're effectively banning them. This is all going to end up with a giant wake up call for American auto-manufacturers when the protections/tariffs are ultimately lifted and they HAVE to compete.
I think it would be great if the tariffs came with huge incentives for domestic manufacturers and motivated them to be competitive. Instead, it's just letting them segment the market for a few years and make a killing. Who loses? The people...