![](https://pawb.social/pictrs/image/b20ce5df-868a-4160-b0b2-a6744b05e514.png)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/d3d059e3-fa3d-45af-ac93-ac894beba378.png)
To be fair, quacks that claim to be able to do magical stuff are still around, some do quite well well for themselves even
To be fair, quacks that claim to be able to do magical stuff are still around, some do quite well well for themselves even
I mean, you can’t really say that we’re going to drive ourselves to extinction, until we’ve been driven to extinction. Most things people list as likely to do this, climate change, nuclear war, are things that could conceivably do so, but honestly aren’t likely to. Destroy civilization maybe, but that just takes disrupting supply lines hard enough. Extinction means nobody, anywhere on the planet survives, even if it’s some little pocket of people in some corner of the world whose climate is good after warming is considered and which isn’t a target of any nuclear arsenals, because in a number of generations such a little pocket can grow to repopulate the planet again. It’s not an impossible thing for sure, but killing off a species capable of surviving in almost any climate zone found on the planet, with the ability to manipulate the growth of it’s own food supply, and adapt new tools actively in response to problems within a single generation, is a difficult task.
the headline did, but the actual article does not
bad title, the actual article is talking about the percentage of each that own homes, not expecting half of all homes to be owned by LGBTQ people
the literary equivalent of:
Tbh he could probably make plenty as a conservative media personality of some kind. Start some webshow and sell tacky branded garbage and fake health supplements to his supporters or something like that
the original undermines its own message: they are lifting it, even if barely and with difficulty, which implies that those characters are within an order of magnitude or so of literal divine power.
something something grapefruit technique
“just change the system” is easier said than done, which I suspect you realize of course, since if it were so easy, you’d have changed it yourself already. The difficulty in such change is that it requires a very large number of people to act in unison, which is quite rare, especially when most people aren’t literally starving, and have different ideas over what they want the system to be, some of which might be better, but some of which might be as bad or worse. It’s a bit like how libertarian types sometimes remark that, if everyone stopped paying taxes, the government would run out of money and be unable to enforce them anymore: technically true, but requires humans to act with uncharacteristic unity towards a singular goal, against pushback from established power. Not to say that it never happens, but it does not seem to happen reliably or in a way that can be readily forced to occur.
I mean, the greater evil would presumably have gotten us worse. And in a system that is set up so as to inevitably produce two viable parties, and where “good” is not on the ballot from either, what else do you expect people to do?
tbf, arent those border policies somewhat popular among some latino voters? Im not defending those policies as they dont align with my own views on the topic, but theres plenty of room for people that managed to get through the immigration system legally to look down of people who havent, or for people born in the country to dislike migration even if their ancestors did it, or for people that want to “pull up the ladder behind them” so to speak. Biden couldnt exactly expect Trump’s border policies to automatically win him that demographic either way.
Why does it need to be a formal contract? People can engage in relationships without the law being involved. I tend to think we should disentangle marriage and law, have some paperwork one can fill out for the legal affairs like hospital visitation and such that can be changed without the same degree of court proceeding, and have the religious or cultural ritual as just a ritual people can but are not obligated to hold if they feel like with no legal meaning to it.
Could one hypothetically make a single shot gun as as cheap and simple as possible so as to be disposable, mount it by some kind of claw grabber type device that can adjust pressure, and then loosen the grip until it’s just barely being held in place before firing, so that instead of the recoil force transferring into the drone, it just yeets the gun out of the drone’s grip instead? Could have a drone with multiple grippers in order to have multiple shots before needing to be reloaded.
“sticks and stones may break my bones drones…”
My suspicion is that it’s abiogenesis, but it’s only a suspicion that I can’t have any certainty of
to be perfectly honest, Ive not had sunny d since I was in like, kindergarten, so I dont really recall what its like much beyond that its orange flavored.
I dont think I could live like these people even if I had the money; I feel like I hate the idea of having people whos relationship is purely professional going around in my space to clean things, but trying to clean all that space by oneself without hiring people to help sounds like a lot of bother.
I dont drink alcohol myself, but isnt there some kind of drink, like the kind they mix up at bars, not sure the term for those kinds, that is just orange juice mixed with vodka? I must imagine this is intended to be similar but premade.
Vore.