Fixed it - thanks! “Dodói” (I also forgot the diacritic) is boo-boo, indeed - a childish way to call small injuries.

Amon isn’t a common pet name here. The one naming him was my mum, who loves Old Egyptian culture; to give you an idea, my childhood cat was Cleópatra, and even one of my current cats (Kika) was supposed to be called Ísis. (The one naming Kika was my nephew - by then he already understood how this “naming” thing works.)

I am not sure but for me it looks like a giant house spider, Eratigena atrica. The abdominal pattern is really similar, compare yours (up) with the one from Wikipedia:

It’s like a mini-Gandalf telling all those Balrog-shaped hot molecules “YOU SHALL NOT PASS!”.

Research on language acquisition is often genuinely cute.

I have some related anecdote on this. When my nephew was learning to talk (back then he was, like, 1~2yo? He’s now 16), I recorded and transcribed some things that he said. Here’s a few of them:

Look at the pattern - pre-stressed vowels get raised. The reason why my nephew was doing this in Portuguese is basically the same as why Orla (from the text) is using [χ] (the “guttural ck”) in her English, because even as the child is learning to talk, they’re already picking up features from the local variety. And that pattern where the vowels get closed before the stress is common place for Sulista Portuguese speakers (check how “mexerica” is pronounced, with [i] instead of [e]), just like Scouse English conditionally renders coda /k/ as [ç x χ].

Yup, I’m using it as a unit of length there. It’s clear enough in context even if the result is a bit silly.

Two* empty cardboard boxes. One is roughly the width and length of my desktop tower; another is ~1/3 of the size of the first.

My desk used to have two drawers, right below the surface top. I was always hitting those bloody drawers with my thigh. Eventually I had enough, unscrewed them, and threw them away.

…ok, but what about the stuff that I stored there? Inside the big box, that is now over my desktop tower. The smaller one and its lid became divisions for the bigger one. It’s organised, within the reach of my hands, and far from my thigh.

*actually three. One of my cats saw it on my chair, as I was organising the stuff here, and went into “if it sits, I fits, I call dibs” mode. It’s in my living room now.

I don’t think that the title is a mistake either; I was focusing solely on what the title says, on a language level, versus what the other user (Kairos) believes to be more accurate.

With that out of the way: yup, copyright was always like this. The basic premise of copyright is to not allow you to share things under certain conditions, and yet this sharing is essential for culture.

In English, the simple present often implies a general truth, regardless of time. While the present continuous strongly implies that the statement is true for the present, and weakly implies that it was false in the past.

From your profile you apparently speak Danish, right? Note that, in Danish, this distinction is mostly handled through adverbs, so I’m not surprised that you can’t tell the difference. Easier shown with an example:

Note how English is suddenly using a different verb form for the second one.

Counting centuries as it has been traditionally done makes sense, because -1 and +1 are different numbers. Using “N00s” doesn’t because -0 and +0 are the same number.

And it’s easy to remember because the Nth century always ends (if positive) or starts (if negative) in the year N*100.

Moral of the story: don’t tell people to fix what is not broken.

They* technically can bite you, but the bite doesn’t hurt, so it’s likely only effective against other really small critters. They can also release some sort of glue, kind of annoying if they do it while tangling in your hair, but harmless.

I wonder if their visual similarity to wasps isn’t some form of defence on its own, as mimicry. They also seem to build nests in places where they won’t get into trouble with mammals, like inside the hollows of tall trees. And that opening “tube” is closed off at night.

*from some websearch I could find one slightly more dangerous species, called “tataíra” or “abelha de fogo” (lit. fire bee). Even then it’s just spitting formic acid, like ants would; and mostly used not against larger critters, but while pillaging beehives of other species.

On itself, a simple claim (like “copyright destroys culture”) cannot be fallacious. It can be only true or false. For a fallacy, you need a reasoning flaw.

Also note that, even if you find a fallacy behind a conclusion, that is not enough grounds to claim that the conclusion is false. A non-fallacious argument with true premises yields a true conclusion, but a fallacious one may yield true or false conclusions.

The issue that you’re noticing with the title is not one of logic, but one of implicature due to the aspect of the verb. “X destroys Y” implies that, every time that X happens, Y gets destroyed; while “X [is] destroying Y” implies that this is only happening now.

I believe that most of the native species here don’t even sting, and if you annoy them they’ll flock around you and… that’s it, like a bunch of kids calling you meanie. Or at least the ones that look like wasps, like this:

I’ve seen quite a bit more of those this winter.

I wonder if this is related to the fact that I’ve seen quite a bit more native bees in my neighbourhood. (I’m in South America mind you.) And people freaking out because they look like wasps.

Eh, sounds like a conspiracy theory.

Not really, even if false. It’s just a hypothesis.

It’s the kind of thing that would look really bad if it got out, but doesn’t have much upside.

We [current and former Reddit users] babble a lot about shit the admins do. If this got out, it wouldn’t cause much damage to the already barely existent reputation of that shithole; and as HelixDab2 said, the ones still in that shithole would outrage for 15min then go back as if nothing happened.

If it significantly affected profits, maybe, but this doesn’t register there.

I think that a system like this would actually increase the margin of profit, in the medium term. Because it would allow them to cut some slack to the cash cows, while you’re still removing some users who are pissing the others off.

Fair point - your ban hints that my hypothesis is wrong.

What I’m going to say is just a hypothesis from my part. It might be bollocks. But.

For a long time I’ve suspected that Reddit runs some sort of algorithm to predict the profitability of each user, based on factors like

• platform used (desktop vs. mobile)
• running / not running an ad blocker
• if not running an ad blocker, clicking on ads or not
• likelihood of that user to buy Reddit junk (e.g. the “coins” of the past)
• likelihood of that user to attract newer users
• etc.

and then the output of that algorithm is taken into account when handling rule violation. As in: you can go rogue and they’ll give you a short ban if you’re deemed profitable, or a small offence will give you a permaban if unprofitable.

With that said I don’t think that they manually review your earlier posts/comments before enforcing the rules.

Whoever enforces rules in Reddit has the same basic reading comprehension of a potato that has been hit multiple times with a hoe, and then left to rot under the Summer heat. In fact I bet “being functionally illiterate” is a requirement to work for Reddit, just like “lacking dignity” is to be a moderator there nowadays.

If what OP is narrating is accurate, it doesn’t really matter. OP was predicting what he believes that is going to happen, not telling people what to do. (“Inciting violence” would be the later, not the former.)

Pigs are the original artist’s muse.

Well… that seems accurate, in the light of Ancient Greek slang. Like using χοῖρος/khoîros “pig” to refer to the vagina.

[Sorry. I couldn’t resist being pedantic and vulgar at the same time.]

For my main thoughts on this matter, refer to this comment. I’ll only mention what’s different from this source to the other:

“We are more transparent than many players in this industry who have used public content to train their models and products,” Meta said.

“Since some people kill puppies, just kicking one is totally fine” moral reasoning might perhaps give you some breach in countries following Saxon tribal law, but not in countries following Roman civil law. In those, what matters is the law, not how the relevant organs handled other similar cases.

The law in this case being the LGPD (Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados - Data Protection General Law). If it’s found that Meta’s activities violate the LGPD, well, cry me a river, “I dun unrurrstand, Google does it worse, I’m so confusion…” won’t save Meta’s skin.