otp

joined 2 years ago
[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 3 points 48 minutes ago (5 children)
[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 51 minutes ago

French doesn't have a creator

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago

The deaths can be directly observed and also allow for post-mortem examination.

Have you done this?

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

The exceptions likely have etymological explanations. Note that they're exceptions -- the norm is that word-initial G make a G sound and not a J sound.

When we steal a word and its spelling from another language, that's how we get exceptions.

When someone invents a word and changes the rules, that's how we spot a troll.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago

Good point! I hope that's always the case.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Pricing in the loss only makes sense if it recovered any of the losses.

Maybe I'm not understanding what you mean, but I don't think that's true. They raise prices to account for the fact that they will not receive any money and lose out on what they paid for some percentage of the items.

And if it did, I'm pretty sure they would've already done it regardless of whether there's any loss since it would just be pure profit in its absence.

Not necessarily. Not if they're trying to beat a competitor's price, for instance.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago

Those are probably covered by the other three groups

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 16 hours ago (4 children)

The guy who created gif says jif, so that one

I'm not going to believe a troll. He's just seeing if he get away with fucking with people

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 2 points 17 hours ago

That's rich

Yeah, exactly.

Funny how it's always the rich who get a free pass.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 4 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

We have as much evidence for it being a horrible death as we have for it being one of the best ways to treat an invasion

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 2 points 18 hours ago (3 children)

Many places punish employees for excessive "loss" in their departments. Sometimes explicitly.

Even ignoring that places will price "loss" into their products, I think it's important to consider that this can affect "the little guy" too. Disproportionately at times, imo

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 18 points 18 hours ago

I do get where you're coming from, but there are a lot of roads where the speed limit is artificially low (or temporarily lowered for no legitimate reason) for the sole purpose of collecting income from speeding fines

 

I know a lot of us use ad-blockers and the like so we don't see ads often anymore. But we can get some insight as to how much certain "services" make by showing ads to the average customer when they have paid ad-free subscriptions available. YouTube, for example. Maybe streaming services.

I'm curious how much most things would cost in this case, especially since so many "services" tend to have maintenance and upkeep costs.

How much would Facebook cost to use if it were ad-free? Snapchat? Windows? (Which is extra gross for having all of an up-front cost, ads embedded, AI included, and pushes for paid subscriptions of its own complementary products...)

 

According to explanatory documents provided to reporters, potential changes could give landlords more “flexibility” to control who occupies their units and for how long, allowing them to “adjust tenancy arrangements based on market conditions, personal needs, or business strategies.”

[...]

Other, more concrete changes proposed in Thursday’s bill include ending the requirement for landlords to compensate tenants if they or an immediate family member move back into their own property, as long as the tenant is given 120 days notice.

[...]

If passed, Bill 60 would also amend more than a dozen other existing major laws. Other marquee changes would affect how municipalities collect development charges, how the provincial government builds transit-oriented communities, and how Queen’s Park restricts bike lanes and encourages road-building.

 

I have 3 credit cards...

  1. Oldest, good for groceries, but that's it. It represents about 45% of my total credit card limit.
  2. Crappy card, used to have good rewards but now sucks. This is about 40% of my total credit card limit. A few years old. I use it once every few months to keep it active.
  3. My current "best" card that I use for most things. Only had it about a year. Represents around 15% of my total credit limit, but I'd like it to be more as it has the best rewards.

I pay off all my cards twice a month and have a great credit score.

I'm wondering if there's any drawbacks to cancelling my crappy card and either applying for a limit increase on my good one or just applying for a new/better card.

 

I know MediaBiasFactCheck is not a be-all-end-all to truth/bias in media, but I find it to be a useful resource.

It makes sense to downvote it in posts that have great discussion -- let the content rise up so people can have discussions with humans, sure.

But sometimes I see it getting downvoted when it's the only comment there. Which does nothing, unless a reader has rules that automatically hide downvoted comments (but a reader would be able to expand the comment anyways...so really no difference).

What's the point of downvoting? My only guess is that there's people who are salty about something it said about some source they like. Yet I don't see anyone providing an alternative to MediaBiasFactCheck...

view more: next ›