well theres a reasonable chance that his son did it and OJ tried to cover it up… but since OJ’s professional career was based on head injuries i personally doubt it.
I had never heard this theory prior to his death, but now I see it popping up here and there. Is there any evidence to support this? I still think he probably did it, but I’m curious as to why people are saying this now.
his son was a chef and had military knife training and had attacked an ex gf with similar knife. also had a history of drugs. OJ comes off as more a gun/muscle kind of problem solver.
The watch cap found at the scene was the kind the son wore. dog hair on the scene, son owned a dog and oj did not. sons alibi was very weak. sons vehicle was bloodied not the bronco. the glove fit the son.
Well, what kind of sources did you find for the claims that you are actively stating as facts? I think it’s important to provide sources for claims as strong as these, regardless of whether you are a reporter or a veterinarian.
User Num10ck actually said they don’t believe that OJ’s son did it, and they’re just articulating another prevalent theory. If this were a debate I’d agree with you, but this is just casual speculation about an event from 30 years ago.
Its just bad internet manners to not provide the links to the claim you want people to understand/ engage with.
Like, if we’re going to discuss something, and you have a point your are looking to make, drop a link. Its not my job to put out effort to find support or research a claim I’m not making.
It really is. Now you have all these suggestions you’re not going to qualify. Arguing is performative and it’s clear you would rather do that than take five seconds to clarify lmao
Here’s the thing: nobody on the internet ever wants to have a philosophical discussion with you, much less with a username like Tropical Dingdong. Nobody has to prove shit to you. I can make outlandish claims like “Crazy frog arcade racer 2 is the best racing game ever created” and not back it up at all and that’s fine. Nobody has to argue with you or give you any benefit of the doubt. I know I sure won’t.
Thanks for posting this! I also googled it (It took like 10 seconds, not sure why we’re expecting so much of you below) and saw they’re are a lot of people talking about it. I don’t know how much stock I put in it personally, but it’s an interesting theory that I knew nothing about prior.
Good God please use xlookup. We have some old school people that still use vlookup and refuse to convert their ranges to tables, it drives me crazy.
I still use index/match for multiple lookup returns (or is it sumifs I can’t remember?) But I do a lot of work in BI and it’s much more intuitive for me in DAX/M.
Sheesh their mom seems so done with them. Also yeah the saying things at the same time is really weird. The pther just randomly daying words to match her sister.
It seems one needs to raise twins with a healthy dose of individuality or risk them becoming emotionally stunted in their development and being overly dependent on one another. Weirdly, this is the second time I've seen a video of Australian twins who are way too in to it
Omg they are really insane! Also ben has NO clue what’s going on. He just sits there like “I have no idea how I got into this situation or how to get out, pls help.”
Just googled them. They seem to be twins to a worrying degree. If something happens to one, it has to happen to both of them, including unnecessary medical procedures. They seemed to really go off the deep end when realising they might not get pregnant together.
I had to end a relationship with a twin when her sister got pregnant. I was in no situation to support a child then if it could be avoided, and I just knew there was a “accident” coming soon. She managed to get pregnant from some guy less than 2 months later.
The winget package manager should already be installed on updated systems, but if not, you can install it from the Microsoft Store app. It is listed as ‘App Installer’ and is authored by Microsoft.
Oh whoops, I should close some windows, because I currently have 623 open tabs in Firefox across 107 windows. It’s working fine, even with all my plugins running. Firefox is good at unloading dormant tabs.
They’re probably talking about their experience on their hardware, we don’t know what machine or what version of Firefox they’re talking about. (It’s possible it’s a really old version and not really relevant now or it’s possible their experience is valid for their hardware)
Well, I HATE having many tabs open. Just bookmark them for later. So far, FF is friendlier with how I go whereas the last times I tried Chrome, it often allocates RAM at launch for a thousand tabs that will never exist (hyperbole but you get it)
Like other options of its ilk, this surely ultimately just sets a flag in the registry someplace, which anyone can do once we figure out what the path to that flag is.
Incidentally, although I have not had to do this in a long time, you can move a copy of the Group Policy Management snap-in (gpedit.msc) from a Windows 10 pro/enterprise/whatever machine over to a Win10 Home machine and run it, and it’ll Just Work.
I confirmed that twiddling the Group Policy setting sets this to either 0 or 1.
This is also adjacent to the “Disable Windows Consumer Features” setting, which is located right next to it in CloudContent. Another flag most sane people will want to set to 1.
I don’t know much about the registry file format or the Windows APIs, but it’s possible that smaller data types wouldn’t save space due to alignment requirements for the datastructures.
Using more than one bit for true/false isn’t just a microsoft thing, and not really as ridiculous as it sounds. Memory isn’t addessable by bits, but by bytes. You can either:
Do it like the example here.
Use bitfields: Pack multiple values into the same address, but “waste” more memory and cpu time for keeping track and checking which bit your bool is in. This is mostly useful when the data itself has to be really small.
Why is it 32bit / 4 bytes instead of one? I assume a byte alignment reason because of some optimization.
If I remember correctly, it’s not the freezing point. Fahrenheit used a brine that included ammonium chloride to set 0 on his scale since it was the closest thing he could make in his lab that was a consistent temperature. The other end was body temperature, which he set at 96 if I’m remembering right since it’s more easily divisible than 100. He was a little off on his body temperature measurements so it’s considered a little higher than that now.
He started with the Romer scale (brine freezes at zero, water 7.5, boils at 60, body temperature 22.5), which he tweaked to not need fractions for plain water freezing and body temperature by fudging some numbers and multiplying by four.
This made water freeze at 30 and human body temperature 90. He recalibrated it so that it was 32 and 96 so that there were 64 degrees between them, so he could draw the markings by dividing the interval between them in half six times.
He then saw that water boiled at about 212 on this scale, so he tweaked it again so that water froze at 32 and boiled at 212, since they’re 180 degrees apart, which is desirable because it puts them on opposite sides of a temperature gauge.
Because of these tweaks, the original brine temperature is now about 4F, and body temperature is 98.6.
The tweaks make sense if you know that Fahrenheit was making and selling temperature gauges, so taking the Romer scale and marking every quarter degree gets you the first Fahrenheit scale.
Then he tweaked it to make it easier to produce, and then again to fit in the dial better.
How is changing a number fudging the science? Dude just liked powers of 2 so he set arbitrary things to be slightly different numbers. Heck, even Celsius is pretty arbitrary. The triple point of Hydrogen Hydroxide isn’t actually some magical mystical temperature that’s more important than all other temperatures, and the boiling point of one particular chemical at our best estimate of the average atmospheric pressure on the surface of this one particular rock is almost completely meaningless.
Because it wasn’t science. :) keep in mind it was before there was a notion that a temperature scale was part of science, it was part of a tool.
“My thermometer is easier to read and the scale is more likely to line up with what you want to measure”.
It’s kinda like how a CD having 700mb of storage is a product of engineering choices and compatibility with older tape/record formats that usually had less than 80 minutes of audio, and not some fundamental measurement about the world.
The science he did was in making methods of consistently measuring temperature, not the numbers he assigned to those temperatures.
CDs have ~700 mb storage because that’s how many bytes it took to store 74 minutes, which was how long a CD needed to be to store Wilhelm Furtwängler’s 1951 recording of Beethoven’s 9th Symphony. That was the longest copy of the Symphony they could find and so that’s what set the standard.
It’s debated. One source points to the lower end of the scale established as the freezing point of a brine made by dissolving ammonium chloride in water.
Man, OPs caption unlocked a core memory I have of calling my high school boyfriend at 858 pm, and talking on the phone with him for about 2.5 hours before he got notified that he was under 10 mins left for the month.
We had thought he was only going to lose 2 of his minutes 😭.
I stayed with Sprint through years of them being the shittiest in my area because I was grandfathered into an old plan with free nights starting at 5pm. Just taking non-stop at 6pm like a baller.
lemmyshitpost
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.