I broke my brother’s exchange beta 4 install by telnetting into SMTP port and sending an email with an accidentally typo’d recipient. The bounce bounced, that bounce bounced and it continued until priv.edb was full and the service crashed. After a morning on the phone with Microsoft support he asked me if I did it. They made a hotfix for the bug.
ahh, I rember that old time I wanted to make a “your mom bot” for discord, one of the function was saying “No, your mom” when someone said in a phrase “your mom”, little did I know that discord bots read their own messages if you don’t check it
Ever wanted to be talked down to by a 14 year old alt-right sociopath who pretends to support lgbt so they can stealthily insult liberals and blame western whites for how China is?
Edit; downvote more, at the end of the day you’re still a hexbear 🤢
No, celebrations of any kind are western propaganda. Your question has been audited and was found to have negative implications towards the state. Shock troops have been dispatched to your most recent location, have a great day, comrade.
holy fuck I laughed out loud at this outside by myself at ten to 1am … I didnt know what hexbear was, soooo, I reported a post for saying that anyone who ever supports a democratic candidate in america needs to be hit by a truck, and that violence needs to befall them, so the mod I reported it to posted my username and announced I had reported it in a comment to that post. people then piled on saying how I was a hypocrite and deserved violence brought against me, because violence has been done by cops agains homeless and trans people. also, that all I care about is getting brunch
We’ve never “pretended to support lgbt”, why would we? What would be the point of a load of alt right channers roleplaying as queer communists for years on an incredibly niche social media in the hope that eventually redditors would come to the site? And even supposing we did, and we were all just alt right types, if we’d spent years doing reading groups of queer theory together and kicking out transphobes and creating the most queer friendly space on lemmy just as an incredibly long extended bit then would the supposed communists we’re impersonating even take issue with that?
Like just use some critical thinking, at this point almost half of the sites users are trans and most of the rest are queer, most new users cite our radical opposition to queerphobia as their reason for joining, what evidence is there that we lie about being queer friendly? Like just check out !traaaaaaannnnnnnnnns or !anti_cishet_aktion or !transenby_liberation and tell me in good faith that all these people have been lying for years about being queer
They’ve decided a radically inclusive, three-year-old community of lefties who were here well before there was any serious activity on Lemmy are secret fascists who only pretend to be heavily LGBT for laughs. How are you supposed to respond to that? It’s hugely insulting and absurd on its face.
According to some weird red-brown alliance “patriotic socialists,” “maga communists,” or whatever they’re calling themselves now (The first one was probably way too on the nose). We’re not them though. We even immediately drove one of the main figures behind that cryptofash bullshit out, and now they’re just a semi-regular feature in the dunk tank.
/Edit - May be confusing the drumming out with another far less edgy community and/or the r/CTH days. Folks like that are prolific about trying to wedge their way in. Latter point there still stands though.
For the majority who don’t know, 9gag is a Hong Kong based meme recycling organization run by people who are equally intolerant of lactose and melanin.
Ask lemmygrad folks whether hexbear or lemmygrad has more trans users. Theyll say hexbear. Lemmygrad doesn’t even have pronouns listed in username as default and they have 20 percent trans users.
Trump is so broke he can’t pay his lawyers and is selling coffee cups with his mugshot on them but, okay? Hopefully he’s in prison one day for all he’s done.
Weve all spent three years faking being gay and trans for your amusement, yeah. We even went as far as to code in mandatory pronouns next to display names to own the libs. /s
Imagine being so conspiracy brained that you say such incredibly insulting nonsense.
Hey, nobody is telling you what to do, you can spend 3 years doing anything you like. I’m not going to get up here and say you’re wrong for it. I will, however, speak on my doubts on the support this “organization” supplies.
Who is misgendering anyone in the comment you replied to? They clearly edited their comment at some point, as they posted 29 minutes ago while you replied six hours ago, but what is up right now has no gendered terms at all. Did they remove that language?
You know how you can misgender trans people by claiming that they’re faking being trans right? That’s what it comes down to when they claim we aren’t supportive of lgbt people/faking being lgbt.
I wasn’t aware that would be misgendering them however the comment as posted states faking supporting LGBT people which is different than what you are claiming here. I am asking if they altered the comment in any way that would make your claims logical or did you just misread them?
There was a version with each image separate but Imgur deleted it because Imgur is a hollow shell of itself after whoring out yet another community for money in a naked act of stage-two enshittification.
Oh my God, I didn’t know the OP image came from a much larger piece, this is incredible. Thanks for sharing. It is extremely 2014, you’re right. What’s especially funny about this is that I’ve never actually seen Mulan, but I’m familiar enough with how it goes. If I do ever watch it though, this riff will be on my mind for the entirety of it.
I’m in Europe, and work for an American company. After a few issues in production, they tried to implement an on-call requirement for employees to check the alerts during their out of work hours (5am to 10pm or something stupid like that). I just reminded them that my country has the “Right to disconnect” law, which protects us from having to work outside our required hours.
They changed it to volunteer basis. I refuse to volunteer (because my off time is my time).
When I was younger, I also though I’d be cool to work in America, but once you learn a bit about their conditions, it’s a big nope. Much better lifestyle in small cities with an average salary in EU and the 23 days vacation + 13 - 14 bank holidays. Mental health checks out. 😄
About the Prod on calls, even if you “volunteer”, depending on the country and kind of job, they have to paid those “on call” hours even if there’s no calls at the end, and if there’s work required, the pay is higher.
I’m like you, I wouldn’t exchange my free time no matter what. 🤘
Years ago now I was asked to be on call for a week, 24/7 outside working hours. I was told it would be paid. Being naive I thought I’d be paid at my normal rate.
Turns out the on call rate was based on the likelihood of being called and this project was deemed to be low, after tax I got less than £10 extra for the whole week. It was something like 14 pence an hour.
They had a whole load of restrictions on my life as well, couldn’t be more than an hour from the office, couldn’t be drunk, had to answer the phone within a minute at all times and be able to get on my laptop within 5 minutes.
Refused to do it again after that first week and they ended up having to pay a contractor £400/week instead.
Were you in the UK? if so they robbed you. They need to pay at least minimum wage in the UK even for on call. You are also allowed rest breaks. What they did was unbelievably criminal. Hell if that overtime included times where you were asleep and you were still on call they still need to pay you the National minimum wage for those hours as well.
Only part that wasn’t illegal is the extra restrictions, as you are still working so you can’t exactly treat it as a day off.
I know it should be obvious but had to read twice to realize there would be a “/s” at the end. Some employers or at least HR/PR teams honestly believe that every word you just mocked is the actual nature of employment, while those same managers pull all kinds of BS to pinch every penny they can and then leave before the ship sinks if the company doesn’t turn into a monopoly zombie like EA.
(For those wondering how Electronic Arts is a “monopoly zombie”, think about how long most companies that become like EA - when it comes to being greedy and stingy - actually last. A few years at best. Yet EA has 50 years under it’s belt? That happened because they have/had a monopoly on official sports leagues, Maxis-created gameplay styles, the Star Wars IP (until Disney bought it), and the Mass Effect IP that they ruined the 3rd and onwards games of.
In short, don’t feed the zombie. Don’t buy Sports video games until the collapse of that genre kills the Madden and FIFA EA franchises, and buy games like NewCity, Urbek City Builder, Elysian Eclipse, Alterlife, or Cities Skylines if you liked Sim City/The Sims/Spore.
As for Mass Effect, maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t see much hope for that franchise’s legacy. EA’s execs probably think “oh, we made a 33% profit off of those first two loss leaders” before anything else when you mention it in any way to them, which just feels like a punch in the gut to the tune of “your choices never really mattered” that are currently popular plot twists for games.)
A few years back, a company where a friend of mine worked was bought up by an american company. I do not know why they didn’t do their research beforehand, but the new american owners announced they would be expecting the newly bought company to adopt an american work culture. Almost everyone quit. My friend is a programmer. He got a new job offer almost before he was out of the door.
American work culture: “We can’t make you slaves since we actually have to pay you, but could you at least work every waking moment and accept being looked down on if you don’t?”
laughs at american company You know what’s good about software companies? They don’t need expensive inventory. Most of company are devs. If devs leave you are left only with name. And if you want to start one, you just hire devs.
It’s amazing that I work for a large European company in America and am forced to accept calls or come into the plant 24/7.
It’s almost like it has to come from a government to make corporations behave.
I have colleagues that have their out of offices set to “I’ll be available by cell or email” or somesuch. Mine doesn’t say anything, and I don’t check it unless I want to. My vacation time is MY time.
Either the government does it or you join a union. I am a member of a large construction trade union and it’s written into our contract that we cannot be denied time off and can’t be forced to be available during off hours or made to work overtime.
The catch is that if you want to advance in the company it really helps if you can make a little extra effort. You absolutely will never be penalized for sticking to the minimum requirements, but you also will never move up into management, which is perfectly fine with a lot of people.
I work in tech, in a datacenter, and godamn this whole industry needs to be unionized. Between all the servers/etc serviced from the hot aisle (which is constantly more than 100F), no structured cabling anywhere, and a lack of sane standards that actually serve a purpose… Yeah I should get a different job
Not defending them, but I assume it’s the American bosses implementing what they think is normal.
If a company wants to keep policy in other countries it has to make it very clear to each branch, otherwise they will forget or not care about the policy.
Yes. It totally has to come from the government. No way companies alone will do any good for their employees and respect their time.
Take the 6 or 8 can holder plastic thingy (that turtles and fishes always get tangled up). In the EU, it is forbidden to use them. So, companies like Coca cola don’t implement them. But in the US, there are no laws stating that, so they continue selling with that shit.
Without the government backing them, employees are just numbers in sheets for companies. Nothing more.
This is just how it is in Canada too, at least in Ontario we have a recent “right to disconnect” law. Whenever I work with US tech companies and have to leave for a meeting they’re like “oh we can just continue this on the weekend or after hours” and I’m just like okay but I work 9-4 so I won’t be there.
It’s the same in the US if you’re unionized. My union operates in Canada too and from what I’ve been told our contracts are pretty similar, apart from pay scale varying by district council and currency.
I’m unionized in Canada as well as a power sector worker, although I work in IT. The contract negotiations are very compensation-focused not necessarily focused on enhancing what is already law.
I hate that this is true, plus he’s already said he would “take the best of the left and the best of the right” as some nonsense enlightened centrist candidate.
It’s centrist nonsense, if someone says a waterfall flows downstream and someone else says the waterfall flows upstream, that doesn’t mean the waterfall is stagnant, or that the person who said it flows upstream has a good point.
The left and right aren’t arbitrary collections of disorganized and incoherent positions you can combine ad-hoc.
Your comment makes it seem like there can only be two sides, that’s the entire issue with the US democracy from an outsider, where’s the other parties? Why only two, and why are you defending that there should be only two on divided lines?
And neither are they, so what’s your point? They’re just saying that both sides have good points, and they’re the “party” that will get what the nation wants done. Is trying to do what the nation wants as whole centrist to you? Or are trying to smear someone who doesn’t align fully with you? That’s the issue that they are also trying to bring to light, you are saying there is sides, there shouldn’t be… since to be centrist requires sides… or parties… you’ve no contradicted yourself in your explanation.
What’s centrist about that? I think you’re just reading way too far into this or trying to make it into something it’s not. Both sides have points, both are wrong, and you’re trying to decry someone saying this. That’s frankly wrong dude.
There shouldn’t be sides, and that makes centralism impossible, it’s only possible with the two party system.
They’re just saying that both sides have good points
Which is wrong. What “good points” do right-wingers legitimately have?
Is trying to do what the nation wants as whole centrist to you?
Saying “both sides have good points” places a mystical property on whatever is in the middle, as though the middle is inherently correct.
You’re batting a bit too hard for someone that thinks correct answers come from finding the midpoint. If someone says 2+2=4, and someone else says 2+2=6, the answer is still 4, not 5.
Which is wrong. What “good points” do right-wingers legitimately have?
This is why US politics are wild.
Saying “both sides have good points” places a mystical property on whatever is in the middle, as though the middle is inherently correct.
And you’re saying only the left is right in both of your statements, obviously you aren’t impartial and have a bias, as pointed out in my previous comment
You’re batting a bit too hard for someone that thinks correct answers come from finding the midpoint. If someone says 2+2=4, and someone else says 2+2=6, the answer is still 4, not 5.
That is some fallacious strawmanning right there, you’re saying only one side can be right, that’s not someone who is willing to have a discussion, you’re obviously just throwing shit at anything you don’t agree with.
Which is the entire point of his joke running, it’s hilarious that you can’t see this, but not surprising since you think there’s only one party. This is American politics people.
This isn’t unique to the US. The US did not invent the concept of a midpoint.
And you’re saying only the left is right in both of your statements, obviously you aren’t impartial and have a bias, as pointed out in my previous comment
I never said I wasn’t biased. Of course I am biased, I am biased because I have a coherent worldview and set of values that aligns to the left.
That is some fallacious strawmanning right there, you’re saying only one side can be right, that’s not someone who is willing to have a discussion, you’re obviously just throwing shit at anything you don’t agree with.
Generally, yes, there is a correct side.
Which is the entire point of his joke running, it’s hilarious that you can’t see this, but not surprising since you think there’s only one party. This is American politics people.
Not sure where you got the idea that I think there’s only one party, but keep cooking, it’s funny lol
This isn’t unique to the US. The US did not invent the concept of a midpoint.
What other countries have a two party democracy? And what other countries smear the other parties to the degree of US politics?
I get you have an axe to grind, but I said I was an outsider, how am I supposed to know one side is right and one side is wrong? If one is right and one is wrong, that really only makes one party now doesn’t it? You seem to want to point out math to others, but have an issue understanding it yourself.
I get the sense that you don’t follow politics super often… if you’re an outsider, I understand that “you must be biased to say that only one side has any good points” seems like the obviously correct position, but trust me, it’s not. Don’t attack people who have spent time in politics and developed a more accurate viewpoint just because it’s counterintuitive.
Hence maybe why I’m pointing out that there shouldn’t be any sort of party or candidate that should be referred to as “centrist”…?
In other countries and political systems, that would be someone who would stand in the middle and actually have both good points as their platform.
In the US it’s used as smear to refer to people who don’t align politically with you. Same with the terms “left” and “right”. Other democracies have parties in these sides, but A there’s more than one, and B, the term isn’t used to smear and slander people or parties.
Hence this being a uniquely American thing…. Other countries use terms like progressive and conservatives instead, much more friendly and correct terms.
No, I’ve never seen an article or comment about US politics use those terms. Which is odd for how often they get posted in other places.
And no, your country and politics specifically avoid those terms, since they want a two party system and that’s part of how it works.
It’s republican and democrats, not progressive and conservatives, that’s the “marketing”. Would love some articles from the US that use these terms though.
Really? You’ve never heard that? I’m sure if you searched around for some articles you’d hear people or even ideas described as “progressive” or “conservative” equally if not more often than by their parties.
And no, your country and politics specifically avoid those terms, since they want a two party system and that’s part of how it works.
Again, as someone who self-admittedly doesn’t usually follow US politics, you should really stop telling me, a politically-involved US citizen, how you think our politics works. I don’t presume to know more than you about your country’s politics.
Ideas, but not the party themselves since they want to distance themselves…
Yes I don’t follow, but it’s shoved down everyone’s throats.
I’m telling you how your politics look to OUTSIDERS… this is how WE view the shithole that you claim is democracy. None of those terms are used how you’re claiming they are.
Sure YOU use the terms, but anything that escapes to other people doesn’t, because that’s how they want to be presented. As you say, they only use the term for “ideas”, that’s distancing dude… yeeesh.
Politics is literally entirely composed of ideas. The parties are named the way they are because that’s what they’ve been named for like a billion years.
None of those terms are used how you’re claiming they are.
The onus is on you, you claimed the terms are used and I already asked and you decided to not oblige and tell me to Google it.
So you Google it, or provide the proof you claimed of first.
The terms the US wants and uses is democrats and republicans, since they don’t really follow ideologies at all.
In a healthy political system the right will have some left ideas and left will have some right. Maybe educate yourself on other politcal systems first if you want to discuss and call me out? Your democracy is a sham, others don’t operate that way, yet you want to claim they do…? What….?
I’ve made literally no claims about anyone else’s democracy.
As a matter of principle I refuse to use Google for you, you’re the one who originally made the claim that we don’t use progressive or conservative as terms, and if you’re going to insist on playing the Burden of Proof game then that’s what you’re going to get. Educate yourself on this topic or leave.
Again, when did I mention parties? You keep bringing them up when nobody else did.
If one is right and one is wrong, that really only makes one party now doesn’t it?
You’re confusing concepts like leftism and rightism with parties. Parties can have incoherent collections of ideas, they usually serve their donors alone.
You seem to want to point out math to others, but have an issue understanding it yourself.
You’ve mentioned left and right, are those not the party lines? You can’t claim you’re not mentioning parties when you’ve only done it using different terms in every comment. You can’t have someone who is “centrist” in democracies with more than 2 candidates, it’s a uniquely US issue, especially with the smear campaigns instead of actual politics.
I mean you described them that way, and you’re using them to describe the two different parties. Claiming otherwise is asinine. If they aren’t parties, and they aren’t sides, then what are they?
Without parties or sides, you can have left, right, or center. I’m sorry you got called out on this and are now flinging shit and making yourself look like biased bigot.
Now can you answer my questions or are you just going to deflect because you can’t answer simple questions without decrying people who don’t align politically with you…?
You’ve mentioned left and right, are those not the party lines?
Nope, I am referring to positions, not parties, ie Socialism vs Capitalism, as an example.
You can’t claim you’re not mentioning parties when you’ve only done it using different terms in every comment.
I haven’t brought up parties a single time.
You can’t have someone who is “centrist” in democracies with more than 2 candidates, it’s a uniquely US issue, especially with the smear campaigns instead of actual politics.
You absolutely can. Centrist does not mean someone purely in between 2 and only 2 concepts.
Without parties or sides, you can have left, right, or center. I’m sorry you got called out on this and are now flinging shit and making yourself look like biased bigot.
What are you cooking here? Parties are not sides, parties are groups of people with a shared position. People don’t get their values and views from party lines.
Now can you answer my questions or are you just going to deflect because you can’t answer simple questions without decrying people who don’t align politically with you…?
Not a single one of your questions has made sense, like when you keep referring to parties.
You are comparing basic addition with extremely complex social economics. You can’t just do A and guarantee B will happen. But if B actually happens it can be good for one group of people and bad for another one. Often the best solution is some kind of compromise. That said there surely can be some obviously bad ideas.
The Right are denying scientific consensus on anything that doesn’t make them money or own the libs.
Forget the “social economics” which is also bunk, because the majority of Americans want lower healthcare costs, gun control, freedom of choice, better economic equality, and better education.
These are all things the right (and written down in Project 2025 btw).
If Mr. Beast knew anything, he’d claim to work with the popular majority, but he’s been trained by social media that controversy equals popularity. Basically it’s an algorithmic version of “no such thing as bad press”. So he won’t do the best thing for the world, he’ll do whatever he thinks will be a net gain in popularity. Which is why he said what he said, so he doesn’t lose and right wing viewers of his clickbate.
I seriously wish this were the case. As someone who genuinely finds policy and political theory fascinating I wish I could have actual good faith policy discussions with people who don’t mostly agree with me, but the unfortunate fact is the Republican party doesn’t have any clear policy other than “whatever is good for the party members individually” or more currently “whatever Trump wants this week” (seriously, what isn’t listed at all on the shiny new Republican Party Platform speaks volumes to how the party doesn’t have any coherent political ideology to even pay lip service to)
Looks like overanalysis to me. Not sure the massive metaphor was necessary to attack ‘them centrists’.
That being said - the notion that centrism is a compromise is only something I’ve seen from people who are not partaking in said centrism. Not that I give a shit or anything.
Why is it “overanalysis?” It’s a common problem, people who grow up privledged and don’t consider themselves to be very “political” tend to think politics is about listening to everyone and compromising. It isn’t limited to Mr. Beast.
As for the metaphor, it was, like, 2 sentences. I don’t think that’s “massive,” and it seemed to get the poijnt through.
As for Centrism, why is Centrism good? Why are Centrists Centrists?
Why are you calling people who want to do what’s good for the nation, centrists?
You’re smearing them since they are wanting to do something different than what you want, that doesn’t automatically make them bad.
This is the state of US politics… can’t even have someone poke their head in without being insulted since they aren’t fully in the left or right. Two party democracy doesn’t work, and you’re perpetuating and making it harder for your country to try and accept this needed change.
Don’t just insult and call people names who don’t agree with you politically, that just makes you an ass.
Why are you calling people who want to do what’s good for the nation, centrists?
People who want to do good for the nation are Leftists, not centrists.
You’re smearing them since they are wanting to do something different than what you want, that doesn’t automatically make them bad.
I’m smearing people who think politics is about taking midpoints from incompatible solutions.
This is the state of US politics… can’t even have someone poke their head in without being insulted since they aren’t fully in the left or right. Two party democracy doesn’t work, and you’re perpetuating and making it harder for your country to try and accept this needed change.
This is not a US issue.
Don’t just insult and call people names who don’t agree with you politically, that just makes you an ass.
When have I insulted anyone or called them names? Centrist nonsense is nonsense, correct, but I haven’t personally insulted anyone here, unlike you.
In a functioning political system both the “left” and “right” are competent and have good ideas.
Who said midpoints from incompatible solutions? Thats unique US issue as we’ve already discussed and pointed out, in other countries and political systems, that’s what you would want, since they are combing good ideas, not 2+2=6 as you’re claiming. Yes that’s apparently what happens in US political, not in healthy democracies.
Uh… yes it is, that’s why I would like for you to point to any other countries with these two party democracy issues.
You seriously can’t see how calling people “left”, “right”, or “centrist” is insulting them? Is that how ingrained and indoctrinated this stuff is in US politics?
It’s progressives and conservatives, the fact that you don’t even comprehend you’re refering to sides while using these insults and slurs to refer to political parties is quite frankly wild. You’re calling anyone who doesn’t agree with you politically names, I never mentioned in here dude lmfao, that makes you an ass. But yeah that shows your intent with this discussion, I’m gonna block you now instead.
In a functioning political system both the “left” and “right” are competent and have good ideas.
Why? The Left is correct regardless of where you are.
Who said midpoints from incompatible solutions? Thats unique US issue as we’ve already discussed and pointed out, in other countries and political systems, that’s what you would want, since they are combing good ideas, not 2+2=6 as you’re claiming. Yes that’s apparently what happens in US political, not in healthy democracies.
Logic. The left and right aren’t incoherent groups of random positions from people genetically labeled “left” or “right.” If leftists want prison reform, privitizing prisons gets in the way of that and can make it worse.
Uh… yes it is, that’s why I would like for you to point to any other countries with these two party democracy issues.
It doesn’t matter how many parties you have, centrism is still nonsense. This isn’t a two-party democracy issue. Having multiple leftist and multiple rightist parties doesn’t change that the midpoint is not inherently a good thing, and can make things worse by combining incompatible policies.
You seriously can’t see how calling people “left”, “right”, or “centrist” is insulting them? Is that how ingrained and indoctrinated this stuff is in US politics?
Nowhere are these considered insults inherently. Stop making this about the US. I’m a Communist, why would I be insulted by “left?”
It’s progressives and conservatives, the fact that you don’t even comprehend you’re refering to sides while using these insults and slurs to refer to political parties is quite frankly wild. You’re calling anyone who doesn’t agree with you politically names, I never mentioned in here dude lmfao, that makes you an ass. But yeah that shows your intent with this discussion, I’m gonna block you now instead.
They are smearing “centrists” and the “right” in every comment dude…
And no, they just have an axe to grind for anyone who doesn’t align politically with them.
In a functioning democracy a “centrist” would have the good ideas of both the progressives and conservatives. So there isn’t anything about denying probable facts, and the rant they’re going on about 2+2=6 is a strawman fallacy to derail the conversation. Since that’s the uniquely US issue…
You’re really proving their point here. You’re starting with the false assumption that both sides have good ideas, and the best solution must be somewhere in the middle. If one side’s platform is based entirely on lies, this is an idiotic position to take. It’s an ideology for privileged autofellatio enthusiasts who haven’t bothered to really figure out what’s going on, because it’s much easier to just pretend you’re the smart one, and everyone’s getting upset over nothing.
Yup. He had a community post saying he was too young to run but if he could run it wouldnt be about left or right, he’d sit down with both sides and work out a compromise. Previously i thought the minimum age should be lowered but after seeing something so naive i reconsidered.
To be fair, i think making an effort to de-radicalize and deescalate american politics would go a long way
I don’t watch Mr Beast, nor do i know anything about him, but my gut says he’s not a good fit for this purpose
I don’t know, i just wish politics wasn’t such a cult-of-personality, us-vs-them scream fest. I just can’t be bothered to care when everyone is at each other’s throats over everything
My friends and I still use TS3. The audio quality and voice activation is better than Discord’s, and the desktop app doesn’t take ten fucking gigabytes of RAM to run.
“someone told me that the cold war never really ended, but my cousin Lucy went to Turkey on holiday last year and she said it was really hot and she got sunburnt, so has it ended or is the cold war only happening where it’s snowed?”
Don’t sell them short; incel lifestyle is about so much more than (no) sex. I’d challenge you to find any incel posts that exhibit empathy or even a reasonable understanding of human interaction.
Incel as a term describes something much more specific than “virgin (but they don’t want to be).” That may be the literal meaning of the words, but like, we all know that the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea is not democratic, people’s, or a republic.
Incel, the way it’s typically used, describes a particular type of person who’s embittered by their long-lasting virginity, and because of that, views most or all members of the opposite sex as lesser than them, believing that they’re in some way owed sex, and have been denied that ‘right.’
The word “incel” colloquially covers quite a bit more territory than its acronym expansion implies, much like MAGA means quite a bit more than just a collective of individuals who want to see America succeed. But of course you know this, so why exactly are you asking?
But of course you know this, so why exactly are you asking?
No. I don’t. That’s why I’m asking.
I thought incel was an abbreviation for an involuntary celibate person, male or female, who genuinely can’t have sex for a plethora of potential reasons. Since the word “involuntary” is part of the abbreviation, to me, that means the person who’s celibate can’t help it.
For what it’s worth, I’m on the spectrum, and one aspect of my neuropathy is that I over-emphasize strict definitions of words etymologically and need to have strict meaning in communication. I perceive people using fluid or inaccurate definitions for words as a vehicle for hostile manipulation and malicious intent.
I am in therapy for this, but I’m skeptical CBT or drugs can rectify how I interpret linguistic nuance.
While it is true that there was inexpensive housing available in the USSR, and that rents were quite reasonable compared to anything that currently exists in the US, and people couldn’t readily be evicted if they lacked the ability to pay, it’s a flat-out lie to say that that was the “solution” to homelessness, or that it eliminated the problem. Rather, the USSR criminalized being homeless and not being engaged in socially-productive labor; people that were homeless ended up in prisons and were labelled as parasites. The problem that we have now is that the official records simply didn’t record the problem, in much the same way that Stalin had histories and photos revised to eliminate people that had become enemies of the state.
Rather, the USSR criminalized being homeless and not being engaged in socially-productive labor; people that were homeless ended up in prisons and were labelled as parasites.
Swap USSR with USA and the statement remains true. Though Im sure the degree of severity was much greater in the USSR.
That’s kind of true in some parts of the US, indirectly. Some places criminalize not being homeless but all the things that are the result of being homeless like sleeping outside or in public places. But there are a lot of places in the US that do provide for the homeless. New York City has a right to housing provision, for example.
And it fucking shouldnt be the case. Ensuring basic humanity and human dignity should be a key matter of the federal government and not delegated to the whimps of states opinions on waht constitutes human rights.
If we set a national policy today and didn’t allow local governments to set their own policies, I’m pretty sure we’d have a national policy of no help for the homeless at all. Be happy the places that do have support are allowed to because of states’ rights.
Prison would be a step up for a lot of them. They receive other punishments, like having all their belongings confiscated wherever a cop or some bureaucrat decides they’re getting in the way too much.
I was homeless and police literally made up a reason to put me in jail and label me as a felon to make me be cheap labor when I plead guilty just to get out. No fair and speedy trial during COVID. I live in the US.
What the law tells you it’s doing and what they’re actually doing are very different. Don’t try to tell me different because I’m a first hand example. If you’re interested in the full story, let me know and I can do a Discord call or something.
A submarine. You remember the rich maniac who wanted to see the titanic wreck and didn’t apply to any safety regulations since it’s international water
It’s a shame that Valve couldn’t get Steam to issue them a new AppID, so they had to delete CSGO in order to put CS2 on the store. It was the only way.
I’m not defending anyone, it’s just a fact. In my opinion it would be tolerable if they didn’t cut content and if the performance was on par with the previous game.
Players are hurt from having it split. Way more so than Valve. In fact, I fail to see why Valve would be gaining anything, they aren’t selling the missing parts.
When a game updates, do you keep matchmaking servers up for every old edition of the game? Place people in a different queue for every hotfix version they are on? When the game is updated often over a lifespan of 12 years? Then no one would be in any matchmaking, let alone enough people of your skill level.
If they marketed this as “CSGO: Source 2 engine update” people wouldn’t be whining, so I don’t understand why people go out of their way to make a big deal about this. We knew not all the content would be available at release when they completely rewrote and modernized the game’s code.
And no anti-consumer business practices involved. You CAN play csgo still, if you want to. Sure, it’s inconvenient to download an old version of the game to run, but it is also inconvenient to download an old version of any game to run in every case. Anyone saying CSGO is unplayable and “that’s unfair because I paid for it” is maliciously spreading misinformation.
If you bought CSGO, you automatically got access to prime mode when the game went free to play.
It’s a separate matchmaking pool that puts you in servers filled with only other people who also bought the game, substantially reducing the likelihood of encountering cheaters and bots who just make endless free accounts.
This also carries over into CS2 as far as I’m aware.
The reason they did this is because they had a huge hassle getting everyone to move over back when they moved CS to the source engine. They didn’t want that hassle again, so CS2 is even installed in the CS:GO folder. This is the first time they’ve ever pulled anything like this, but the reasoning is because they didn’t want to create ANOTHER esport division, they just wanted CS2 to replace CS:GO for esports.
but the reasoning is because they didn’t want to create ANOTHER esport division, they just wanted CS2 to replace CS:GO for esports.
So Valve is fully on the “fuck the consumers, our esports money is more important” bandwagon, huh? I paid for CS:GO years ago, and this feels like some kind of bait and switch.
Like, who does having CS:GO and CS2 around at the same time hurt except Valve? Literally nobody. Nobody is hurt by having both games available.
They could have killed the official servers and still made it that CS:GO had to use community servers. Like, how would have that split the community when official servers would no longer exist?
Every reason people come up with comes down to: Valve is more interested in profit than honoring the fact that the game was on sale for six fucking years and free to play for five. It was a sold product for longer than it was a free product, but I guess everyone who bought a copy for six years running can go fuck themselves, according to Valve.
This is a joke, and the “reason” Valve had for it is a shitty anti-consumer reason. There is literally not a single reason they did this that was to benefit the people playing the game. Everything was about money and their esports division.
If you’re not upset about this, you’re a corporate bootlicking fucking idiot.
I don’t see it as very anti-consumer that every skin and statrak item has been brought along to the new game. I agree it would be nice to be able to play the old one, but I’d rather the option to torrent old clients and host my own dedicated server on the old one than be forced to upgrade to the new one. They don’t host it anymore, pirate away Who cares?
This release has sucked ass, CS:sources release sucked ass, Condition Zero as a whole sucked ass, and ask anyone old enough, the move to 1.6 from 1.5 sucked ass.
I still expect it to end up a good game, just like 1.6 and source eventually was.
They did this with 1.6 and the source Mac update previously. They’ve just completely changed the game and the feature set before it’s nothing new. This time they just change the name of the game with it, instead of claiming a balance patch.
It has nothing to do with consumer choice. It has to do with maintaining the servers and infrastructure to run these games. Patching and updating one game is way easier than doing it for multiple games. It’s the same thing that they did when CS went from a mod to a standalone game on Steam. Everyone was on the same version and, despite some people begrudgingly getting dragged along, was really what turned CS into the behemoth it was.
It’s the same thing that they did when CS went from a mod to a standalone game on Steam.
No it isn’t. Valve did not make CS 1.6, CS 1.6 was a user-created mod. Valve did then hire the mod makers to help make the Source engine (just like DICE hired the Desert Combat modders to make Battlefield 2), but Valve had no involvement with CS in its inception, nor its maintenance pre-Source. Hell, both CS 1.6 and CS:Source primarily ran on user servers, so there wasn’t even any significant upkeep costs.
CS 1.6 pre-dates Steam. CS:S was Valve, but both games did not have any servers or infrastructure to manage, beyond a simple exchange server that catalogued everyone’s game servers (also VAC, if the server host enabled it). It’s CS:GO that started having a big back end. Your point is valid, but only for CS:GO.
It’s kind of surprising how so many people in here have the history muddled.
I don’t have anything mixed up and you’re not right. The mod was only pre-Valve when it was still in beta. They hired Minh right around Beta 5. When Valve made CS 1.0 (way before CS 1.6) part of the official Valve catalog, they set up official servers but you could still set up community servers. When Steam came out, they required that it be run through Steam which forced everyone onto the same version of both the client and the server. You could still spin up your own server using an older version but you the game wouldn’t be listed in the game’s browser. You had to use Gamespy or HLServerWatch.
Steam forced everyone to update. It’s not 100% analogous to this situation but going from mod to standalone fractured the playerbase and codebase. This was clearly a move to prevent that from happening again. I’m indifferent to it but obviously everyone isn’t.
You can still play CS 1.6, you don’t even need clouds for that one. You can play CS source. In this case they wanted to carry the momentum live the good little service game that they are. Technical reasons are superficial smokescreens.
They know every time they made a release some people didn’t want to switch and stayed behind.
Yes, it is about forcing everyone to switch and I’m sorry but you sound completely ignorant of what goes into a game like CS that is used in professional esports. CS1.6 and CS:Source are locked codebases. There are no official servers for them. They are standalone server games only. They are not getting updates unless there are some major exploits. CS:GO is the official, active codebase and its the same codebase as CS2, upgraded to Source2.
It has nothing to do “clouds” (a term you’re not even using correctly) and technical reasons are the entirety of the reasons. They’re not smokescreens. They are exactly why they did what they did - to maintain 1 active codebase that everyone playing uses. That’s it. There’s no mystery or conspiracy.
That was not the reason. The reason are the skins. I only own a few skins (and old cases) and they a worth over 500 €. There are a lot of players with an inventory worth thousands. So, what now, after you release a new iteration? Clone every player’s Inventar? Forcefully transfer every Skin from CSGO to CS2? Or delete the old iteration. Valve did the last, same with Dota Reborn a few years ago.
We should condemn Valve for protecting their stupid gambling mechanism…
The reason they did this is because they had a huge hassle getting everyone to move over back when they moved CS to the source engine.
You missed a generation there. CS 1.6 -> CS:Source -> CS:GO.
This isn’t in response to people not moving over to the Source engine, there wasn’t much issue with that - although 1.6 still lingered on for a long time and people did complain, many people were excited by the Source engine and all the new physics it introduced, so people did buy Half Life 2 (with CS:S) even if they preferred to play CS 1.6. However with CS:GO it was different, there were no significant new features except the hat-ification and skins along the lines of Team Fortress 2, also CS:GO was just a standalone game rather than bundled. So many people did not move to CS:GO.
there were no significant new features except the hat-ification and skins along the lines of Team Fortress 2
Skins and cases were not in release CSGO. The release and beta features of CSGO were supposed to be controller support and cross-platform play with consoles.
they were never going to be able to release a totally new game without a lot of backlash from the addict skin trading communities. They wouldn’t want to risk their free income from the whales by splitting the player base and eventually shunning the skin investors stuck on the old game.
US rail freight is unironically some of the best in the world.
Part of the reason US passenger rail sucks so much is because the network is largely owned by freight companies, so priority always goes to freight over passengers.
The US freight rail industry isn’t some of the best in the world, it’s actually really quite terrible. It fails to maintain it’s infrastructure, can’t run to a schedule, frequently loses cargo, and causes ecological disasters. It is good at creating short term profits for shareholders, not being an effective transportation network. If you want more info, here’s a video that explains it better.
US freight rail looks great since for one, the freight railways dominate the scene, and for two, the US is up there in network distance as well as cargo transport volume in tonne kilometers. And of course, they have some very high operating margins.
However, the devil’s in the details.
For one, if we redefine the amount of cargo transported to be measured in US Dollar kilometers, they’re suddenly doing a trash job. Much of the cargo they move is fungible (it doesn’t matter what unit of this cargo you have, any kg is a good kg), bulky and not time sensitive. Things like coal, crude oil or gravel are disproportionately common freights on US rails, compared to other places.
Secondly, they put a lot of trains besides the tracks. I recall seeing they managed to derail about 1700 trains a year. Most other train systems don’t even do a tenth of that in a decade, even when corrected for track mileage.
Speaking of track mileage, US railroads actively reduce the amount and quality of track, while bitching & moaning to the government and the press that they’re overburdened. Meanwhile, they also operate a procedure of precision scheduled railroading, which I’ll spare you the details on, but let’s just say it’s not precise, it’s not scheduled and it’s barely railroading, and despite forcing some train crews to sit back and do nothing for hours, it still saves them one train crew. The only time they’ll actually expand is because either they really did have a bottleneck for decades, or something catastrophically fails.
On top of that, the freight railroads do everything in their power to avoid capital spending, so they refuse to electrify their lines and/or to install more advanced signalling and train protection. One major fuel shock, and American railroads are on their knees while India, China and most of the EU are laughing. And most signalling is unenforced, or maybe functioning at the tech level of AWS.
You just know that if the train in the East Palestine derailment was run not my Norfolk Southern, but by SBB Cargo, the Swiss national railways’ cargo branch, then
The track would have been at least doubled, under wires, and secured using a very advanced standard of positive train control.
The train would have been several trains, each hauled by electric locomotives.
The disaster train, at best, would not even have made it out of the yard. At worst, it would have been stopped, and probably directed onto a siding, two towns prior for having a failing bearing.
Passenger trains would have all the room to run down the track they need.
US freight rail is fine and a lot of cargo goes by train for the most part. There’s still gotta be trucks to get to and from the terminal. Not many facilities have built in rail spurs, or the need to ship an entire train load at once for that matter
The US has had a transcontinental railroad network for over a century. The Western US was initially settled largely on railway stops, land grants, and mandatory passenger service. The passenger service was one of the conditions for the land grants.
The US has had a transcontinental railroad network for over a century.
Sure, now try and figure out the expense and time required to build another one NOW, not in 1890 but in 2023. The right of ways alone may take you until 2123 to get sorted out and I really suspect that the Chinese aren’t going to show up to work for pennies a day to build the thing.
The passenger service was one of the conditions for the land grants.
We aren’t talking about Passenger Service. We’re talking about Cargo Service and since we already have one TC Rail System it follows that the meme is agitating that we build another one.
It would take decades and cost billions, probably tens of billions.
The problem is a lot of the costs of highways are externalized: cars are more expensive to run than trains, parking is more space costly, roads require dedicating much larger amounts of space for lower capacity. The reality is car roads cost more but are subsidized more.
The cost to construct a new rail connection is significantly higher than the cost to construct a new road connection. Subsidies don't enter into it.
If somebody says they have an easy and low cost solution for you, you'd be annoyed if it turned out that it was actually far harder and pricier until maybe 50 years down the line.
Maybe consider different framing: If 50 years ago we had budgeted as much public money on public railroads as roads, we’d be in a much better position today and its even more likely this trend will continue.
for railways it’s 1-2 million by most estimates, of course land acquisition has to be talen into account too but that’s true for roads too.
then there are the efficiency and maintaince costs. first of all if you are building tracka you can electrify it right away meaning you have a very green mode of transporting both people and cargo.
and efficiency wise google says trains are 3-4x more efficient than trucks (semis)
you also have to consider the electrification of trucks, if you need trucks to go across the country to hail stuff, eiher they need large batteries, which is more weight and thus more wear and tear on the roads or you need to maintain an extremely inefficient Hydrogen ecosystem which has 30% or so efficiency compared to the 85-90% of BEVs.
wouldn’t it make more sense to havw smaller semis with less range and thus smaller batteries that just hauls stuff in the final miles? from the cargo train depot to the intended destination?
I wouldn’t exactly call removing nature and laying down the track “easy” either. That’s tens of thousands of miles of steel carving through the terrain.
Also, we have a ton of rail, it’s just prioritized for freight over passenger transit. A high speed passenger rail network would be nice though.
compared to a 5 lane highway its a pittance - theres a reason why private rail companies can exist but private road companies largely don’t.
The problem is there’s a lot more federal funding for the shittier solution so when budgetting are you going to build the thing the feds will pay 100% or 0%?
why would a private company pay for a new road when the government will build that infrastructure for them? and even if they would, why on earth would they build a 5 lane highway solely for private use?
in either case, a rail line is still more expensive than a highway
thats the thing though, a rail line can pay for itself, a road often can’t. Its easy to “create a new branch road” but when you add in all the externalized maintenance factors: policing traffic, emergencies, fueling stations, stormwater management, the costs per user, the costs per user per mile traveled, land use requirements per user (4 parking stalls per vehicle, multiple vehicles per person) etc.
They often cannot pay for themselves, hence why the subsidies are necessary and why things like big box stores with huge parking lots are a net drain on most communities (its not just the low wages)
If they could pay for themselves we’d see more companies that just build and rent private roads like train companies do.
all of the factors you just listed also apply to railways
since railways are more expensive to construct and maintain than roadways, there are more cases in which a railway couldn't pay for itself versus a roadway
why would a company build a private road when the government will do it for them?
"* all of the factors you just listed also apply to railways"
massive Walmart style parking lots don’t factor if your urban planning is centered around public transit, and parking is definately one of the highest hidden costs of road infrastructure.
"* since railways are more expensive to construct and maintain than roadways, there are more cases in which a railway couldn’t pay for itself versus a roadway"
yes, when people stubbornly refuse to use rail infrastructure or when rail/transit infrastructure is prioritized less than roads/car based transportation then of course its going to be less economically viable. Economies of scale and induced demand are a huge factor here.
"* why would a company build a private road when the government will do it for them?"
good question, and yet we still have private roads and tollroads.
trains still need sidings, along with a bunch of marshaling infrastructure that doesn't really have an equivalent for cars
yes the reason a rail line to take you directly from your house to your local convenience store wouldn't be profitable is because people would refuse to use it
what argument are you making here? this was in response to how rare private roads are in comparison to private rail, and your response is that actually they're not rare? are you just trying to disagree with everything i'm saying for the sake of disagreeing?
I’m mostly just responding to your points, but if I’m trying to make any argument its that mile per mile train infrastructure is cheaper than road infrastructure when you add up all of the costs, especially the ones people normally dont consider including vehicle maintinance, extra land and infrastructure for parking, more policing, gas, time wasted on longer commutes, ect. I’m also trying to point out that the reason we can’t have nice things is because we have chosen the wrong priorities as a society, thats why we are stuck in a loop where we try to solve our car problems with more cars and car infrastructure instead of addressing the root cause of the problem.
it’s kind of an agenda pushing shit to compare high speed rail with highways, high speed railroads compete with airplanes not cars, on a regular track you can reach 150km/h easily and those cost a fraction and that’s already more than the 130km/h limit of highways in Europe
Cheaper than highways. The reason why long haul trucking exists is because the construction of highways is highly subsidized. Even then, it’s often more cost effective to use rail.
“While a few rail-transit lines may have had a marginal effect on rush-hour congestion, the cost is exorbitant. The average light-rail line under construction or in planning stages today costs $25 million per mile ($50 million per mile in both directions). Heavy rail costs more than twice as much. By comparison, the average lane mile of freeway costs only about $5 to $10 million.”
I wonder if these high costs are due to it being passenger rail inside a major city. I’m curious if this cost applies to freight rail as well.
Out here in the countryside it seems that a mile of freight rail should be worth much less than a mile of highway. Everything from easement size to site prep, equipment needed and bill of materials seems a fraction of that required for highway construction.
As mentioned elsewhere the maintenance is minimal compared to a highway as well, with the trains plowing snow themselves and the rails being very hard-wearing. The only work we ever see them doing on the rail lines is occasionally replacing sleepers and fixing up the road crossings - and it’s heavy trucks that ruin those, not the trains.
I might be mistaken, but by that quote and given that every motorway has three lanes in each direction, or at least two I assume in the USA, the cost of the road is at least comparable and at most a bit dearer. I’d even say it constitutes fudging the numbers to pull the wool over.
Only if you compare 3 roads to 1 track. If you’re arguing about which costs more then it doesn’t make sense to include the cost of the whole 3 lanes as all that traffic doesn’t need to go by rail.
This is about light rail though, which is usually built in cities (or, at least between a city and its suburbs). So I wonder how much of the cost (for both rail and road) is for land rights.
I know that asking you to Google things is maybe a lot, but isn't the answer pretty obvious if you think about it for more than five seconds?
Roads are made out of what would otherwise be a waste product from refining oil, mixed with dirt. If you just leave it alone, it will basically just sit there.
Rails are made out of steel, which is both expensive and rusts. Tolerances have to be tight. And if you fuck about with maintenance in rail, you get a train derailment.
No, it’s because your answer is overly simplistic. We don’t build one lane roads, we tend to build 3 or 4 in each direction, at least in cities.
Also, leave a road alone, it does not just sit there. In cold climates you get frost heaves, in hot climates asphalt is never truly “solid” so it gets ruts… water causes damage, plants grow through it…
Add in some of the other responses and we have a more complete picture. I’m not convinced. At best it might be a wash.
edit just realized you’re not the same person, sorry. My point still stands though.
They build roads going every direction because people and stuff needs to go every direction, people still need to go to those places if you replace them with trains.
Also the effort to fix and replace train lines is far more than fixing roads, I think a lot of Americans haven’t really used trains much so they don’t comprehend how complex it is, when you’ve had trains cancelled for a thousand dumb reasons like the wrong kind of leaves on the track then trains don’t feel as reliable - and when the track is blocked for repair they can’t go round so it’s bus replacement service so if you scrap roads then you need redundancy so you end up with masses of tracks everywhere.
I love trains but people need to learn how they actually work and the costs involved so we can be reasonable in planning and build the most useful solution for each situation - just saying trains for everything doesn’t make sense.
Rails are indeed one of the cheapest, best scaling, and most reliable ways to move goods no doubt, but it also has a last mile problem.
Just wanted to point out the solution isn’t as easy as “rails all things”. Trucks still do offer some situational advantages, and will still have their place in logistics.
Fair response. It’s likely due to the lack of rail infrastructure why this delivery was “across the country”. Rails are typically much cheaper per ton-mile than trucks. If a rail alternative existed, I’m fairly certain the economics would have forced the use of trains.
However, I’d say the self driving part is still be a benefit that would improve truck utilization rate.
I did some digging. According to the article, the route went from Tulare, CA to Quakertown, PA. OpenRailwayMap is really good for this. Both have freight rail lines running directly through the heart of the town. Going by destination alone, this is kind of a pointless operation. Then again, the point was more to demonstrate the possibility of an autonomous truck rather than whether that particular route made any sense.
Chatgpt: Balls typically have a stitch line or a seam due to the way they are manufactured. Here’s a brief explanation for a couple of common types of balls:
Baseballs: A baseball is made of a rubber or cork center, wrapped in yarn, and covered with two pieces of white leather stitched together. The stitching is not just for aesthetic purposes. It also affects the ball’s aerodynamics. The raised seams can cause the ball to move in various ways depending on how it’s thrown.
Basketballs: Traditional basketballs have eight panels stitched together. The lines where these panels meet are the “stitch lines.” They offer grip to players and give the ball its characteristic look.
Soccer balls (footballs in many parts of the world): Traditional soccer balls were made of 32 panels: 20 hexagons and 12 pentagons. These panels were stitched together to form the ball, creating the stitch lines. This design makes the ball roughly spherical and ensures that it bounces and rolls uniformly. Modern soccer balls have varying designs but still require seams to join the panels.
Tennis balls: The felt covering of a tennis ball is made up of two pieces, which are stitched together. This creates the familiar “figure-8” stitch pattern on the ball.
In many cases, the stitch line or seam is a byproduct of the manufacturing process, as multiple pieces of material are joined together to create a spherical shape. In some sports, like baseball, the seam also plays a functional role in the game.
Chatgpt is a sweet summer child confirmed… After some mild redirecting:
Chatgpt: Ah, I see what you’re getting at. The “stitch line” on human testicles, commonly referred to as the “scrotal raphe,” is a line or ridge that runs from the anus, up the middle of the scrotum, and ends at the base of the penis.
It’s a result of human embryonic development. During the early stages of development in the womb, male and female embryos have a similar undifferentiated structure, which includes a genital swelling and a groove called the urogenital groove. In males, under the influence of testosterone, this groove closes to form the scrotum and the penis. The scrotal raphe is essentially the remnant or “scar” of where the two halves fused together.
GPT4, Write a poem about a ball sack that has a mysterious seam on it.
In realms of flesh where mysteries dwell, A ball sack’s tale I’m here to tell, Its surface smooth, yet a seam concealed, A riddle of secrets, soon revealed.
Beneath the skin, a journey untold, Where life’s enigma begins to unfold, A hidden seam, like a whispered song, Invisible threads, where wonders belong.
A vessel of life, in delicate guise, Holds the promise of love in its size, Yet, a seam’s mystery, a cryptic design, In the dance of existence, it intertwines.
Perhaps it’s a mark of life’s creation, A symbol of nature’s artful foundation, Or a reminder that within us, seams run deep, Where mysteries and stories eternally keep.
So, let us ponder this ball sack’s grace, With its hidden seam, a mystical trace, In the human tapestry, where secrets gleam, A testament to life, like a waking dream.
memes
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.