I know that this isn’t the point but I absolutely can’t stand the word “juice” to describe meat drippings.
Juice is from a fruit! When I see juice to describe meat drippings, all I can think of is someone squeezing a big steak and squeezing all the “juice” out.
Anyway, commit message is on point. Add a small pinch of flour to thicken the “juice” and you’ll have gravy.
From Middle English jus, juis, from Old French jus, jous, from Latin jūs (“broth, soup, sauce”), from Proto-Indo-European *yúHs, from *yewH- (“to mix (of meal preparation)”).
Sounds like the right word to me.
You sound like one of those people who take issue with non-dairy milks being called milks too.
Maintaining social order, especially in the form of violent repression against demonstrations, indirectly protects the rich’s properties, so all in a day’s work.
There’s plenty of cases where they don’t look for cars either.
Or the cops themselves just straight up steal the car themselves.
My wife’s car was ordered to be towed by, according to the impound lot, the police.
Neat thing was that there was no ticket with the car, no police station within 3 miles had a record of a ticket for her or the car, and the area she had parked had no signs that suggested it was illegal to park where she did, nor does the city have any ordinance about overnight parking.
Best we can figure, is a cop or the tow company that works with the city, just decided to tow a car for funsies and the 500 bucks it took to get it out of impound.
The police and every organization associated with them are corrupt to the core.
Reading that I almost had a thought like it must have been a mix-up or something, but no, US police will murder people with less thought, so that type of fuckery is completely expected.
Love bikeindex, I actually got my stolen bike back thanks to that site. It was literally two years later but still, the police wouldn’t have even made a report probably in the city I was at, with bike theft so ubiquitous.
Given the number of times I’ve seen cops on police forums and r/protectandserve use terms like “bikefags”, I think it’s just the typical cop disgust of anything they perceive to be weak or effeminate.
Yeah, I don’t get that. Bicycling requires strength and endurance. It exposes you to the elements. Why is sitting in a cushy car something some people think as being more macho? Is it that you’re in control of a heavier and more powerful machine?
So does cleaning a house, but that’s “women’s work”.
Is it that you’re in control of a heavier and more powerful machine?
That’s it. You didn’t get it at first because made the mistake of associating manliness with things like patience, strength, hard work, endurance both of toil and hardship; all things that do make up ideals of manliness to normal people. But you need to approach it from the perspective of a wastrel, a weak, foolish, and lazy person who demands the respect and deference of being manly without putting in the hard work—something he has avoided all his life. He might praise hard work in abstract, but he has no discipline for it and doesn’t respect those who actually do it, he just considers them beneath him. To such a person, the defining aspect of manliness and machismo is mastery, mastery over others and their wills, and since mastery through work is a waste of time to him, he turns to shortcuts.
From there, it’s not hard to see where the thought process goes. Since strength is to him based on control and mastery, he picks something that gives him more command over the road in a direct and in-your-face way. The man who drives a lifted Ram 2500 can confront you by running you the fuck over. By contrast, in his opinion, cyclists are entitled jackasses in miniscule booty shorts who can only confront you on the road by screaming “CRITICAL MASS! FUCKING CAGER!” and throwing sparkplugs at your windows. The difference in power dynamic is proof enough to our friend of who the “real man” is.
To take the mentality to its conclusion, the easiest way to gain mastery in general is through authority, and the easiest way to get that, even easier than joining a gang, is by becoming a cop.
I’m pretty sure any petty theft is very hard to track down. Not just bikes, if someone broke into your house and stole some minor things it’s almost certainly not gonna get found. Bikes are the same, it’s very easy to resell them and repaint, and nobory registers bikes.
Because even if they look for it and find it, whoever is riding just says it theirs and there is literally nothing the police can do unless it was caught on video or there is a meaningful identifying feature like a serial number or something else specific and unique.
Seeing a sketchy guy with a black and red bike with the same bike rack you had isn’t enough to prove anything.
If an officer approached me riding my bike around and asked me to prove it’s mine, I couldn’t either despite not being a thief.
Anything that’s not serialized and recorded is basically impossible to find. If you have serial numbers then they can inform local pawn shops, but even then the shops probably aren’t checking serials for anything under $500.
And if the thief just sells it on craigslist then no one is checking serials.
What you’re entering the third act of your love story and you have to get to the church in time to break up the wedding and declare your love, what’s a little bike theft? The universe will take care of it.
It probably depends a lot on where you live. My wife’s bike got stolen and she was woken up by police coming to check on it (one of the maintenance guys at our apartment noticed a man at 7-Eleven riding it and recognized it; came back running to check if it’s indeed missing and called the police). We fully expected the police would do nothing about it (it was the cheapest Walmart bike), but an hour later they called that they found the bike and have the culprit in custody. It did help that the bike was a girly mint green with a wicker basket, so they instantly recognized it when they saw it.
Then again, in San Francisco, when my wife got her car window smashed and wallet stolen (she was late for class and dropped her wallet under the car seat, didn’t stop to take it; but it wasn’t the wallet that caught the thieves’ attention, it was the breast pump bag that looked like a laptop bag; they threw it on the floor when they saw what it was), we never heard anything back from the police.
Fun fact. Cops on average have lower IQ and often fail literacy tests. Furthermore it appears that critical thinking is discouraged in the job, with candidates being selected who lack critical thinking abilities over those that have them.
Calling 25 years a quarter century is a fun way to make it seem way longer. Precedent is kind of important in law so setting a precedent that says they can discriminate on the basis of IQ is relevant until is overturned. Do you have any articles about a ruling overturning that precedent?
I think it’s more nefarious than that. Many departments want a good 'ol boys club where they’re the ultimate authority and they want their officers to fall in line rather than question department actions.
No, only the first one (supposing they haven’t invented the zeroth law, and that they have an adequate definition of human); the other two are to make sure robots are useful and that they don’t have to be repaired or replaced more often than necessary…
The first law is encoded in the second law, you must ignore both for harm to be allowed. Also, because a violation of the first or second laws would likely cause the unit to be deactivated, which violates the 3rd law, it must also be ignored.
They never were intended to. They were specifically designed to torment Powell and Donovan in amusing ways. They intentionally have as many loopholes as possible.
Remove the first law and the only thing preventing a robot from harming a human if it wanted to would be it being ordered not to or it being unable to harm the human without damaging itself. In fact, even if it didn’t want to it could be forced to harm a human if ordered to, or if it was the only way to avoid being damaged (and no one had ordered it not to harm humans or that particular human).
Remove the second or third laws, and the robot, while useless unless it wanted to work and potentially self destructive, still would be unable to cause any harm to a human (provided it knew it was a human and its actions would harm them, and it wasn’t bound by the zeroth law).
…she swallowed the horse to catch the cow, she swallowed the cow to catch the goat, she swallowed the goat to catch the dog, she swallowed the dog to catch the cat, she swallowed the cat to catch the bird, she swallowed the bird to catch the spider (that wriggled and jiggled and tickled inside her), she swallowed the spider to catch the fly. I don’t know why she swallowed the fly. Perhaps she’ll die. 🤷🏻♂️
Indeed, God help whoever NASA puts in charge of date and time conversion.
If we do a lot of space travel we’ll have to get used to this, though. And even worse, there’s no consistent way of defining a frame of reference not subject to gravity, so there’s a chance any standard one will fall into a black hole, which is funny because it’s a tangible thing destroying a concept.
That looks like an IBM PC. I recognize it from my childhood years when the father of a friend (who worked for IBM) had one in the early 80’s. That dude is probably as nerdy as he looks. So not a dumb terminal, it’s one of the first home computers.
Yep, looks about right. The photo to too dark to see the .25" drives but with all those boxes, it’s clear it gets use. I can almost hear that damn dot matrix printer though because I had that model one at home as a kid . That thing was LOUD.
Or the satisfying ka-thunk when you pushed the bar on the floppy drive to lock the disk in place. We had a modified one when I was growing up that had a five MB hard drive.
programmer_humor
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.