Thank God some people still know what’s up.

I agree the claim requires more evidence and it would be foolish to just take it at face value, but even if my intuition told me it was intrinsically safe I wouldn’t place any degree of trust in my own logical conclusions, or discount someone else’s warnings, however spurious.

The burden of proof should never be on the accuser when it comes to safety, in my opinion, or anything else of public concern. And the standard of proof should be higher to show that everything’s ok than to show that it’s not. At least in an ideal world.

I mean, it sounds like you’re saying, “I don’t know how it can be dangerous, therefore it’s not dangerous.”

Both perspectives are defensible. The question could be interpreted generally on its own, or in the context of OP’s new-user experience. Personally I would lean towards the latter, but that makes an assumption that the] look

God I hate camping

Of course not, but that’s not what Bob and Mike did. Bob and Mike are nearly indistinguishable in terms of military spending, conducting wars abroad, allowing our economy to be plundered, and generally doing jack shit to help ordinary American citizens who are suffering worse and worse as a result.

So yeah. Every single one of them did very bad things, and any differences you can point out are not nearly substantial enough to make any of them worth defending.

Everything Democrats accuse Republicans of is true.

Everything Republicans accuse Democrats of is true.

Biden is bad.

Trump was bad.

Obama was bad.

Bush was bad.

Clinton was bad.

“At least he did X” is not the right thing to focus on.

“But Y was/would have been worse” is not the right thing to focus on.

Yeah, there’s a big difference between “random country” and “home country”.

I experimented with this some time ago and failed because I didn’t have a credit card from the foreign country to pay with. I’m sure this can be circumvented with some effort, but it’s not trivial.

Quite notable, that Bernard.

Your mistake is in thinking that representation in the media/web sphere = representation in the population. White I don’t know the numbers, I reckon that the percentage of the population that doesn’t want a headphone is less than half—possibly much less.

That was nice but early reddit days, before subreddits, were the best days of the Internet.

But that’s literally the way villains behave in the movies.

It doesn’t matter how common the written error is, because the ambiguity is omnipresent in speech and we sort it out every day of our lives, so it will always be easy as fuck.

FYI, both of you are overacting. It’s weird to react to the correction so seriously, but equally weird for you to get so offended by the error. Both of you be better.

You’re currently in violation of the oldest, most sacred rule of secret-sharing, and recommend you amend that per your obligation to the social contract, as a matter of principle.

“Wait! How did you beat me when I hit every note perfectly? I’ve never seen anyone use their whammy bar the entire time—just what in the hell was that?”

“Nao, that’s what I call music.”

What’s the basis for that argument, especially in refutation of his detractors?

Hot take: their browser is good.

I get the school arcs because they’re a lot more relatable for the Japanese audience that is actually going through that experience.

Homelessness.

Billionaires.

War.

Magic, aka science and technology.

Yeah they definitely need to pick a more harmful-sounding name than angel wing.