There’s also plenty of room in there for less malicious situations as well (not that the malicious ones you speak of aren’t happening…they are…but there’s other cases as well).

I think a lot of the problems arise based on differing expectations, and ideas about what a “conversation” entails.

Too often, it seems like a conversation means “let me voice my grievances, assign blame, and explain my ideas about why it’s like that and what should be done…and didn’t you dare to disagree with me or question anything or point out flaws in my logic, because this is my space!”

And hey, you’re free to do that…but that ain’t a conversation. Conversation means you don’t get to dictate the terms completely to everyone else.

I feel like those who do this do know, deep down, that they don’t want a conversation at all… but “everyone shut up, let me say my thing, then agree with me” tends to draw in a smaller audience. You might be right, you might be wrong, but, “Listen to me and don’t say anything I don’t like.” isn’t a conversation.

Telling a person wandering through the desert “I also get thirsty” maybe deflects from the issue at hand.

Or… That may be a show of support, in sharing of a common burden, a message of, “You are not alone in this struggle.”

Rather than always seeing it as a negative, maybe allow for the possibility that it’s coming from a different place.

Honestly, I feel like this whole sentiment of, “Don’t attempt to bring any context into a conversation. Only stick strictly to what one person has decided to talk about.” is not only counterproductive in that moment, but also in the medium and long term has a marked effect in shutting down future conversations about difficult and uncomfortable topics.

I mean, how many times does a person get into a conversation that starts with, “Can we talk about X?” or “Let’s have an open, honest discussion about Y?”…only to add something to that conversation and be told, “No, you’re wrong for bringing that up. We’re only talking about X and why it’s the worst thing ever.”… before they get to the point where the next time someone says, “Can we talk about Z?” they just say, “No, sorry. Not interested.”?

For me, while I get where the post is coming from, a lot of the narrative seems to revolve around the dynamic of:

“We need to have an open dialog about XYZ. Let’s have a conversation.”

“Okay, then here’s ABC for context, as a comparison to XYZ.”

“Actually I’m here to talk about XYZ, not ABC. And you’re the problem for not strictly limiting this open conversation to the specific scope I want to consider.”

Like… you can either ask for open discussion or you can say, “Everybody shut up and listen to what I have to say, and unless you’re opening your mouth to completely agree with me in every way, don’t bother because I’m not here for anything other than letting you all know what I think.”

I’m not saying that the points are wrong or bad, just that it’s a bad look to start out with talking about an interest in having a dialogue, then as soon as there’s any expansion of the scope of discussion, suddenly being unhappy that there’s thoughts different from where it started out, and playing the victim or worse, blaming whoever took the invitation for an open dialogue at face value and engaged in good faith.

The only thing I know about vesicles is that microvesicles are gross… thanks to paleobotanist Dr. Ellie Sattler.

What little blue house?

I get the concern, and it’s a good concern to have when you’re talking about what would be such a huge shift in so many ecosystems…

…buuuuuut…

I have to believe this change would happen slowly… mosquitoes wouldn’t just go extinct over a holiday weekend. It’d take years, if not decades, of dedication to the eradication strategy and even then, certain populations may prove immune to the best efforts of science.

That being said, even if it did execute as planned, I feel like the gradual decline of the mosquito would coincide with a gradual increase in other invertebrate species that would fill that niche. So as mosquito populations slowly declined in a local pond or creek, you’d see things like say chironomids (midges) thriving with the reduced competition for habitat, and the fish that ate mosquito larvae replacing that part of their diet with more midges.

Not saying there couldn’t be other complications, but I don’t think we’d see results fast enough that we’d end up with a broken link of the food chain leading to ecosystem collapse.

Exactly.

My thought when opening the post was basically, “Can you imagine the depths that American corporations would sink to in a market where they can totally conceal the flavor, size, quality, etc. of their products until after the sale, and not have anyone from the company present, making them totally immune to any negative feedback?”

Presumably the companies behind these things in Japan are at least delivering a somewhat acceptable food item. I wouldn’t be surprised in any way to find an American version of this thing dispensing literal dead rats.

Would the victim be officially dead?

The bounty is posted by Iran… wouldn’t it be better for everyone if we dropped him off at Tehran?

Chocolate with raisins is super common though…

A properly run nuclear plant will also expose people living within a 50 mile radius of the plant to less radiation than if it were a coal fired plant.

The whole thing is pretty regulated.

I feel like that’s probably a good thing.

Or upload some kinda freaky shit.

It was pure fan service but both Parks and Recreation as well as Schitt’s Creek can go on that list.

Not if you drop off $100 in these fake things and then pull a real hundo from the plate.

Also wild seeing this…I had never heard of them till I started dating my gf. She and most of her friends are big fans and I just saw them live a few weeks ago.

Nope.

And even if it did, it was restarting itself anyway.

Bought a pixel 3 as soon as the 4 was released.

It was a fantastic phone… except for the two times it got stuck in a boot loop until the battery died.

Bonus points for the second time, when, thanks to a google update for emergency services, it decided it should dial emergency services every time it restarted…meaning I had to stay up until 330am that night, hanging up on emergency services, until the battery finally died.

A year or two ago, I bought a P7 Pro to replace it, hoping it’d have all the good of the P3, but with better camera, bigger screen, and no boot loop.

It is indeed bigger, the camera can zoom more, but isn’t necessarily better, there’s no boot loop issues which is great…but I find i have more cases of the phone locking up and needing a restart…and the in-screen fingerprint sensor (and gesture controls) are absolute hot garbage compared to the P3.

The fingerprint and gesture annoyances have been enough that my plan now, unless there’s something significant that changes things, is to go back to an iPhone for my next phone.

Not only that, but there’s a 100% chance they sell this shit to you as a forever mouse, then in a few years if it’s not making them money hand over fist, they’ll discontinue it and keep your money.

Is the church still active?

If it’s recently defunct or relocating, I’d bet this is the parsonage, assembled on a shoestring budget from the church offering, and using whatever materials they could source as absolutely cheaply as possible.

I’m guessing that either a member of the congregation or family connection of same is a siding guy and was able to get all of this for free or obscenely cheap from somewhere, or was able to get it donated, and rather than waste it or decline what they couldn’t put on the outside, they decided to save money on drywall and paint and put it inside as well.

Same with the furniture, etc. this just reeks of “super tight budget but with excesses in certain odd specific areas because we got it donated”.