I don’t really understand what this means. Can you explain the implications?

Of course not. I’m in love with a whole person, not her appearance. I love her fierce intellect, her passion for justice, her wanderer’s spirit. I love that we can sit together and watch anything only for it to lead to a new and endlessly fascinating discussion.

Makeup doesn’t affect any of that.

I like how makeup highlights her favorite features or hides when she feels tired or insecure. I like that it helps her feel more fully herself. I think it’s great that makeup can do that for her.

She will always be attractive to me for who she is. How she looked may have helped me first talk to her, but who she is has kept us talking for 16 years.

Moon Reader+ is probably the only thing I still miss from Android.

It requires no restraint if you’re not a monster.

Vice President is the surest path to President in US politics.

Can and absolutely do. Pet is my standard security question and it’s just a standardized password I use only on that field.

What an insanely powerful piece and a masterful use of black and white.

I’m honestly not sure what the authorial perspective of the crusades was. In the late 1800’s, it probably wasn’t safe to be openly critical, but this feels very critical.

The soldiers seem almost skeletal. There’s a ghoulish tone to everyone except the angel, who seems to be undeniably leading this army of the damned.

Really interesting image.

I wonder how bad their financials are if the CEO is publicly speaking out about this problem.

Chipotle used to be my favorite restaurant, but the last time I ate there was probably 2019. It just stopped being worth the effort of trying to get a full bowl.

Oh, yeah, no world in which I’m paying $4k for being wrong. Good on the other guy for taking your twenty. Good luck and I’ll be watching with interest.

Would that be $2 from me if I lose?

It’s my understanding that, with LLMs, being polite can net better results because they’re trained off human interactions where being polite is better.

It’s not that they care at all, it’s just how language works.

I’ve not seen a study of the phenomenon or even tested it myself, but it seems plausible.

I suspect just the air near the bat, as we both did it on our first try. Bats are small and fast, so the odds of us hitting the bat on the first try is low.

To be fair, in both instances, the bat had gotten into a building and couldn’t be shooed back out, so intervention is pretty important to saving its life.

Once it’s on the ground, you pretty much have it, as they can’t take off from the ground. Mine scampered under a bed very quickly and we had to move the bed to scoop it up and carry it outside.

In both instances, the bat was perfectly fine and flew off safely once outside.

I’m not sure the watcher would want this one recorded.

Anecdotaly, if ever a bat gets into your home and is flying around unable to escape, the easiest way to relocate it safely is to slap it out of the air with a bath towel whip.

In college, my best friend did this to a bat on his first try and it became the stuff of legend. Years later, stay at a hostel with some friends, a bat got into our room and I remembered the towel trick. First try! It was surprisingly intuitive.

I carried the bat (after getting gloves) outside where it lept from my hands and flew to safety.

The more you know!

Oh that whole thing is the cope cage! I thought it was just a building behind it or something.

I can’t speak for anyone else, but I’m okay with news that sad so long as it’s not all the news we get. Life can be sad and nature can be harsh, that’s just the reality of loving wild things.

You’re applying the behavior of Republicans under Trump in 2024 to their behavior in 2016 under Mitch McConnell, which is not a fair way to interpret history.

The Republicans’ primary goal has always been to consolidate power, a strategy evident even before Trump’s influence. This was evident in 2016 when McConnell blocked Merrick Garland’s appointment. It wasn’t just about denying Obama a win; it was about maintaining control over the Supreme Court. By holding the position open, they ensured a conservative majority with Gorsuch’s appointment in 2017.

While their actions under Trump have often seemed erratic and without principle, the decision to block Garland was a calculated, strategic move rooted in the same pursuit of power. Viewing their behavior solely through the lens of recent events, like the border bill, ignores the broader, consistent strategy they have employed over the years.

The move to block Garland was a clear demonstration of their long-term strategy to secure judicial power, not an isolated act of obstructionism. This context is crucial for understanding the continuity in their approach to power, rather than seeing it as a sudden shift in behavior.

This isn’t a bill and this wasn’t 2024. Mitch McConnell was responsible for stonewalling Garland’s appointment to the supreme court. Trump was responsible for killing the bill. Trump is an idiot, McConnell is just evil. They don’t play the same way at all. They almost certainly would have passed that legislation if Trump hadn’t interfered.

It was a lifetime appointment to the most powerful position in the country, assuming you have a like-minded majority. If he were a federalist, it would have been a gift to them on a silver platter.

We’re dealing with counterfactuals here, but attributing their increasingly irrational behavior today to all their actions in the past is a terrible way to interpret history.

He is not. If he were, why would the republicans have stonewalled his nomination for Supreme Court Justice? It doesn’t make sense.

He has participated in some events, like debates, with the federalist society, but he is not a member.

Do all the research in the world and you will not find any connection there.

There’s always a chance, it’s just very small. These corrupt justices are the end game for the republican party, the odds of any of them breaking ranks to convict is very low.

That said, it’s almost certainly not about conviction, so much as upholding the rule of law and creating political pressure and support for something like packing the court.