Why own the libs when you can do even better and own yourself?

OT, but do people really have bumper stickers in FRONT? I mean, who would be able to read it and honk in time? (Disclaimer: I’m from EU, don’t drive and don’t know much about US driver culture).

Cats and dogs have more in common than you think.

For example, did you know that both cats and dogs have four legs? Yeah… There’s even more similarities, I hear…

Not acting “for free” does not mean zero-sum game.

I am no expert but I don’t think nations need to (or do, in general) operate on a zero-sum game. Actions can benefit both sides.

I call it a (wo…)manmade organised dogmatic religion. Sure, it might be just with a member of one (which is kinda cool and all and probably makes the organizing part a little bit easier) but it’s still kind of the same thing…

But seriously, it really depends on the details on such belief. It might be anything from harmless cope to superstition to delusion to paranoia. Or a first brave step in escaping a cult–which I would genuinely applaud.

It loosely reminds everyone of everything because “other planes of existence” is an all-encompassing meaningless term.

Just about every religion or fiction fits this, because they can–and do-- say “oh but it’s in oThEr pLaNeS oF eXiStEnCe!”. Which is a silly excuse because just about only concrete property that “other plane of existence” implies is that things on beings on it can’t affect things or beings on this plane of existence, so any theory (as in “has to make useful, verifiable predictions”) involving interactions between planes of existence is kind of dead on arrival.

No, He actually did return and it was in the news, don’t you remember? Oh, it’s that vicious news cycle again.

Someone has to teach those little gangstas how extortion is done.

Well at least you tried…

I see, So that’s what the jack-o-lanterns are for?

So they are actually not lanterns but temporary toilets, but then someone got an idea to put candles in them so that it at least makes the “trick” part kind of uncomfortable. Right?

Well the images are already dumb AI slop. I don’t know who the article is for but the images scream “don’t think about me!”. For me it’s hard to take it seriously at that point.

OT, but the comment under the video is pure gold:

“Sharks have a similar metaphor, ‘swam under the Fonzie’.”

I usually dry inside and I make sure to turn stuff inside out before hanging it on the rack but I do it because I believe it dries better when things like pockets can be stretched out.

UV is a great point, I never realized that.

So it looks like I’ve been doing it all wrong all the time. Especially with hoodies, there’s always a t-shirt under them, so the “dirtier” side of the hoodie is more likely to be the outside.

With jeans it’s kind of the same, assuming not too much sweating (and proper underwear turnaround).

Just about the only thing I remember was that my mom always said that one should zip them up and not leave the zipper open – specifically so that it does not clank around and perhaps scratch the washing machine drum or get its tiny teeth brush and the moving part tangled with other, softer garments.

Turning the hoodie inside out might mitigate that a little bit more, but not much…

…or any inanimate objects, really.

LOL next time I wait for tram I’ll just imagine meaningless alien symbol arrive instead of it. :D

But really, I think the abstraction is kind of fascinating. The “closeness” of a route 34 to route 36 means nothing. Or the number of “34” in route 34 has nothing to do with gate 34 on an airport. So much is kind of obvious to most adult humans. (I think–and I suppose there might be interesting cases with neurodiversity.)

Now what if instead of numbers it was happy cartoon-like animal symbols like they use in day cares. Again, I can state the obvious: duck is a bird and hen is a bird, but the “duck route” and “hen route” don’t need to have anything to do with each other. And sure, duck route and duck airport terminal have nothing to do with each other as well. Again, sort of obvious, right?

Then if it’s alien symbols: sure, now I can’t do the connections like “32 vs 34” or “duck vs hen” anymore, can’t I? Well … no matter meaning in any other context, as long as I can recognize difference between two symbols I can also recognize similarity between other potential pair of symbols. Eg. if two alien symbols had a dominant vertical line then I could still have the same space for connections.

My point is that this need of separating the abstraction from concretion is inevitable, regardless of whether the symbol has a conflicting meaning used elsewhere. As long as we attach some understanding to the symbols, there are still some relations we might want to attach to them. That’s even if we did not use the same symbols elsewhere, which we do.

The next stage of the thought experiment: what if it’s not symbols but just the real things. Can I recognize a tram from another one? (Literally one physical vehicle from another?) Well it would be really hard but actually also counter-productive in the modern world, because the whole point of the abstraction in those arbitrary numbers is that they represent the route – which is also completely abstract concept. Ie. it does not have to be the same vehicle, and the same vehicle could be re-assigned to another route.

I don’t know where on this axis would the radio frequencies mentioned in OP be placed, though. Frequencies exist in range(s) so a certain frequency currently on your radio receiver being higher or lower than the target one does tell you how to twist the knob. (Yeah, I’m 45 years old so I have used analog radio, although it was like 30 years ago…) There must be at least one other axis to it.

honestly with drawings like that I half expected at least one panel be involving bloodletting

wow, so Trump is doing “Liberatem resigno” (“I give up my freedom”) but with rubber shackles.

Still, maybe if Zucc did it people would actually find him cool.

(“Cool” as in, like an average politician, which is still way cooler than he is now.)

LOL that’s why I will never be a politician. I would be so frustrated by not being allowed to touch my face! The irony of it would just overwhelm me.