"Modern audiences" 1 comments
lucky11
· 5 weeks ago
Could be because it was fantasy franchise with a name attached that had almost nothing to do with actual fantasy franchise.
3
sighhhh 1 comments
lucky11
· 5 weeks ago
Play the game. Realize that all the scientists are old weak guys. MC must be the new guy forced to do all the grunt work. Has to save the world from an inter-dimensional invasion. Succeeds!!!! Only to find out that it was merely the scouting party.
The sunandha effect 5 comments
lucky11
· 5 weeks ago
I literally addressed what you said. "It may have been, as you say, well deserved (I don't know)". Maybe I just wasn't clear enough, about what was deserved. In this case I was referring to letting her drown. I wasn't contradicting you.
The sunandha effect 5 comments
lucky11
· 7 weeks ago
The penalty for touching her was death. It may have been, as you say, well deserved (I don't know), but there had been cases similar where they saved the person and the rescuer was executed because they violated the law.
Spookposting '24 #10 - Sweet but Corny 2 comments
lucky11
· 7 weeks ago
It's just sweetened wax. The colored layers can sometimes taste slightly different based on the dye. Here's a list of typical ingredients: Candy corn is made with sugar, corn syrup, salt, sesame oil, honey, artificial flavor, food coloring, gelatin, and confectioner's glaze. The confectioner's glaze is made from lac resin, a bug secretion
It wouldn't be a problem if y'all wasn't lying all the time. 1 comments
lucky11
· 7 weeks ago
Facts are facts. Problem is when the "fact" checkers don't check and just present their opinion of the fact instead of someone else's. Anecdotal though it is I've seen "fact" checkers censor a fact only to turn around and corroborate it with their own because they're "fact" checking specific groups or people. Then there's the "who is fact checking the fact checkers?" I like the ones that do the Fact: "adfads adsfads" True/False/Partial, give the actual fact or full fact and then present where they are getting there info from.
Awsome cold unearthly 1 comments
lucky11
· 7 weeks ago
I definitely did not see a fire pit on my first glance. Nope, totally saw the group of people in the middle of hay bales with lighting ringing the inner side of the bales.
They are afraid 8 comments
lucky11
· 7 weeks ago
Daydreaming seems to be a viable method though. Keeps your mind engaged and doesn't require anything. Also "most" people won't start worst case scenario thinking. Of those even, "most" of them won't induce a panic attack. However, if you do fall into that small percentage, absolutely, do what you need to keep your mind engaged and actively pursuing a healthy line of thought.
▼
They are afraid 8 comments
lucky11
· 7 weeks ago
And "travel experts" are who we should all go to for the psychological evaluation of this method of decompression. And by "travel expert" they mean some guy that sits in a chair at their job and not someone whose job is to actually travel.
▼
Sleepy Bison 1 comments
lucky11
· 7 weeks ago
Earthworms can't hear bird noises. They have no ears and can only feel vibrations through their bodies. Most birds do have sheer volume necessary to let earthworms "hear" them.
You're welcome 2 comments
lucky11
· 7 weeks ago
Square: a regular quadrilateral, which has all the four sides of equal length and all four angles are also equal
Quadrilateral:
noun: a four-sided figure.
adjective: having four straight sides.
So no, this is not a square. Just remember all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares.
3
Quadrilateral:
noun: a four-sided figure.
adjective: having four straight sides.
So no, this is not a square. Just remember all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares.
Gothic Quarter, Barcelona (short vid in comments) 1 comments
lucky11
· 8 weeks ago
Hmm... no vid. Must be a bot repost. Here ya go instead.
https://theuselessweb.com/
·
Edited 8 weeks ago
https://theuselessweb.com/
Journalism keyboard 3 comments
Now you mention it… 7 comments
lucky11
· 9 weeks ago
Nope. We don't really tolerate anymore than previous generations. We're just more altruistic about it. We hope that by informing the idiots they won't be idiots. That doesn't make us more tolerant.
Several times a year 1 comments
lucky11
· 9 weeks ago
More than you'd expect and a whole lot more than I think i actually think about it.
Now you mention it… 7 comments
lucky11
· 9 weeks ago
Yes, but also no. Stupid is stupid, there's no denying that. As far as owners manuals though? The sheer amount of computerization and special equipment needed to make adjustments on many cars prohibits the average consumer from doing many things. That doesn't make the current generation stupid just a generation more willing to look out for the idiots, on paper at least, than previous ones.
1
A picture of Jesus making out with Judas from a 14th century illuminated manuscript 1 comments
lucky11
· 9 weeks ago
So the best part of this isn't the completely wrong take on a cultural act. Instead it's the accidental highlight to something not even in the picture. For a very long time religious books were hand written (no duh). What most don't realize is that many were written in monasteries because monks made good scribes, what with them being generally literate and with more time on their hands. Now, just because a bunch of guys swore off the sex didn't mean it wasn't always on their minds. Many manuscripts, have interesting pictures drawn in them that are of the hiding in plain sight variety.
More Reliable than iPhones 2 comments
lucky11
· 9 weeks ago
Well, any phone where you can remove the battery can't be tracked as long as the power source is not connected. Of course we can't track bricks either, but a brick isn't very useful if I need to make a call.
Paradox resolved. 1 comments
lucky11
· 9 weeks ago
Of course a contract has to be accepted by both parties or there isn't a contract merely a one sided expectation. To then use that one sided expectation as an excuse to vilify or demean the other party completely defeats the purpose of any Tolerance. This is why it's not a social contract but instead a moral standard. A moral standard doesn't need everyone to accept it. Those that do, fall under that social construct we call a culture. Different cultures have different moral standards and while some standards seem to be cross cultural, nuances will always exist. The argument presented is fundamentally flawed and completely ignores individuality and diversity of thought. It was a good try though.
1
·
Edited 9 weeks ago