So your suggestion is instead of any attempt at regulation people should just boycott a company years after they’ve already given that company their money, despite the fact that you admit n even more ideal circumstances boycotts still do not work?
That sounds like superheated water to me. When you heat water in a microwave it can reach temperatures above 100C without boiling, if you disturb the water in that state it boils instantly and explodes.
The entire premise of your comment is absurd, but let’s assume for a moment we really do live in a world where a legal process can’t be used unless it’s successfully been used for widespread change before; what other action do you suggest people should take?
Imagine superman barging into your home with two rich kids just to say “look at this shithole, can you believe people actually live like this?” He excludes the kid he wants the others to include, too.
Plenty of words mean the opposite of themselves, so much so that there’s multiple words for it; autoantonym, contranym, or Janus words.
This morning my alarm went off so I turned it off.
I wanted to buy a new console as soon as it was out but they were all out.
Two people were left so I left.
I fought with Bob over chores, but I fought with Bob in the war.
Partly right, but they don’t decide if a word is “official” (whatever that’s supposed to mean). For a word to be a so-called “real” word it only has to be in common use among some group, dictionaries simply document words that have been in common use. Merriam-Webster is an authoritative record of words in use specifically in US English (with some records for other English variants and dialects, I think? ) but they are not a prescriptivist organisation. A word which appears in their dictionary is almost certainly a word that is or was in use in US English but a word that doesn’t appear might also be a real word, particularly if it’s a relatively new word or meaning.
So with that in mind, arguing that a word is real when it doesn’t appear in the dictionary can be valid in some cases, but arguing that a word isn’t real when it does appear in a dictionary (like Brian did) is generally not smart.
tl;dr, a dictionary, not the dictionary; not all English; “official” doesn’t make sense here; in some (but not this) cases disagreeing is valid.
My work offered a compressed work week for a few years where employees could work the same number of hours over 9 days every fortnight, meaning they could take every second Friday off still working the same number of hours. Employees based in NA didn’t get that benefit, instead of trying to get that implemented over there NA employees were practically celebrating when the company recently scrapped it everywhere else instead.
My experience of American work culture is very much toxic crab-in-a-bucket mentality, pull everyone else down instead of trying to make work life the littlest bit more bearable, ironically directly contradicting the company’s slogan. The amount of brown-nosing sycophants on all-teams calls is pretty insane too.
So yes, I very much believe this is something American media would say.
Sort of, but but really. You’re right that historically the daylight hours set an upper limit on the amount of work that can be done per week for most types of work, but that limit is far higher than 8 hours per day over 5 days. The 40 hour work week is based on unions fighting for a 40 hour work week. If it wasn’t for the unions you’d be working all day every day except Sunday, for religious reasons.
That might change over the next few decades too, the current fight is for a 4 day work week and studies are showing promising results there.
Aphantasia is a spectrum, but even when you can visualise a full realistic scene it should be easy for most people to tell the difference between that and seeing something physically. When you can’t tell the difference that’s a hallucination.
It’s only total aphantasia if you can’t visualise an image in your mind at all. I believe then you’d get more a concept of an apple than an image or other depiction of an apple but that’s only my understanding from hearing other people talking about it.
This specific case isn’t really to do with the evolution of language, more just ineffective linguistic prescriptivism. Some guy 200 years ago decided they didn’t like how “less” had been used for the past millennium so they made up a guideline for what the preferred (like what you just said) then people decided to treat that as an actual rule. Obviously it’s still common to use “less” that way even after a couple of centuries of people trying to enforce that rule, it’s a good demonstration of how prescriptivism is a waste of time.
Strangely enough, in my experience many prescriptivists who rely on etymological arguments are fine with language changing for this one rule. Makes me think they never really did care about historic usage of a word.
First paragraph of the article:
Earlier this month, the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement added Microsoft to its list of priority targets due to the company’s intense entanglement with the Israeli military via Azure cloud and AI services. Specifically, BDS called for supporters to boycott Xbox, including Game Pass, individual games, and future purchases of consoles and peripherals. Now, in a show of solidarity, indie label Ice Water Games has removed one of its projects, open-world tactics RPG Tenderfoot Tactics, from the Xbox store.
Absolutely, I just meant to point out that there’s far more blatant examples so no need to couch your language in phrases like “some have said”. Goblins have been antisemitic caricatures in fantasy for a long time so it’s easy for a bad writer to just regurgitate existing tropes, meaning a racist writer can use that as a shield, but it’s much harder to justify naming your black character after slave imagery.
The globins follow a lot of harmful Jewish stereotypes but I’m not sure it’s obvious whether they’re intended as racist caricatures or if it’s just bad writing. It’s not unreasonable to assume that though when you put it beside much more blatant examples, such as calling the black guy “Shacklebolt” and the Asian girl “Cho Chang”.
Wow, what the fuck. I have honestly no idea what about my username or post history could have made you so hostile. The last sentence you’re complaining about is literally a tldr of the rest of the comment; everyone’s talking trends between generations and you’re dismissing that (and complaining about entire subsequent generations) based entirely on one person’s individual experience.
Nobody has ever claimed that every gen x owned a home. There have always been people who can and people who cannot afford a home, but each generation has more people in the can’t-afford group than the previous. At 30, more genx owned a home than millennials, and more millennials than genz.
The problem you’re having is that everyone else is talking trends and you’re talking personal annecdote.
In that case it’s the app handling code blocks poorly, you’re complaining to the wrong person.
⢰⣦⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣼
⠀⢿⣷⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⣤⠴⠶⠖⠒⠛⣿⣽⡟⠛⠓⠒⠶⠶⢤⣀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⠴⣯⠏
⠀⠀⢿⣯⣿⠷⣶⣤⡴⣶⣶⣤⠤⠤⣤⣄⡀⠀⣀⡤⠶⠛⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠴⠿⣼⠿⠦⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠛⠲⢦⣄⣀⣤⣴⠒⣻⣿⣿⢻⣿⣿⣿⠋⣩⣴⠋⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠙⠿⣦⣼⣟⢷⣷⢹⣿⣌⣿⡟⢺⣿⠛⠻⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⣤⠤⠖⠒⠒⠛⠒⠒⠒⠦⠤⣤⣀⠀⠀⢀⣤⠖⠛⢿⣇⠐⡾⣷⣿⡟⢚⣿⣷⣿⠶⠋⠁⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠙⠛⠛⠻⠾⢿⣾⣮⣗⣸⣿⣆⠄⠀⠙⣦⡖⠛⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⢉⣷⡟⠀⡀⢨⣽⣿⣽⣶⢿⡿⠛⠛⠉⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣴⠛⠉⠙⠻⢿⣷⣶⡂⣸⡟⠓⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⠞⠛⣧⣄⣿⣾⣿⡋⠉⠀⠀⠙⢦⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⠟⠁⠀⠀⠀⣠⠾⣿⣿⣿⣿⡁⠀⠈⢳⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣴⠋⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿⣫⣶⠟⢦⡀⠀⠀⣀⠹⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡼⢿⡷⣾⠀⢀⡞⠁⠀⠹⡄⢻⣿⣿⡆⠀⠘⣿⣦⣤⣀⣀⠀⠀⣀⣀⣤⣶⣿⡯⠀⢀⣾⣿⡿⠋⢀⡞⠀⠀⠙⢆⣀⣿⣻⣯⣷⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡾⠷⠛⢳⡞⣻⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⢳⡀⢻⣿⣿⣦⣠⣿⡯⣷⡉⣽⠿⠿⠟⠉⣹⡯⣿⣷⣤⣾⣿⣿⠁⠀⣼⠃⠀⠀⠀⠈⠻⡍⠏⠁⠉⢷⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡾⠁⠀⠀⠈⡱⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⢷⠈⣿⣿⣿⠟⣿⣇⡝⣮⡈⠀⠀⠀⣴⡟⠀⢿⡟⢿⣻⣿⣇⠀⣰⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⡄⠀⠀⠀⢿⡀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣼⠇⠀⠀⠀⡼⠃⠀⠀⠀⣀⣀⣠⣤⣼⠿⣿⢿⠃⣰⠋⠈⠁⢻⡙⢶⣴⠟⣹⠃⠀⠀⠱⡄⢹⣿⣟⠲⢿⠤⠤⣤⣤⣀⡀⠀⠀⠸⡆⠀⠀⠈⣧⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⡏⠀⠀⠀⣰⣃⣤⠖⠋⣉⡡⢆⣠⠟⠁⣼⣿⡿⢸⣇⠶⠊⠀⢸⣷⠛⠉⢳⣿⠀⠀⠐⢶⠹⡌⣿⡿⣆⠈⠱⢦⡐⠦⣄⣉⣙⣶⣄⣹⡀⠀⠀⢸⡇⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⣾⠀⠀⢰⣶⣿⣿⣿⡿⢿⣥⣶⣟⣁⣠⣞⣽⠟⡇⢸⣿⡀⣀⡴⠋⢹⡄⠀⣸⣉⣻⣦⣄⣸⣰⡇⣿⢹⣮⣷⣤⣤⣿⠿⠞⣛⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠂⠀⠀⢿⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⡟⠀⠀⠀⢹⠋⠳⢿⣿⣷⡶⠦⢭⣽⣾⣿⡟⠰⢷⣘⣿⠁⠿⠋⠉⠙⣿⠉⡿⠉⠉⠉⠏⢩⣿⢠⣟⣐⣿⣿⢷⣾⣷⣒⣩⣿⠿⠟⠉⠀⢱⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⢠⡇⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠈⠙⠻⠿⢿⣿⣿⣿⡟⣠⣾⣳⣽⣷⣦⢠⠄⣖⢹⣿⠃⠃⠠⠂⣰⣿⣿⢿⣧⣄⣻⣿⣿⣛⠟⠛⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⡄⠀⠀⢸⡇⠀
⠀⠀⠀⢸⡇⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣸⠿⠋⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⡽⣽⣾⣿⣦⣬⠞⠏⠀⢤⣼⣿⣿⣿⢱⣿⣿⣿⣿⡆⠈⠙⠲⣤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⡇⠀⠀⢸⡇⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⡇⢰⣄⣤⣾⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⠶⠋⠁⠀⢀⣾⣿⢿⣿⣾⣇⢹⡏⣻⣿⠞⠀⠀⠀⠰⣿⣏⣸⡇⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠳⢦⣀⠀⠀⢸⢳⣦⡞⢸⡇⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⣷⡼⣯⡽⢿⣆⣤⣞⣋⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣸⣿⣿⣧⠬⠹⣯⣬⣿⠉⠹⣄⠀⠀⠀⣰⠏⠉⣿⢤⣿⠟⠲⣾⣿⣻⣧⣤⣤⣤⡤⠤⠤⠽⠿⢦⡼⠛⣷⠛⢿⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⢻⡄⠘⠃⠀⢿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⢿⣿⣷⣄⠀⢻⣿⠏⢦⠀⠈⠐⠀⠸⡁⠀⡟⠙⣿⠟⠀⣠⣾⣿⣾⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⡇⠀⠙⢀⡿⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⣇⠀⠀⠀⠈⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⢿⣿⣿⣷⣄⠿⣄⠈⢿⡆⠀⠀⠀⢴⡿⠀⣠⠟⣠⣾⣿⢿⡽⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡞⠀⠀⠀⣸⠇⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢹⡆⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⢿⣿⣿⢿⣶⡈⢦⢸⡇⠀⢠⠀⢸⡇⠐⢁⣼⣿⢿⣯⡟⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡼⠁⠀⠀⢠⡏⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢻⡄⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⢶⣿⣿⣳⠀⠀⡇⠀⣼⠀⢸⡇⠀⣜⣿⣹⠶⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡼⠁⠀⠀⢀⡿⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢻⡄⠀⠀⠀⠈⢣⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠙⣯⡃⢸⡇⠀⢹⠂⠈⡇⠀⣿⠋⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⠞⠀⠀⠀⢠⡞⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠹⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⢦⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣽⠷⣼⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⢷⡰⢹⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⠔⠁⠀⠀⠀⣠⠟⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⢷⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⢦⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢿⣴⣿⣦⣀⣠⣀⣤⣿⣧⢾⠆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⠶⠃⠀⠀⠀⢀⡼⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⢦⡀⠀⠀⠀⣆⣉⣷⢦⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⡜⠿⣷⣿⣿⠿⣽⡿⠛⡞⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⣴⢊⣁⠀⠀⠀⢀⣴⠟⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠦⣄⣠⢿⣩⡷⡄⠈⠙⠓⠤⢤⣀⣙⣦⣈⣻⣦⣾⣁⣠⣞⣁⣀⠤⠴⠚⠋⣀⣿⣻⣧⡀⣀⡴⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠑⠦⣟⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠉⢿⡿⠷⣿⢿⡯⠉⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠉⣿⡾⠛⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠓⠶⣄⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⣶⡿⢸⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣠⠴⠞⠋⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
Is this better?
It’s alternative medicine (ie not medicine) and pseudoscience (ie not science). Chiropractic injury rate may seem lower in some cases for two reasons: significantly more people without injuries visit chiropractors and some forms of real medicine do carry real risks, eg real surgery carries obvious risks.
Your primary argument for chiropractors is that some real therapists use some of the same techniques, so why not go for real medicine instead?
I’m a short man (5’6")
Worldwide average height for men is around 5’7", you’re average. I’m guessing you just live in a region that skews taller.
You mean like all the things in the link OP posted which you scrolled past just to be an ass in the comments?