Hopefully in a year or two they'll eventually just call it Twitter or maybe if we're lucky it will go out of business and then they'll probably still just call it Twitter because the X thing would then have just been a short lived portion of its overall lifespan.

You have my vote for your interpretation, that had always been my understanding too.

Knowing my memory I'd forget it all very soon after it happened and need a history book to help me recall any of it and the stuff left out or distorted would end up warping that recollection enough that it'd be so unreliable I may as well believe the historians. I can scarcely remember the previous day as it is.

There's windows only laptops?

It's a nice picture and all but I definitely upvoted for the sentence "congratulations to ClopClopMcFuckwad for their pic of the week".

Yes, I accept that that is a URL.

So abortions bad, but killing babies good?

It's not reviewed and may have harmful content, so please read the harmful content on an app instead?

Title seems dumb in context but the post itself is top notch.

Charlie Chaplin does Dallas

This is probably a slightly misguided idea to go after them as bad people because as soon as they do do something "good" you leave the door open for people to think that perhaps on balance they're not so bad after all.

The problem of billionaires being billionaires is itself the chief complaint people should have. It doesn't matter if they're Mr Rogers and Santa Claus combined, because they can choose to be so entirely at will and can be selfish assholes too entirely at will. They can also be other things entirely, given they are actually human beings after all they can try to act on best intentions, but like all humans, with great ignorance or with flawed thinking. When you or I do that the consequences can be terrible, but mostly, we'd be unable to come close to the scale of impact these demi gods can leave in their wake, not to mention the "original sins" that allowed them to become billionaires in the first place leaving a legacy of nasty indirect consequences for society at large.

There's actually a lot of examples of billionaires philanthropy and as you likely expected to point out when people mentioned that, some of those acts hide less pure intention, but undoubtedly they probably really did do some good and that itself is enough to completely undermine your whole point that they never do anything good. The issue is that, with the sheer vast quantity of concentrated wealth and power they can wield, the society that supports them is bereft of a real voice in how it's resources are used. So much of the fruits of our labour end up closed off in private coffers and it undermines public institutions like democratic governments because while we may theoretically have a say in what they do, we legally have no say at all in how a billionaire spends his bucks (and I say his intentionally). They might say we oughtn't since it's their money and no one typically has a say in what the rest of us do with our money but as with most things, there's a point of extreme where this logic becomes perverse.

The guy clearly isn't familiar with a lot of image formats and is trying to find out about them by asking, a perfectly reasonable thing to do, and in a special community called no stupid questions, no less.

You don't need to call anyone a gullible fool and furthermore you've not actually helped to answer the question "what is webp", at all. What are you trying to achieve with this pointless aggression? If you wanted one less "gullible fool" you'd have to answer the question and educate, at best you've sown confusion.

Well I mean what did you just read? He already said those are the facts bro.

This is the most made up sounding story I've allowed myself to be clickbaited into for a while.

The fun thing about October is that whenever the date is written for the first 10 days it looks like a score.

You write well dude, I feel like I was right there for all three of these.

It's amazing how effectively just hearing this from someone who has firsthand insight can put it in perspective.

Quack

I'm really liking the posts along these lines because there's so much associated with ADHD that I haven't been aware was part of it and it's so accuratly described here. There's kind of this sense of living like a double agent or something, except in that scenario the person knows what it is they're hiding. I've gone through life having unconsciously learned that the actual reasons I do things aren't acceptable or at least not explainable so I'm always having to improvise something more plausible or different. It's sorta like lying, but not exactly, but there's the ever present fear that I'll be exposed for... something.

I almost feel like this life time of training would actually have helped me really be a secret agent if only all the other symptoms of ADHD weren't completely debilitating and would sabotage such work terribly.

It's gratifying seeing this because usually when I see these kinds of worrying data permissions it's because a service I really want or need is being held hostage until I agree to this false choice and I have to start figuring out whether there's some way around this or if I'm going to have to embarrassingly explain to someone why I can't use this service they expected me to sign up to.

But then I see this and it's for something I'd never want to sign up to anyway and it's just like a list of dodged bullets. 😎 So nice to just laugh at their bullshit.

One of the devilish features of the enjoyment of alcohol is that it likens itself to excess. You tend to drink it in a social setting and that setting makes it more fun to drink and then the drinking makes the actual social occasion more fun in turn. It also, obviously, feels good while you're drinking it and getting drunk, which tends to make you want to drink even more of it because you're enjoying the experience so much. On top of that, obviously, it makes you drunk, and as you probably know, being drunk doesn't tend to make for very good decision making so thoughts like "you might be enjoying this a lot, but you should stop now, then you won't be sick tomorrow" tend to give way to "nah I feel fine right now, so it'll definitely be a good idea to have another and definitely won't be a terrible idea come tomorrow. Also, that's tomorrow's problem anyway".

Have a hangover enough times in your life and this dynamic happens less often since even the drunk happy version of me remembers somehow the deeply unpleasant experience of a hangover from last time and stops before it's too late but unfortunately, every now and then the lesson has to be re-learned.

If the simulation is actually perfect, then it isn't a simulation anymore and whatever would have been unethical in a non-simulated context would still be unethical.

At this point I'm wondering if any one has ever actually played this game or if it even really exists. Everyone hates that shit and it's so over the top. They don't let the people they sponsor put any kind of a spin on it either it's just this completely alien and obnoxiously long diatribe where you can just about see the creator blinking in Morse code.

It'd be cruel to the people around me, but I do rather like the idea of starting over every 30 years or so, your could try out so many different paths.

People are posting a lot of maybe more rational reasons, but I think there's another answer that's more in line with just being a human. Airports suck, air travel, generally, sucks and the whole process is riddle with both intentional and also just unavoidable misery. Every time a new step in the sequence of unpleasant and boring steps that is air travel nears, we start to anticipate it and get anxious to move on to that next step in the process. It doesn't make it faster, it likely only makes the misery arguably worse, but some times people just can't help trying to mentally hasten things even if in reality nothing is hastened at all.

Laser tag. Shit's great, the shine does get taken off somewhat when I do really well and rank top but all my opponents are small children and their parents look vaguely annoyed.

Awesome really hope this spreads to other regions.

Oh my god this perfectly describes it. It's like the main reason I read so slowly because I don't realise I'm doing that other weird kind of reading where you process and register the word but no the group of words arranged in to meaning. Suddenly I realise that started happening several pages ago and have to go back and start over.

Wow I was going to comment on how their legs look they have boners but uh... never mind I guess.

OK so it's a law banning semi automatic weapons, and also a ban on the censorship of books (more or less), NOT a law banning semi automatic weapons and a law censoring books in libraries. That was a rollercoaster from reading the unfortunate title and then the article clarifying.

I think what's really coming through in recent times aided well by Musk, is how profoundly average these billionaire geniuses really are, despite their extraordinary lives.

This wouldn't be such a bad thing, after all, you or I aren't typically judged in the same way for being just ordinary and it might even be comforting that they're just people after all, but the problem is that we've geared up society in such a way where they're basically king's (and I choose Kings, not Queens deliberately).

The positions they hold demand great people, even a good person will not suffice. If we're to have these demi-gods profoundly influencing society they'd better be something special. In the past, there was an idea cultivated that royalty were divine representatives, in the modern context they create a similar myth of genius expertise that is manifest and evident because of their wealth, but sadly the reality appears to be that they're special for being wealthy, not wealthy because they're special.

This doesn't bode well in a society that allows billionaires to exist.

When I have a BBQ, even where all the guests are meat eaters, I still like to have a potato salad and vegetable skewers and bread and sometimes a regular salad and roasted corn and sometimes roasted eggplant. I like to think if there was a vegetarian there, they'd be well catered for by default without me having to really do anything different. I love meat, and for a BBQ it's typically the star of the show, but you're going to want a supporting cast.

Was it meant to make money? I mean, I think it's just basically like old fashioned campaigning materials and propaganda, it's just taking on the new interactive dimensions of social media and the perpetual campaigning of modern politics that Trump particularly is known for. Really it's "profit" would be measured in outcomes rather than dollars, just as ad campaigns track numbers.

This honestly looks fine. (Assuming this is before the dishwasher has run). There's not like solid chunks of food or anything just the actual stuff that you own a dishwasher to wash off for you so you don't have to. The configuration of the dishes is haphazard and chaotic but if you want to fit a lot of dishes it usually ends up that way. The cup and cup like vessels not being upside down is a problem but for the most part things are upside down or on their side as they should be. I want the dishwasher to wash dishes for me not the other way around. If you get the occasional dish after a cycle that hasn't completely cleaned you have to wash it yourself, which sucks, but that doesn't always happen so there's a reasonable chance you won't have to, and when it does happen, it's still way cleaner than it was so you're talking a cursory fix up of very few dishes. I'd take that over rinsing each and every one every time or having to hand wash half the load when there's a lot of dishes in service of a neater stacking configuration that's optimal but less space efficient.

What is more mildly infuriating than reading a post complaining about someone else complaining? Adding another level!

I don't know, maybe a post complaining about people complaining about people complaining? Seriously though I didn't notice such posts. I've only seen level 1 of this rabbit hole so far with people complaining about Reddit users ruining their little club and that seemed to peter out mostly over the past 2 weeks.

This is exactly the type of thing I imagine my fellow Lemmings asking as a serious question.

I got 7 and even then that's only because half way through I began to notice a theme on the really obscure ones with long names.

These are ridiculous, they often bear no resemblance at all to their supposed meaning wtf? Slanted closed eyes with steam coming out the nostrils isn't anger it's.... "Triumph"!?

At the risk of sounding like exactly what you decry, I'm going to pick on your choice of language, hopefully it will seem like it's for good enough reason. I largely sense a similar, regretful shift in the way the internet is experienced and have some mixed feelings about it, but I would be very cautious in using a term like 'enslaved'. When you choose to fire up your own high-tech information device to access the publicly available internet and you don't find the experience exhilarating or thrilling, or fulfilling, in comparison to some relatively rose-tinted view of the same experience had during your childhood can you honestly say that that is similar to enslavement?

However, semantics aside, yeh it's kind of a shame some of the quirky rough around the edges character of the internet has changed a bit since it became more mainstream and since corporate participation has refined and figured out how to extract much more efficiently from it. That said, as is often said when this sentiment is expressed, the old style of web is still there, you just don't see it. Nothing stops people from hand coding a website if they want to, but it's unlikely to be the top of any given search result from Google, and we all use Google. Similarly, unlike decades past, there is just so much stuff on the web that these types of things will likely not be noticed. There's kind of a paradoxical relationship with how much more in general is available online with how much less varied our consumption of it is. Pretty much every web experience through a browser is going to start with www.google.com, either through the page itself or a default search bar and after that for many it's going to be facebook, or reddit or amazon. Out of billions of pages, it tends to come down to about 4 for most and then a smattering of other larger media presences accessed via the portal of one of those 4. It can seem like there's nothing else there in such a case and though not really true, it kind of in practice is true because you'll much less likely find someone's home made hobbyist website through major portals than you might have when by virtue of little else being available, that's what a search engine returned or word-of-mouth recommended.

How bad a thing this is, is nuanced. The web is vastly more useful than it ever was, although the forces at work that made it so seem to be engaging in cannabilising themselves and one another and crippling their own utility in the never ending quest for more profit. I miss some of the feel of the earlier web, although when I was coming of age and using it heavily in the early 2000s, it was very well established already so I don't have quite the same basis of comparison as someone who might have used it throughout the 80s or 90s. I think I have detected something of a shift away from the 'edgy' persona adopted by most on forums, but then it's hard to separate my usage and interests at the time from the general web itself. I think, for one thing, there still remained even in the early 2000s, a nicheness and 'geek' culture to those who spent time on forums that tended to skew the demographic towards teenage boys although I have no evidence for this, this has gone unless you seek it out. I personally haven't really had too much of a problem with shunning and banning, in fact that type of thing tended to happen more in my earliest web experiences where there seemed to be more places that had issues with swearing, however I have seen a similar puritanical streak that results in this. However I've only really perceived that on major platforms as they've reached their stage of the life cycle where they can cash-in and must become investor and advertiser friendly. That arc, a more recent arc in my opinion does match what you're saying but I view that more of a change in how those specific platforms rather than the web itself operate. So it's harder now than maybe 5-10 years ago to speak your mind with little to no consequence or backlash on a major platform whose reach and influence amplifies that opinion to millions and millions of people. I think you have about the same capacity to speak your mind now as you ever did on the web, but lost the ability to use corporate machinery to do it and not also expect human beings to react to it and to even be silenced when doing so flies against the interests of the owners of the corporate machinery.

I hadn't heard of that idea as yet. He's not generally well liked, given his position and personal role and the enshittification process of Reddit and generally entitled attitude possessed of many similarly wealthy people. I mean put more simply he certainly seems to be a dick, but I hadn't heard he was in some way associated with Nazism. What did he do?

This is disturbing. I wanted to know more so I googled it but I found nothing. Where did you hear this?