deleted by creator

Try to look at it from the perspective of the person you’re talking to. Nobody wants to make a fool of themselves, and assuming someone is interested (without evidence) is a great way for someone to become very embarrassed. Flirting is how you subtly let a person know it’s safe to suppose you might be into them and proceed accordingly. Conversations and invitations that are completely devoid of flirtation will instead tell them that you’re just being polite or friendly.

So it’s important!

It’s true that some Americans don’t have Social Security numbers, but those Americans can’t collect Social Security benefits unless/until they get one.

Yikes, which one?

You must not have the soft close feature. I hate standing around for 20 seconds waiting for the soft close seat to drop so I can pee (learned the hard way that if you force it, it wears out in a couple years). So that would probably have killed this little ritual as soon as she had to go twice before you came along to put the seat down for her. It would annoy you sometimes too I bet, unless you stand up to shit.

Still, even though you don’t want to spoil the magic, maybe there are other ways to show affection, because (in order of importance):

1. Farticles on every surface ew?
2. It’s ugly to see straight into a toilet bowl when the bathroom is in view (and also very bad Feng Shui)
3. Habit/muscle memory will likely lead her to leave toilet seats up when she is a guest elsewhere, which is kind of hilarious actually, but could be hilarious at her expense

Admittedly, none of this is what you asked. But it’s weird how many people try to make toilet seats a fairness thing. If the lid is kept down, everyone has to take it from closed to open and back to closed again. Isn’t that fair?

Both can be bad, right?

If you’re talking about your computer and you have access to its keyboard, you can’t beat screenshot keyboard shortcuts!

But if you’re talking about your TV or some screen you’re not in control of, fair enough. For anyone wondering, the reason this is tough to correct with an app is because your little bitty lens is trying to capture a grid of millions of LEDs to your itty bitty camera’s sensor, which has its own pixel grid that almost certainly doesn’t match up with the grid you’re photographing. Also, photographing a colored light source makes white balance tricky for any camera, and this is a bunch of light sources that are kind of in motion, because LEDs give off rapid pulses of light, not a steady light. Modern camera apps are getting better at antialiasing to smooth it all out and using AI models to try to guess what the image was supposed to look like, but you’ll usually still see some Moire effect from those mismatched grids. I wonder if we’ll ever see a solution to this while LED screens continue to exist in their current form.

We’re pretty lucky we can capture a shitty image of what’s onscreen, though. Just ask anybody who’s tried to photograph a CRT.

I don’t doubt that there are lessons to learn from the SPE, but it’s also worth noting that it’s been widely criticized for various biases and influences and lack of controls, and that no other researchers have ever been able to replicate its findings. Some might call it debunked, others perhaps not, but I think it’s fair to say it isn’t generally accepted as gospel.

This story is inspiring. I feel like there are a lot of people who wouldn’t feel like it’s within reach (no building/renovating skills or experience, or certain neighborhoods that maybe don’t feel safe to a single woman for instance, and yeah schools as you mentioned if you’re a parent or planning to be)—but for the people who can do that, it sounds like an absolutely phenomenal route to take.

I was struggling to find the right way to phrase the question, and I failed. I guess what I really wanted to know was: for a typical working class person, is a house at that price within reach? Or if you move there for the cheap houses and get a job, do you end up still barely able to afford the payments?

Leaders will. The poor ignorant voters who thought they were promised positive change will be totally boned.

How’s the job market?

It’s a fine thing to do if you’re trying to show someone your data without inviting them to change it, intentionally or otherwise.

The phrase came originally from Wayne’s World, which was first an SNL sketch, yeah. Bill & Ted aren’t from SNL, though, and predate Wayne and Garth by a good bit. Bill & Ted said “party on,” among other things, but not “party time, excellent.” That’s specifically the Wayne’s World theme song iirc.

(as a millennial, I avoid self checkout because massive corporations are eliminating jobs without reducing prices and I think that’s bullshit)

Like where? I’m curious to look at the style guides from there.

Fwiw, apps like Boost don’t even show avatars (unless you tap through to the profile)

It’s a stretch to assume they’ve thought it through to this degree.

The things you’re saying aren’t necessarily untrue, but through a lot of the 20th century, immigrants and their children accounted for more than half of America’s population growth. A lot of us aren’t descended from the batshit OGs but from people who made perilous journeys in search of a better life, so goes the lore (and of course the people who were kidnapped and brought here in bondage). Your point stands, but there’s a whole lot of different crazy here besides just settler crazy.

Backtracking five years later isn’t strictly the same thing as lying. Five years is enough time to learn new information, and she’s being upfront about the change. I’d be more concerned if she were saying right up until the election that she’s going to ban fracking, then suddenly refused to do so as president.