|
dokmo posted:British English is I believe largely non-rhotic, which means they don't pronounce the "r" sound the way americans do in a lot of places, in particular at the end of words. I think a Brit would pronounce "marm" like an american would say "maam". Is this correct? I don't know how an American would say "maam", but I think you're on to something. I think the intent was to rhyme with "farm" or "harm" but, as you say, non-rhotically. That's certainly how it read to my (Australian, also non-rhotic) ear as a kid. In any case, wiktionary has the UK pronunciation as /mɑːm/ or /mæm/, and only the second one for the USA. For reference, "mum" is /mam/ ... which that IPA reader seems to say as either pronunciation of "ma'am", which isn't right at all!... ...ah, here we go! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPA_vowel_chart_with_audio Hyperlynx fucked around with this message at 23:13 on Nov 4, 2022 |
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 22:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 23:37 |
|
|
looking for a simple image favoriting Chrome extension. I mouse over an image, click the heart. it saves the image url and webpage, downloads a copy to my favorites folder associated with the extension on a server or their server or google drive or something, and saves to an associated folder on my pc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 01:53
|
|
|
anyone remember that terrifying story about the person who was going around some town in the middle of the night wearing a clown costume? trying to find it. thougth it was madison but guess not. maybe five years ago?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 02:27
|
|
|
ulmont posted:In western tradition it’s just one variation on religious hermits, which date back to approximately the 4th century. Cool. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 02:29
|
|
|
actionjackson posted:anyone remember that terrifying story about the person who was going around some town in the middle of the night wearing a clown costume? trying to find it. thougth it was madison but guess not. maybe five years ago? That was a whole wave of "incidents" over the course of a few months. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_clown_sightings
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 02:49
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:Was Michael Jackson bigger than the Beatles? Follow up question, have the Beatles surpassed Jesus?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 05:04
|
|
|
Leal posted:Follow up question, have the Beatles surpassed Jesus? none of them have come back from the dead yet, so not at this time
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 05:53
|
|
|
Goon Boots posted:none of them have come back from the dead yet, so not at this time D-drat 
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 07:16
|
|
|
Ringo is immortal, way more powerful than Jesus
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 10:41
|
|
|
greazeball posted:Ringo is immortal, way more powerful than Jesus He's also a top 4 Beatles drummer
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 13:06
|
|
|
Powered Descent posted:Perhaps it's a reference to the 1999 cinematic masterpiece starring Brendan Fraser and Rachel Weisz I read this and literally went "The Constant Gardner?" Man, I'm dumb.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 13:19
|
|
|
What does a "blue check" on Twitter do? Mechanically, it just indicates you've taken a picture of you holding your ID or whatever, right? But what does it actually do? What is its social function? I've heard so much frustration and agony and satire about the "blue check" but not a single thing that actually addresses its mechanical purpose and why losing it or having to pay for it would be good or bad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 13:28
|
|
|
It has two purposes. It allows users to trust that this person/company actually is who they said they are. And probably more importantly for Twitter, it shields them from liability from consequences of impersonation. The whole system was created because of a baseball coach being (clearly satirically) impersonated, but going on to sue Twitter over it. Having to pay for it is annoying, and classic VC, but doesn't break the system. No longer needing to actually verify identity to get it would be extremely dumb and defeats both of its original purposes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 13:39
|
|
|
credburn posted:What does a "blue check" on Twitter do? For me, I follow a bunch of journalists, who now usually break news stories on twitter, and you can instantly tell the credibility of the breaking news story if the blue check is in place.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 13:41
|
|
man
|
Xenoborg posted:Having to pay for it is annoying, and classic VC, but doesn't break the system. No longer needing to actually verify identity to get it would be extremely dumb and defeats both of its original purposes. Oh boy do I have hilarious news for you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 14:19
|
|
|
Yup. The new bluecheck system has zero ID requirements. As of Monday, twitter is useless as a source of information unless you can independently verify authenticity. There will be a bluecheck @RealDonaIdTrump, @ReaIDonaldTrump, and @ReaIDonaIdTrump. Each will be hawking a crypto scam.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 15:00
|
|
|
credburn posted:What does a "blue check" on Twitter do? VC guys and their associates reply guys have invented a headcanon where having the check is some kind of social cachet for the holder, but it’s actually just something that makes twitter easier to use for everyone else
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 15:43
|
|
|
Musk thinks bots won’t pay $8/mo so bluecheck twitter will be “real person” twitter while nocheck means you’re a spambot.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 15:50
|
|
|
There is a blue checkmark that means your identity has been verified, to prevent impersonation. Now there will be an identical checkmark that means you paid :8bux: to join the cool kids club. Both checkmarks will exist simultaneously for a while, and then they will take them away from verified users. Because obviously they are now retroactively bots for not joining the club. This is what's happening?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 16:17
|
|
|
On the plus side it'll probably destroy brand Twitter, once anyone with 8 bucks can make a "verified" Wendy's account to spew racist nonsense no sensible company is going to want a presence there.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 18:26
|
|
|
Trapick posted:On the plus side it'll probably destroy brand Twitter, once anyone with 8 bucks can make a "verified" Wendy's account to spew racist nonsense no sensible company is going to want a presence there. the situation has real potential for hilarity 
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 18:48
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:Yup. The new bluecheck system has zero ID requirements. As of Monday, twitter is useless as a source of information unless you can independently verify authenticity. What’s the difference between each of those handles?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 19:37
|
|
|
dokmo posted:the situation has real potential for hilarity The fact that blue-checks can change their display name without re-verifying has always been a huge bug in the system. And now it's going to get orders of magnitude worse. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 19:41
|
|
|
tuyop posted:What’s the difference between each of those handles? code:
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 19:51
|
|
|
I have pretty spotty wifi in some places in my house, like my bedroom and bathroom (especially when I'm lying in the bath and using my phone) and I get that that's because of the signals being hindered by distance, walls and water and all that. I'll get some amplifiers or whatever pretty soon, but just now I just realised something that made me wonder about how it works. You see, in my living room I have no wifi issues because I'm close to the source and there's no obstacles, but then I go to bed and it goes spotty. Streaming will start buffering and poo poo, but then I just reconnect to the same wifi and everything seems to be fine, or at least better. Still not as good as it was without the obstacles and distance compared to living room, but definitely better than before I made new connection. What's happening there? Is there like an algorithm or whatever that decides 'oh this bandwith seems to be less hindered by the walls and poo poo so even though it's slower it's more stable and I'll use that now'? Like I said, I'll probably have an engineer from the ISP come by because my house is big and old and complicated (due to the work I do) and I want to provide good wifi for both myself and my clients, but I'm still curious.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2022 23:56
|
|
|
This guy on twitter is eating a whole rotisserie chicken every day. He's up to 39 days and showing no signs of stopping. I'm curious about this because it honestly doesn't seem like that much food - when I was bodybuilding, I would have loved to do that for at least a few weeks. But I wonder how long you could keep that up, would your body start rejecting it after a period or would you adapt and instead get sick if you changed your diet? Assuming you're also eating other things like vegetables. It got some friends talking about "if you could eat just one thing for a year/the rest of your life/whatever, what would it be?" I think I'd pick salmon sushi. Also not really all that bad for you if you're active, but again I wonder about the cumulative effect - we know that seafood tends to have a bit of mercury in it, could you actually get mercury poisoning from eating a great deal of salmon over an extended period of time, is that even possible? Or conversely, could you get acute mercury poisoning from eating a ton of salmon in one sitting? Is THAT even possible?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2022 00:30
|
|
|
Taeke posted:I have pretty spotty wifi in some places in my house, like my bedroom and bathroom (especially when I'm lying in the bath and using my phone) and I get that that's because of the signals being hindered by distance, walls and water and all that. I'll get some amplifiers or whatever pretty soon, but just now I just realised something that made me wonder about how it works. It will be hard to say without knowing the exact products being used, but yes there are aspects of wi-fi that try to improve the quality of the connection based on certain conditions. For example, once I was in an environment where I was at the very edge of the wireless radius for an access points 5 GHz band. This meant that sometimes my device would momentarily lose the signal to the 5GHz network and then reconnect to the 2.4 GHz network since it could still detect that network. It's also possible that there could be connection quality rules or settings on the device you are using that check for things like dropped packets or packets that have to be resent and if it reaches a certain threshold, then it tries switching to a more stable connection, although I would suspect rules like this would only be on a device managed by a company's IT department. If your router has a 5 GHz band and multiple antennas, then it probably also performs a signal processing technique called beamforming. Essentially this technique tries to locate where your device is and then modifies the signal from the antennas so the signal is stronger in the direction of your device. When you move around, it's possible that the router is updating so it can retarget your device more accurately (although I think the router would update this instantaneously every few seconds, so I'm not sure if it is an actual issue). Edit: Also, you don't necessarily need an evaluation of your house to make a stronger network. You may want to look into a mesh router and network system which let's you place multiple access points around your house which then form one network by communicating with each other. https://www.tomsguide.com/us/what-is-mesh-wifi-router,news-24580.html Goon Boots fucked around with this message at 01:00 on Nov 6, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2022 00:37
|
|
|
Mister Speaker posted:This guy on twitter is eating a whole rotisserie chicken every day. He's up to 39 days and showing no signs of stopping. I'm curious about this because it honestly doesn't seem like that much food - when I was bodybuilding, I would have loved to do that for at least a few weeks. But I wonder how long you could keep that up, would your body start rejecting it after a period or would you adapt and instead get sick if you changed your diet? Assuming you're also eating other things like vegetables. A rotisserie chicken is an excellent source of protein and fat and a good source of a lot of micronutrients, if he's eating other stuff as well for vitamins and fiber there's no reason he couldn't do it forever as long as he keeps his calorie expenditure high. If he's not getting enough fiber he's eventually going to have colon issues and he needs vitamin C and stuff so he doesn't get scurvy or rickets or whatever, but overall there's not really any major issues with it as long as other dietary issues are addressed. Mercury is most harmful when inhaled, ingested mercury isn't as dangerous and something like less than 10% of it actually enters the body (at which point it takes a couple months to leave). I don't know what the concentration in salmon is on average, but you could certainly poison yourself with it if your salmon had enough mercury in it. I don't think fish with that level of mercury are that common in the modern supply chain but it's happened in the past. PiratePrentice fucked around with this message at 02:20 on Nov 6, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2022 02:18
|
|
|
Hopefully an easy one. I can't find my cookie cutters. What can I use to cut shapes into a really thick sugar cookie dough? I tried using a jar and a glass, but they form too much suction and it's hard to get them out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2022 03:08
|
|
|
A knife?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2022 03:09
|
|
|
Cut an aluminum can in half with a dull knife you don't care about. If you make a second cut you can shape the metal circle into a star or something pretty easily. When you go to use it press down with a hotpad or something so you don't cut your palms
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2022 03:15
|
|
|
I've heard of hunters in the olden times dying of malnutrition due to eating nothing but rabbit. But that might also be bullshit, I'm having a hard time finding a credible reference, only preppers and "meat only" diet advocates (did you know that subculture existed? I didn't!) and various other wackos of that stripe.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2022 03:20
|
|
|
Meat is basically the most nutritious thing you can eat, you can survive almost entirely on meat if you've got a good source of vitamin C (pine needles boiled into tea even works). Humans are one of only three mammals that needs dietary vitamin C, all the others just create it themselves. We prefer variety because of evolutionary factors, but we don't really need it, we just need a certain suite of micronutrients and enough protien and fat and you'll survive just fine. There are plenty of mammals that eat literally the exact same thing for their entire life, some animals prefer it and will balk at the variety we crave (housecats prefer monotonous diets for example). None of this is to say that you should eat nothing but meat, it's bad for your colon and you'll probably die of cancer a lot earlier than someone with a normal diet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2022 03:26
|
|
|
RCarr posted:A knife? lol. Square sugar cookies it is
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2022 03:39
|
|
|
Hyperlynx posted:I've heard of hunters in the olden times dying of malnutrition due to eating nothing but rabbit. But that might also be bullshit, I'm having a hard time finding a credible reference, only preppers and "meat only" diet advocates (did you know that subculture existed? I didn't!) and various other wackos of that stripe. From what I’ve read, that’s because rabbits don’t have enough fat. I think that only goes for wild rabbits though. I used to raise meat rabbits and on a modern pellet diet plus snacks I had some faaat rabbits.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2022 03:45
|
|
|
Hyperlynx posted:I've heard of hunters in the olden times dying of malnutrition due to eating nothing but rabbit. But that might also be bullshit, I'm having a hard time finding a credible reference, only preppers and "meat only" diet advocates (did you know that subculture existed? I didn't!) and various other wackos of that stripe. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_poisoning
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2022 04:13
|
|
|
There's some old timey wisdom that i think there's some truth to that you could survive a winter eating bear and deer, but not just one or the other. Of course if you eat either one + some plants you are fine. But i guess in the mountains in the winter that might not always be an option.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2022 04:31
|
|
|
Inuit people did well on basically only fish and marine mammals - beluga whale skin apparently has a lot of vitamin C, as does liver from various animals.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2022 04:58
|
|
|
Yes, I found it too, and it has a big ole warning at the top saying "these sources are poo poo, someone please add one from an actual respected medical authority" E: wow, username post combo!
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2022 05:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 23:37 |
|
|
Just be sure not to eat polar bear liver, you will die from vitamin A poisoning. That is, if you don't die from trying to kill a polar bear with a knife.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2022 08:40
|
|