other than dire emergencies
if you got to ditch the cart for safety, that’s fine
other than dire emergencies
if you got to ditch the cart for safety, that’s fine
n = 40, this is junk. they couldn’t even get 100 people for this?
these were all sampled from 1 company in amsterdam. the differences could be explained by company culture, or local culture, or whatever. more work needed.
here you go:
more can be found like this, @chichi__charlie in any good web browser
oh my goodness that’s a painting
i was scrolling idly and thought it was a mid smartphone photo
wow 🤯
it’s an example of simpson’s paradox
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson's_paradox
a worked example: if england/scotland/wales all use heart ❤️ 49% and use tears of joy 😂 at 51%, and then northern ireland was to use heart ❤️at 100%, you can imagine this would tip the whole uk over
even more freaky, you could make all 4 constituent countries use heart ❤️ at 49%, make each constituent use a different unique emoji 👍😀🥰😼 at 51% each, and then the aggregate would show that heart ❤️ is still the most used across the UK
now consider for each place on this map, they are ranking more than just 2 emojis. the map itself says that tears of joy 😂 is only scoring 5% worldwide, and that’s 1st place. with margins of 5% and under to be deemed winner, it’s no wonder funky effects show up
aww it’s like hardstyle shuffle rave phat pants!
ok, here’s the context. (click here)
the source of this file, regrettably, is the daily mail. broken clocks and all that. i will link the “article” that the video file was from, but you will need a hazmat suit going in, for both the cookies/trackers and low quality writing
here’s that source now. (click here)
for posters below saying they couldn’t find this, i understand it. we all get different search results, it’s possible you all got hugboxed and were unable to find the clip as a result
also, i don’t care to discuss the topic, i only wanted to link the source, because you were all struggling with it. i like finding sources :)
have a nice day 🥰
why would future humans bother bringing all these people back
i think it’s worth reminding why doctors treat people now, in this time and space. they do it mostly because they want to save people. maybe a few do it for money, but past a certain point, the money isn’t why you do it. i think it’s a safe bet that doctors of a future would see these corpses as patients, and act accordingly. an analogy - think how we see heart attack victims as patients, and not how our medieval ancestors would have seen them (as corpses)
…literally nothing positive to contribute to the utopian future…
true, but, a good chunk of patients in hopsital today have nothing to contribute to society, and cannot contribute any more, whatsoever. we treat them anyway, because that’s what we do. humans have consistently cared for others that are sick and have “nothing to contribute” throughout history, and that shows no sign of going away anytime soon
here’s one example for you (click here) exploring igbo gender norms
here’s a second report that’s worth reading too (click here)
i don’t have much knowledge about the other cultures suggested, others can provide info for those
okay, here’s al jazeera reporting on the ballistic missile, it’s a one liner but it’s something
this is a saturation attack imo, the question is, at what target?
citing abc news (link here), us official says 400 to 500 drones
unconfirmed reports of ballistic missiles in the air too, it’s all osint right now so no good source on that yet, if i get one i’ll add it as a reply
take a look here at the papa johns live activity meter next to the pentagon on google maps 🍕
oh god they’re actually doing it
that’s a really cool map, thank you for posting 🙂
i’ll be honest, unless you’re at the west coast of ireland, probably give this one a miss. :(
okay, using the words listed at the start of this wikipedia article, here’s where i place myself:
analyze/center/defense/labour/organize/program
or, British 1, American 5, Canadian 4, Australian 2
it’s a nice litmus test to see where you’re at. i knew i used to skew NA in writing style, but i didn’t think by that much
i mean, i really dont want to be that poster, but he’s not being arrested for blocking with a scooter, he’s being arrested for protesting
there’s a separate discussion to be had about arresting protesters, but the way they’re trying to spin this as “they oppressed a disabled person for being disabled” is honestly insulting to the agency of disabled people that choose to protest, and whom accept the risk of consequences for doing so
in my mind, you can’t be both trying to normalize disability, and then also weaponizing it when it suits you for an opinion piece after being arrested. in particular, i take offense to the line in the article: “Now prosecuting disabled people to (sic) acting ‘socially responsibly’”, as if that’s magically a step too far?
a “fairer” title here would have been something like “activist prosecuted for deftly showcasing how climate risks disproportionately affect disabled people”. although, it wouldn’t have been as attention grabby, and so none of us would be reading it…
REMEMBER, YOU ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE OTHER PERSON’S ANGER. WHEN SHOUTING HAPPENS, DISTANCE YOURSELF TO SHOW THAT IT’S NOT OKAY
OR JUST CRANK THE HOG LOUDER, AROOOOOOO
> implying you don’t know what an implication arrow is
it’s one of these: >