That would be Lyndon B. Johnson, who is said to have had a hell of a tramp stamp.

I don’t think a screwdriver would illuminate much at all. You are a bit crazy.

deleted by creator

It looks uncomfortable. You should not phoony that much.

Ah, the innocence of youth.

The same nonsense is invading all of my feeds as well. These things need to be required to label their AI usage so they can be filtered out.

Is Man… cala. Mancala, but where all the pieces are replaced with bits of TNT.

I enjoyed hearing about meme crossovers in a recurring Reply All segment where they would take a host who didn’t understand a complicated Tweet and break down all the pieces.

Here’s an excerpt that stuck with me:

PJ: Dog underscore rates. Ok. So, there is a–there is a Twitter account, uh, that has over 2 million followers.

ALEX BLUMBERG: Ok.

PJ: And it is devoted to rating peoples’ dogs,

ALEX BLUMBERG: Rating them.

PJ: Yeah. So like, scale of one to ten?

ALEX BLUMBERG: Ohhhh.

PJ: Except they always give them above 10. Like, every single time. Um, can I just show you the best moment in WeRateDogs™’ history? Where a guy got angry, that he thought the ratings system was skewed?

ALEX BLUMBERG: Uh, so, this guy Brant?

PJ: Yeah.

ALEX BLUMBERG: He was like, “@dog_rates You’re rating system sucks! Just change your name to cute dogs!” And then WeRateDogs™ wrote back: “Why are you so mad, Bront?” And then he said, “Well, you give every dog 11s and 12s, it doesn’t even make any sense!” (laughing) That’s a guy who is not in on the joke.

PJ: Yes.

ALEX BLUMBERG: (laughing) And then WeRateDogs™–and then WeRateDogs™ says, “They’re good dogs, Brent.” Brant: “It’s a cheap gimmick!” WeRateDogs™: “Well Brint, (laughing) the people love it and I’m doing it for them, not you.” Uh. Brent: “All I’m saying is you could have real legitimate ratings instead of every just saying (laughing) every dog is a 10, 11, or 12”

PJ: So like, that is basically–that is like a good encapsulation of what is good about this.

ALEX BLUMBERG: (laughing)

PJ: (laughing) Alex Blumberg is losing his mind.

ALEX BLUMBERG: Oh, “They’re good dogs, Brent” is really funny.

Here’s the episode: https://gimletmedia.com/shows/reply-all/o2ho9j

Miss that show.

If the entire Earth blows up, it’ll be a good disaster recovery solution.

Probably they find net zero (minus cost of hiring musicians) preferred over paying out a moderate income to actual artists. Capitalism at its finest.

chat j’ai pété

Audit trails are automatically generated, and can often be found on logs and cable trays.

Most high class poop joke I’ve ever heard

Heavily featured in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwMwzGIt5ek

So these books are the reason I am the way I am?

When you’re here, you’re ɴᴇᴠᴇʀ ʟᴇᴀᴠɪɴɢ.

Does it count if I give a proof reducing the entire universe down to a 2-dimensional construct?

I’m the bus.

Did some Googling. Apparently it’s nutritional supplements:

https://5percentnutrition.com/

That sounds super interesting! Can’t read it until I get home (am on vacation at Disneyland right now) but in about a week’s time I hope you don’t mind if I reply with my updated understanding, and maybe a question or two.

I made a comment a while back (on my alt account) about how the origin of the universe can be expressed as a simple formula: https://sopuli.xyz/comment/3303086

So, I’m curious if that viewpoint will shift at all with a better understanding of electron positron interactions. It kind of makes sense to me that the universe and the antiverse are stacked on top of each other but with time pointing in opposite directions. But I’m sure I’m oversimplifying Feynman’s theory and I’ll have to read his reasoning to really understand.

Not in the current standard model, for sure. Or is there a reason empirically why they simply can’t be.