I drive a large pickup truck for work. With the backup camera, it is WAY WAY WAY easier to back into a tight spot than to pull head in. I pretty much always back the truck in.

I’ve only ever seen those in parking lots where each lane is one way. They want you to pull in so when you back out you’re heading the correct direction of traffic. But those also typically have angled spaces, like you mentioned.

It can also be bad writing. Like, an author can just write inconsistent characters. That doesn’t mean it’s a plot hole.

None of these are plot holes. It may be bad writing, but it’s only a plot hole if it breaks the rules established by the story. Tony overlooking something, or HYDRA not putting their existence in SHIELD files isn’t a plot hole. A lot of people managing to keep conspiracy secret isn’t a plot hole.

By definition, no it’s not. If it’s a thing that can actually physically happen, it’s, by definition, not a plot hole.

I 100% agree with this.

One of the classic examples often given (and one of the top results if you search for “famous plot holes”) is from The Lord of the Rings. “Why don’t the Eagles just fly them to Mount Doom to destroy the One Ring, allowing them to bypass all the trouble getting there?” It’s often cited as a well-known plot hole and given as an example to define what a plot hole is.

Yet it’s not a plot hole at all. It’s just characters making decisions the reader might not agree with.

TBH, most fiction have 0 plot holes. Most people who use the term ‘plot hole’ in commentary on the internet are using it incorrectly. They tend to use it to mean “something happens which I personally dislike or don’t understand” rather than it’s real meaning, “something that directly contradicts previous plot points and leads to a logical inconsistency.” That is, it’s only a plot hole if it literally cannot happen because it would negate some other plot element.

A character making a decision that feels out of character isn’t a plot hole. Someone not choosing to use the sci-fi magic tech to solve a problem when it exists in-universe isn’t a plot hole. It might be bad writing. But it’s not a logical inconsistency.

A plot hole would be something like a plot point centering around a character’s illiteracy (in a manner where it’s clear they’re not faking) after a scene where the character is shown reading.

Suicides would skyrocket, too, and probably at a young age. Probably infant death would skyrocket, too. Imagine you have a kid with a birth defect or some other kind of lifelong condition. Why make them live a whole life dealing with that when you can just let them take a mulligan and reincarnate, hopefully under better conditions.

Get into an accident and lose the use of your legs or get paralyzed or something? Oh well. Better luck on your next play-through. Hit the reset button and try again.

Suicide would skyrocket, and people would be born with ungodly amounts of personal debt. Honestly, I don’t see any positive to this.

Toddlers have object permanence. Object permanence develops at around 4-6 months old. Kids are still infants at that point. Toddlers are generally 1-3 years old.

That’s a parenting red flag. That happens because the parents keep putting a phone in the kid’s hand and expect the phone to occupy all their time. Spend time reading and speaking to the kid in his mother tongue rather than giving them a phone and they’ll become proficient pretty quickly.

This is a parenting issue, not a kid thing. It’s because parents put a tablet in their kid’s hands, teach the kid to use it, then expect the tablet to occupy all the kid’s time while they don’t engage with the kid.

I have a 5 yo and a 3 yo. We have a family iPad, but the kids barely know how to use it. They virtually never watch videos on it (only exception was the one time they’ve been on an airplane). My 5 yo is very artistically inclined, so we downloaded a sketchpad app she can draw with. She also builds legos, so we downloaded the lego app she can use for instructions. Those are the only apps she knows how to use, and she doesn’t even know how to navigate to find them. We have to open the app for her and get her setup before she can run with it. My 3 yo doesn’t even know how to do that much.

We mostly use the iPad to video chat family or play music, both of which are controlled by grown ups.

Yet my kids are extremely proficient at a lot of other stuff relative to kids their own age. The 5 yo can fully read and write and can do simple arithmetic. The 3 yo can read small words, can write all her letters, and can count at least to 100. They both do small chores around the house, both help cook (especially the 3 yo has gotten very good at slicing veggies).

Toddlers being hypercompetent with a tablet is 100% a parenting red flag. It shows the parents aren’t very engaged and just let the tablet do all the parenting for them.

I would say ‘chauvinistic’ rather than racist.

The word “civilized” essentially just means “people who act in a way I deem morally good.” What ‘morally good’ means is 100% subjective to the individual saying it. Since personal morals are so heavily influenced by the culture and society one was raised in, the term ‘civilized’ is almost necessarily going to be used to justify why one’s own culture is necessarily better than another.

This isn’t necessarily racist, but since modern western society is so heavily based on white supremacy, it’s inherently going to be racist when used by someone supporting western society. But it can also be used in other contexts in a non-racist way. But it’s always going to be chauvinistic.

Man…what 12 year old me would have given to explore Alex Mack’s secret world…

This feels like a reference to the most recent episode of The Last of Us.

Back left pocket

What was their reasoning? I’m assuming the scenario is a patient in a secured hospital who isn’t supposed to leave trying to escape?

Most accurate hacking sequences ever. Everyone knows that the most common file structures involve a 3D rendered cybercity.

Also, it’s amazing that the most commonly used passwords are still God, Sex, Secret, and Love. Why would people use anything other than just a single word for a password?

I’m an electrician who installs (mostly) commercial electrical systems, including fire alarm systems.

In most cases, pulling a fire alarm pull station doesn’t set off the fire suppression sprinklers. The pull station just sets off the alarm and calls the Fire Department. Sprinklers aren’t automatically activated. The water in the sprinkler pipes is under constant pressure. Sprinkler heads are just nozzles with a little heat-activated stopper in them. When that stopper heats enough, it breaks and opens the nozzle, allowing water to flow (they can also be broken by fucking with them or hitting them with something). But there’s no mechanism that sets off other sprinkler heads when one goes off. Each head needs to be heat activated individually to go off. You see in movies and TV all the time someone pulling a pull station and that setting off sprinklers throughout the entire building, or someone lighting a fire in a small closet and that setting off sprinklers throughout the building. That simply isn’t how they work.

(note: there are some fire suppression systems which do have remote activation, but those are not standard. They’re usually used somewhere like a data center or a lab where there’s extremely expensive stuff that you want to be sure doesn’t get damaged. And those systems usually use a fire suppression foam or powder, rather than water.)

Also, the water in sprinkler pipes is NASTY. It’s been sitting in those pipes for years, sometimes decades. It gets black and sludgy pretty quickly. It stains/destroys anything it touches.

So instead we assume he’s being framed despite no evidence being provided?

And, to be clear, there has been evidence provided that he did it. It’s very questionable evidence from an even more questionable source, but it’s not no evidence.

Compared to no evidence or even a claim from Luigi or his lawyers that he’s being framed.