What a weird bunch, to me these are 2 titans, 1 serial one-hit-wonder, and 1 guy whose humour is family guy cutaway gags.

Ah, yes. Their “We found space whales on Nimbus!” video (about speculative Zoology of alien worlds), which was later titled “What actual aliens might look like” was something I could excuse. I don’t consider claiming the impossible click-bait, but seeing the controversy, it was best they changed it.

However, what I really hated was their ad for a “strange matter” vile/necklace (i forgor), not because they lied about it containing reality destroying elements, but because they did the “buy now because they’ll never come back” trick. I consider manipulative sales tactics to be a greater sin than clickbait.

I believe discussion on this flares up now and then because it is an easy answer, tough decision.

If you make this decision for others: of course this is the most ethical thing to do, the data isn’t ambiguous.

If you are yourself affected: Oof. Yes it might be better for society, but personally I value this and that, and I am but one and would rather wait on legislation before I do anything.

We love to argue it because one side thinks experiencing it taints your view, the other that only reading data misses the point. Can be about indoor cats, vegan diets or pineapple on pizza, the argument itself never matters.

There is a trading card shop here - in a village of 2500.

How?

I just don’t respect botanical definitions any more. Who cares what they think berries, fruits, grain and nuts should be? They can’t even define a tree! If anyone gets to define these terms for every English speaker, it sure isn’t going to be them.

Culinary definitions all the way! Unfortunately, they have no satisfying category for rhubarb either.

The beginning of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_performance sums it up pretty cleanly.

Take a look what subject “they” is standing for in my sentence. And then the quantifier before that subject.

Don’t lecture me on semantics.

I disagree. I only see one “thing” here, and that’s “shooting as a sport”. I also didn’t consider quail and deer hunting separately, so I don’t know why you wasted so much time writing all the different forms down: to an outsider, the are the same in this context. Maybe 2, the sports that arose from hunting and the ones that arose from the military, the latter often drawing human outlines on their targets which just adds to my point.

And unfortunately, I already was at such competition as a visitor. It’s a sport like any other, your enjoyment largely depends on the people there, and guns attract the kind I want nothing to do with.

I would have considered this the popular opinion, but it seems I’m the odd one out. The comments here defending it are hard to read.

Like, Farmers and Hunters: You know you are like 8% of the population at most, right? Killing animals should have maybe been mentioned as an alternative use for guns, sure, but come on: most gun nuts, as most people in general, are city folk. They buy a gun to shoot or threaten to shoot people exclusively.

That is a very American excuse. The US has 120 guns per 100 people, Europe’s highest, Serbia, which had a literal civil war not 2 decades ago, has 40.

The US has a gun problem.

I can see a few problems with getting pork sausages delivered to these regions, but I’m sure the Taliban will acquiesce given the importance.

Uninformed take. First of, we are working on killing off only a few, malaria carrying Mosquito species in certain regions. Whatever niche they leave will be filled by another, possibly native species of Mosquito.

2nd, nutrient transfer my butt, they carry like 1ml and that’s mostly water. You definitely transfer more nutrients by having some ants in your compost bin.

I never bought any Apple product and thought they were overhyped, so it might be easy enough for me to say, but no, I personally wouldn’t have been Ok with it.

I can see more people begrudgingly using it if Apple did it though.